Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A25530
|
An answer to a letter written by a member of Parliament in the countrey upon the occasion of his reading of the Gazette of the 11th of December, 1679.
|
|
1679
(1679)
|
Wing A3320; ESTC R10364
|
7,226
|
6
|
An Answer to a LETTER Written by a Member of Parliament in the Countrey upon the occasion of his reading of the Gazette of the 11th of December 1679. SIR I Received your Letter when I was engaged in much other business which will excuse me that I have not returned an Answer sooner and that it is done no better now You desire me to let you know what that Judgment is which my Lord Chancellor acquainted my Lord Mayor and his Brethren with and what my thoughts are upon it and that I may obey you in both I will first Transcribe that Case as it is reported by Justice Crook that being already put into English whereas the Case in Moor is in French MEmorandum That by Command from the King all the Justices of England with divers of the Nobility viz. the Lord Ellesmere Lord Chancellor the Earl of Dorset Lord Treasurer Viscount Cranbourn Principal Secretary the Earl of Nottingham Lord Admiral the Earls of Northumberland VVorcester Devon and Northampton the Lords Zouch Burghley and Knowles the Chancellor of the Dutchy the Archbishop of Canterbury the Bishop of London Popham Chief Justice Bruce Master of the Rolls Anderson Gawdy VValmesley Fenner Kingsmil VVarberton Savel Daniel Yelverton and Snigg were assembled in the Star-Chamber where the Lord Chancellor after a long Speech made by him concerning Justices of Peace and his Exhortation to the Justices of Assize and a discourse concerning Papists and Puritans Declaring how they both were disturbers of the State and that the King intending to suppress them and to have the Laws put in Execution against them demanded of the Justices their Resulutions in three things First Whether the Deprivation of Puritan-Ministers by the High Commissioners for refusing to conform themselves to the Ceremonies appointed by the last Canons was Lawful Whereto all the Justices answered That they had conferred thereof before and held it to be Lawful because the King hath the Supreme Ecclesiastical power which he hath delegated to the Commissioners whereby they had the power of Deprivation by the Canon-Law of the Realm And the Statute of 1 Eliz. which appoints Commissioners to be made by the Queen doth not confer any new power but explain and declare the ancient power And therefore they held it clear That the King without Parliament might make Orders and Constitutions for the Government ☜ of the Clergy and might deprive them if they obeyed not And so the Commissioners might deprive them But they could not make any Constitutions without the King And the divulging of such Ordinances by Proclamation is a most gracious Admonition And for as much as they have refused to obey they are Lawfully deprived by the Commissioners ex Officio without Libel Et ore tenus convocati Secondly Whether a Prohibition be grantable against the Commissioners upon the Statute of 2 H. 5. if they do not deliver the Copy of the Libel to the party Whereto they all answered That that Statute is intended where the Ecclesiastical Judg proceeds ex Officio ore tenus Thirdly Whether it were an offence punishable and what punishment they deserved who framed Petitions and collected a multitude of hands thereto to prefer to the King in a publick cause as the Puritans had done with an Intimation to the King That if he denied their sute many thousands of his Subjects would be discontented Whereto all the Justices answered That it was an offence finable at discretion and very near to Treason and Felony in the punishment For they tended to the raising of Sedition Rebellion and discontent among the people To which Resolution all the Lords agreed And then many of the Lords declared That some of the Puritans had raised a false Rumor of the King how he intended to grant a toleration to Papists Which offence the Justices conceived to be heinously finable by the Rules of the Common Law either in the Kings Bench or by the King and his Councel or now since the Statute of 3 H. 7. in the Star-Chamber And the Lords severally declared how the King was discontented with the said false Rumor and had made but the day before a protestation unto them that he never intended it and that he would spend the last drop of blood in his body before he would do it and prayed that before any of his Issue should maintain any other Religion than what he truly professed and maintained that God would take them out of the world I doubt not but your self and every English Protestant will joyn with this Royal Petitioner and will heartily say Amen But you desire to know if I think that the Resolution of the Judges in this case ought to deter us from humbly Petitioning His Majesty that this Parliament may effectually sit on the 26th day of January next In order to this give me leave to observe to you As it is most certain that a great Reverence is due to the Unanimous opinion of all the Judges so there is a great Difference to be put between the Authority of their Judgments when solemnly given in Cases depending before them and their sudden and extrajudicial Opinions The Case of Ship-money it self is not a better proof of this than that which you have now read as you will easily see if you consider distinctly what they say to the several Questions proposed to them As to their Answer to the first Questiom it much concerns the Reverend Clergy to enquire whether they did not mistake in it and whether the King by his Proclamation can make new Constitutions and oblige them to Obedience under the penalty of Deprivation Should it be so and should this unhappy Kingdom ever suffer under the Reign of a Popish Prince he might easily rid himself of such obstinate Hereticks and leave his Ecclesiastical Preferments open for men of better Principles He will need only to publish a Proclamation that Spittle and Salt should be used in Baptism that Holy water should be used and Images set up in Churches and a few more such things as these and the business were effectually done But if you will believe my Lord Chief Justice Cook 12. Co. 19 he will tell you that it was agreed by all the Judges upon Debate Hill 4 to Jacobi and that it was resolved by the whole Court of Common Pleas Trin. 6 to Jacobi 12. Co. 49 that the King cannot change his Ecclesiastical Laws and you may easily remember since the whole Parliament declared that he could not alter or suspend them I have the uniform Opinion of all the Judges given upon great Deliberation Mich. 4 to Jac. to justifie me Co. Mag. Char. 616. if I say that our Judges here were utterly mistaken in the Answer which they gave to the second Question I will not cite the numerous subsequent Authorities since every man knows that it is the constant practise of VVestminster-Hall at this day to grant Prohibitions upon refusal to give a Copy of Articles where the Proceedings in
