ARTICLES OF ACCUSATION EXHIBITED By the Commons House of Parliament now assembled AGAINST Sr. John Bramston Knight Justices of his Majesties Bench. Sr. Robert Berkley Knight Justices of his Majesties Bench. Sr. Francis Crawley Knight one of the Justices of the common-Common-pleas Sr. Humphrey Davenport Knight Barons of his Majesties Exchequer Sr. Richard Weston Knight and Barons of his Majesties Exchequer Sr. Thomas Trevor Knight Barons of his Majesties Exchequer 2 CHRON. 19.6 7. Jehosaphat said to the Judges Take heed what ye doe for ye judge not for man but for the Lord wherefore let the feare of the Lord be upon you for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God nor taking of gifts Printed in the yeare 1641. Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and all the Commons of England against Sir Richard Weston Knight one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer impraching him as followeth 1. THat the said Sir Richard Weston about the moneth of November Anno Domini 1635. then being one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer and having taken an oath for the due Administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion c. ut suprà in Sir Robert Berkley's Charge 2. That in or about the moneth of February Anno Domini 1636 the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of the said Court of Exchequer subscribed an extraiudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a Letter from his Maiesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned c utsuprà 3 That the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of his Maiesties Court of Exchequer did deliver his opinion and iudgement in the Exchequer chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in the Case of shipmoney That he the said Iohn Hampden c. as in Judge Crawley's Charg 4. That where as in the moneth of April 16. Carol the Officers of the Custome-house having seised a ship of one Samuel Warner's laden with Tabacco being the goods of the said Warner the bulke of the said ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course of the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said ship might be restored to the Proprietors giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Attorney that there needed no information because there was no penalty the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme deny the restitution of the said ship unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmers of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover upon the case in the Office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seised his ship and goods Whereupon the Kings Attorney Generall exhibited an Information by English Bill in the Exchequer-chamber against the said Warner setting forth that Customes and Subsidies upon Merchandize were a great part of the Kings revenue and payable to him and that the said ship was seised for non-payment of the aforesaid duties Notwithstanding the said Warner the proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a Suit at Law and prayes that he may answer the said information before any further proceedings be had at Law Thereupon the said Sir Richard Weston together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the proprietor moving for delivery of his said goods should first answer to the Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine duty was set forth by the Information Which demurrer yet remaines not over-ruled but the said Sir Richard Weston with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurrer ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceed upon the action of Trover The proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pretence of viewing the said goods caused them to be brought forth of a Cellar hired by a Deputy to the Farmors to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffs of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the president inrolls his case the said Sir Richard Weston with the said other Barons adiudged that the said goods were not replevisable and granted an Iniunction to maintaine the possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by Protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Richard Weston and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Richard Weston shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premises or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Richard Weston one of the Barons of his Maiesties Court of Exchequer may be put to answer c. The Articles of impeachment of Sir Robert Berkley Knight one of the Iustices of the Court of the Kings Bench by the Commons in this present Parliament assembled in their own name and in the name of all the Commons of England in maintenance of their accusation whereby he standeth charged with high treason and other great misdemeanors 1. INprimis that the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Kings Bench hath traiterously and wickedly endevoured to subvert the fundamentall Lawes and established government of the Realme of England and in stead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannicall government against Law which he hath declared by traiterous and wicked words opinions judgements practices and actions appearing in the severall Articles ensuing 2. Whereas by the Statute made in the five and twentieth yeare of the reigne of the late King Henry the eight prices of victualls are appointed to be rated in such manner as in the said Statute is declared But it is manifest by the said Statute Corne is none of the victualls thereby intended Neverthelesse some ill affected persons endevouring to bring a charge upon the subjects contrary to Law did surmise that the prices of Corn might be rated and set according to the direction of that Statute and thereupon great gaine might be raised to his Majesty by licenses and dispensations for selling Corne at other prices And a
such cause onely as was clearly baileable by Law yet hee remanded them where they remained prisoners very long which said deferring to grant the said writs of Habeas Corpus and refusals and delayes to discharge prisoners or suffer them to be bailed contained in in this Article are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petition of Right were well knowne to him the sud Sir Iohn Brampston 4. That whereas there was a cause depending in the Court Christian at Norwich between Samul Booly Clerk and _____ Collard for two shillings in the pound for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich the said Collard moved by his Councell in the Court of Kings Bench for a prohibition to stay proceedings in the Court Christian at Norwich and delivered into the said Court of Kings Bench his suggestions that the said cause in the said Court Christian was for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich which was determinable by the Common Law only yet he the said Sir Iohn Brampston being chiefe Justice of the said Court of Kings Bench and sitting in the said Court deferred to grant a prohibition to the said Court Christian in the said cause although the Counsell did move in the said Court severall times and several termes for a Prohibitions And he the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to grant his Majesties writs of prohibition to severall other Courts on the motions of divers others of his Majesties subjects where the same by Laws of this Realme ought to have been granted contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and his owne knowledge And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Iohn Brampston and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Iohn Brampston shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall bee exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Iohn Brampston Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Francis-Crawley Knight one of the Iustices of his Majesties Court of common-Common-pleas impeaching him as followeth 1. THAT he about the moneth of November Anno Dom. 1635. then being one of the Justices of the Court of common-Common-pleas and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more peculiarly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime patts as in case of Piracie