Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	error_n	parliament_n	writ_n	2,585	5	9.9558	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88211	The lawes funerall. Or, An epistle written by Lieutenant Col. John Lilburn, prisoner in the Tower of London, unto a friend of his, giving him a large relation of his defence, made before the judges of the Kings bench, the 8. of May 1648. against both the illegal commitments of him by the House of Lords, and the House of Commons, ...	Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657.	1648 (1648)	Wing L2130; Thomason E442_13; ESTC R210612	38,933	34

me that now before them I had said for my self because my adversaries were transcendantly pocent who by their wills and pleasures had in some kind destroyed men of more power and greatnesse then all the Lawyers at the Bar and therefore Sir though I am acquainted with some Lawyers that sometimes plead at this Bar. yet peradventure my respects and obligations may be such unto them that it cannot stand with honour justice or conscience for me to desire them to plead my cause seeing I am confident they cannot do it with safety and for me to expect that from them or put that upon them that in mine owne conscience I do verily believe will be their ruine in their practise and lively hoods when I am not able in any reasonable manner to requite them I should in my owne thoughts render my selfe the basest and unworthiess of men Whereupon Mr. Justice Bacon begun to speake and to make a kind of reply or answer unto divers of the things I had infisted upon and told me that Sir Edward Cooke in the 4. Part of his instituts whom he did see I had very much studied saith That no inferiour Court could meddle to question Judgements of Parliament and after a pretty large speech told me I was committed upon a centence from a Superiour Court whose judgements by Law they neither were able nor could controule and therefore must of necessity remand me back again and after he had done I replyed Sir it is true the Judgements of Parliament is not to be questioned by inferiour Courts alwaies provided they meddle with that which by Law appertaines to the Judgement of the Parliament which the executing of Lawes in the Originall Judgeing and desiding of deferences doth not the least And besides Mr. Justice Bacon you doe not I hope in Law Judge the Lords House singly or the House of Commons single to be the Parliament true it is sir severall statutes in Queene Elizabeths time as the 27. Chap. 8. 31. ch 1. provides That if any find himselfe agreeved by false judgements in the inferior Courts he shall if he please by a Writ of Error sue in the high Court of Parliament which I cannot beleeve in Law is meant the Lords House *⁎* And it is the most irrationall thing in the world to say that legally no Law can be binding but that which is made by the consent of the King Lords and Commons and yet to prefor a single judgement of the Lords made without all forme shaddow colour or pretence of Law above all the Acts of Parliament made for 3. or 400. yeares together for this I will offer to all the Lawyers in England and challeng them to shew me one Statute or a peece of a Statute to justifie the Lords proceedings against me in Law and I will be willing to lose my head and to bee cut in ten thousand peeces and besides it is most irrationall for the Lords who never pertended to any power but what they derived from the King to immagine or go about to make the world beleeve that they can by their wills destroy all the Lawes of England as in their dealing with me they have done when the King their fountain of power can doe no Judiciall action but by his Courts of Justice and that in the legall method manner or processe of the Law although by Law a thousand times more is given and instated into him then unto all the Lords of England and for the truth of this see the 2. part inst f. 168 186. 187 yea if the King imprison me illegally by his owne Warrant either in matter or form I have my remedy against him at law as appears by the Act that abolished the Star-Chamber and therefore it is the height of erationally to conceive or say that the Lords will shall be Lord Paramount above the will of the King their Fountain and Creator and the power of the Law which is above Him from whom they derive all they have or can pretend vnto and I am sure the law tells me that in the Courts of Justice which is established and bounded by the law and is administred adjudged and executed by sundry Judges and Ministers of the Law is betrusted a full and ample power for tryall of property of lands and goods and for the conservation of the people of this Realm in peace and quietnesse but I am sure by the Judges remitting of me back to prison there is a failer of Justice which the Law abhors and an insufficiency in the Law to deliver me from destruction by lust will and pleasure and therefore without dispute slaves are the people of Eng. in the highest and slaves they must continue if they spedily rouse not up their spirits stand stifly for their rights single for the