with other proofes is not materiall for other proofe will doe the deede without this bad concurrence and so will a violent presumption as if two goe safe into a Roome one of them is found stabbed to death the other may suffer this presumption is inevitable the law of God the lawes and statutes of the Realme protect and preserve the life of man it were therefore hard to take away by circumstance such a reall and noble essence This concurrence marrs the evidence it helps it not If one gives false testimonie once by the ancient law his testimonie shall never be received againe Leges Canuti Regis Lamb Saxons lawss fol. 113. p. 34. much lesse where they are notorious ill doers this and the reason and ground of this question already opened will I hope give your Lordships satisfaction For this question I will state it without any tenure reserved by expresse words as the question is put whether the reservation of rent or Annuall summe will rayse this to bee a tenure in capite I conceive it will not for sundrie reasons First from the beginning there have beene Fayres and Markets and no president booke-case or Record to warrant the new opinion in this Case before Trinitie terme 1639. in the Court of wards Secondly the practise of that Court was alwayes before to the contrary in the same and the like Cases Thirdly it is a thing as the question is of new creation and never in esse before for this see the Bookes of 3. Henr. 7. 4. 12. Henr. 7. 19. 15. E. 4. 14. 46. E. 3. 12. 21. Henr. 6. 11. Stamford prerogative 8. Therefore there is no necessitie of a tenure thereof upon the Conquest it was necessarie that all lands should be held by some tenure for the defence of the kingdome 1. The statute of Quia emptores terrarum c. praerogativa Regis speake of Feoffator Feoffatores c. therefore a tenure I meane this tacite or implyed tenure was originally onely intended of Land 2. The King may reserve a tenure in all things not mainerable by expresse reservation or Covenant 44. Edw. 3. 45. Fitz. natur brevium 263. c. but that is not our Case 3. Heere it is left to construction of Law which is aequissimus Iudex and lookes upon the nature of things and therefore in Cases that include Land or where land may come in liew therof a tenure may be by implication as a mesnalty a reversion expectant upon an intayle the like 10. Edw. 44. a. 42. Edw 3. 7. Fitz. Grants 102. and divers other bookes 4. No tenure can be implyed by reason of a rent if the rent be not distreynable by some possibility of its owne nature upon the thing granted as appeares by 5. Henr. 7. 36. 33. Henr. 6. 35. 40. Ed. 3. 44. 1. Henr. 4. 1. 2. 3. Fitz-cessabit 17. 5. The distresse upon other land is the Kings meere prerogative like the case of Buts Co. 6. 25. a distresse may be for rent in other land by Covenant 6. This is no rent because it issueth not out of land 7. If the Patentee here had no land there can be no distresse in this case 8. This is a meere priviledge it issueth out of no lands and participates nothing of the nature of land all the cases of tenures in our bookes are eyther of land or things arising out of land or some way or other of the nature of land or that may result into land or that land by some possibilitie may result into it Therefore I humbly conceive that new opinion is not warranted by law or president These My Lords are in part the things which satisfied the house of Commons in all the matters aforesaid they are now left to the judgement and Iustice of your Lordships QVESTIONS PROPOVNDED IN PARLIAMENT AND Declarations of the Law thereupon in Parliament WHither the Subjects of this kingdome bee a free people and to be governed onely by the Common-lawes of England and statutes of force in this kingdome The subjects of this his Majesties kingdome of Ireland are a free people and to be governed onely according to the Common-law of England and Statutes made established by Parliament in this kingdome of Ireland and according to the lawfull customes used in the same VVhither the Iudges of this land doe take the Oath of Iudges and if so whether under pretext of any Act of State Proclamation writ letter or direction under the great or privie Seale or privie Signet or Letter or other Commandment from the Lord Lieutnant Lord Deputy Iustice or other chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome they may hinder stay or delay the suite of any subject or his Iudgement or execution thereupon if so in what cases and whether if they doe hinder stay or delay such suite judgement or execution thereupon what punishment doe they incurre for their deviation and transgression therein That Iudges in Ireland ought to take the Oath of the Iustices or Iudges declared and established in severall Parliaments of force in this kingdome and the said Iudges or any of them by colour or