Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	aaron_n	account_n	send_v	38	3	4.7505	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43106	Remarks upon the tryals of Edward Fitzharris, Stephen Colledge, Count Coningsmark, the Lord Russel, Collonel Sidney, Henry Cornish, and Charles Bateman as also on the Earl of Shaftsbury's grand jury, Wilmore's Homine replegiando, and the award of execution against Sir Thomas Armstrong / by John Hawles.	Hawles, John, Sir, 1645-1716.	1689 (1689)	Wing H1188; ESTC R10368	100,698	108

about August that the 30th of Sept. Walcot Dined with him told him that the Lord Shaftsbury was secreted and desired to speak with him Walcot brought him to the Lord Shaftsbury who complained of the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Russel for deserting him but there was such preparation made in London that now he was able to do it of himself and intended to do it suddenly he had above 10000 brisk Boys ready to follow him when he held up his Finger they would possess themselves of the Gates and in twenty four hours they would multiply to five times the number and would be able to possess Whitehall by beating the Guards the Lord Howard went to the Duke of Monmouth told him the Lord Shaftsbury's complaint who said the Lord Russel and he told the Lord Shaftsbury from the beginning that there was nothing to be done by them in the Country at that time the Matter of the discourse between him and the Duke of Mounmouth him and the Lord Shaftsbury and him and Walcot is too tedious to relate and as little to the purpose if the Jury had understood Matter of Law which they did not in it he takes care to shew what Confidence my Lord Shaftsbury had in him more than in the Duke of Monmouth or the Lord Russel how very Cautious he was and how Precipitate the Lord Shaftsbury was and that what he told the Duke of Monmouth the Duke told the Lord Russel and he heard the Lord Russel had been with the Lord Shaftsbury and put off the intended rising at wich the Lord Russel interrupted him and said he thought he had very hard measure there was great deal of Evidence given by hear-say only whereupon the Chief Justice said it was nothing against the Prisoner he declared it to the Jury but the Attorney General bid the Lord Howard go on in the method of time and that it was nothing against the Prisoner but the Witness was coming to it if his Lordship would have Patience he assured him so the Lord Howard went on where he left off with a story between him and Walcot of an intended Rising and of some dark Sayings let fall by Walcot and the Lord Gray importing a Design upon the Kings Person but the Lord Howard was very careful to put al off but at last it was resolved to rese on the 17th of November but the Lord Howard fearing it had been discovered because he saw a Proclamation a little before for bidding Bonefires without the Lord Mayors leave that of the 17th of November was also disappointed and the Lord Shaftsbury went away and died but considering they had gone so far that it was not sase to retreat and considering that so great an Affair as that was consisting of such infinite Particulars to be managed with so much fineness they erected a Cabal of six Persons the Duke of Monmouth Lord of Essex Lord Russel Mr. Hampden Algernon Sidney and himself about the middle of Jannary last and about that time they met at Mr. Hampdens House where it was considered whether the Insurrection should be in London or in Place distant what Countries and Towns were fittest and most disposed to Action what Arms necessary to be provided how to raise twenty five or thirty thousand Pounds and how they might so order it as to draw Scotland into a Consent with them about ten days after they met at the Lord Russe's House and then resolved to send some Persons into Scotland to the Lord Argile to invite some Persons hither to give an account of that Kingdom the Persons to be invited were Sir Jo. Cockram Lord Melvil Sir Campbill that matter was referred to Col. Sidney who told him he had sent Aaron Smith they agreed not to meet again till the return of the Messenger the Messenger was gone about a month it was six weeks or more before he returned and then his Lordship was forced to go into Essex where he had a small Concern where he staid three weeks and when he returned he was informed Sir John Cockram was come to Town and afterwards he was forced to go to the Bath where he spent five weeks and from that time to this was five weeks all which time was a Parenthesis to him And that he and the five mentioned erected themselves by mutual Agreement into that Society Atterbury swore Campbell was in his Custody then Col. Rumsey was asked whether my Lord Russel heard him when he delivered his Message to the Company and in what place of the Room the Company were who answered that when he came in they were standing by the Fire-side but all came from thence to hear him and when my Lord Russel said Col. Rumsey was there when he came in Rumsey said no the Duke of Monmouth and Lord Russel went away together Then in behalf of my Lord Russel the Earl of Anglesey was examined who said that visiting the Earl of Bedford the Lord Howard came in and told the Earl of Bedford that his Son could not be in such a Plot or suspected of it and that he knew nothing against the Lord Russel or any body else of such a Barbarous Design and he was going on again with what the Lady Chaworth had told him but was interrupted by the Kings Council telling him as the Court