Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	court_n	king_n	plea_n	3,508	5	9.7258	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50695	A collection of acts of Parliament, charters, trials at law, and judges opinion concerning those grants to the Colledge of Physicians London, taken from the originals, law-books, and annals, commanded by Sir Edward Alston Kt., president, and the elects and censors / made by Christopher Merret ...	Merret, Christopher, 1614-1695.	1660 (1660)	Wing M1836; ESTC R18709	67,476	139

Statute of 14. H. 8. Wherefore it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Coram Judice D. Jo. Popham APrilis die 8. Anno Dom. 1602. Compauerunt Rogerus Jinkins Simon Read in Aedibus Primarii Angliae Justitiarii D. Johannis Popham Equitis Aurati coram ipso Judice quiritantes de Injuria illis illata per Praesidentem Censores Collegii Medicorum quorum authoritate ob illegitimam Medicinae praxin in Carcerem conjecti sunt ibidemque jam per aliquot septimanas detenti Adfuerunt ex parte Collegii per Praesidentem missi Censores tres D. Johannes Nowell Edwardus Lyster Johannes Argent Incarceratorum causam agebat quidem Magister Harris Jurisperitus Judex prius sedulò perlectis iis Regni statutis quae ad medicinam faciunt Jinkins urgebat ut rationem redderet cur ausus sit Medicinam exercere licenti● non priùs impetratâ à Collegio Medicorum Is Primùm Praxin denegavit Postea urgente magis Judice haesitanter ambigue respondit Tandem metuens ne Jurejurando premeretur fassus est se aliquando Practicasse idque ut putabat non illicitè Quid inquit Judex Obtinuistine unquam Collegii Commune Sigillum Non inquit ille Sed quia Chirurgus sum in opere Chirurgico saepe necessarius est internorum Medicamentorum usus Respondit Judex re ita urgente advocandum esse Medicum atque nullo modo licere Chirurgo medicum agere Objecit Jurisperitus Praesidentis Censorum authoritatem non eam esse quâ possint quenquam in Carcerem conjicere ideoque à Collegio ad alios Judices causam omnem esse promovendam Hunc reprehendit Judex asserebatque validam esse maximéque legitimam hac ex parte Collegii authoritatem Multùm tandem conquestus est Jinkins quòd ob raram praxin eamque ex aliorum Praescripto tam gravis ei Mulcta sit inflicta Tum Libro Annalium ostenso Compertum est eum jam antea sexties Publicè accusatum esse aliquoties etiam leves mulctas subiisse Unde Judici aequissimum visum est ut cum clementer tractatus incorrigibilem tamen se praebuisset graviori tandem mulcta premeretur Et eo quòd aliorum Medicorum Praescriptis ad suam Praxin saepius sit abusus Consultissimum putavit Medicor praescriptis Dies Mensis cum patientis Nomine adscribendus Judex ut omnes Medici Praescriptis suis omnibus diem mensis Patientis nomen inscribant unde fraus iis abutentium faciliùs deprehendi possit Judex Re auditâ Collegiique Censurâ optimè approbatâ Jinkins redditur Carceri Jinkins denuò Carceri reddendum censuit donec Praesidenti Censoribus satisfactum sit Cumque quorundam Amicorum instantiâ rogatus est Judex ut fide-jussoribus admissis immunitatem illi concederet à Carcere Non est inquit Judex penes me ut hoc faciam Legibus enim Regni illis solum datur ut istud concedant Quidam qui astabat objecit Statuto quodam regni cautum esse ne quis liber Civis Londinensis per forinsecum aliquem incarceretur Perlectis statuti verbis nulloque modo sensum hunc ferentibus Hujusmodi inquit Judex interpretationibus meam etiam possitis infringere authoritatem These words the Lord Chief Justice said in hearing this Cause 1. There is no sufficient Licence without the Colledge Seal 2. No Chirurgeon as a Chirurgeon may practise Physick no not for any disease though it be the great Pox. 3. That the authority of the Colledge is strong and sufficient to commit to prison 4. That the Censure of the Colledge rising from lesser mulcts to greater was equal and reasonable 5. That no man though never so learned a Physician or Doctor may practise in London or within seven miles without the Colledge Licence Annal. l. 1. pag. 155 156. Read conquestus est Collegium contra regni statutum ultra 20 l. paenam erogasse verbis statuti perpensis pronuntiavit Judex Collegio licere quam velint mulctam infligere custodem tamen carceris non esse astrictum ut eum detineat si sit ultra 20 l. Read praxin suam asseruit quod statuto regni cuivis concessum est per herbas c. aliquos saltem morbos curare at respondit Judex nonlicere quoniam non ad missus erat per Collegium Resolutions of Questions concerning the Colledge by the Lord Chancellor and Judges THe King having directed his Letters to the Right Honourable Thomas Lord Ellesmere Lord Chancellor of England Sir John Popham Lord chief Justice and one of his privy Councel They the said Lord Chancellor and Lord chief Justice by vertue of the same Letters called unto them Sir Thomas Fleminge then Lord chief Baron Sir Thomas Walmesley Sir Peter Warburton Knights Justices of the Court of common-Common-Pleas and Sir David Williams and Sir Lawrence Tanfield Justices of