Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	john_n	richard_n	sir_n	9,973	5	7.2530	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90626	Concerning moneys deposited in the chamber of London by Sir Richard Gurney, Kt. & Bar., late Lord Mayor of the city of London, and since his death, due to Sir John Pettus of the county of Suffolk, Knight.		1680 (1680)	Wing P1904A; ESTC R181743	4,632	11

and was allowed so there was no further proceedings on that Discovery By this time Cromwell took upon him to be Protector Decem. 54. whereupon the Executors by Petition complaining of the Injustice of the House of Commons in punishing a man so often for one offence or without hearing the Executors Case though it stood committed gained a reference to his Councel when the injustice and unusual proceedings were made so clear that the Lord Richardson was discharged of his Security given to Goldsmiths-Hall Jan. 1654. 1655. 1656. and Sir John Pettus of his Sequestration with an order of restitution of what had been taken from him yet he lost above 600 l. on that accompt nor was there a clear effect of the order of discharging the 5000 l. till the year 1657. These three years were years of great commotion in the City c. so as there was no stirring there 1657. 1658. 1659. in matters which concerned money The Executors were advised though the 500 l. debt was transferred to Sir John Pettus to Petition to the Lord Major In 1660. 1661. c. in all their Names and had some Proceedings upon it This Debt was lookt upon to be so good 20 Novem. 1662. that Mr. Charles Eucrard Goldsmith of London who about that time fined for Alderman takes the Assignment of it as a good Security for above 600 l. which the said Sir John did after Repay so as little was done more in getting in the money till 1663. And then the Executors upon a new Petition 2 June 1663. gains a Reference to a Committee of Aldermen and a Report from them to the Court of Aldermen to this effect 20 June 1663. viz. That they found the money to be paid by Sir Richard Gurney but not repaid to him but in respect the money was issued out of the Chamber as was pretended they conceived it could not be levyed without a Common Councel Upon which the Executors prepared a Petition to the Major and Common-councel 1664. but being delayed His Majesty well knowing the great Sufferings of Sir Richard Gurney 16 June 1665. by his Loyalty and Fidelity to the City writ a Letter to the Lord Major Court of Aldermen and Common-Councel recommending the Case to them but the Common-Councel not sitting and the Plague encreasing nothing was done more in that year Before the Executors could bring the matters to any Resolution the Plague destroyed the Citizens and in 1666 1666. the Fire consumed the City wherein Sir John had an house let for 100 l. per Annum and more worth burnt and in 1667 1667. the Dutch gave a trouble to the whole Kingdom for all which Reasons Sir Johns Counsel and Friends advised him not to stir in it till the City was in a better condition to pay him The Executors applied themselves fresh again to the Court of Aldermen but soon after 1670 1671 1672 1673 viz. in 1672 and 1673 Sir John being the only Prosecutor of it was imployed in Suffolk about the Dutch Wars on that Coast Those being ended the Executors applied themselves again to the Court of Aldermen 1674 1675 1676 and then some scruples were raised concerning the nature of the Debt which occasioned Sir John Pettus to be at great expences and trouble in searching the Books in the House of Lords and House of Commons the Court not permitting Sir John to have the view of the Chamberlines books as formerly he had At last Sir John being then the sole Petitioner found that some of the Aldermen did favour his Lady who had lived about Twenty years from him and was turned Roman Catholick and had endeavour'd to make a stop of any money to be paid to Sir John Whereupon Sir John prest to know the resolution of the Court whether they would pay it or not 1677 that the might take some other legal course to which two of the Aldermen replyed that if Sir John did go to Law for it the Excommunication which his Lady had against him should be pleaded Upon which Answer 1678 Sir John gave over solicitation But now his Lady being Dead and the Excommunication discharged under the Seal of the Spiritual Court and publisht in Form so as the whole Interest being in Sir John he now Petitions singly and desires their Resolution Being able to prove 1. That the 500 l. was Deposited 2. That most if not all others who deposited money upon the same occasion are repaid 3. That Sir Richard was not repaid in his life time 4. That is was engaged by Sir Richard and Redeemed by his Executors 5. That it was afterwards purchased upon very valuable considerations by Sir John Pettus of the other Executors 6. That is was engaged by him for a good sum to one that fin'd for Alderman 7. That it had not been prudent or safe for Sir Richard in his life time nor for his Executors for twelve years after Sir Richards Death to press for it 8. That three years after his Death it was acknowledged by some Aldermen by way of Discovery to be in the Chamber as money justly due to his Executors and so claim'd by Goldsmith-Hall Commissioners 9. That for Fifteen years after that discovery it was acknowledg'd a just Debt by the Court of Aldermen but the manner how it should be raised and paid was the only question 10. Sir John Pettus did coolly Prosecute the payment of it ever after because Sir John did perceive that his Lady had made an Interest in some Aldermen to stop it unless she might have better conditions than he thought fit to allow considering what he had paid for it and what trouble and charge he had been at concerning it 11. That she is now Dead and the right to the said 500 l. and Interest according to contract is solely due to him 12. That it is a Trust in the Court and ought to be performed with as much Sanctity and Integrity as any money due to Orphans Especially Considering That Sir John Pettus can make it appear that Sir Richard was lessened in his Estate by his Imprisonment Plunders and Sequestration c. meerly for his Loyalty to the King and fidelity to the City full 28600 l. of which Sir Johns share as Executor would have been above 14300 l. and therefore in Justice he ought to be paid this 500 l. with Interest which in June last past amounted to 2160 l. or in Equity a greater sum for his Relative Sufferings FINIS