further and due examination of the said judgement in such manner as is used in erroneous judgments in the Court of Kings Bench but the law gives not the Parliament much lesse the single House of Lords the least cognizance in the world originally to meddle with any thing betwixt party and party and if they doe I am sure by the law in force at this day it is corum non judicii but the Lords originally summoned me to their Bar be for any charge exhibited or any indictment proferred or any visible complanant or prosecutor appearing and their high commission and Span●sh I● quisition-like examined me upon interrogatories and so committed me to prison for which they have no shadow of ground in law Whereupon Mr. Justice Roll stept up confirmed that which his Brother Bacon had already said telling me that the Chancery and the Court of Admirals proceedings were diverse from those statutes I had alleadged as well as the proceedings in Parliament were and yet were Lex terrae and it is positively said he the law of the Land that an inferiour court as ours is cannot reverse the judgment of a superiour Court as the Lords are which we must of necessity do if we should release you which we cannot doe if we would without medling with the merit of the cause from the beginning and then the way ought to be by writ of Errour which said he will not lye in this Court in a Judgment given in the Lords House and therefore you must rest content it had been well for you you had pleaded these things before the Lords in your plea there aaginst their jurisdiction Sir said I I did so and they sent me to prison therfore not only so but in Newgate close imprisoned me therefore and would not suffer my wife to come into the Prison yard so much as to speak with me I also appealed to the House of Commons and solely put my selfe upon their Justice and Judgement but I sound them for almost these two years together deaf both unto Justice Law and reason and now as my last legall refuge I come to you after I have been almost two years in

ch 8. and freedom from arrests for them and their servants c. during the sitting of Parliament which the Law supposeth not to be long much less seven years which is a destruction to our fundamental rights viz. Annual Parliaments or at least Annual Elections as appears by the 4. Edw. 3. cha 14. 36. Ed. 3. ch 10. both which are confirmed this present Parliament by the triennial act in 16. Car. Rex and yet if any Parliament-mans servant be imprisoned the House of Commons themselves by Law cannot deliver him but it must be by a Writ out of Chancery and the member must make oath that the party for whom the Writ of priviledg is prayed for was his servant at the time of the arrest made all which appears in the Case of one Mr Hall the 22. of Feb. 18. Eliz. whose servant being arrested and imprisoned a Committee of the House reported to the House they could find no presidents for the delivery of him but in the way before mentioned whereupon Mr Hall was appointed by the House to go to the Lord Keeper and to do accordingly And if they cannot deliver one that belongs to themselves and priviledged by the Law of Parliament but not by the known declared Law of the Land nor punish him themselves that in the execution of the Common Law of England broke their priviledges much less in Reason and Justice can they commit or release one that is far remote from them and doth not by priviledg belong unto them the last of which is my present case and therefore no colour in Law hath the House of Commons to commit me to prison And as for the House of Lords the Petition of Right expresly saith That no man ought to be adjudged to death c. but by the established Laws of the Land and the express established Law of the Land is That no Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or be deseised of his freehold or liberties or free customs or be out-lawed or exiled nor condemned or any otherwise destroyed but by the lawful judgment of his Peers viz a Jury of his Equals of the same neighbourhood where the crime is committed being brought in to answer by due process of Law by Indictment Presentment or Writ original according to the course of Common Law but the Lords are none of my Peers or Equals and therefore are none of my legal Judges nor have not the least Jurisdiction in any case whatsoever in the world over me And though they should have a thousand presidents to shew they have exercised Jurisdiction in the like case of mine they are worth nothing because they are all and every of them against the 29 Chap. of Magna Charta and are therefore expresly declared by the Statute that abolished the Star Chamber 17. Car. Rex this present Parliament to be null and voyd in Law and to be holden for Errors and false Judgments And as for presidents against the Lords and Commons Jurisdiction in my particular case one president against them is of more consequence then a thousand for them and the reason is evident because as Sir Edward Cook often declares all Courts of Judicature are bottomed upon the Law of the Land and it cannot be supposed