the Kings-Bench and after due consideration had both of the Charter of King Hen. 8. and several Acts of Parliament thereof made in the 14. year of the same King and the other in the first year of Queen Mary did on the first of May 1607. at the house of the said Lord Chancellor called York-house resolve the several Questions hereafter mentioned Quest 1 Whether Graduates of Oxford and Cambridge may practise in London or seven miles compass of the same without Licence under the said Colledge Seal by vertue of the clause in the end of the Statute of 14. Hen. 8. and whether that clause hath not relation to the Statute of 3. H. 8. only or how far it doth extend Resp 1 All resolved that no Graduate that is not admitted and licensed by the President and Colledge of Physicians under their common Seal could practise in London or within seven miles compass of the same Quest 2 Whether by Graduates Graduates in Physick only are to be understood Resp 2 They resolved that the Exception in the Statute of 14. H. 8. ca. 11. of Graduates in the two Universities is to be understood only of Graduates of Physick and of no others And all resolved that by that Exception those Graduates may practise in all other places of England out of London and seven miles of the same without examination but not in London nor within the said circuit of seven miles Quest 3 If Graduates not admitted to practise in London practise there whether for evil practise or misdemeanor therein they be not subject to the correction and government of the Colledge They all agreed that they are subject to the Resp 3 government and correction of the Colledge by an express clause of the said Charter enacted which giveth to the Censors Supervisionem scrutinium correctionem Gubernationem of all persons using the practise of Medicine within the City Quest 4 If they may not practise without admission of the Colledge as their Letters patents plainly import Then whether such Graduates are not subject to the Examination without which there were

sealed with the Common Seal which is not so in keeping shall be void and the opinion of the Court that this is a void Statute for it is imperttinent to be observed being the Seal in their keeping the Abbot cannot Seal any thing with it and when that it is in the hands of the Abbot it is out of their keeping ipsofacto And if the Statute shall be observed every common Seal shall be defeated by one simple surmise which cannot be tried and for that the Statute was adjudged void and repugnant And so the Statute of Glocester which gives Cessavit after Cesser by two years to be brought by the Lessor himself was a good and equitable Statute But the Statute of Westminster 2. chap. 3. which gives Cessavit to the Heir for Cesser in time of his Ancester and that that was judged an unreasonable Statute in 33. Ed. 3. for that that the Heir cannot have the arrearages due in the time of his Father according to the Statute of Glocester and for that it shall be void And also the Physicians of the Colledge could not punish any by Fine and also by Imprisonment for no man ought to be twice punished for one offence and the Statute of 1. Mariae doth not give any power to them to commit for any offence which was no offence within the first Statutes for that he ought not to be committed by the said Statute of 1. Mariae But admitting that they may commit yet they have mistaken it for they demand the whole hundred shillings and one half of that belongs to the King And also they ought to commit him forthwith as well as Auditors which have Authority by Parliament to commit him which is found in arrearages But if he do not commit him forthwith they cannot commit him afterward as it appears by 27. H. 6. 9. So two Justices of the Peace may view a force and make a Record of that and commit the offenders to Prison but this ought to be in Flagranti Oriente and if he do not commit those immediately upon the view he cannot commit them afterwards and the Physicians have no Court but if they have yet they ought to make a Record of their commitment for so was every Court of Justice But they have not made any Record of that And Auditors and Justices of Peace ought to make Records as it appears by the Book of Entries So that admitting that they may commit yet they ought to do it forthwith but in this case they cannot commit till the party shall be delivered by them for this is against Law and Justice and no Subject may do it but till he be delivered by due course of Law for the commitment is not absolute but the cause of that is traversable and for that ought to justifie for special cause for if the Bishop returns that he refuses a Clerk for that he is Schismaticus Inveteratus this is not good but they ought to return the particular matter So that the Court may adjudge of that Though it be a matter of Divinity and out of their Science yet they by conference may be informed of it and so of Physick And they cannot make any new Lawes but such only which are for the better government of the old and