or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath been and may bee lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger of which his Majesty is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to bee borne by all the Realme in generall This I hold agreeable both to Law and Reason 2. That he in or about the Month of February Ann. Dom. 1636. then being one of the Justices of the said Court of common-Common-pleas subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as he shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse and whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoyded C.R. May it please your most excellent Majesty We have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of as together taken into serious consideration the Case and Question signed by your Majesty and inclosed in your Royall Letter And we are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Seale of England command all the subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majesty shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And we are also of opinion that in such case your Majesty is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same us to be prevented and avoyded Iohn Bramston Iohn Finch Humphrey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Jones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Barkley Francis Crawley Richard Westone 3. That hee then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Common pleas delivered an opinion in the Exchequer Chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in case of Ship-money that he the said Iohn Hampden upon the matter substance of the case was chargeable with the money then in question a copy of which proceedings and judgement the Commons of this present Parliament have already delivered to your Lordshis 4. That he then being one of the Justices of the said Court of common-Common-pleas declared and published in the Exchequer Chamber and Westminster Circuit where he went Judge That the Kings Right to Ship-money was so inherent a Right in the Crown as an Act of Parliament could not take it away And with divers malicious speeches enveighed against threatned and discountenanced such as refused to pay Ship money All which opinions and judgements contained in the first second and third Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the Subjects right of property and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petitions of Right were well knowne to him And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the Liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Francis Crawley also of replying to the answer
William Jones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Barkley Francis Crawley Richard Westone 6. That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and duly sworne as aforesaid did on the _____ deliver his opinion in the Exchequer Chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in the Case of Ship-mony that hee the said Iohn Hampden upon the matter and substance of the Case was chargeable with the money then in question A coppie of which proceeding and judgement the Commons of this present Parliament have delivered to your Lordships 7. That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and one of the Justices of Assize for the County of Yorke did at the Assizes held at Yorke in Lent 1636. deliver in his charge to the grand Iurie that it was a lawfull and inseparable flower of the Crowne for the King to command not onely the Maritime Counties but also those that were In-land to finde ships for the defence of the Kingdome And then likewise falsely and maliciously affirmed that it was not his single judgement but the judgement of all his brethren witnessed by their subscriptions And then also sayd that there was a rumour that some of his Brethren that had subscribed were of a contrary judgement but it was a base and unworthy thing for any to give his hand contrary to his heart and then wished for his owne part that his hand might rot from his arme that was guiltie of any such crime when as he knew that Mr. Justice Hullen and Mr. Justice Croâ—kâ— who had subscribed were of a contrary opinion and was present when they were perswaded to subscribe and did subscribe for conformitie onely because the major number of the Judges had subscribed And he the sayd Sir Robert Berkley then also said that in some Cases the Judges were above an Act of Parliament which said fals malitious words were uttered as aforesaid with intent and purpose to countenance and maintaine the said unjust opinions and to terrifie his Majesties Subjects that should refuse to pay Ship-money or seek any remedie by Law against the said unjust and illegall taxation 8. That whereas Richard Chambers Merchant having commenced a suit for trespasse and false imprâ—sonment against Sir Edward Bromfield Knight for imprisoning him the said Chambers for refusing to pay Ship-mony in the time that the said Sir Edward Bromfield was Lord Maior of the Citie of London in which sure the said Sir Edward Bromfield did make a speciall justification The said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench in Trinity Term last then sitting on the Bench in the said Court upon debate of the said case between the said Chambers and Sir Edward Bromfield said openly in the Court that there was a rule of Law and a rule of government And that many things which might not be done by the rule of Law might be done by the rule of government and would not suffer the point of legalitie of Ship-money to be argued by the said Chambers his Councell all which opinions declarations words and speeches contained in the third fourth fifth sixth seventh and eighth Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Laws of this Realme the Subjects right of propertie and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament to the petition of right which resolution in Parliament and petition of right were well known to him and resolved and enacted when hee was the Kings Sergeant at law and attendant in the Lords house of Parliament 9. That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Judges of the Court of Kings Bench and being in commission of the Peace and duly sworn to execute the office of a Justice of Peace in the Countie of Hertford on or about the seventh of Ianuary 1638. at which time the generall Sessions of the Peace for the said Countie were there holden The said Sir Robert Berkley then and there sitting on the Bench did revile and threaten the grand Jurie returned to serve at the said Sessions for presenting the removall of the communion Table in All Saints Church in Hertford aforesaid out of the place where it anciently and usually stood and setting it Altar-waies against the Lawes of this Realme in that Case made and provided as an innovation in matters concerning the Church the said grand Jurie having dilivered to them in charge at the said Sessions by Master Sergeant Atkins a Justice of the Peace of the said Countie of Hertford that by the oath they had taken they were bound to present all innovations concerning Church matters And he the said Sir Robert Berkley compelled the fore-man of the Jurie to tell him who gave him any such information and thereby knowing it to be one Henry Browne one of the said grand Jurie he asked the said Browne how he durst meddle with Church matters who affirming that in the said charge from Master Sergeant Atkins the said Jurie was charged to doe he the said Sir Robert Berkley told the said Browne hee should therefore finde suerties for the good behavior and that he the said Sir Robert Berkley would set a great fine on his head to make him an example to others and thereupon the said Browne offered sufficient baile but he the said Sir Robert Barkley being incensed against him refused the said baile and committed the said Browne to prison where he lay in Irons till the next morning and used to the said Brown and the rest of the Iurors many other reviling and terrifying speeches And said he knew no Law for the said presentment and told the said Browne that hee had sinned in the said presentment And he compelled the said grand Jurors to say they were forty for what they had done in that presentment and did bid them to trample the said presentment under their feet and caused Browne to teare the said presentment in his sight And he the said Sir Robert Berkley when as Iohn Houland and Ralph Pemberton late Maior of Saint Albons came to desire his opinion on severall Indictments against John Browne Parson of Saint Albons and Anthony Smith Vicar of Saint Peters in Saint Albons at the quatter Sessions held at the said towne of Saint Albons on the foure and twentieth of June 1639. for the removall of the Communion Table out of the usuall place and not administring the Sacrament according to Law in that Case provided He the said Sir Robert Berkley then told them that such an Indictment was before him at Hertford and that he quashed the same and imprisoned the Promoters by which threatning and reviling speeches unjust actions and declarations he so terrified the Jurors in those parts that they durst not present any Innovations in the Church matters to then great griefe and trouble of their consciences And whereas severall Indictments were preferred against Iohn Brook Parson of Yarmouâ—h by Iohn Ingram and Iohn Carter
