commandement by Letters from the King That whereas the Earl of Warwick had commanded divers persons to the custody of the said Sheriffe the King sent a Letter to the said Sheriffe commanding that those who were committed to his custody by the Earl of Warwick he should shew no grace to them that is they should not be bailed The Sheriffe notwithstanding this command lets some of those prisoners to bail whereupon he was complained of in Parliament that he had done against the Kings commandement and he was condemned for it This was a Parliament I wonder this should be done in Parliament and that it was not said there That this commitment being done by the Kings commandment was not good no he was condemned in Parliament for it was one that did break the Statute of Westm primo My Lord the use that I make of this Record is this It recites that the Earl of Warwick committed divers it might be that he did commit them by direction from the King but the Record mentioneth not so much but it shews that the King by Letters commanded the Sheriffe that he should shew those persons no grace and yet he did he was examined upon this and by Parliament committed The next matter I will offer to your Lordships judgement for the true exposition of the Law in this case is the Book we call the Register an authority respected it is the foundation of all our Writs at the Common Law I bring not the Book Register fol. 77 c. In this Book there is one Writ saith thus Rex c. Quod replegiar ' fac ' A. nisi fuerit per speciale mandatum domini Regis Iustice Doderidge In what Writ is that De homine replegiando Atturney Generall Yea in the Writ De homine replegiando and there is another Writ directed to the Constable of Dover in the very same words by which it appears that they that are imprisoned by the Kings command non sunt replegiabiles F.N.B. 66. f. Master Fitzherbert a grave Judge and is in authority with us perusing these Writs expressed it in these words plainly There are some cases wherein a man cannot have this Writ although he be taken and detained in Prison as if he be taken by the death of a man or if he be taken by the commandement of the Kings Justices and mentions not chief Justice which I beleeve is to be intended not of the chief of the Court of Judicature but of the chief Justice of England for there was such a one in those days Thus my Lord you see the opinion of Master Fitzherbert in this case The next thing that I will shew your Lordship is the opinion of Master Stamford in his Pleas of the Crown Fol. 72. where he sets down the Statute of Westminster primo and then he addes That by this appears in four cases at the Common Law a man is not replevisable In those that were taken for the death of a man or by the commandment of the King or of his Justices or of the Forest And there he saith That the commandment of the King is to be intended either the commandment of his mouth or of his Councell which is incorporated to him and speak with the mouth of the King My Lord I shall desire no better Commentaries upon a Law then these reverent grave Judges who have put books of Law in Print and such Books as none I beleeve will say their judgements are weak The next thing I shall offer unto your Lordship is this that I cannot shew with so great authority as I have done the rest because I have not the thing it self by me but I will put it to your Lordships memory I presume you may well remember it It is the resolution of all the Judges which was given in the four and thirtieth of Queen Elizabeth it fell out upon an unhappy occasion which was thus The Judges they complain that Sheriffes and other Officers could not execute the processe of the Law as they ought for that the parties on whom such processe shall be executed were sent away by some of the Queens Councell that they could not be found the Judges hereupon petitioned the Lord Chancellor that he would be a suitor to her Majesty that nothing be done hereafter And thereupon the Judges were desired to shew in what cases men that were committed were not bailable whether upon the commitment of the Queen or any other The Judges make answer That if a man shall be committed by the Queen by her command or by the Privy Councell he is not bailable If your Lordship ask me what authority I have for this I can onely say I have it out of the Book of the Lord Anderson written with his own hand My Lord I pray you give me leave to observe the time when this was done It was in a time and we may truly call it a good time in the time of good Queen Elizabeth and yet we see there was then cause of complaint and therefore I would not have men think that we are now grown so bad as the opinion is we are for we see that then in those times there was cause of complaint and it may be more then is now This my Lord was the resolution of all the Judges and Barons of the Exchequer and not by some great one Now I will apply my self to that which hath been enforced by the Councell on the other side which was the reason that the Subject hath interest in this case My Lord I do acknowledge it but I must say that the Soveraign hath great interest in it too And sure I am that the first stone of Soveraignty was no sooner laid but this power was given to the Soveraign If you ask me whether it be unlimited my Lord I say it is not the question now in hand But the Common Law which hath long flourished under the Government of our King and his Progenitors Kings of this Realm have ever had that reverent respect of their Soveraign as that it hath concluded the King can doe no wrong And as it is in the Lord Berklies Case in Plowdens Com. 246. b. it is part of the Kings Prerogative that he can doe no wrong Title Travers 5. In the fourth of Edward the fourth fol. 25. the King cannot be a disseisor and so it is also in the Lord Berklies Case in 32 H. 8. Dier fol. 8. The King cannot usurp upon a Patron for the Common Law hath that reverent respect to him as that it cannot conceive he will doe any injury But the King commits a Subject and expresseth no cause of the commitment what then shall it be thought that there is no cause why he should be committed Nay my Lord the course of all times hath been to say there is no cause expressed and therefore the matter is not ripe and thereupon upon the Courts of Judicature have ever rested satisfied therewith they would not search into it My
THE ARGVMENTS UPON THE WRIT OF Habeas Corpus IN THE COURT OF KINGS BENCH WHEREIN Are learnedly discussed not onely the severall Branches of the said Writ but also many Authorities as well of the Common as Statute Law and divers ancient and obscure Records most amply and elaborately debated and cleared TOGETHER With the Opinion of the Court thereupon Whereunto is annexed The Petition of Sir Iohn Elliot Knight in behalf of the Liberty of the Subject LONDON Printed by M. F. for W. Lee M. Walbancke D. Pakeman and G. Bedell 1649. ARGUMENTS upon the Habeas Corpus concerning Loans Sir Thomas Darnell his Case Michaelis 3º Caroli Banco Regis SIR Thomas Darnell Baronet being imprisoned in the Fleet by vertue of a warrant signed by the Kings Atturney Generall upon the third of November by Sergeant Bramston his assigned Councell moved the Justices of the Kings Bench to grant him a Writ of Habeas Corpus cum causa directed to the Warden of the Fleet to shew that Court the cause of his imprisonment that thereupon they might determine whether his restraint were legall or illegall and it was granted by the Court returnable Thursday following the 8th day of November On Thursday Sir Thomas Darnell expected that his Writ should be returned but it was delaied and it was moved that the return should be on Saturday the tenth of November which made Sir Thomas Darnell the more remisse in suing out an Alias upon his Habeas corpus On Saturday the Writ was not returned and thereupon the Kings Atturney Generall gave order for an Alias upon the Habeas corpus for Sir Thomas Darnell returnable upon Thursday morning the thirteenth of