also he said plainly that it appears by the Statute of 1. Mariae That the former Statutes shall not be taken by equity for by these the President and Commons have power to commit a Delinquent to Prison and this shall be intended if they shall be taken by equity that every Goaler ought to receive him which is so committed But when it is provided by 1. Mariae specially that every Goaler shall receive such offenders That by this appears that the former Statute shall not be taken by equity And so he concluded that Judgement shall be entred for the Plaintiff which was done accordingly Coke in the conclusion of his argument observed these 7. things for the better direction of the President and Comminalty of the said Colledge for the time to come 1. That none may be punished for practise of Physick in London but by the forfeiture of 5 l. a Month which is to be recovered by Law 2. If any one practise Physick there less then a Moneth that he shall forfeit nothing 3. If any person prohibited by the Statute offend in non bene exequendo c. they may punish him according to the Statute within the Month. 4. Those whom they may commit to prison by the Statute ought to be committed presently 5. The fines which they impose according to the Statute belong to the King 6. They may not impose a fine or imprisonment without Record thereof 7. The cause for which they impose fine or imprisonment must be certain The Proceedings of the Colledge against Christopher Barton Weaver UPon the complaint of divers persons against the said Barton for practising of Physick the said Barton was sent for by a Messenger of his Majesties Chamber who appearing before the President and Censors the 6. of Septemb. 1639. and many things being laid to his charge yet for some reasons he was bound with sureties to appear again before them the 4. of October following And he then also appearing was for the Causes in the Censors Warrant expressed committed Bartons Commitment to the Prison of Woodstreet-Compter London where he remained till the 19. of October following never having by all that time petitioned the Colledge for his liberty and then by vertue of a Writ of hab Corpus which he had sued forth of the Kings-Bench he was carried with his Cause to the Kings-Bench Bar at Westminster The Copy of which Warrant and the return thereof here immediately ensueth Nos Johannes Warner Thomas Adams vic Civit London ss ● Sheriffs R●●●turn London Serenissimo Dno Regi in brevi huis schedul annex noiat ad diem locum in eodem bri content certificamus quod ante adventum nob predct bris scilt duodecimo die Sept. Anno Regni dci Dni Regis nunc Angl. c. decimo quinto Christophorus Barton in dco bri noiat comissus fuit prisone Dni Regis scilt Computator situat in Woodstreet London predct in eadem prisona sub Custodia Isaaci Pennington Johannis Wollaston tunc vic Civit. predct in eorum exit ab officio suo sub custodia nr detent virtute cujusdam Warranti Otwelli Meverell Laurentii Wright Edmundi Smith Willmi Goddard in Medicinis Dctor et Censor Collegii Medicor in London sub sigillo Coi Collegii Medicor London pred Custod predct computorii London predct vel ejus deputat direct cujus quidem Warranti tenor sequitur in haec verba ss We Otwell Meverell Lawrence Wright Edmund Colledge Warrant Smith and William Goddard Doctors in Physick and Censors of the Colledge of Physicians in London being chosen by the President and Colledge of Physicians aforesaid to govern and punish for this present

and knowledge c. or Drink for the Stone and Strangury in any part of the Realm without suit vexation c. any Act or Statute to the contrary notwithstanding And that he having skill in the nature of Herbs Roots and Waters by speculation and practise applied to persons requiring his skill Herbs Ointments Baths Drinks c. to their Sores Uncomes Wounds and for the Stone and Strangury or Agues and to all other Diseases in the said Statute mentioned prout ei benelicuit Et quoad aliquam aliam practisationem seu facultatem medicinae aliter vel alio modo quod non est culpabilis Et de hoc ponit c. And makes his averment Et hoc paratus est verificare The Plaintiff replies and shews the Statute of primo Mariae capite nono which confirms the Charter of decino Henrici octavi and the Statute of decimo quarto Henrici octavi and appoints that it shall be in force notwithstanding any Statute or Ordinance to the contrary And upon this it was demurred because it is a departure for it intitles him by another Act viz. the Statute of primo Mariae which is not mentioned in the Count and therefore 't was assigned for Error But all the Court here conceived That it is no departure Because it fortifies the Count and is as to revive the Statute of decimo quarto Henrici octavi if it were repealed in this particular by the Statute of tricesimo quarto Henrici octavi And for that the Case of Woodhead was shewn to the Court Mich. 42. 