sufficient baile And he the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the Court of the Kings Bench denyed to grant his Majesties writs of Habtas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subiects and when he had granted the said writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and on the returne no cause appeared or such onely as was clearly baileable by Law yet hee remanded them where they remained prisoners very long which said deferring to grant the said writs of Habeas Corpus and refusals and delayes to discharge prisoners or suffer them to be bailed contained in this Article are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petition of Right were well knowne to him the said Sir Rebert Berkley and were resolved on and enacted when he was the Kings Serjeant at Law and Attendant in the Lords House in Parliament 11. That whereas there was a cause depending in the Court Christian at Norwich between Samuel Booty Clerke and _____ Collard for two shillings in the pound for tythes for rents houses in Norwich and the said Collard moved by his Councell in the Court of Kings Bench for a prohibition to stay proceedings in the Court Christian at Norwich and delivered into the said Court of Kings Bench his suggestions that the said cause in the said Court Christian was onely for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich which was determinable by the Common Law onely yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the said Court of Kings Bench and sitting in the said Court deferring to grant a prohibition to the said Court Christian in the said cause although the Councel did move in the said Court many severall times and severall termes for a prohibition And he the said Sir Robert Berkley deferred to grant his Majesties writ of prohibition to severall other Courts on the motions of divers others of his Majesties subjects where the same by the Lawes of this Realme ought to have been granted contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and his owne knowledge All which words opinions and actions were so spoken and done by him the said Sir Robert Berkley traiterously and wickedly to alienate the hearts of his Majesties liege people from his Majesty to set a division betwixt them and to subvert the fundamentall Lawes and established government of his Majesties Realme of England For which they doe impeach him the said Sir Rebert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench of high treason against our Soveraigne Lord the King his Crowne and dignity and of the misdemeanors above mentioned And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Robert Berkley and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Robert Berkley shall make to the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premises or any other impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Robert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench may be put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trialls judgements and executions may be upon every of them had used as is agreeable to Law Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Iohn Bramston Knight Lord chiefe Iustice of the Court of Kings Bench impeaching him as followeth 1. THAT the said Sir Iohn Bramston then being Lord Chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties Liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme did on or about the last of November 1635. subscribe his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more peculicaly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime parts as in case of Pyracy or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath beene and may be lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger of which his Majesty is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to be borne by all the Realme in generall this I hold agreeable both to Law and Reason 2. That he the said Sir Iohn Bramston then being Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench about the Month of February 1635. did subscribe an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty which letter questions and answers follow in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as he shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill and by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided C. R. May it please your most excellent Majestie Wee have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of us together taken into serious consideration the Case Question assigned by your Majestie and inclosed in your Royall Letter And wee are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Sealt of England command all the Subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Shippes with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majestie shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And wee are also of opinion that in such case your Majestie is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided Iohn Brampflan Iohn Finch Humphtey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Iones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Derkley Francis Crewley Richard Weston Which said opinions contained in the first and second Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the subjects right of property and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of
that he the said Sir Francis Crawley shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or of any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require Doe pray that the said Sir Francis Crawlty one of the Justices of the said Court of common-Common-pleas may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every one of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Humphrey Davenport Knight Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth THAT whereas in the moneth of October in the fourth yeare of his Majesties reigne the Farmours and Officers of the Custome-house having seized great quantities of Currants being the goods of Samuel Vassall Merchant and having conveyed them into certaine Store houses at the Custome-house and detained them because the said Samuel Vassall refused to pay an imposition of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of the said Currants pretended to bee due upon and demanded by the said Farmours Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said Currants whereas no such imposition was due or parable for the same but the said imposition was and is against the Lawes of this Realme And whereas also in Mâ—chaelmas Tearme in the said fourth yeare of his Majesties reigne his Majesties then Atturney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer against the said Samuel Vassall setting forth that King Iames by his Letters Patents dated tertio Novemb. in the second yeare of his reigne did command the said imposition of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of Currants should be demanded and received And that his Majesty that now is by his Letters Patents dated the six and twentieth day of July in the second yeare of his Reigne did by advice of his Privy Councell declare his will and pleasure to bee that Subsidies Customes and Impost should be levied in