November by vertue of which Writ the Warden of the Fleet brings Sir Thomas Darnell to the Kings Bench and returneth as followeth Executio istius brevis patet in quadem schedula annexat ' huic brevi The Return was this Ego Henricus Liloe Miles gardianus prisone Domini Regis de le Fleet Serenissimo domino Regi certifico quod dict' Thomas Darnell Baronet detentus est in prisona praedict ' sub custodia mea virtute cujusdam Warranti duorum de privato Consilio mihi directi cujus tenor sequitur in his verbis viz. Whereas heretofore the body of Sir Thomas Darnell hath been committed to your custody these are to require you still to continue him and to let you know that he was and is committed by the speciall command of his Majesty c. Et haec est causa detentionis predict ' Thomae Darnell Sergeant Bramston May it please your Lordship I did not expect this Cause at this time neither did I hear of it untill I came now into the Hall and therefore I shall now humbly shew you what my Client hath informed me since my comming hither I understand by him that he expected not his comming to this place to day the writ by which he was brought hither was not moved for by him but was procured without his privity and seeing his case is so and that he perceives the cause of his comming which before he knew not his motion to your Lordship is that you would be pleased to let him have the Copy of the return and give him time to speak unto it and that this writ being not sent out by his procurement may not be field Heath Attorney Generall My Lords it is true that this Gent. Sir Thomas Darnell being imprisoned in the Fleet did heretofore move your Lordship for a Habeas Corpus c. and it was granted him and his Majesty being made acquainted therewith was very willing that he and all his people might have equall Justice and when they desire that which seemes to accord with the rules of the Law they should have it But it fell out so that on the day when the writ should have been returned the Warden of the Fleet did not return it as it was his duty to have done he did forbear to do it upon a commandement because it was conceived there being five at that time to appear the Court would have been straitned for want of time but I imagined that these gentlemen who did desire the writ before should have again been earnest to renew them which it seemes they did not This Habeas Corpus was sent out by speciall command because these gent. gave out in speeches and in particular this gent. That they did wonder why they should be hindred from triall and what should be the reason their writs were not returned nay his Majesty did tell me that they reported that the King did deny them the course of Justice and therefore hee commanded me to renew the writ which I did and think I may doe it ex officio Sir Thomas Darnell My Lords I knew not untill now but that I was committed by Mr. Atturneys warrant only and thereupon I did desire a Habeas corpus at the Barre which you were pleased to grant me but now I understand that my restraint is by another means and therefore I shall crave leave to have some time to speak to it And as for the words alledged against me as if I had spoken them I humbly pray they may be no disparagement to my cause for I do patiently referre my self to your grave censures as being accused of a fact whereof I am no ways guilty Hide Chiefe Justice You give a temperate and fair answer and now you may perceive the upright and sincere proceedings that have been in this businesse you did no sooner petition to have Councell assigned you but you had it granted to you for indeed we cannot deny it and I know not but that any Councell might have moved for you without having been assigned for you and yet have had no blame for it is the Kings pleasure his Lawes should take place and be executed and therefore doe wee sit here when you made a motion of the Habeas corpus that was likewise granted whether the commitment be by the King or others this Court is a place where the King doth sit in person and we have power to examine it and if it appears that any man hath injury or wrong by his imprisonment we have power to deliver and discharge them if otherwise he is to be remanded by us to prison again now it seems you are not ready to speak to this return if you desire further day we ought to grant it Sir Thomas Darnell My Lords I humbly desire it Chief Justice I know no cause why it should be denied Sergeant Bramston My Lords we shall desire the writ may not be filed and that we may have a Copy of the return Atturney Generall You cannot deny the filing of the writ if you desire to have a Copy of the return Chief Justice Although you be remanded at this time to prison because you are not ready to speak to the return we can adjorn you to a new day upon the Writ and so you may prepare your self but
Domini Regis mihi nunciatum per Robertum Pecke now our case is by the Nunciation of many but in Law majus minus non variant in spetione the certification of one and of many is of the same effect although in morall understanding there may bee a difference Trin. 2 Ed. 3. Rot. 46. in this Court in 21 Ed. 3. in the printed Book there is a peece of it The Abbot of Burey brings a prohibition out of this Court the Bishop of Norwich pleadeth in Bar of that Quod mihi testificatum quod continetur in Archivis that he is excommunicated there were two exceptions taken to this case in this president and they are both in one case the first was that no case appeareth why he was excommunicated there may be causes why he should be excommunicated and then he should be barred and there may be causes why the excommunication should not barre him for it may be the excommunication was for bringing the action which was the Kings writ and therefore because there was no cause of the excommunication returned it was ruled that it was not good The other reason is that upon the Roll which is mihi testificatum Now every man when he will make a Certificate to the Court Proprium factum suum non alterius significare debet he must inform the Court of the immediate act done and not that such things are told him or that such things are signified unto him but that was not done in this case and therefore it was held insufficient and so in this case of ours I conceive the return is insufficient in the form there is another cause my Lord for which I conceive this return is not good But first I will be bold to inform your Lordship touching the Statute of Magna Charta 29. Nullus liber homo capiatur vel imprisonetur c. nec super eum mittimus nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terrae That in this Statute these words in Carcerem are omitted out of the printed Books for it should be nec eum in Carcerem mittimus For these words per legem terrae what Lex terrae should be I will not take upon me to expound otherwise then I finde them to be expounded by Acts of Parliament and this is that they are understood to be the processe of the Law sometimes by writ sometimes by attachment of the person but whether speciale mandatum Domini Regis be intended by that or no I leave it to your Lordships exposition upon two petitions of the Commons and answer of the King in 36 Ed. 3. n o 9. and n o 20. In the first of them the Commons complain that the great Charter the Charter of the Forest and other Statutes were broken and they desire that for the good of himselfe and of his people they might be kept and put in execution and that they might not be infringed by making an arrest by speciall command or otherwise and the answer was that the assent of the Lords established and ordained that the said Charter and other Statutes should be put in execution according to the petition and that is without any disturbance by arrest by speciall command or otherwise for it was granted as it was petitioned In the same year for they were very carefull of this matter and it was necessary it should be so for it was then an usuall thing to take men by writs quibusdam de causis