43. Eliz. rot 397. where the President of the Colledge of All-Souls bringing an Action upon the Case for taking Toll in and shews a Charter of vicesimo sexto Henrici sexti to be discharged of Toll the Defendant pleaded the Act of Resumption of Liberties granted by Henry the sixth made and so the Liberty gone The Plaintiff pleaded a Reviver of them by the Statute of quarto Henrici septimi And it was held to be no departure but as it were a confession and avoiding The third and principal Error assigned was if the Statute of tricesimo quarto Henrici octavi be not repealed by the Statute of primo Mariae and if not Whether the Defendant hath made a sufficient Jusification And quoad that Whether the said Statute be repealed the Court was not resolved But Richardson Chief Justice conceived it was repealed by primo Mariae by the general words any Act or Statute to the contrary of the Act of decimo quarto Henrici octavi notwithstanding But I conceived that the Act of tricesimo quarto Henrici octavi not mentioning the Statute of decimo quarto Henrici octavi was for Physicians but the part of the Act of trices quar Henrici octavi was concerning Chirurgeons and their applying outward Medicines to outward Sores and Diseases And Drinks only for the Stone Strangullion and Ague That Statute was never intended to be taken away by the Act of primo Mariae But to this point Jones and Woitlock would not deliver their Opinions But admitting the Statute of tricesimo quarto Henrici octavi be in force yet they all resolved the Defendants Plea was naught and not warranted by the Statute for he pleads That he applied and ministred Medicines Plaisters Drinks ulceribus Morbis Maladiis Calculo Strangurio Febribus aliis in Statuto mentionatis so he leaves out the principal word in the Statute Externis And doth not refer and shew That he ministred potions for the Stone Strangullion or Ague as the Statute appoints to these three Diseases only and to no other And by his Plea his Potions may be ministred to any other sickness wherefore they all held his Plea was nought for this cause and that Judgment was well given against him Whereupon Judgment was affirmed Termino Trinitatis anno quarto Jacobi Regis in Banco Regis Crokes Reports the Second Part. Doctor Langhton versus Gardener DEbt upon the Statute 14. H. 8. cap. 5. by the 4 Plaintiff as President of the Colledge of Physicians in London and of the Corporation of Physicians there For that the Defendant used the Art of Physick in London without Licence from the Colledge there against the Statute and their Charter For which he demanded 5 l. for every moneth being the penalty given by the Statute The Defendant pleaded the Statute of 34. H. 8. which enables every one to practise Physick or Chirurgery being skilful therein notwithstanding any Act to the contrary The Plaintiff replies and shewes the Statute primo Mar. cap. 9. which confirms their Charter and every Article thereof to stand in force Any Act Statute Law or Custome to the contrary notwithstanding Hereupon the Defendant demurred First because this general clause in this Law doth not restrain the Statute of 34. H. 8. Secondly that this pleading is a departure For it ought to have been shewn before Stephens argued for the Plaintiff First That the Act of 34. H. 8. is repealed by the Statute of of Prim. Mar. Quoad the Colledge of Physicians in London as fully as if it had been by express words recited and repealed For when it confirms the Charter of 14. H. 8. and appoints that it and every part thereof shall stand and be available The Statute of 34. H. 8. cannot stand with it Quia leges posteriores leges priores contrarias abrogant 4. Ed. 4. Porters Case Co. 1. fol 25. Secondly That it is not any departure Because there is not any new matter but matter pleaded in reviving of the former or fortification thereof And a Record was shewn Mich. 10. 11. Eliz. betwixt Bomelins ..... where the Record was in the same manner as this Record is and there the Plaintiff had Judgement Wherefore c. And there being none on the Defendants part to argue The Court upon hearing of the Record gave rule that Judgment should be entred for the Plaintiff unless c. Termino Paschae anno quinto Jacobi Regis in Banco Regis Doctor Atkins versus Gardener Scir fac Upon a Judgment in Debt upon the ●● Statute 14. H. 8. by Doctor Langhton President of the Colledge of Physicians in London who died before execution had and thereupon the successor brought a Scir fac to have execution It was thereupon demurred because the Scir fac ought to be brought by the Executor or Administrator of him who recovered and not by the successor But upon hearing of the Record without argument the Court held that the successor might well maintain the Action For the Suit is given to the Colledge by a private Statute And the Suite is to be brought by the President for the time being And he having recovered in right of the Corporation the Law shall transfer that duty to the successor of him who recovered and not to his Executors The Action being brought for that he practised Physick in London without Licence of the Colledge of Physicians against the