such manner as they were in the time of King Iames and the same and the Farmes thereof to continue untill it might receive a setling by Parliament and commanded the levying and receiving the same accordingly and that the said Sam. Vassall before the said first day of Octob. then last before the said information exhibited did bring into the port of London in ships foure thousand six hundred thirty eight hundred weight of Currants Richard Carmarthen Surveyour 〈◊〉 the said port of London the said first day of Octob. demanded of the said Samuel Vassal the said Imposition of five shillings six pence for every hundred weight of the said Currants and that the said Samuel Vassall refused to pay the said imposition and unjustly detained it from the King To which information the said Samuel Vassall appeared and pleaded the Statute of Magna Charta and the Statute of De Tallagio non concedendo and that hee was a Subject borne under the Kings Allegeance and a Merchant of London using that trade and that the said summe of five shillings six pence-upon every hundred weight of Currants was and is malum talentum and not antiqâ—a seu recta consuetudo and that it was imposed without assent of Parliament to which Plea the said Atturney Generall demurred in Law and the said Samuel Vassall joyned in demurrer with him and when the said cause came to be argued viz. in Trinity Terme in the sixth yeare of his Majesties Reigne the said Sir Humphrey Davenport being then Lord chiefe Barron of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and to the great impoverishment of the said Samuel Vassall publikely denie to heare the Counsell of the said Samuel Vassall to argue for him and said that the case of the said Samuel Vassall would fall under the same rule with the case of one Bates and therefore was already judged and when the Councell of the said Samuell Vassall answering that they had nothing to doe with Bates his Case but desired to argue for Master Vassall the said Sir Humphrer Davenport replyed that they knew the opinion of the Court and should bee heard no further and said that the King was in possession and that they meaning the said Court of Exchequer would keepe him in possession And the said Sir Humphrey Davenport shortly after did together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer imprison the said Samuel Vassal for not paying such summes of mony as were pretended by the said Officers of the Custome-house to bee due to his Majesty and did delay the said Samuel Vassal from time to time from having restitution of his said goods being often in Court moved thereto with intention to force the said Samuel Vassal to pay the said unlawfull imposition and did also give his opinion and judgement upon the said Information for the King and against the said Samuel Vassal and by severall orders for that purpose made did continue the possession of the said goods in the King and the said Samuel Vassal could never obtaine any restitution at all of his said goods whereas it was commanded to the Sheriffe of the County of Yorke by Writ under the Seale of his Majesties Court of Exchequer dated the sixteenth day of May in the seventh yeare of his Majesties Reigne that now is That hee should distraine Iames Maleverer Esquire to appeare before the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer in the Octaves of the Holy Trinity then next following to make fine to the KING for his trespasse and contempt in not comming to the presence of the KING before the one and thirtieth day of January in the first yeare of his said Majesties Reigne to take upon him the order of Knighthood according to the forme of a Proclamation in that behalfe formerly made at which day of the said Octaves of the Holy Trinity the fâ—id Iames Maleverer did appeare and pleaded to the said Writs that although his said Majesty the said one and thirtieth day of January and for three dayes next before the said one and thirtieth day of January was resident and remaining at his Palace at White-hall in the County of Middlesex and that the said James Malaeverer the said one and thirtieth day of January and three dayes next before the said one and thirtieth day of January was resident and remaining at Ancliffe in the said County of Yorke which is distant from the said Palace of White-hall the space of one hundred and fourescore miles and that the said Iames Maleverer the said one and thirtieth day of January aforesaid or at any time before had no lands or rents in his owne hands or in the hands of Feoffees to his use out of the said County
Right 3. That he the said Sir Iohn Brampston then Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench about Trinity Tearme 1637. refused to baile or discharge Alexander Iennings prisoner in the Fleet brought by habeas Corpus to the barre before him the return of this Commitment being two severall warrants from the Lords of the Councell dated the fifth of November 1635. the first expressing no cause the other for not paying Messengers fees and untill hee should bring certificate that hee had paid his Assesment for ship-money in the County of Bucks And the said Sir Iohn Brampston the first warrant being onely read then said The cause of his Commitment did not appeare and that it was not fit for every Goaler to be made acquainted by the Lords of the Councell why they committed and therefore remitted him And in Michaelmas Tearme after the said Iennings being brought by another habeas Corpus as aforesaid and the same returned yet hee the said Sir Iohn Brampston refused to discharge or baile him but remitted him And in Easter Tearme next after severall rules for his Majesties Councell to shew cause why he the said Iennings should not bee bailed a fourth rule was made for the said Iennings to let his Majesties Atturney have notice which notice was given accordingly yet he remitted him And the said Iennings by another habeas Corpus brought to the Barre as aforesaid in Trinity Tearme after and the same returne with the addition of a new Commitment of the fourth of May 1638. suggested that he the said Iennings had used divers scandalous words in derogation and disparagement of his Majesties government After severall rules in the end of the said Trinity Tearme he againe remitted him to prison And he the said Sir Iohn Brampston about the 9. of July after at his chamber in Serjeants Inne being desired by Master Meâ—wtis one of the Clerkes of the Councell-boord to discharge the said Iennings for that he the said Iennings had entred into a bond of one-thousand pounds to appeare before the Lords of the Councell the next Michaelmas Tearme after and to attend de die in diem yet the said Sir Iohn Brampston refused to discharge the said Iennings untill hee entred into Recognizance to appeare the next Tearme and in the meane time to bee of his good behaviour And the said Iennings was continued on his said Recognizance till Easter Tearme after And the said Sir Iohn Brampston did on the fifth of June 1640. deferre to grant his Majesties writ of habeas Corpus for Samuel Danvers and William Pargiter Esquites prisonerâ— in the Gate house and in the Eleet and when hee had granted the said Writ the said eight of June after the returne being the order of the Councell Table not expressing any cause he the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to baile the said Pargiter And the eighteenth of Iune after made a rule for a new returne to be received which was returned the five and twentieth of the said June in haec verba Whereas his Majesty finding that his Subjects of Scotland have in rebellious and hostile manner assembled themselves together and intend not only to shake off their obedience unto his Majesty but also as enemies to â—avade and infest this his Kingdome of England to the danger of his Royall Person c. For prevention whereof his Majesty hath by the advice of his Councell-board given speciall commandement to all the Lord Lieutenants of all the Counties of his Realm with expedition to array and arme a certain number of able men in each County to be prepared ready to be condacted to such places as should be appointed for their Randezvouz in their severall and respective Counties there to be conducted and drawne together into a body for this service And whereas his Majestie according