and many of these words caused many Acts of Parliament and it may be some of these writs may be shewn and I say in the same year they complained that men were imprisoned by speciall command and without indictment or other legall course of Law and they desired that thing may not be done upon men by speciall command against the great Charter The King makes answer that he is well pleased therewith that was the first answer and for the future he hath added farther if any man be grieved let him complain and right shall be done unto him This my Lord is an explanation of the great Charter as also the Statute of 37 Ed. 3. ch 18. is a Commentary upon it that men should not be committed upon suggestion made to the King without due proofs of Law against them and so it is enacted twice in one year Wee finde more printed Bookes as in Henry the sixth Mius de fiacts Fitz. 182. which is a strong case under favour in an action of Trespasse for cutting down trees the defendant saith that the place where the trees are cut is parcell of the Manor of B whereof the King is seised in fee and that the King did command him to cut them and the opinion of the Court was that this was no good plea without shewing the specialty of the command and they said if the King command me to arrest a man and I arrest him he shall have an action of false imprisonment against me although it were done in the Kings presence In 1 Ioh. cap. 7. fol. 46. it is in print and there we leave it Hussey Chief Justice saith that Sir Iohn Markham told King Edward the fourth that he could not arrest a man upon suspition of felony or treason as any of his Subjects might because if he should wrong a man by such arrest the parties could have no remedy against him if any man shall stand upon it here is a signification of the Kings pleasure not to have the cause of the commitment examined he hath here another signification of his pleasure by writ whereby the party is brought hither ad subjiciendum recipiendum that he hath made your Lordship Judge of that that should be objected against this Gentleman and either to punish him or to deliver him and if here be no cause shewn it is to be intended that the party is to be delivered and that it is the Kings pleasure it should be so and the writ is a sufficient warrant for the doing of it there being no cause shewn of the imprisonment and now my Lord I will speak a word to the writ of De homine replegiando and no other writ for that was the common writ and the four causes expressed in that Statute to wit the death of a man the command of the King or his Justices or Forest were excepted in that writ before that Statute made as appears Bracton 133. so that the writ was at the Common Law before that Statute And it apppears by our Books that if a man be brought hither by an Habeas corpus though he were imprisoned De morte hominis as in the 21 of Edward the fourth 7. Winckfield was bailed here this Court bailed him for he was brought hither ad subjiciendum recipiendum and not to he in prison God knows how long and if the Statute should be expounded otherwise there were no bailing men outlawed or breakers of prisons for they are not within this Statute and yet this
Lordship and all others but the parties themselves for I except them My Lord the great and mighty reason that they insisted upon was the inconveniences that might come to the subjects in their liberties if this Return should be good and this reason they inferred out of Records and Books of the Common Law which gives the liberty of the subjects I doe acknowledge that the liberty of the subject is just and that it is the inheritance of the subject but yet it is their inheritance secundum legem terrae My Lords they put many cases likewise to enforce it 1 2 Eliz. Dier fo 175. that the continuance of a Capias shall bee from Term to Term without Term betwixt because otherwise the party defendant may be kept too long in prison and 38 Ass pl. 22. Broke tit Imprisonment 100. that imprisonment is but to detaine the party till he have made fine to the King and therefore the King cannot justly detain him in prison after the fine tendred and 16 H. 6. monstrans de faictz 182. if the King command me to arrest a man and thereupon I doe arrest him he may have an action of false imprisonment or of trespasse against me though it be done in the Kings presence and 1 H. 7. 4. the discourse of Hussey where he saith that Sir John Markham delivered unto King Edward the fourth that hee should not arrest upon treason or felony any of his subjects because hee could not wrong his subjects by such arrest for they could not have remedy against him Prerogative Br. 139. These my Lord are the causes that they insisted upon for this purpose To the two first I shall give but one answer which is that the restraint in these two cases and most of the other cases before cited appears to be in the ordinary course of Judicature fit for Westminster Hall and not for the Kings Councell Table A writ of Capias was the first originall of it and therefore not to be applied to the cause of ours And for the other two cases the law presumeth that the active part of them is not so proper for the Majesty of a King who ever doth these things by his subordinate Officers But that the subject should not be committed by the King was never heard of for the King may commit any man at his pleasure but that is not our case but whether when the King hath committed one he must render a cause of that commitment that it may appear whether the party be bailable or not or else the party must be delivered The Book 9 E. 3. fol. 16. pl. 30. cited of a Cessavit the King having by Proclamation commanded that in the County of Northumberland no Cessavit should be brought c. during the war the tenant pleadeth this command and it was denyed him and he that notwithstanding was commanded to plead but the reason thereof was because the commandment thereof was given by E. 2. who being dead the commandment was determined The Book of Edward the third 4. fol. 16. is indeed where the commandment was given by the same King and that was likewise denyed him for the King cannot command your Lordship to any other Court of Justice to proceed otherwise then according to the Laws of this kingdome for it is part of your Lordships oath to judge according to the Law of the kingdome But my Lord there is a great difference between those legall commands and that absolute Potestas that a Soveraign hath by which a King commands but when I call it absoluta potestas I doe not mean that it is such a power as that a King may doe what he pleaseth for he hath rules to governe himself by as well as your Lordship who are subordinate Judges under him the difference is the King is the head of the same fountaine of Justice which your Lordship administers to all his subjects all Justice is derived from him and what he doth he doth not as a private person but as the Head of the Common-wealth as Iusticiarius Regni yea the very essence of Justice under God upon earth is in him and shall not wee generally not as subjects onely but as Lawyers who governe themselves by the rules of the Law submit to his command but make inquiries whether they be lawfull and say that the King doth not this or that in course of Justice If your Lordship sitting here shall proceed according to Justice who calleth your actions in question except in your own Judgements you see some errour in the proceeding and then you are subject to a writ of Errour But who shall call in question the Actions or the Justice of the King who is not to give any account for them as in this our case that he commits a subject and shews no cause for it The King commits and often shews no cause for it is sometimes generally Per specialâ— mandatum domini Regis sometimes Pro certis causis ipsum dominum Regem moventibus but if the King doe this shall it not bee good it is all one when the commitment is Per speciale mandatum domini Regis and when it is Pro certis causis ipsum dominum