under pretext of any act of state or proclamation or under colour or pretext of any writ Letter or direction under the great Seale privie Seale or privie Signet from the Kings most Excellent Majestie or by colour or pretext of any Letter or Commandement from the chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome ought not to hinder or delay the suite of any subject or his judgement or execution thereupon and if any letters writs or commaunds come from his Majestie or any other or for any other cause to the Iustices or to other deputed to doe the law and right according to the usage of the Realme in disturbance of the law or of the execution of the same or of right to the parties the Iustices and other aforesaid ought to proceed and hold their Courts and processes where the pleas and matters bee depending before them as if no such letters writs or commaundments were come to them and in case any Iudge or Iudges Iustice or Iustices bee found in default therein he or they so found in default ought to incurre and undergoe due punishment according the law and the former declarations and provisions in Parliament in the case made and of force in this kingdome or as shall be ordered adjudged or declared in Parliament And the Barons of the Exchequer Iustices of assize and Goale-delivery if they be found in default as aforesaid it is hereby declared that they ought to undergoe the punishment aforesaid VVhether the Kings Majesties privie Councell eyther with the chiefe Governor or Governors of the kingdome or without him or them be a place of Iudicature by the Common-lawes and wherein causes betweene party and party for debts trespasses accompts possession or title of Lands or any of them and which of them may bee heard and determined and
Fayres and Markets to bee held in Capite when no other expresse tenure bee mentioned in his Majesties Letters-patents or grants of the same Fayres and Markets although the rent or yearely summe be reserved thereout The King grants Lands to be held in free and Common-soccage as of a Castle or Mannor by Letters-patents under the great Seale and by the same Letters-patents or by other Letters-patents grants a Fayre and Market reserving a yearly rent or summe without expressing any tenure as to the said Fayre or Market the said Fayre or Market is not held by knights-service in Capite or otherwise in Capite Copia vera Ex ' per Phil Fern Cleric Parl. Com. FINIS Faults escaped PAg. 9. l. 19. insteed of causes reade Cases p. 40. l. 6. for the reade their p. 44. l. 10. for wages reade wayes p. 56. l. 17. for best reade least p. 57 lin 18. for Rottoman reade Hotoman ibid. l. 21. for Master Sleyden say Selden p 61. l. 3. is omitted before that p. 63. l. 19. for strike r. stick p. 64. l. 14 for Primes case say Princes case p. 67 l ultima for Strata Marclad say Strata Marcella p. 68. l vlt. for here say there p 70 l 1 for sit say Litt. ibid. l 2 for give say gives p 70 l 22 for writ say writs p 72 l 1. for this the p 7â— l 23. for as say or p 86. for Willielmi Collet say Willielmus Collet p. 87 l 12 for Monopolites Monopolists p 88 l 8 for Cod. say C. p 93 l 19 for promissum est say provisum est p 94 l 2 for promissum say provisum p 97 l 21 for the say this p 109 l. 3 for Thornbow say Thorn borow pag 116. l. 7. for Placit. Com. say Plo. Com. ibid. l 19 for partes say parties p 121 l 7 non is omitted p 122 l vltim for relivuum say relevium Preamble to the questions 1. q. 1. rat 2. q. 2. rat 3. 4. q. 3. 4. ratio 5. 6. 7. q. 5. 6. 7. rat 8. q. 8. rat 9. q. 9. rat 10. quest 10. ratio 11. quest 11. ratio 12. q. 12. rat The second remembrancers certificate 1. Iunii 1641. 13 quest 13. ratio 14. quest 14. ratio 15. q. 15. rat 16. quest 16. ratio 17. quest 17. ratio 18. q. 18. rat 19. quest 19. rat 20. que 20. rat 21. quest 21. rat Hopperus de vera Iuris prudentia pag. 118. Lord Chancel Egerton de postnat fol. 17. â— ratio Poltons stat fol. 8. Atchi Tuâ—ris Lond. Cambd. Anals Hibern 2. ratio 3. ratio 4. ratio 5. ratio 6. ratio 7. ratio 8. ratio 9. ratio Genes c. 3. vers. 7. c. 4. vers. 8. 1. Quest 1. Answer Archi. Turris London Stat. Hiberniae 67. a. 2. Quest 2. Answe 5. Ed. 4. 2. 36. Hen. 6. 29. 14. Hen. 7. 13. 3. quest 3. answ. Sir Thomas Tempest Knight 1. object 2. object 1. Resp. 2. Resp. ad 2. Object 4. Quest 4 Answer Archiv Turris Londin De comunibus placitis per billas coram Iusticiariis Hiberniae nequaquam terminandis 5. Quest 5. Answer 6. Quest 6. Answer 7. Quest 7. Answer Natura Br. fol. 85. in se Briefe de securitate inveniend quod non se divertat ad partes extras pars extra cannot be intended the Kings dominions Fol. 12. 13. Natura Br. 32. 19. Hen. 3. fitz Her Darien presentment 23. â— Hen. 3. fitz Her Dower 179. 35. Henr. 6 26. 37. Hen. 6. 17. 49. Edw. 3. 4. 11. Co. 86. 