Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	heir_n	hold_v	tenant_n	3,220	5	9.7276	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01338	The argument of Master Nicholas Fuller, in the case of Thomas Lad, and Richard Maunsell, his clients Wherein it is plainely proved, that the Ecclesiasticall Commissioners haue no power, by vertue of their commission, to imprison, to put to the Oath ex officio, or to fine any of his Maiesties subiects.	Fuller, Nicholas, 1543-1620.	1607 (1607)	STC 11460; ESTC S102744	22,550	38

corrupt periurie shall forfeit twentie poundes And because the preamble and matter precedent touched witnesses only therefore that penaltie is restreyned by construction to charge witnesses onely therwith and not such persons as shall commit voluntary and corrupt periurie in their owne cases And so upon the statute of 7. Edward 6. against Receivers Bayliffs etc. although the wordes of that statute extend generally to lay a penaltie of 6. shillings 8. pence for every peny that receivours shall take unlawfully yet because the preamble of that statute touched only the Kings officers It is in construction restrayned to take force against the Kinges officers onely and against none other receivers or bayliffes And to conclude this poynt of the exposition of the wordes of the statute he did demaund why the exposition and construction of all statutes is left to the Iudges of the law but for this cause for that they are and alwayes haue been thought the most carefull iudicious and jelous preservers of the lawes of England And is it not apparant that to uphold the right of the lawes of England the Iudges in ages past haue advisedly construed some wordes of divers statutes contrary to the common sence of the words of the statute to uphold the meaning of the common lawes of the Realme as in the statute of 25. Ed. 3. where it is sayd that non tenure of parcell shall abate the writt but for parcell yet if by the writt an entier manour be demaunded non tenure of parcell shall abate the whole writt And where by the statute of Marlbridg ca. 4. it is prohibited that no distresse shal be driven out of the County where it is taken yet if one manour extend into two Counties there the distresse may be drivē from one County into another Countie And upon the statute of Prerogatiue which toucheth the King although the wordes be generall that the King shall haue the custodie of all the landes of his tenaunt where parte is holden in Capite yet if part of the landes of his tenaunt doe descend to severall heyres on the parte of the Father and on the parte of the Mother there the King shall not haue all the landes of his tenaunt during the minoritie of the heire for that in all these Cases the great regard of the rule and right of the common lawes doth controll the generall or common sence of the wordes of those statutes And why then should this statute receiue construction by the Iudges of the law contrary to the rule of all other statutes to this effect that by in intendment gathered out of the generall wordes of the Act according to the tenor of the say● letters Pa●ents there might be erected in this common wealth of England a course of an arbitrarie governement at the discretion of the Commissioners directly contrary to the happie long continued goverment and course of the common lawes of the Realme and directly contrary to Magna Charta which if the statute of 24. Edw. 3. did so highly regard as to make voyd Acts of Parliament contrary to the same it would a fortiori make voyd all construction of statuts contrary to Magna Charta which haue no expresse wordes but an intendement or construction of words with much violence to be wrested to that end And for such as would make such construction of the statute as that whatsoever should be conteyned in the letters Pattents should be as a law he would haue them remember that the King may make new letters Patents for these matters Ecclesiasticall causes every day altering the same in the penalties and manner of proceeding and that if the letter of the statute should be purused the King may change the Commissioners every day and make any persons Commissioners being naturall borne subjectes to the King although not borne in England which were against the meaning of the Act which meaning of the Act is the life of the Act and not the letter of the Act. And besides those former errors of the Commission before remembred he sayd that he did not see how by colour of the statute of 1. Eliz. which gaue power to the Commissioners to execute the premisses conteyned in that Act they should inlarge their Patent to enquire of offences cōtrary to other statuts made thirtie or fortie yeares and more after an 1. Eliz. which then were not dreamed of nor meant to be any part of the premisses conteyned in the sayd statute of anno 1. Eliz. and of other civill and temporall thinges for which if the Ecclesiasticall court had held plea a prohibition did lye at the common law according to the statute of 24. Edw. 1. cap 1. and 22. Ed. 4. fol 20. and in 13. Hen. 7 fol 39. Brooke and Fitzh fol. 43. 