Regem moventibus and it is the same if the commitment be Certis de causis ipsum dominum Regem tangentibus And my Lord unlesse the Return to you doth open the secrets of the commitment your Lordship cannot judge whether the party ought by Law to be remaunded or delivered and therefore if the King allow and give warrant to those that make the Return that they shall expresse the cause of the commitment as many times he doth either for suspition of felony or making money or the like we shall shew your Lordship that in these causes this Court in his Jurisdiction were proper to try these criminall causes and your Lordship doth proceed in them although the commitment be Per speciale mandatum domini Regis which hath not secret in it in these causes for with the warrant he sendeth your Lordship the cause of the committing and when these warrants are made and brought into this Court your Lordship may proceed but if there be no cause expressed this Court hath always used to remaund them for it hath been used and it is to be intended a matter of State and that it is not ripe nor timely for it to appear My Lord the main fundamentall grounds of Arguments upon this case beginnes with Magna Charta from thence have grown states for explanation thereof severall Petitions of Parliament and Presidents for expedition I shall give answers to them all For Magna Charta in the 29 Chapter hath these words No Free-man shall be taken nor imprisoned or disseised of his freehold liberties nor free customes nor be outlawed or exiled nor any other way destroyed nor we will not passe upon him nor condemn him but by lawfull Judgement of his Peers or by the Law of the Realm My Lord this statute
hath been many times confirmed the Lord Coke numbred up the number to be about twenty and we are to conclude on this it is the foundation of our liberties No Free-man can be imprisoned but by legale judicium Parium suorum aut per legem terrae But will they have it understood that no man should be committed but first he shall be indicted or presented I think that no learned man will offer that for certainly there is no Justice of Peace in a County nor Constable within a Town but he doth otherwise and might commit before an Indictment can be drawn or a Presentment can be made what then is meant by these words Per legem terrae if any man shall say this doth not warrant that the King may for reasons moving him commit a man and not be answerable for it neither to the party nor under your Lordships favour unto any Court of Justice but to the High Court of Heaven I doe deny it and will prove it by your statutes My Lord it was urged by the Councell on the other side that our printed Magna Charta which saith nec super eum mittimus are mistaken and that in divers Manuscripts it is expresly set down to be nec eum in Carcerem mittimus I cannot judge of the Manuscripts that I have not seen but my Lord I have one here by me which was written many Ages agoe and the words in print are word for word as that that is here written Then they say that Matthew Paris sets it downe so in his story my Lord we doe not govern our selves by Chronicle but to answer that of Matthew Paris he reports a thing done in King Iohns time but it was then but thought on and it was enacted in the time of Henry the third and there bee many things said to be done in Matthew Paris which were not and many things omitted by him which were done This Charter was but in election in the time of King John and then it might be nec eum in Carcerem mittimus but it was not enacted till the time of Henry the third and then that was omitted and the Charter granted as now we have it But if they doe see no more then I in this clause I know not why we should contend about these words seeing the first part of this statute saith Nemo imprisonetur why then may not I say as well nec eum in carcerem mittimus I see no difference in the words and therefore my Lord I shall not insist any longer upon the literall exposition of the words of Magna Charta but I will resort to the rest of it which is exprest in the subsequent statute and in common practise 2 E. 3. 8. 5 E. 3. 9. 14 E. 3. 14. The Councell on the other side said that the statute of 28 E. 3. c. 3. expresseth and giveth life to this Charter I shall desire to have that statute read Keeling Clerk Item whereas it is contained in the great Charter c. Vide all these statutes following in Master Littletons Argument in Parliament Heath Atturney My Lord the reading of this statute will give answer to it for it is apparent by the words thereof none shall be taken by petition c. and that the Court be extended to the first arrest but they are to be understood that none shall be condemned but hee shall be brought to answer and be tried And if it be expounded otherwise it will be contrary to that practise which was then in use But it is utterly forbidden by this statute that any man should be condemned upon suggestions or petitions made to the King or Councell without due triall by Law The next statute they cited was 25 Ed. 3. cap. 4. My Lord I desire that that may be read Keeling Clerk Item that no man of what estate or condition soever that he be shall be put out of land or tenement nor taken nor imprisoned nor disinherited nor put to death without being brought to answer by due processe of Law 42 E. 3. 3. Heath Atturney My Lord this statute is intended to be a finall prosecution for if a man shall be imprisoned without due processe and never be brought to answer that is unjust and forbidden by this statute but when a man is taken in causes that are unknown to us who walk below the staires we are not privy to the circumstances which may cause the triall to be delayed and peradventure it is not time to bring the matter to triall because it is not yet come to maturity and therefore this is not in the meaning of the statute Another statute that they mention is in the same year and it is pag. 9. chap. 9. I desire it may be read Keeling Clerk Item because the people of the Realm c. Vide Master Littleton as before Heath Atturney My Lord it is very clear that this statute had no manner of thought of this cause in question But whereas Sheriffes did procure Commissions to be awarded to themselves for their private gain to the prejudice of the subject the statute condemneth those commissions but it maketh nothing to this question which we have now in hand The next statute which they cited was 37 Ed. 3. cap. 18. I beseech it may be read Keeling Clerk Item though it be contained in the great Charter c. Vide as aforesaid Heath Atturney My Lord this statute seems to be a commentary and light to the other statutes the scope whereof is against private suggestions made to the King or his Councell and not in legall way and therefore it condemnes them and this is more fully expressed in the statute of 38 Ed. 3. cap. 9. which they likewise mentioned by which statute direction is given what security those persons which make such suggestions are to give that they should prosecute their suggestions and what punishment they shall undergoe if their suggestions be found false Keeling Clerk Item as to the Article made at the last Parliament c. Vide as before said Heath Atturney My Lord this and the last statute seem to conduce both to one purpose that they that in their accusations went not in a legall way to bring the party to his answer it was directed by this statute that they should goe a legall way The last Parliament in print the Councell on the other side produced was the statute of 1 R. 2. chap. 12. which I desire may be read Keeling Clerk Item whereas divers people at the suit of parties were committed to the Fleet c. Vide as before Heath Atturney My Lord it appeareth that the scope of this statute is against the Wardens of the Feet for some miscarriages in them but there is one thing in this statute which I shall desire your Lordship to observe and that is for those misdemeanours he shall forfeit his office except it be by writ from the King or his commandement so that it was no new doctrine