8. Quest 8. Answer 9. Quest 9. Answer 10. Quest 10. Answ 11. Quest 11. Answ 12. Quest 12. Answ Vide 5. Henr. 7. 9. a. prescription to impound Cattle untill amends be done according to his will not good This appeares by severall Records in Hen. 6. Hen. 7 time in the secoÌ„d Remembrancers Office in Ireland 24. Hen. 8 B Fealty homage 8. 13. Quest 13. Answ 14 Quest 14. Answ Vide 2. 3. Phil. Ma 〈…〉 e 123. b. 15. Quest 15. Answ Co. Inst. 109. Stat. Hib. 3. Edw. 4. cap. 1. Co. 4. 34. Bozoons case 16. Quest 16. Answ 17 Quest 1. Answ Verba Statut. Lo. Visc Clanmoris 18. Quest 18. Answ 19. Quest 19. Answ 20. Quest 20 Answ Gen. cap. 1. v. 31. Gen cap. 1. v. 27. 21. Quest 21. Answ 48. Edw. 3. 9. 33. H. 6. 7. 8. Hen. 7. 12. Co. 6. 6â— Co. 9. 123. Question 1. Declaraon Question 2. Declaraon Question 3. Declaraon Questioâ— 4. Declaration Question 5. Declaraon Question 6. Declaration Question 7. Declaration Question 8. Declaration Question 9. Declaration Question 10. Declaration Question 11. Declaration Question 12. Declaration Question 13. Declaration Question 14. Declaration Question 15. Declaration Question 16. Declaraon Question 17. Declaraon Question 18. Declaration Question 19. Declaration Question 20. Declaration Question 21. Declaiation
or penaltie upon the libertie goods or lands of him that would bring an assize of Daren presentment for a prebendary I doe finde that a provision was made in haec verba Promissum est à Consilio Regis quod nullus de potestate Regis Franciae respondeat in Anglia antequam Anglici de jure suo in terra Regis Franciae c. Yet by that provision no forfeyture upon the lands or goods of him who sued a Frenchman in England at that time It is true that a Custome may bee contrary to the law and yet allowable because that it may have a lawfull commencement and continuall usage hath given it the force of a law Consuetudo ex certa rationabili causa vsitata privat communem legem but no proclamation or act of state may alter law For example sake at Common-law a Proclamation cannot make lands devisable which are not devisable by the law nor alter the course of descent The King by his Letters-patents cannot doe the same nor grant lands to bee ancient demesne at this day nor make lands to be descendible according the course of Gavelkind or Borrough English unlesse that the custome of the place doth warrant the same nor Gavelkind land to be descendible according the course of law à fortiori an act of state or proclamation which I hold to bee of lesse force then the Kings patent under the great Seale cannot doe it And in the case of Irish Gavelkind it is not the proclamation or act of state that did abolish or alter it but the very custome was held to be unreasonable and repugnant to law If an act of state bee made that none within the kingdome shall make Cards but Iohn at Stile this act is voyde for the King himselfe cannot grant a Patent under his great Seale to any one man for the sole feazance of Cards So it is of all proclamations or acts of state that are to the prejudice of Trafficke trade or Merchant affaires or for raysing of Monopolies or against the freedome and libertie of the subjects or the publicke good as I said before Also if proclamations or acts of state may alter the law or bind the libertie goods or lands of the subjects then will acts of Parliaments bee to no purpose which doe represent the whole body of the kingdome and are commonly for creating of good and wholesome lawes Therefore I conceive that all proclamations made against law are absolutely voyde and that the infringers thereof ought not to loose or forfeyte their liberty goods or lands And for the punishment of such Iudges that vote herein I referre to the sixt they deny to answer to this question This answer is generall and dangerous withall it is generall viz. they know no ordinary rule of law for it they ought to declare the law against it the right use of it here they commend and yet they doe not describe that right use therefore they commend two things the one the life of a subject to be left to Marshall law in time of peace the other they leave it likewise discretionary when they describe not the right use their last resort is to the Kings prerogative I have said before that Lawyers write the King can doe no wrong and sure I am our King meanes no wrong the Kings of England did never make use of their prerogative to the destruction of the subject nor to take away his life nor libertie but by lawfull meanes I conceive this advise should become the Iudges other advise they find not in their law Bookes The statute of Magna Charta cap. 29. and 5. Edw. 3. cap. 9. the petition of right the third of King Charles in full Parliament declared Tell them nay doe convince them that no man in time of peace can bee executed by Marshall law My Lords I could wish the Iudges had timely stood