the Ecclesiastical Courts are ex Officio You see there was a kind of ill Fate upon the Judges this day as usually there was when met in the Star-Chamber and that they were very unfortunate in answering two of the three Questions proposed to them let us go to on to consider what does principally concern us at present their Answer to the last Question You have just done reading it and therefore I need not repeat to you either the Doubt or the Solution of it but one may be allowed ro say modestly that it was a sudden Answer 'T is possible the Lords then present were well enough inform'd when they were told that such kind of Petitioning was an offence next to Treason and Felony but I dare be so bold as to say That at this day not a Lawyer in England would be the wiser for such an Answer they would be confounded and not know whether it were misprision of Treason which seems an offence nearest to Treason or petty-Larceny which seems nearest to Felony You will be apt to tell me that I mistake my Lords the Judges and they spoke not of the nature of the crime but of the manner of the punishment but this will mend the matter but little for since the punishments of those two Crimes is so very different you are still as much in the dark as ever what these ambiguous words mean Well but we will agree that the Crime about which the Enquiry was made was a very great one When men arrive to such insolence as to threaten their Prince it will be but little excuse to them to call their Monaces by the soft and gentle name of Petitions But you would know for what and in what manner we are at present to Petition and I will give you a plain and an infallible Rule 13. Car. 2. c. 5. It is the Statute 13. Car. 2. c. 5. Be it enacted c. that no person or persons whatsoever shall solicite labour or procure the getting of hands or other consent of any persons above the number of Twenty or more to any Petition Complaint Remonstrance Declaration or other Adresses to the King or both or either Houses of Parliament for alteration of matters established by Law in Church or State unless the mattet thereof have been first consented to and ordered by three or more Justices of the County or by the major part of the Grand Jury of the County or Division of the County where the same matter shall arise at their publick Assizes or general Quarter-Sessions or if arising in London by the Lord Mayor Aldermen and Commons in Common Council Assembled and that no person or persons whatsoever shall repair to His Majesty or both or either of the Houses of Parliament upon pretence of presenting or delivering any Petition Complaint Remonstrance or Declaration or other Addresses accompanied with excessive number of people not at any one time with above the number of ten persons upon pain of incurring a penalty not exceeding the sum of 100 l. in money and three months Imprisonment without Bail or Mainprize for every offence which offence to be prosecuted at the Court of Kings-Bench or at the Affizes or general Quarter-Sessions within six months after the offence committed and proved by two or more credible Witnesses Here you observe the Parliament who set themselves directly to obviate all the inconveniences which might arise to the Government from tumultuous Petitioning will not allow that great Numbers should joyn in Petitions for alteration of the Laws because it is possible ill men might abuse such a liberty unless the mattet of the Petition be consented to in such a manner as the Act directs but in all other cases they leave the Subjects to their undoubted liberty as well knowing that from thence there could arise no possible inconvenience but on the contrary that to bar the people of that humble way of making their wants known might force them upon worse ways of doing it And therefore I must tell you that you do my Lord Chancellor great injustice if you think his Speech tends to deter men from all manner of Petitioning No that wise and eloquent Lord who receives every day so many Petitions will I suppose be content the King should receive some too It never yet was thought seditious or tumultuous in any Government for the Subjects in an humble manner to beg That he who has the only power to do it would redress their Grievances 'T is the way by which we apply our selves to the King of Heaven who knows all our wants and yet expects from us that we should daily express them to him in humble Petitions And the Wisdom of the Church which has appointed Liturgies and forms of Common-Prayer seems to instruct us that God is pleased when huge Numbers joyn in the same Petition Why should not then suppliant Subjects with like humility and in like manner address themselves to the Gods on Earth especially since Kings cannot know our Desires or our Grievances till we our selves inform them what they are Dan. ch 6. I remember some wicked Councellors of Darius did once obtain a Law to be made that none should Petition any one but the King for Thirty days but there never yet was found so absurd a Statesman as to advise a Law that Subjects should not supplicate their Prince 'T is probable it would be well for some Favourites who are near a King if such a right could be taken from the people for then all their false suggestions and informations might pass undiscovered but 't is impossible that a King should long be safe in such a condition I will suppose a malicious Statesman intending to raise a jealousie in the mind of the Soveraign should inform him in dangerous times that he was not beloved by his people and that he was not to trust them How could the Subjects in such a case recover the Princes good opinion in the absence of a Legal Representative but by humble and affectionate Addresses Or suppose some good Protestant Prince should be so unfortunate as to have some Councellors near him who are conceal'd and others whose Crimes make them fear Parliaments it is easie to suppose that the one sort will be filling his ears with Stories that a great part of his Kingdom are inclined to Popery and the other sort that the best of his Subjects are quite out of love with Parliaments as factious and seditious Assemblies Into what unfortunate circumstances would such a Prince be apt to fall if his people were precluded from addressing themselves and opening their desires to him I might go on to trouble you with infinite Instances of this nature but there is no want of any in so plain a case 'T is the Doctrine of our Church that the only Arms of Subjects are Prayers Petitions Supplications and Tears and they are no friends either to the King or Church who would disarm us of these My Lord Chief Justice Hobbart