in those times that the King might then give such commandment for committing the scope of this statute had two hands first that the Warden should forfeit his office and secondly that he should recompence the party In the fourth and fifth of Phil. Mar. Dier 162. it was resolved that if the Warden shall deliver a man out of prison without command hee forfeiteth his office and damage unto the party But if he have the command of the King that shall excuse the forfeiture of his office but he must bring the party hither and here these Gentlemen are now for that commandment of the King is no exception for him not to observe If he receives a writ from this Court to shew the Court from whence he receives his warrant it may excuse the forfeiture of his office but notwithstanding he is subject to the action of the party But I desire your Lordship to observe that part of the statute which the other party would not make use of which is that the King may command by writ or otherwise these were all the printed statutes cited by the Councell on the other side But because I would not misinterpret these statutes I thought it equall to desire your Lordship that they might be read Besides the printed statutes they mentioned Petitions by the Commons and the Answers to them of severall Kings in Parliament The first is Rot. pl. â—6 Ed. 3. Numero primo Numero vicesimo besides these two there is one other of 28 Ed. 3. nu 18. My Lord these three petitions and their answers the two first were mentioned by the Councell on the other side that in 28 E. 3. 28. I have produced all of them even to one purpose The Commons then petitioned the King that all the Statutes made in exposition of Magna Charta and of the Forest may be kept and observed The King makes answer that it shall be done And in one of the answers it is said If any man be grieved he may complain But what is all this to the point in question could there be any other answer to give life to these requests The King he is petitioned that some are injured he answers That if they complain they shall be relieved And now my Lord we are where we were to finde out the true meaning of Magna Charta for there is the foundation of our Case all this that hath been said concerneth other things and nothing to the thing in Question There is not a word either of the commitment of the King or commandment of the Councell in all the Statutes and Records And now my Lord I am at an end of those Statutes and come to that that was alledged and mentioned to be in 3 H. 6. 46. and if I could have found it I would have brought it but I could not finde it therefore if they have it I desire that they will shew it but I think they have it not and therefore I will let that goe And now my Lord I come to that which I insisted upon the Question as it was at first not whether the King or the Lords of the Councell can commit a man and shew no cause wherefore they do commit him but whether the ordinary Courts of Justice have power to bail him or no for that I will insist upon the Statute of Westm primo which I desire your Lordship may be read and then I will apply Cap. 15. Mainprise Br. 11 56 78 Dier 170. Vide Westm primo My Lord this Statute if I misunderstand it not is a full expression to this purpose of Magna Charta the scope whereof is to direct us in what case men imprisoned were to be bailed It was especially for direction to the Sheriffes and others but to say Courts of Justice are excluded from this Statute I conceive it cannot be It recites that whereas heretofore it was not resolved in what cases men were replevisable and in what cases not but onely in these four cases For the death of a man or by the commandement of the King or of his Justices or of the Forest My Lord I say that this Statute expresseth not the Law was made by this Statute that in these cases men were not replevisable but it expresseth that the Law was clear in these cases In these four cases it was clearly resolved before I pray you my Lord observe the time of the making of this Statute that of Magna Charta was made in the time of Henry the third and this of Westminster in the time of Edward the first so that the first it was made in the time of the same And my Lord if they had understood the Statute of Magna Charta in another sense would they not have expressed it so in this Statute was it not fitter for them then for us they being nearer the first making of Magna Charta then we are But certainly the Statute of Magna Charta was expounded at the time as I have shewed before if not without all doubt at the time of making of Westm primo The Parliament would not have been so carefull to provide for things of lesser moment and omit this of so great consequence if there had been any question of it In all times and ages Magna Charta hath been confirmed but they shew not any one Law that doth except against this positive Law of Westminster the first or any Acts of Parliament nay more in any printed books that in this case men should be replevisable My Lord if you know nothing printed or unprinted if any will desire to alter a course that always hath been held you will seek for presidents for the constant use and course is the best exposition of the Law it is not enough for me to say this it is unlesse I make it good First then I say they on the other side cannot cite one Book late Statute or other thing to prove That they that have been committed Per speciale mandatum domini Regis are bailable But my Lord I finde some to the contrary that they are not bailable and I will cite some of them and read of others for I would not in a case of that expectation that it should be thought that any thing should be mis-interpreted In the 33 of Hen. the sixth folio vicesimo tertio Robert Poynings Case he was committed Pro diversis causis ipsum dominum Regem tangent ' this alters not the case for it was as good as no cause for it was the Warrant Domini Regis and there is no question upon this But my Lord I know this is not the point in question The next thing I shall shew unto your Lordship is Pasch 21 Edvardi primo Rot. cla secund and this my Lord was near the time of making of the Statute of Westm prim and this president is to this purpose The Sheriffe of Leicestershire and Warwickshire for then there was but one Sheriffe to both those Shires did receive
signification of the command was given by Master Peck of Cliffords Inne but there the Warrant shews the cause of the commitment was for the peace and suspition of felony and therefore he was bailed The next was in 40 Eliz. Wendons Case but my Lord that commitment was out of the Star-chamber by an ordinary course Then they cited 8 Jac. Thomas Caesars Case he indeed was committed by Speciale mandatum domini Regis and brought his Habeas Corpus but the Roll saith remittitur and is that a Warrant for them to say that he was delivered Then Sir Thomas Vernons Case was cited and my Lord when we looked into the Records we found that he was committed for suspition of Treason and he was tried for it and discharged The next president was Sir Thomas Monsons Case I wonder that they did cite that for he was committed by the Lords of the Councell indeed but the ground of it was the suspition of the death of Sir Thomas Overbury and he was discharged again by the Lords of the Councell Certainly if you had known this you would not have named this as a president for you The next was Reynors Case he my Lord was one of the Gunpowder-Treason and yet there was a Warrant to discharge him too And therefore what these presidents are I shall submit to your Lordship I must confesse when they are cited together they make a great noise but when they are examined severally they prove nothing My Lord there is one more president of these that were cited here before your Lordship and I hope that one shall be as none It was mentioned to be Lawrence Browns Case 30 Eliz. I know not what it is but it is like to be of the same value