in the right opposition to the drawing of causes proper for the Kings Courts to an aliud examen the improper and unlawfull examen thereof on paper petitions whereby the Kings Iustice and Courts were most defrauded whereas an arbitrement being a principall meane to compose differences arising betweene neighbours and to settle amitie betweene them without expence of time or money was a course approved by law all our Bookes are full of this It is by consent of parties by arbitrators indifferently chosen bonds for performance thereof are not voyde in law and Iudgements given upon arbitrements and such bonds in our Bookes without question or contradiction to the lawfullnesse of an arbitrement or bond in proper Cases the principall good wrought by them was the hindering of suites debates at law therfore that exception fals of it selfe then I am to consider how far an Oath in the particular is punishable I will not speake of an Oath exacted or tendered that is not the question the question is of a voluntary Oath which the arbitrator cannot hinder I speake not to the commendation of any such Oath nor doe I approve of any Oath other then that which is taken before a Magistrate who derives his authoritie from the King the fountaine of Iustice but onely how farre this Oath is punishable by the late statute 10. Caroli fol. 109. a prophane Oath is punished by the payment of twelve pence no more vide stat of Marl. cap 23. 52. Hen. 3. viz. Nullus de caetero possit distringere liber ' tenentes suos c. nec jurare faciat libere tenentes suos contra voluntatem suam quia nullus facere potest sine praecepto Domini Regis which statute teacheth us that an exacted or compulsive Oath is by the Kings authority a voluntarie Oath is not reprehended 19. Edw. 4. 1. a. It was not reprehended in the case of an arbitrement this voluntarie Oath is punishable in the Star-chamber as the Iudges would affirme which I conceive to bee against the law First for that wee cannot learne any president in England for it It was but lately introduced here therefore the house of Commons is unsatisfied with the answer to this question in Boyton and Leonards case in the Star-chamber in Ireland Boyton was dismissed in a Case to this purpose about the yeare 1630. or 1631. It hath beene the late introduced course of the Castle-chamber and Councell-table not to admit the party censured to the reducement of his fine before hee acknowledged the justnesse of the sentence pronounced against him and that for divers reasons First the course of a Court being as ancient as the Court and standing with law is Curiae lex as appeareth by our bookes 2. Co. 16. b. Lanes case 17. Long 5. Edw. 4. 1. but if it be a course introduced de novo in mans memorie or a course that is against law it cannot be said to be lex Curiae for consuetudo licet sit magnae authoritatis nunquam tamen praejudicat manifestae veritati
to this positive question the answer is too generall viz the Parliament is concerned therein and so are two other Courts of Iustice and likewise the Kings prerogative is interested therein wherefore they cannot answer till the matter come in debate and be argued before them The consideration of the Court of Parliament will much conduce to the clearing of this question Co. preface to the fourth Reporte the exposition of Lawes ordinarily belongeth to the Iudges but in maximis difficillimisque causis ad supremum Parliament ' Iudicium Cooke preface to the ninth Report describes that supreame Court in this manner si vetustatem spectes est antiquissima si dignitatem est honoratissima si jurisdictionem est capacissima of this enough the learning is too manifest that it is the Supreame Court nay the primitive of all other Courts to that Court belongs the making altering or regulating of lawes and the correction of all Courts and ministers Looke upon the members of it first the King is the head who is never so great nor so strong as in Parliament where he sits insconced with the hearts of his people the second are all the Lords Spirituall Temporall the third the knights Citizens Burgesses these three doe represent the whole Common-wealth Looke upon the causes for which they are called Circa ardua urgentia negotia Regni looke upon the priviledges of it if any member or members servant thereof bee questioned or any thing ordered against him in any other Court sitting the Parliament or within forty dayes before or after all the proceedings are voyde by the lawes and statutes of this Realme The not clearing of this question is against the Kings prerogative which is never in greater splendor or Majestie then in Parliament and against the whole Common-wealth therein concerned as aforesaid the King hath foure Councels the first is commune concilium which is this Councell secondly Magnum Concilium which is