Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
king_n black_a contrary_a white_a 146,432 5 11.6832 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45503 The Case of Samuel Hanson, merchant and planter in Barbadoes humbly offer'd and submitted to the Kings most excellent Majesty's consideration and royal determination in council. 1684 (1684) Wing H664; ESTC R29468 24,118 19

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Court of Exchequer for trying the Cause upon the aforesaid Capt. Richard Young's 2000 l Bond to which Court RICHARD SEAWELL Esq His Majesties Attorney General Jan. 19. 83 4. came and exhibited three several Informations one against Young the other two against each of his Sureties Matthew Haviland and John Fowler these Informations were in His Majesties name and on his behalf prosecuted but the Bond was entred into to Sir Richard Dutton and never by him assigned to the King The Information sets forth That on September 18. 1682. Young Haviland and Fowler became joyntly and severally bound to the said Sir Richard Dutton Governour of Barbadoes in a Bond of 2000 l. penalty conditioned among other things that Young should not carry off any person whatsoever White or Black without a Ticket from the said Sir Richard or his Successors Deputy or Deputies THAT contrary to this Bond Note Whatever Cresset Writ was in kindness to Sir Richard and prov'd to be truth For the King and Council have declared that Judgement erroneous which Hanson complained of and Cresset writ some of the Lords were of opinion would be reverst when the Cause came to hearing therefore advis'd him to end the matter there which was all the Letter Young carrid off Samuel Hanson a Planter and Resident on the Island without a Ticket which Hanson was then a Prisoner for Crimes and Misdemeanors committed against His Majesty contained in an Order of the Governour and Council made October 31. 1682. which Order recites That Hanson was committed some days before by Warrant from Sir Richard for divulging the Contents of a Letter sent to him by John Cresset of London Sollicitor in which Sir Richard was traduced and some Lords of the Kings most Honourable Privy Council unfitly mentioned and exposed to the Malicious Censure of the disaffected in that Island to His Majesties Government and ordered to remain in custody till with sufficient Sureties he should enter into a Recognizance of 10000 l. before three of His Majesties Council to answer the same and other misdemeanours committed IT also recites That Hanson appeared that day before the Council and upon Examination denyed that he had seen the Letter so directed as aforesaid but confessed he received a Copy thereof from one South his Correspondent which Copy he produced and upon Examination was found a true Copy the which he confest he had shown or read to three persons or suffered them to read it for which and other misdemeanors he had done to Sir Richard he was remanded till he should find Surties as aforesaid and for the good Behaviour and the Copy of his Letter to remain in the Secretaries Office till Sir Richard should think fit to make use of the same there or in England THEREFORE the Attorney General insisted that the 2000 l. being the penalty of the Bond for breach of the Condition thereof in bringing away Samuel Hanson was become due to His Majesty and prayed a Judgement for the same Young Haviland and Fowler by Council appeared prayed time to plead Feb. 2. 83 4. and had till the Thursday following given for that purpose THEY all Three pleaded severally Feb. 6. 83 4. THEY protested against the Information adding that the matter therein contained was not sufficiently set forth and denied that they were guilty of any contempt against the King or breach of his Laws in manner and form as in the Information was set forth but for further Plea 1. THEY said that upon the Construction of the Law it is evident that the intent of entring into such Bonds as aforesaid was only to secure the Inhabitants of the Island who should have their Debtors or Slaves carried off without a Ticket 2. THAT by constant usage the Governors have ever since the Act made assigned over such Bonds to the Persons agrieved by the carrying off any Person contrary to the form of the Act which Implies the Governors by that Act are only made Trustees for the Inhabitants in such Cases Optima est Legum Interpres Consuetudo 3. ALL such Assignments as by the Act are directed would be void if the said Bonds should be construed to be made to the Governors in trust for the King for in such Case the Governors connot Assign the King's Debt to any Person Especially if not Creditors of the Kings 4. If it should be alledged that the King is damnified by Young's carrying off Hanson yet is the information defective in its not setting forth wherein and how much of which the Court ought to judg whereby the Defendants are outed of their Appeal granted by an Act of the Island Entituled An Act for the establishing the Court of Common Pleas within the same 5. HAVILAND and Fowler pleaded that the Attorney General had before exhibited an Information against Young the Principal for the said 2000 l. supposed due to the King which they conceived amounted to a Prior Information 6. THEY insisted that they ought not to be charged in that Court till return made That the Principal could not be found or was insolvent Magna Charta Cap. 8. saith as followeth Neither shall the Pledges of the Debtor be distrained as long as the Principal Debtor is sufficient if the Principal fail of Payment having nothing wherewith to pay or will not pay where able then the Pledges to answer 7. THEY say taking such Bonds by any Person for the use of the King is expresly prohibited by the Act of 33. Hen. 8. cap. 39. therefore the Act of that Island cannot be construed to be repugnant to that Statute c. 8. THEY insisted that the said Bond if at all suable for the King ought not to be sued in Sir Richard's Name all Bonds to the King's use being prohibited as aforesaid from being taken in any name but his own 9. THEY alledged that the Attorney General in his Informations hath not shown that Sir Richard did assign the said Bond to the King 10. THEY insisted that the Attorney General in his Informations hath not cited the proper Acts whereby any Officer is impowered to take any such Bond with such Condition endorsed as he pretends is forfeited to the King 11. THEY aver that if the Information should be ruled right to lye then Judgmeet would be entred for 2000 l. and no relief against the intire penalty to be had tho the Damages designed by the Act to be made good should not amount to a 20th part thereof which would be a grievance expresly against the Letter of the Law and contrary to the constant practice of recovering Damages upon the said Statute 12. THEY add that by this method of proceedure they should be deprived of the benefit of their Appeals expresly provided for by the Act for setling the Court of Common Pleas for that being a Court Inferior to this high Court cannot be appealed to from any Judgment given here so that they must be left without any Adjustment of the Damages which by the Law