that any Court can be miscognizant or ignorant of its proper Jurisdiction And for the Lords they have confessed in the 4. of Edw. 3. Rot. Parl. 2. in the case of Sir Simon De Berisford that it is against the Law for Peers to try Commoners and have promised and enacted or at least ordained that they neither shall nor will do the like again though that occasion were superlative viz. about the absolute murther of King Edward the second And Secondly although the Maior c. of the Corporation of Cambridg were by the Kings Writ out of Chancery summoned before King Richard the second in full Parliament and there impeached of horrible Treason committed and acted in levying War against their soveraign Lord and King and being expresly within the Statute of Treasons made in the 25 of Edward the 3. Cha. 2. And though they surrendred up the Charters of Cambridg in open Parliament unto the will and pleasure of the King as forfeited into his hands by their Treason and Rebellion yet as to the point of Treason they by their Councel expresly pleaded that the King and his Lords assembled in Parliament had no Cognizance or Jurisdiction there to medle with Treasons committed by them and saith the Record which under the Register or Record Keepers hand of the Tower I have to shew unto your Honor if you please to have it read they alledged divers reasons therefore and the King and the Lords by their silence allowed of their plea as good in Law and let them go without any punishment there for their notorious Treasons as appeareth Rot. Parl. 5. Rich. 2. membrana 9. num 45.58 59. which is supposed in reason they would never have done if their own consciences and knowledg had not told them that by Law they had not the least Jurisdiction in the world over Commoners in any case whatsoever For if not in Treason the highest then much less in misdemeanors the inferiorest which is the most that ever they layd to my charge And if the King and Lords have not Jurisdiction over Commoners much less the Lords without the King and much less that House of Lords that hath layd the King their fountain of power and honor aside as unfit to be addressed unto any more and yet have not essentially or avowedly altered the Government of the Kingdom seeing by their Writ of summons and all their own Declarations they own nor challenge no power unto themselves but what they derive from him and therefore by their own principles and by the Law it self they have unpowered themselves and totally overthrown and destroyed their Jurisdiction and now cannot legally or rationally be called a Court of Justice or a House of Parliament in any sence as clearly appears by the 4 part Instit chapt High Court of Parliament fo 1.366.46 the King being in Law as Sir Edward Cook there declares the head the beginning and the ending of the Parliament and in reason it is impossible where there is no primitive there should be any derivative and therefore I do positively conclude that the Lords have both by Law and Reason unpowered themselves and destroyed their House from being a House in any sence and therefore have not the least shadow or colour of Jurisdiction over me or any Commoner of England And besides I find in the time of this present Parliament many Presidents of the House of Commons in putting out their extraordinary necessitated power to redeem and rescue the Commons of England out of the devouring paws of the Lords illegal and usurped a Here Judg Bacon interrupted me and told me they could not suffer the Lords to be arraigned before them in that manner that I did and therefore pressed

am that the dealings of the Lords and Commons with me demonstrated by their orders of committments flowes not from any power given them either by the Law of the Laud nor from the Indentures betwixt them and their chusers no nor yet from any word or clause in the Writ of there summons or Elections and therefore fourthly it must flow from there CROOKED IVSTS DEPRAVED VVILLS and ARBITRARY PLEASVRES by which with naked faces they declare themselves to be limitted by no boundary unaccountable and obnoxius to no censures for any possible abuse whatsoever that can becommitted by them for by these committments they evidently declare there is no rule whereby to measure the rectitude or obliquitie justice or injustice of their Government and actions and by consequence they are under an impossibilitie to render an account of their wayes and doings and so by consequence the people of England are in the absolutest road way of perfect slavery that is upon the earth this the Parliament or the Lords and Commons would have the World to beleive they abhord in the King as appeares by there last declaration against him in which they shew the reasons of their votes not to make or to receive any addresses to or from him for in Page 12 they s●y the King hath laid a fit foundation for all tiranny by that most destructive maxime of his viz. that he oweth no account of his actions to any but to God alone but by the warrants of my cōmitments it seemes this wicked and heathenish Maxim is Iudged by the makers