the Councell of his Lords thirdly the privie Councell for matters of estate fourthly the Iudges of his law Co. institut 110. a. Then by what law or use can the inferiour of these foure Councels question the first Supreame and mother Councell I know not the state of the question considered which is of Burroughs who anciently and recently sent to the Parliament by the same law that one member may bee questioned forty eight members may bee questioned as was done in our case in one day six such dayes may take away the whole house of Commons and consequently Parliaments especially as this case was for upon the returne of the first summons foure and twenty Corporations were seized the learning therefore is new that it should rest in the discretion of the Sheriffes who might make unfaithfull returnes and of three Barons in the Exchequer who have no infallibilitie to overthrow Parliaments the best Constitutions in the world Search hath beene made in the two bookes of Entries in old Natura brevium and in all the yeare bookes that are printed there is not one president that in any time ever so badde such à Quo-warranto was brought in Co. entries 527. a à Quo-warranto was brought against Christopher Helden and others to shew cause why they claymed such a Borrough c. which is nothing to our purpose the quo-warrantoes in the question and those which were in the Exchequer did admit them Borroughs and yet required them to shew cause why they sent Burgesses to the Parliament this is oppositum in objecto to admit them Burgesses and to question their power to send Burgesses which were formerly both anciently and recently so admitted in Parliament Master Littleton the first booke we reade cleares this question sectione 164. There are ancient Townes called Borroughs the most ancient Townes of England all Cities were Borroughs in the beginning and from them come Burgesses to the Parliament so that in effect if an ancient Borrough ergo they sent Burgesses to the Parliament all these ancient Townes in England did remayne of Record in the Exchequer 40. ass plac 27. In Ireland they doe remayne of Record in the Parliament Rolles the tryall of them is by the Record it selfe and not otherwise If a Towne send Burgesses once or twice it is Title enough to send ever after 11. Henr. 4. 2. So if a Peere called once by writ and once sitting as a Peere Co. institut fol. 9. b. hee is a Baron ever after In the foure ordinary Courts they have priviledge for the meanest of their members or servants why not the Parliament It was the custome of the ancient grave Iudges to consult with parliaments in causes of difficultie weight a parliament was then to be at hand they did not stay to advise with them in a point which concerned the parliament so neerely and which was of the greatest weight of any cause that ever was agitated in the kingdome In our books all the entries it is true and cleare that Quo-warrantoes are brought and ought to bee brought against such as clayme priviledges Franchises Royalties or the like flowers of the Crowne but to question Burgesses in this nature is to question the Kings prerogative in an high degree priviledges take from the King parliaments adde and give unto him greatnesse and profit in parliaments he sits essentially in other Courts not altogether so but by representation what greater disservice could bee done the King then to overthrow parliaments how shall Subsidies bee granted or the kingdome defended how shall ardua Regni be considered Oh the Barons of the Exchequer I wot will salve all these doubts I may not forget My Lords how the law of the land the whole Common-wealth is herein concerned and upon that I will offer a Case or two If a statute be made wherein the private interest of a subject or the generall interest of the Common-wealth be enacted the King by his Letters-patents cannot dispence with this statute Co. 8. 29. a. Princes case though they be with à non obstaute nor make any grant Non obstante of the Common-law therefore I conclude this question First that it is against the Kings prerogative to issue such à Quo-warranto as is here stated Secondly it is against the Common-wealth as destructive of parliaments and consequently of government Thirdly this is no priviledge but a service done to the King whole Common-wealth which cannot receive so much as a debate but in parliament Fourthly all the proceedings in the Excheqver touching this parliament were Coram non judice as was already voted in both houses as for the punishment we come not to urge your Lordships to punish other then with reference to that which I said before viz. the Oath These two questions have so neere a relation the one to the other meeting in the Center of the Castle-chamber that I will speake to them at once or as to one question My Lords if that golden