22. Hen. 8. because for the same thinges redresse may be had at the common lawes and in 7. Hen. 8. fol. 181. the Bishops of the Convocation house for medling against Doctor Standish for a temporall cause by him disputed before the LL. of the Councell were adiudged by all the Iudges to be in danger of Premunire But it wil be objected that use is the best expositor of the statute and then the continuance of this Commission since the statute of 1. Eliz. being aboue 40. yeares will prevaile much to which he answered that long use in a setled court maketh it the law of the court and the iudgments in one Court are not examinable in every other Court or in any but in the proper Court by writt of error false iudgement or appeale vnles the inferior Court meddle with that which is not within their power and then in many cases their iudgment is coram non Iudice and so voyd But this Ecclesiasticall Commission is but a Commission executorie by the intent of the statute of 1. Eliz. to continue so long as should please the Queene or King no setled Court and was meāt at the first as he thought to haue continuance for a short time to strengthen the authoritie of the Bishops against whose Ordination and installmēt the Papists did at the first except In which cases of things done by Cōmissions whatsoever the Cōmissioners doe it is examinable in every Court where it shall come in question at any time after whether that they haue pursued their Cōmission or authority in due forme or no. For their Decrees and sentences are not pleadable in law as Iudgments in Courts of Record are and the many yeares use of the Commissioners especially being Ecclesissticall men for the most parte who know not the lawes of the Realme will giue no enforcement to their proceeding if it be contrary to law But as in this Commission touching causes of Premunire Abiuration and other Cases where the forfeiture of landes and goods doe ensue the Commissioners Ecclesiasticall say they use not in these cases to force any subject to accuse themselues although the words of their Commission doe extend so farr because they see it apparantly contrary to law and right so the Iudges may say the like that in other cases of lesse penaltie to their knowledge untill of late yeares the Commissioners used not either to force any to accuse themselues or to imprison them for refusing so to doe And he did further answer according to the learning and difference which is taken in 44. Edw 3. fol 17. that albeit the allowance in Oier of some Commssion may be of great force to giue strength unto the same Commission yet the allowance or toleration in some other Court of such Commissions many times if it after appeare to be contrary to law bindeth neither the right of the King nor subjects but that the Iudges of the law may judge thereof according to law Vpon all which matters he did conclude that although the Commission be of force to execute the auncient Iurisdiction over the Ecclesiasticall and spirituall estate yet because this Commission and the proceedings of the Commissioners did much vary from the course of It is in construction restrayned to take force against the the ould Common lawes of England expressed in the statute of 42. Edw 3. cap. 3. and from the auncient Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall for that no pretended custome against those statutes which prohibite such kind of proceeding can be of force and especially for that the Act of Parliament of 1. Eliz. did not giue life or strength to the sayd Commission in those parts so varying but the contrary therefore he did hold the proceeding of the Ecclesiasticall Commissioners against the subjectes by force of the sayd Commission in these poyntes to be voyd and erroneous according to the wordes of the sayd statute 42. Edw. 3. and did humblie pray that his Clients may be discharged from their Imprisonment and the subjects freed from such erroneous proceedings too too heavie and burdensome to them FINIS Lev. 19.15 Ye shall not doe uniustly in iudgment Thou shalt not favor the person of the poore nor honor the person of the mightie but thou shalt iudge thy neighbour iustly Deut. 1.17 Ye shall haue no respect of person in iudgment but shall heare the small as well as the great ye shall not feare the face of man for the iudgment is Gods Fitz H. f. 4● 4● Edw. ● cap. 3. In the Tower amōgst the Parliament 〈◊〉 15 ●● ● 〈…〉 Fit●● fo 40 E● ● fo 36. Ex-rotulo Parliamenti de an 2. H. 4. Petitio cleri c●ntra hereti●●s 〈…〉 The Petition of the Commons The answer of the King Act. Mo fol 539. Act. Mō fol. 481. 〈◊〉 Edw. 3. fol. 2. Acts 23.35 Bra●● fol. 5. cap. ●● a) Stamf. fol. ●● 8. Hen. 4. fo 19. com fol. 236. 1. Ed. ● ●● 26 Fitz H.f. 31. H. 8. prohib Bosomes Case Cooke fol. 35.