as the rest Pro certis causis eos moventibus c. And thus my Lord I have gone through those presidents that were alledged here before your Lordship and now I will come to these presidents that were brought to me and not mentioned here The first was John Brownings Case in 21 H. 8. My Lord these presidents came not to me before Saturday last about candle-lighting and yesterday was no time fitting to search out presidents and how could I then search for this The next was William Rogers Case of the same time But the cause is expressed to be for suspition of felony which is a cause within the Jurisdiction of this Court Newports Case was the like in 4 5 Phil. Mar. and so was Thomas Lawrence Case 9 Eliz. and Edw. Harecourts Case 5 Eliz. which was for suspition of felony Richard Beckwith and not Barkwith as was cited for they have mistaken both names and matters was committed Per speciale mandatum domini Regis and the Record saith he was bailed But it was by reason of a letter from the Lords of the Councell The cause of Peter mans commitment in the 4 and 5 of Philip and Mary appears to be for suspition of felony and robbery For Reynors case it is the same with Beckwith and were both for one thing In the eighth of Henry the seventh one Rog Cherry was committed Per mandatum domini Regis and it was for a criminall case and he was afterwards indicted and acquited and delivered And there is another president thereof that saith he was afterwards arraigned condemned and hanged we have the Record of it And now my Lord I will shew some presidents on the other side where men have been committed by the commandement of the King and by the commandement of the Councell and have been delivered again by their directions And of this kinde there be two in the Tower that as they were committed by Warrant so by Warrants again for their bailing they were delivered the offences were against the Forest and for Murther In the fourth of Edward the third M. 4. Edmond de Newport in Essex was indicted for an offence committed by him in the Forest And M. 7. John Fox was likewise indicted for an offence by him done in the Forest and there be two Warrants to bail them M. 20. John Cobb was the like and there was a letter from the King Quod ponatur in Ballium usque ad proximam Assisam These were offences within Westminster primo and there be severall Warrants to bail them The Clark of this Court hath many Records by which it appeareth that many have been committed by the command of the King and of the Queen and of the Councell and brought their Habeas Corpus and the successe was that many of them were committed to the same Prisons and divers were committed to the Marshall of this Court the reason was for that many of them were to appear here their causes being triable here and it would have been a great trouble to send them back so farre to Prison as into the Countries and therefore they were delivered to the Marshall of the Kings Houshold again many had their Trials in this Court and some suffered and some were delivered by speciall command as they were committed by speciall command The number of these of this nature are infinite that have been in our times we have found some forty presidents of men committed out of the Chancery and by the High Commission for contempts and some by the Barons of the Exchequer and some in London that have been brought hither by Habeas corpus Of this I shall observe that in the 11 Iacobi there was a private Constitution in London made between the white Bakers that they might live one by another and the one not to invade the others liberties and for contempt against this Ordinance some were committed to prison as Thomas Heanning and Littlepage they had a Habeas corpus and the cause was shewn to be by reason of the said Constitution and thereupon the prisoners were sent back to London to abide the Order of the Mayor for my Lord this Court hath been ever carefull not to examine the Decrees of the Chancery or Court of Requests but have only looked whether the cause returned be within the jurisdiction of this Court nor have they called in question the by-laws and constitutions of London but they send them back to the court of Justice that committeth them And hath this Court been so carefull of these inferiour Courts to this which is the chief and when the King who is the head of Justice shall commit a man shall not they be as carefull to do the like Justice to them But when the King saith to them the commitment was by my warrant and commandment will you question this and whether this commitment be good or no I hope you will not And now my Lords touching some presidents which have been taken out of their own shewing I shall make it appear that as they have been committed by the King or Councel so they had warrants also to discharge them and they my Lords are two ancient Records the first is 7 H. 7. Rot. 6. the other Rot. 73.
the statute of 28 Ed. 3. cap. 9. But before that statute this writ did lie in the speciall Case as is shewn in Brooks 9th Reports Powlters Case and the end of this writ was that the Subject might not be too long detained in prison as till the Justices of Eyre discharged them so that the Law intended not that a man should suffer perpetuall imprisonment for they were very carefull that men should not bee kept too long in prison which is also a Liberty of the Subject and my Lord that this Court hath bailed upon a suspition of high treason I will offer it to your Lordship when I shall shew you presidents in these cases of a commitment by the Privy Councell or by the King himself But before I offer these presidents unto your Lordship of which there be many I shall by your Lordships favour speak a little to the next exception and that is to the matter of the return which I finde to be per speciale mandatum domini Regis 8. and what is that it is by this writ there may be sundry commands by the King we finde a speciall command often in our Books as in the statute of Marlborough cap. 8. they were imprisoned Rediss shall not be delivered without the speciall command of our Lord the King and so in Bracton De Actionibus the last chapter where it appears that the King commandment for imprisonments is by speciall writ so by writ again men are to be delivered for in the case of Rediss ' or Post Rediss ' if it shall be removed by a Certiorare is by a speciall writ to deliver parties so that by this appears that by the Kings commandment to imprison and to deliver in those cases is understood this writ and so it may be in this case which wee have heard And this return here is a speciall Mandatum it may bee understood to be under some of the Kings Seals 42 Ass and ought to be delivered and will you make a difference betweene the Kings command under his seal and his command by word of mouth what difference there is I leave it to your Lordships judgement but if there be any it is the more materiall that it should be expressed what manner of command it was which doth not here appear and therefore it may be the Kings command by writ or his command under his seal or his command by word of mouth alone And if of an higher nature there is none of these commands then the other doubtlesse it is that by writ or under seal for they are of record and in these the person may be bailed and why not in this As to the legall forme admitting there were substances in the return yet there wants legall form for the writ of Habeas Corpus is the commandment of the King to the Keeper of the prisons and thereupon they are to make return both of the body and of the cause of the commitment and that cause is to appear of them who are the immediate Officers And if he doth it by signification from another that returne is defective in Law and therefore this return cannot be good for it must be from the Officer himself and if the cause returned by him be good it bindes the prisoners The warrant of the Lords was but a direction for him he might have made his return to have been expresly by the