to the Lawes and Statutes of this realme and the constant custome of his Predecessours Kings and Queenes of this Realme hath power for the defence of this kingdome and resisting the force of the Enemies thereof to grant forth Commissions under his great Seale to such fit persons as hee shall make choice of to array and arme the Subjects of this kingdome and to compell those who are of able boly and of able estates to arme themselves and such as should not bee able of bodies but of abilitie in estate to assesse them according to their estates to contribute towards the charge of arraying and arming others being able of body and not able in estate to arme themselves And such persons as should be contrariant to commit to prison there to remaine untill the King should take further order therein And whereas the Earle of Exeter by vertue of his Majesties Commission to him directed for the arraying and arming of a certaine number of persons in the Countie of Northampton hath assest William Pargiter being a man unfit of body for that service but being of estate and abilitie fit to contribute amongst others to pay the sum of five shillings toward the arraying and arming of others of able bodies and wanting abilitie to array and arme themselves And whereas wee have received information from the said Earle that the said William Pargiter hath not only in a wilfull and disobedient manner refused to pay the said money assessed upon him towards so important a service to the disturbance and hinderance of the necessary defence of this kingdome but also by his ill example hath mis-led many others and as we have just cause to beleeve hath practised to seduce others from that ready obedience which they owe and would otherwise have yeelded to his Majesties just command for the publick defence of his person and kingdome which we purpose with all convenient speed to enquire further of and examine These are therefore to will and require you to take into your custodie the person of the said Willam Pargiter and him safely to keepe prisoner till further order from this Board or untill by due course of Lawe he shall bee delivered And the like return was then made in all things mutatis mutandis concerning the said Danvers for not paying a sum of money assessed upon him Yet hee the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to bail the said Danvers and Pargiter but remitted the said Danvers to the Fleet where hee remained till the 12. of July 1640. and the said Pargiter to the Gate-house where he remained till the ninth of November last although the said Ienings Danvers and Pargiter upon all and every the said returns ought to have been discharged or bailed by Law and the Councell of the said Ienings Danvers and Pargiter offered in Court very sufficient baile And he the said Sir Iohn Brampston being chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench denyed to grant his Majesties Writ of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subiects and when hee had granted the said writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and on the returne no cause appeared or
of Yorke and that that part of the said County of Yorke which is neerest to the said Palace of White hall is distant from the said Palace of White-hall the space of one hundred and thirty miles and that no Proclamation by vertue of any Writ of Proclamation for the appearance of any persons whatsoever to take the said Order of Knighthood was made in any part of the said County of Yorke before the thirtieth day of January in the said first yeare of his Majesties Reigne by reason whereof the said Iames Malaverer could not personally come to the presence of his said Majesty to take the said Order of Knighthood before the said one and thirtieth day of January in the said first yeare of his Majesties said Reigne yet the said Iames Maleverer for his fine in the premisses did humbly submit himselfe to the said Court and demanded to be discharged of the said issues returned and imposed upon him by reason of the premisses yet notwithstanding the said Plea and submission of the said Iames Maleverer and after the same was made as aforesaid and entred upon Record in his Majesties said Court of Exchequer and the said Court moved for stay of the Processe and discharge of the issues the said Sir Humphrey Davenport being then Lord chiefe Baron of the said Court of Exchequer contrary to his oath and contrary the Lawes of this Realme and to the great impoverishing of the said James Maleverer did together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court refuse to impose any fine whatsoever upon the said James Maleverer and told him that the said Court had no power to fine him and that hee must compound with certaine Commissioners for that puropose appointed And did farther order and direct severall other writs of Distringas to issue forth of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer under the Seale of the said Court directed to the severall high Sheriffes of the said County of Yorke whereby the said Sheriffes were commanded further to distraine the said James Maleverer to appeare as aforesaid upon which said writs of Distringas severall great and excessive issues were returned upon the lands of the said Iames Maleverer amounting to the somme of two thousand pounds or thereabours a great part whereof the said Iames Maleverer was inforced to pay and in like manner the said Sir Humphrey Davenport together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer did order and direct such and the like unjust and undue proceedings and the said proceedings were had and made accordingly against Thomas Moyser Esquire and against severall other persons his Majesties subjects in severall parts of this Realme to the utter undoing of many of them 2. That a sentence of Degradation being given by the high Commissioners of the Province of Yorke against Peter Smart Clerke one of the Prebends of the Church of Durham for a Sermon by him formerly preached against some Innovations in the Church of Durham a triall was afterwards had viz. in August in the seventh yeare of his said Majesties Reigne before the said Sir Humphrey Davenport Knight then one of the Judges of Assizes and Nisi crius for the County Palatine of Durham concerning the Corps of the Prebend of the said Mr. Smart which was then pretended to bee void by the said sentence of Degradation the said Sir Humphrey Davenport contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and to the destruction of the said Master Smart upon reading the writ dehaeret co comburendo did publikely on the Bench in the presence of divers his Majesties subjects then attending declare his opinion to bee that the said Prebends place was void and gave directions to the Jury then at Barre to finde accordingly and being then informed that although the said Master Smart had beene dead or deprived yet the profits of his Prebend had beene due to his Executors till the Michaelmas following the said Sir Numphrey Davenport then answered that though the said Master Smart was not dead yet if he had had his desert he had beene dead long agoe for hee deserved to have beene hanged for the said Sermon and that he was as wicked a man as any lived in the world call him no more Master Smart but plain Smart And when the said Jury had found against the said Mr Smart the said Sir H. Davenport in scandall of his Majesties Government and Justice and of the proceedings of his Majesties Judges did publikely as aforesaid speak words to this effect that the said Jury had well done and that the said Smart had no remedy save by appeale to the King and there he should finde but cold comfort for the King would not goe against his owne Prerogative upon which the Judges and high Commissioners did depend and therfore would not contradict one anothers Acts. That the said Sir Humphrey Davenport about the Month of November Anno Dom. 1635. then being Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of exchequer and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties Liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of that Realme subscribed his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more particularly redound to the good of the Potts or Maritime parts as in case of Pyracy or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath beene and may bee lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger of which his Majesty is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to be borne by all the Realme in generall this I hold agreeable both to Law and Reason That in or about the Month of February Anno Dom 1636. the said Sir Humphrey Davenport then being Lord chiefe Baron of the said Court of Exchequer subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as he shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill and by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided C. R. May it please your most excellent Majestie Wee have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of us together taken into serious consideration the Case Question assigned by your Majestie and inclosed in your Royall Letter