thereof not to be to sweete a morsell for their own Pallets though in their said declaration they judge it to sweet for the Kings and therefore to conclude this point if this honorable Court of Justice the Judges whereof are sworne to Judge according to the Law and not lust will nor pleasure will Judge these arbitrary Committments of mine to be legal then I make my humble desire unto you the Judges thereof that you would cousen and deceive the people of the Kingdome no longer by assuming unto your selves the name of Judges of the Law but rather translate your Titles into the name of Judges of lust will and pleasure that so the people may expect the legall administration of the Law no longer from you and so I have done with the Fift and last ingredient to a legall Mittimus Now Mr. Justice Bacon seeing it is objected both by you and Mr. Justice Roll that my Commitment from the Lords is rather a Sentence Judgement or Decree hen a bare Mittimus and therefore being a judgement by the Lords a higher Court for 7. yeares imprisonment I cannot be delivered by this Court which being inferiour to it cannot reverse it nor be Judges of it To which Mr. Justice Bacon I answere First I doe not seeke unto you at present for reversement of my Sentence which is 4000. l. fine and perpetuall disfranchisement of the Liberties of an Englishman as well as seven yeares imprisonment But I come unto you as Judges of the Law who are sworne impartially to doe me Law and Justice notwithstanding any command whatsoever by any whatsoever to the contrary for my personall liberty which is my undoubted right by Law for any thing that judicially appeares before you upon the Warrants of my commitments For I have already fully proved unto you there is not legally the least crime in the world laid unto my charge and therefore no rules in Law for you to send me backe againe to prison But secondly I answer that I have already proved the Lords are none of my legall Judges and therefore all their proceedings with me from first to last are corum non judici Yea even their Sentence and Commitment it selfe for being it is against the 29. Chap. of Magna Charta it is void and null in Law which expressely saith That no Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or be dissesed of his Freehould or Liberties or free Customes or be Outlawed or exiled or any otherwise destroyed nor past upon nor condemned by the lawfull judgement of his equals or by the Law of the Land which Law of the Land is expounded by the Statute of the 25. Ed. 3.4 37. Ed. 3.18 and Sir Edward Goke in his 2. part instit fo 50.51 to be by due Processe of Law viz That none shall be taken and past upon c. by Petition or suggestion made to our Lord the King or to his Counsell undesse it be by indictment or presentment of good and lawfull men where such deeds be done in due manner or by Writ originall at the Common Law being brought in to answere by due Processes according to the common and olde Law of the Land all which c. is confirmed by the Statute that abolished the Starre-Chamber this present Parliament 17. C. R. and all Acts Ordinances Orders Judgements and Decrees made contrary thereunto or in diminution thereof are thereby declared ipso facto to be null and voide in Law and are to be holden for errors and false judgements which totally barrs and overthtowes all Presidents whatsoever to the contrary yea although the Lords had a million of them And excellent to this purpose is Sir Edward Cookes Commentary upon the 3. Ed. 1. chap. 15 but especially his Commentary upon these words viz. Or Commandement of the King First faith he the King being a body politique cannot command but by matter of Record for the King commands and the Law commands are all one for the King must command by matter of record according unto the Law Secondly When any Judiciall Act is by Act of Parliament referred to the King it is understood to be done in some Court of Justice according to the Law And the opinion of Gascoine Chiefe Justice is notable in this point that the King hath committed all his power judicall to divers Courts some in one Court some in another c. and because some Courts as the Kings Bench are Coram Rege and some coram Justiciariis therefore the Act saith by the commandernent of the King or his Justices Hussey Chiefe Justice reported that Sir John Markham said to King Ed. 4. that the King could not arrest any man for suspition of Treason or Fellony as any of his Subjects might because if the King did wrong the party could not have his action if the King command me to arrest a man and accordingly I doe arrest him hee shall have his action of false imprisonment against me albeit he was in the Kings presence resolved by the whole Court in 16. H. 6. which authority might be a good warrant to defend his said opinion to Ed. 4. The words of the Statute of the 1 R. 2. chap. 12. are unlesse it be by the Writ or other commandement of the King and it was resolved by all the Judges of England that the King cannot doe it by any commandement but by Writ or by order or Rule of some of his Courts