Kings commandment there was warrant for it I shall not need to put you cases of it for it is not enough that he returns that he was certified that the commitment was by the Kings command but he must of himself return this fact as it was done And now my Lord I shal offer to your Lordship presidents of divers kindes upon commitments by the Lords of the Privy Councell upon commitments by the speciall command of the King and upon commitments both by the King and the Lords together And howsoever I conceive which I submit to your Lordship that our case will not stand upon presidents but upon the fundamentall Laws and Statutes of this Realm and though the presidents look the one way or the other they are to be brought back unto the Lawes by which the Kingdome is governed In the first of Henry the eighth Rot. Parl. 9. one Harison was committed to the Marshalsey by the command of the King and being removed by Habeas Corpus into the Court the cause returned was that he was committed per mandatum Domini Regis and he was bailed In the fortieth of Elizabeth Thomas Wendon was committed to the Gatehouse by the commandment of the Queen and Lords of the Councell and being removed by an Habeas Corpus upon the generall return and he was bailed In 8 Jacobi one Caesar was committed by the Kings commandment and this being returned upon his Habeas Corpus upon the examination of this case it doth appear that it was over-ruled that the return should be amended or else the prisoner should be delivered The presidents concerning the commitment by the Lords of the Councel are in effect the same with these where the commitment is by the reason why the cause of the commitment should not be shewn holds in both cases and that is the necessity of suit and therefore Master Stamford makes the command of the King and that of the Lords of the Privy Councell to be both as one and to this purpose if they speak he speaks and if he speaks they speak The presidents that we can shew you how the Subject hath been delivered upon commitment by the Lords of the Councel as in the time of Henry the eight as in the times of Queen Elizabeth Queen Mary are infinite as in the ninth of Elizabeth Thomas Lawrence was committed to the Towre by the Lords of the Councell and bailed upon an Habeas Corpus In the 43 of Elizabeth Calvins case In the third of Elizabeth Vernons case These were committed for high treason and yet bailed for in all these cases there must be a conviction in due time or a deliverance by Law There be divers other presidents that might be shewn to your Lordship In 12 Iacobi Miles Renards In 12 Jacobi Rot. 155. Richard Beckwiths case In 4 Iacobi Sir Thomas Monson was committed for treason to the Towre of London and afterwards was brought hither and bailed and since our case stands upon this return and yet there is no sufficient cause in Law expressed in the return of the detaining this Gentleman and since these presidents doe warrant our proceedings my humble suit unto this Court is that the Gentleman Sir Iohn Henningham who hath petitioned his Majesty that he may have the benefit of the Law and his Majesty hath signified it It is his pleasure that justice according to the Law should be administred at all times in generall to all his Subjects and particularly to these Gentlemen which is their birth-right My humble suit to your Lordship is that these Gentlemen may have the
benefit of that Law and be delivered from their imprisonment Master Noye his Argument of Councell with Sir Walter Earl at that time May it please your Lordship I am of Councell with Sir Walter Earl one of the prisoners at the Barre the return of this writ is as those that have been before they are much of one tenour and as you have heard the tenour of that so this Gent. coming hither by an Habeas Corpus I will by your Lordships favour read the writ Carolus Dei Gratia c. Iohanni Lylo Milit ' Guardian ' Prison ' nostrae de le Fleet Salut ' Praecipimus tibi quod corpus Walteri Earl Milit ' in prison ' nostra sub custodia tua detent ' ut dicit una cum causa detentionis suae quocunque nomine praedict ' Walter ' censeat in eadem Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum recipiendum ea quae curia nostra de eo ad tunc ibidem ordin ' conting ' in hac parte haec nullatenus omit ' periculo incumbent ' habeas tibi hoc breve Test ' Hyde apud Westminster quarto die Novembris Anno 8. Executio istius brevis patet in quadam schedula huic brevi annexat ' Prisonum Regis de le Fleet. Respons Johan ' Liloe Guardian ' Prison ' de le Fleet. Ego Iohannes Lyloe Mil ' Guardian ' Prison ' domini Regis de le Fleet Serenissimo Domino Regi apud Westminster ' 8. Post receptionem hujus brevis quod in hac schedula est mentionat ' Certifico quod Walter Earl miles in eodem brevium nominat ' detentus est in Prisona de le Fleet sub custodia mea praedict ' per speciale mandatum domini Regis mihi significatum per Warrantum duorum aliorum de Privato Concilio per Honorabilissimi dicti Domini Regis cujus quidem tenor sequitur in haec verba Whereas Sir Walter Earle Knight was heretofore committed to your custody these are to will and require you still to detain him letting you know that both his first commitment and this direction for the continuance of him in prison were and are by his Majesties speciall commandment from White Hall 7 Novembris 1627. Thomas Coventree C. S. Henry Manchester Thomas Suffolk Bridgewater Kellie R. Duneln ' Thomas Edmunds John Cook Marlebrugh Pembrook Salisbury Totnes Grandisson Guliel ' Bath Wells Robert Nanton Richard Weston Humphrey Mayes To the Guardian of the Fleet or his Deputy Et haec est causa detentionis praedict ' Walteri Earl sub custodia mea in Prison ' praedict ' Attamen corpus ejusdem Walteri coram Domino Rege ad diem locum praedictum post receptionem brevis praedict ' parat ' habeo prout istud breve in se exiget requiret Respon ' Johan ' Liloe milit ' Guardian Prison de le Fleet. My Lord the first Habeas corpus bears date the 4 of November then there is an Alias habeas bears Teste after that and the tenour thereof is a command to the Warden of the Fleet quod habeas corpus Walteri Earle coram nobis ad subjiciendum recipiendum ea quae curia nostra de eo c. ordin ' conting And the Warden of the Fleet he certifies as your Lordship have heard May it please your Lordship I desire as before was defired for the other Gentlemen that Sir Walter Earl may bee also bailed if there be no other cause of his imprisonment for if there were a cause certified and that cause were not sufficient to detain him still in prison your Lordship would baile him and if a man should bee in worse case when there is no cause certified at all that was very hard The writ is that he should bring the prisoner coram nobis before the King the end of that is ad subjiciendum recipiendum now I conceive that though there be a signification of the Kings pleasure to have this Gentleman imprisoned yet when the King grants this writ to bring the prisoner hither ad subjiciendum recipiendum his pleasure likewise is to have the prisoner let goe if by Law he be not chargeable or otherwise to detain him still in prison if the case so require it I will put your Lordship in minde of a case and it was Pasch 9 Ed. 3. M. 3. I will cite by the placita because my Book is not paged as other Books are it is in the case of a Cessavit In that case there were two things considerable the one that there was a signification of the Kings pleasure past and that determined with him the other that though there was a signification of the Kings pleasure before which was yet there comes after that a writ and that was another signification of the Kings pleasure that the prisoner shal be brought hither ad subjiciendum to submit himself to punishment if he have deserved it or ad recipiendum to receive his enlargement and be delivered if there be no cause of his imprisonment And if upon an Habeas corpus a cause of commitment bee certified that cause is to be tried here before your Lordship