said County of Yorke whereby the said Sheriffes were commanded further to distraine the said Iames Maleverer to appeare as aforesaid upon which said writs of Distringas severall great and excessive issues were returned upon the lands of the said Iames Maleverer amounting to the summe of two thousand pounds or thereabouts a great part whereof the said Ianes Maleverer was inforced to pay and in like manner the said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer did order and direct such and the like proceedings and the said proceedings were had and made accordingly against Thomas Moyser Esquire and against severall other persons his Majesties subjects in severall parts of this Kingdome to the utter undoing of many of them 5 That he the said Sir Thomas Trevor about the moneth of November Anno. Domini 1635. then being one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion c. ut suprain Baron Davenports Charge pag. 30. 6 That in or about the moneth of February Anno Domini 1636. then being one of the Barons of the said Court of Exchequer he subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned c. ut suprà loco citato and subscribed ut priùs 7 That the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer did deliver his opinion and judgement in the Exchequer chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in the case of Ship-money That he the said Iohn Hampden upon the matter and substance of the case was chargeable with the money then in question a copie of which proceedings and judgement the Commons in this present Parliament have already delivered to your Lordshippes 8. That whereas in the moneth of April 16. Car. the Officers of the Custome-house having seised a Ship of one Samuel Warner's laden with Tobacco being the goods of the said Warner the Bulke of the said ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course of the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said Ship might be restored to the Proprietor giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Atturney that there needed no information because there was no penalty the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then one of the Barons of his Maiesties said Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme deny the restitution of the said Ship unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmors of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover in the office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seised his Ship and goods whereupon the Kings Atturney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer chamber against the said Warner setting forth that customes and Subsidies upon Merchandise were a great part of the Kings revenue and payable to him and that the said Ship was seised for non-payment of the aforesaid duties notwithstanding the said Warner then Proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a suit at Law and prayes that he may answer the said Information before any further proceedings be had at Law Thereup the said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the Proprietor moving for delivery of the said goods should first answer to the said Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine duty was set forth by the Information which demurrer yet remaines not over-ruled but the said Sir Thomas Trevor with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurrer ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceed upon the action of Trover The Proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pretence of viewing the said goods caused them to be brought forth of a Cellar hired by a deputie of the Farmors to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffe of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the President inrolls his case the said Sir Thomas Trevor with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not Replevisable and granted an Iniunction to maintaine the possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by protestation saving to themselves only the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Thomas Trevor and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Thomas Trevor shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proof of the premises or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Thomas Trevor one of the Barons of his Maiesties Court of Exchequer may be put to answer to all and every the premises and that such proceedings examinations tryals and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice FINIS
for refusing severall times to administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to them without any lawful cause at the Assizes held at Norwich in _____ 1633. Hee the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Judges of the Assize proceeded then to the tryall on the said Indictments where the matter in issue being that the said Brookâ— refused to administer the said Sacrament because the said Ingram and Corter would not receive tickets with their Sir names before their Christen names which was a course never used amongst them but by the said Brooke He the said Sir Robert Berkley did then much discourage the said Ingrams Counsell and over rule the cause for matter of Law so as the Jury never went from the Bar but there found for the said Brooke And the said Sir Robert Berkley bound the said Ingram to the good behaviour for the prosecuting the said Indictments and ordered him to pay costs to the said Brooke for wrongfully inditing him And whereas the said Carter not expecting the triall at the same Assizes he preferred his Indictment was then absent whereupon the said Sir Robert Berkley did cause to be entred upon the said Indictment a vâ—â—at quia non sufficiens in lege and ordered an Attachment against the said Carter which said proceedings against the said Ingram and Carter by the said Sir Robert Berkley were contrary to Law and Justice and to his owne knowledge 10. That the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and duly sworne as aforesaid in Trinity terme 1637. deferred to discharge or baile Alexender Jenings prisoner in the Fleet brought by Habeas Corpus to the Bar of the said Court the returne of his Commitment being that he was committed by two severall warrants from the Lords of the Councell dated the fift of November 1636. the first being only read in Court expressing no cause the other for not paying Messengers fees and untill he should bring a certificate that hee had paid his Assessement for Ship money in the County of Bucks but remitted him And in Michaelmas Terme after the said Jenings being brought by another Habeas Corpus before him as aforesaid and the same returned yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley refused to discharge or baile him but remitted him And in Easter Terme after severall rules were given for his Majesties Councell to shew cause why the said Jenings should not be bailed a fourth rule was made for the said Jenings to let his Majesties Attorney generall have notice thereof and notice was given accordingly and the said Jenings by another Habeas Corpus brought to the Bar in Trinity Terme after and the same returne with this addition of a new Commitment of the fourth of May suggesting hee the said Jenings had used divers scandalous words in derogation and disparagement of his Majesties government He the said Ienings after severall rules in the end of the said Trinity Terme was againe remitted to prison And he the said Sir Robert Berkley did on the fifth of June last deferre to grant his Majesties writs of Habaas Corpus for William Pâ—rgiter and Samuel Danvers Esquires Prifoners in the Gate house and in the Fleet And afterwards having granted the said writ of Habeas Corpus the said Pargiter and Danvers were on the eight of June last brought to the Bar of the said Court where the returnes of their Commitments were severall warrants from the Lords of the Councell not expressing any cause yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley then sitting in the said Court deferred to baile the said Pargiter and Danvers and the eighteenth of June last made a rule for a new returne to be received which were returned the 25. of June last in haec verba Whereas his Majesty finding that his Subjects of Scotland have in rebellious and hostile manner assembled themselves together and intend not only to shake off their obedience unto his Majesty but also as enemies to invade and infest this his Kingdome of England to the danger of his Royall Person c. For prevention whereof his Majesty hath by the advice of his Councell-board given speciall commandement to all the Lord Lieutenants of all the Counties of this Realme appointed for their Randezvouz in their severall and respective Counties there to be conducted and drawne together into a body for this service And whereas his Majestie according to the Lawes and Statutes of this realme and the constant custome of his Prodecessours Kings and Queenes of this Realme hath power for the defence of this kingdome and resisting the force of the Enemies thereof to grant forth Commissions under his great Seale to such fit persons as hee shall make choice of to array and arme the Subjects of this kingdome and to compell those who are of able body and of able estates to arme themselves and such as should not bee able of bodies but of abilitie in estate to assesse them according to their estates to contribute towards the charge of arraying and arming others being able of body and not able in estate to arme themselves And such persons as should be contrariant to commit to prison there to remaine untill the King should take further order therein And whereas the Earle of Exeter by vertue of his Majesties Commission to him directed for the arraying and arming of a certaine number of persons in the Countie of Northampton hath assest William Pargiter being a man unfit of body for that service but being of estate and abilitie fit to contribute amongst others to pay the sum of five shillings toward the arraying and arming of others of able bodies and wanting abilitie to array and arme themselves And whereas wee have received information from the said Earle that the said William Fargiter hath not only in a wilfull and disobedient manner refused to pay the said money assessed upon him towards so important a service to the disturbance and hinderance of the necessary defence of this kingdome but also by his ill example hath mis-led many others and as we have just cause to beleeve hath practised to seduce others from that ready obedience which they owe and would otherwise have yeelded to his Majesties just command for the publick defence of his person and kingdome which we purpose with all convenient speed to enquire further of and examine These are therefore to will and require you to take into your custodie the persons of the said Willam Pargiter and Samuel Danvers and them safely to keepe prisoners till further order from this Board or untill by due course of Lawe they shall bee delivered Yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley being desired to baile the said Pargiter and Danvers remitted them where they remained prisoners till the ninth of November last or thereabouts although the said Ienings Pargiter and Danvers on all and every the said returnes were clearcly baileable by Law and the councell of the said Ienings Pargiter and Danvers offered in Court very
And wee are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Shippes with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majestie shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And wee are also of opinion that in such case your Majestie is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided Iohn Brampston Iohn Finch Humphrey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Iones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Derkley Frantis Crawley Richard Weston That whereas an action of Battery was brought by one Richard Legge against Robert Hoblins to which the said Hoblins pleaded Justification de son assault de mesme and the said cause came to triall at the Assizes holden for the County of Gloucester in Summer 1636. before the said Sir Humphrey Davenport then one of the Justices of Assize and Nisiprius for that County At the said triall the said Robert Hoblins did begin to make proofe of his said Justification and produced one Robert Tily a witnesse in the cause who proved upon oath that the said Richard Legge did make the first assault upon the said Robert Hoblins and that the occasion thereof was that the said Richard Legge and others came upon the Lands then in possession of the said Hoblins and did take and drive away eighteen Cowes of the said Hoblins pretending they had a warrant from the Sheriffe to distreine the same for fourty shillings assessed upon the said Hoblins for Ship-money And when the said Hoblins being present endevoured to hinder the said Legge and others from taking away his said Cattell the said Legge strooke the said Hobilins with a staffe who after defended himselfe That upon the opening of the matter the said Sir Humphrey Davenport would not suffer the said Hoblins to produce any more witnesses on his behalfe though the sayd Hoblins desired that other of his witnesses then present and sworne might bee heard nor his Councell to speak for him but being informed that the said Hoblins when Ship-money was demanded of him answered that hee would not pay the same because it was not granted by Parliament the said Sir Humphrey Davenport did then openly in the hearing of a great number of his Majesties liege people then assembled and attending the Court in great passion reprove the said Hollins and told him that the King was not to call a Parliament to give him satisfaction and did then and there also falsly and of purpose to prevent his Majesties loving subjects from the due and ordinary course of Law and contrary to his oath and the Lawes of the Realine publish declare and affirme that it was adjudged by all the Judges of England that Ship-money was due to the King and directed the Jury sworne in that cause to finde a verdict for the said Richard Legge And the said Jury did accordingly and gave him twenty pound dammages And the said Humphrey Daverport did then also without any cause imprison the said Robert Hoblins and bound him to the good behaviour That whereas in the month of April Decimo sexto Caroli the Officers of the Custome-house having seized a Shippe of one Samuel Warner laden with Tobacco being the goods of the said Warner the Bulk of the said Ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course of the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said Ship might bee restored to the Proprietors giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Atturney that there needed no information because there was no penalty the said Sir Humphrey Davenport being then Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his Oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme deny the restitution of the said Shippe unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmours of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover in the Office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seized his Shippe and Goods Whereupon the Kings Atturney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer Chamber against the said Warner setting forth that Customes and Subsidie upon Merchandize were a great part of the Kings revenne and payable to him And that the said Ship was seized for non-payment of the foresayd duties notwithstanding the said Warner then Proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a suit at Law and prayes that he may answer the said information