But if no cause be shewn then the proceedings must be ut curia nostra ad mar ' contigerit the Court must doe that which stands with Law and Justice and that is to deliver him My Lord I shall be bold to move one word more touching this return I conceive that every Officer to a Court of Justice must make his return of his own act or of the act of another and not what he is certified of by another But in this case the Warden of the Fleet doth not certifie himself of himselfe that this Gentleman was commanded to him by the King but that he was certified by the Lords of the Councell that it was the Kings pleasure that he should detain him But in our case the Warden of the Fleet must certifie the immediate cause and not the cause of the cause as it doth by this return Detentus est sub custodia mea per speciale mandatum Domini Regis mihi significatum per Warrantum duorum de Privato Concilio that is not the use in Law but he ought to return the primary cause and not the subsequent cause as in 32 Edw. 3. returne Rex vicecom ' 87. in a writ De homine replegiando against an Abbot the Sheriffe returns that hee hath sent to the Bayliffe of the Abbot and he answered him that the party was the Abbots villain and so he cannot deliver him that is held an insufficient return and a new Alias was granted but if the Sheriffe had returned that the Abbot did certifie him so it had been good but he must not return what is certified him by another In one of the presidents that hath been noted as that of Parker 22 Hen. 8. there the Guardian of the prison certifies that Parker detentus est sub custodia mea per mandatum
the first was Thomas Brown he was committed to the Marshalseys Per mandatum domini Regis aliis certis de causis and afterwards the Records say Dominus Rex quoad Chase relaxavit mandatum suum and he was bailed and the rest lay by it My Lords I will conclude I could be infinite in this case in presidents but enough is enough your Lordship knoweth the weight of presidents it is not enough to shew this was done but also to shew the reason why it was done I wil trouble your Lordship no longer but if any man shall doubt whether that or any part thereof be truly recited which hath been said touching the Records or Statutes I can say no more but that the statutes have been read and the Records are ready sorted out to be seen by your Lordship I shall conclude that I shall say in this case to answer the fear rather then the just ground of them that say that this may be a cause of great danger with the words of Bracton who spake not to flatter the present age lib. 1. chap. 8. in the end speaking of a writ for wrong done by the King to the Subject touching land he saith these words si judicium à Rege testatur cum breve non currat contra ipsum locus erat supplicationi quod factum suum corrigat emendet quod quidem si non fecerit satis sufficit ei ad poenam quod dominum expectet ultorem nemo quidem de factis suis praesumat disputare multo fortius contra factum suum venire My Lords I englished it not for I apply it not any man may make use of it as he pleaseth and so I conclude both for the point of Exception and matter of the Return which I referre to your Lordships judgement whether all in the Return but these words Per speciale mandatum domini Regis be not superfluous And for the matter whether these Gentlemen be bailable or not bailable I have shewed your Lordship that by the practise of all ages they are not bailable but have beene remaunded back And therefore I pray your Lordship that these Gentlemen may be remitted and left to goe the right way for their delivery which is by Petition to the King whether it be a Petition of right or of grace I know not it must be I am sure to the King from whom I do personally understand that these Gentlemen did never yet present any Petition to him that came to his knowledge Hide Chief Justice Master Atturney thus much we must say to you you have taken a great deal of pains you having had so short a time to consider of this case it is a case of very grear weight and expectation and we doe not intend that you shall expect long for our resolution for that these Gentlemen are in prison and desire no doubt to know where they must trust I hope we shall resolve according to the reason of former times and according to our consciences but this I must tell you as I did those that argued you must bring in your presidents for though wee have seen some of them yet some of them we have not seen therefore we desire that your servants or your selves doe attend and bring unto us after dinner those presidents you have mentioned on the Kings part for we intend to meet this afternoon and you shall have our opinions to morrow and I must tell you on the other side that this cause being of such weight Councell should be wary how they speak any thing to inveagle the Court. Touching such presidents as you urged in some of them we know there is something urged which makes not for you so you have omitted some materiall things to be shewn I speake it to this purpose not to prejudice the cause or to deliver my opinion which becomes me not but to shew that Counsellors should be carefull and this I dare say there is matter in some of the presidents themselves that leads to another case if they were intirely cited The Term grows away you shall not be long in expectation we will meet this afternoon and give you our opinions to morrow morning Master Noye We desire that Master Atturney may bring the presidents of 34 Elizabeth with him Master Atturney I will shew you any thing but my Lord I shal be bold to claim the priviledge of my place as the Kings Councell when the Kings Atturney hath spoken there ought to be no Arguments after that but if you aske to see any thing you shall have it Hide Chief Justice It is that we aim at the truth and right may appear and not satisfie the one or the other part but it is not desired to make use of it by way of reply but for satisfaction onely Serjeant Bramstone My Lord for the presidents I cited I did think they should have been brought and read in the Court that your Lordship might see them Hide Chiefe Iustice You shall need no Apology the Records and Presidents shall be brought to the Court and read openly for the Court will not wrong you and you shall see the difference between them and your relation of them nor you must not wrong us with your written verities On thursday the twenty eight of November Michaelis 3. Caroli Regis Hide Chief Justice Justice Doderidge Justice Jones and Justice Whitlock on the Bench Sir John Corbet Sir Walter Earle Sir John Henningham and Sir Edmund Hampden at the Bar. Hide Chief Iustice I am sure you here expect the resolution of the whole Court as accordingly yesterday we told you you should have This is a case of very great weight and great expectation and it had been fit we should have used more solemn arguments of it then now for the shortnesse of the time we can doe for you have been long in prison and it is fit you should know whereunto you should trust I am sure you expect Justice from hence and God forbid we should sit here but to doe Justice to all men according to our best skill and knowledge for it is our oaths and duties so to doe and I am sure there is nothing else expected of us We are sworn to maintain all the Prerogatives of the King that is one branch of our oath and we are likewise sworn to administer Justice equally to all people We cannot I tell you deliver in solemn arguments and give the judgements of every one of us touching this case as the weight thereof requireth but we have met together and we have duly and seriously considered of it and of all that which hath been spoken of on either side and we are grown to a resolution and my brothers have injoined me to delâ—ver to you the resolution of the whole Court and therefore though it bee delivered by my mouth it is the resolution of us all I hope I shall not mistake any thing of their intention in my delivery but if I doe they sit