before any further proceedings bee had at Law Thereupon the said Sir Humphrey Davenport together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the Proprietor moving for the delivery of the said goods should first answer to the Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine duty was set forth by the Information which demurrer yet remaines not over-ruled but the said Sir Humphrey Davenport with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurter ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceede upon the action of Trover The proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by Action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon preâ—ence of viewing the said goods caused them to bee brought forth of a Cellar hired by a Deputy to the Farmours to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffs of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the President inrolls the case the said Sir Hemphrey Davenport with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not Replevisable and granted an Injunction to maintaine possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by protestation saving to themselves only the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir H. Davenport also of replying to the answer that he the said Sr Humphrey Davenport shal make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall bee exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Hamphrey Davenport Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such
proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Thomas Trevor Knight one of the Barons of his Majesties court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth 1. THat in or about November 4. Car. divers goods and merchandizes whereof Iohn Rolls George Moore and other Merchants of London were Proprietors being seised and conveyed into certaine Store-houses at the Custome-house by Sir Iohn Worstenham Abraham Dawes and others the Farmors and Officers of the Customes and by them there detained because the said Proprietors refused to pay the Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage pretended to be due and demanded by the said Farmours and Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said Merchandizes whereas no such subsidy or duty of Tonnage or Poandage was due or payable for the same no Subsidy of Tonnage and Poundage having beene granted by Parliament to his Majesty The said Iohn Rolls and other the Proprietors of the said goods having by reason of such unlawfull seisure and detainer as aforesaid sued forth one or more writ or writs of Replevin directed to the Sheriffes of London being the proper remedy provided by the Law to regaine the possession of goods taken and with-held from the owners contrary to Law the said Sir Thomas Trevor Knight then and yet one of the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court upon information to them given that the said Proprietors or some of them had sued forth and did prosecute such writ or writs of Replevin for the delivery of the said goods did order an Injunction under Seale of the said Court to issue forth directed to the Sheriffes of London commanding them thereby not to execute the said writ or writs of Replevin or any like writ thereafter to be sued forth by any person or persons for the delivery of any goods in the like nature detained And did declare and order publiquely in the said Court of Exchequer that the said goods by Law were not Replevisable alleaging for cause that the said goods were in the Kings owne possession whereas the same did not judicially appeare to them and they did well know that the said goods were at that time in the possession of the Farmours and Lessees of the said Customes and no lawfull cause to them appearing or suggested of the taking and detaining of the said goods which Injunction and Declaration so granted and made were and are against the Lawes of the Realme and in subversion of the common right and remedy of the Subject for regaining the possession of his goods being taken and with-holden from him without lawfull cause That the Sheriffes of London for the time being served with the said Injunction did forbeare to execute the said writ or writs of Replevin By meanes whereof the said good continued so detained as aforesaid contrary to Law from the said moneth of November untill the moneth of June next following That the said Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid knowing the said goods to be unlawfully seized and detained for the pretended duties and Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage whereas no such were payble by Law did from time to time delay the respective Proprietors from having restitution of their said goods being often in Court moved therein with intention thereby to force the said Proprietors by wanting their goods and the use thereof to pay all such summes as the said Officers of the Customes pretended to be due to his Majesty That to the end aforesaid the said Sir Thomas Trevor and the said other Barons refused to accept of any security to be given by the said Proprietors upon restitution had of their goods for payment of all such duties as should to made appeare to be made payable to his Majesty in such manner as the said Barons should direct That the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid knowing that the said summes demanded on his Majesties behalfe by the said officers of the Customes not to be due by Law did refuse to order restitution of any part of those goods so detained as aforesaid to the Proprietors thereof unlesse the said Proprietors would deposite all such summes of money as the said Officers respectively demanded of them for pretended duties to his Majesty and the said Proprietors refufing to deposite the said summes demanded the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid did order the said Officers to detaine double the value of the summes by them demanded for pretended duties to his Majesty and to restore the residue The said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the said Barons then knowing that the pretended summes demanded by the said Officers were not by Law due or payable to his Majesty 2. That in or about January 4. Car. the said Officers having seised severall Merchandize of the goods of Richard Chambers Merchant upon the pretences aforesaid did detaine the same and the said Chambers prosecuting by plaint to have his said goods replevied tho said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the said other Barons did in like manner in the said Court of Exchequer declare the said Chambers his goods not to be replevisable and enjoyned the Sheriffes of London to proceed no further therein no cause to them appearing of such seisure or detainer And the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons of the said Court refused to order the delivery of the said Chambers his goods upon good security offered by him to pay all such summes as should be made appeare to be due and for which the said goods were pretended to be detained and the said Barons being often moved in Court therein did refuse to order restitution of any part of the said Chambers goods untill the 23. of November 5. Carol and then ordered that the said Officers should detaine in their hands double the value of the summes by them demanded and restitution of the residue to be made to the said Chambers no cause of detaining any part of the said goods to them in any wise appearing 3. That whereas in the moneth of October in the fourth yeere of his said Majesties reigne the Farmers and Officers of the Custome-house having seised great quantities of Currants being the goods of Samuel Vassall merchant and having conveyed them into certaine store houses at the Custome house and detained them because the said Samuel Vassall refased to pay an imposition of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of the said currants pretended to be due and demanded by the said Farmours and Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said currants whereas no such imposition was due or payable for the same but the said imposition was and is against the Lawes of this Realme And whereas also in Michaelmas Terme in the said fourth yeere of his Majesties raigne his