would not permit them to give Hear-say in Evidence against the Prisoner so they must not permit his Lordship to give Hear-say in Evidence for the Prisoner Mr. Howard said that the Lord Howard took it upon his Honour and his Faith he knew nothing of any Person concerned in that Business and not only thought my Lord Russel unjustly suffered but he took God and Man to witness he thought my Lord Russel the worthiest man in the World. Dr. Burnet said the Lord Howard was with him and he did then as he had done before with Hands and Eyes lift up to Heaven declare he knew nothing of any Plot nor believed any and treated it with great Scorn and Contempt The Lord Cavendish testified as to the Life and Conversation of the Lord Russel and thence concluded it was not likely he should be guilty of any such matter and heard the Lord Russel speak of Rumsey as if he had an ill Opinion of him and therefore it was not likely he should trust him Dr. Tillotson spoke of his Conversation Dr. Burnet and Dr. Cox spoke of his Cenversation and of his Aversness to all Risings Dr. Cox testified that my Lord Russel said the Lord Howard was a man of luxuriant Parts but he had the luck not to be trusted by any Party The Duke of Somerset spoke of the Lord Russels Conversation The Lord Clifford Mr. Leveson Gore Mr. Spencer and Dr. Fitz-Williams spoke as to my Lord Russel's Conversation The Lord Howard being asked by the Jury what he said to the Earl of Anglesey's Evidence owned what the Earl said but he did it to out-face the matter and if he said untrue he ought

me the Kings Council said in the argument of the challenge that they would not have the point of being a Jury-man tho not a Free-holder lost to the City of London and one of the Judge said 't was the Priviledges of the City were struck at in that point if by those expressions it is meant that it is for the benefit of the publick that there should be no failure of Justice I argree to it but if it be meant that it is for the benefit of the Citizens to be Jurymen I deny it and I think nothing shews it plainer than that it is a Priviledge that a Citizen shall not be drawn out of the City to be a Jury-man that a Nobleman shall not be on a Jury that it is a Matter of Prerogative in the King and favour to a particular Person to grant him a Charter of exemption from being on a Jury so that if I consider the Law I know what is meant by those expressions if I consider allowed Practice it is true a Jury-man may earn his Eight Pence for a Tryal but that is too inconsiderable pay for Persons of substance as the Jury-men in this case were said to be fond of the employ or to account it a Priviledge but even that was but in civil Mattres in criminal Matters not Capital the Jury were heretofore paid if they acquitted the Defendant but not if they found him Guilty though of late it hath been Practised to give them more and treat them higher if they Convicted the Defendant than if they acquitted him but in Capital Matters as the Case in question was it was never allowed or at least owned to pay the Jury be the Verdict which way it would having spoken to the Preliminaries I proceed to the Tryal wherein Coll. Rumsey was first produced he said he was sent by my Lord Shaftsbury about the end of October or beginning of November who told him he should meet at one Sheppards the Duke of Monmouth Lord Russel Lord Gray Sir Tho. Armstrong and Mr. Ferguson to know of them what resolution they were come to about the Rising of Taunton Sheppard carryed him where they were and Answer was made Mr. Trenchard had failed them and there would be no more done in the Matter at that time thereupon the Lord Shaftsbury took a Resolution to be gone Mr. Ferguson spoken most of the Message and he thought the Lord Gray spoke something to the same purpose he did not know how often he had been at that House he was there more than once or else he heard Mr. Ferguson make a Report of another Meeting to the Lord Shaftsbury my Lord Russel was in the room and that was all they said at that time that he remembred he was not there above a quarter of an hour there was some Discourse about seeing in what posture the Guards at the Mews and Savoy were in by all the company to know how to surprise them if the Rising had gone on Sir Tho. Armstrong and Mr. Ferguson began all debated it he thought the Duke of Monmouth the Lord Gray and Sir Tho. Armstrong were sent to view them the Rising was appointed to be the 19th of November he was spoke to by the Lord Shafsbury to go to Bristol if the Rising had gon on but in what quality was not determined the Lord Russel agreed to the Debate being asked if my Lord Russel said any thing there and what He answered my Lord Russel spoke about the Rising at Taunton being asked what my Lord Russel said he answered my Lord Russel discoursed of the Rising being asked if my Lord gave his Consent to the Rising he said he did The next witness was Mr. Sheppard who said in October last Mr. Ferguson came to him in the Duke Monmouth's Name and desired the Conveniency of his House for himself and some Persons of Quality which he granted In the Evening the Duke of Monmouth Lord Gray Lord Russel Sir Thomas Armstrong Coll. Rumsey and Mr. Ferguson came not altogether but the one after the other Sir Thomas Armstrong desired that none of his Servants might come up and that they might be private so what they wanted he went down for a Bottle of Wine or so the substance of the discourse was to surprize the Kigns Guards and in order to to it th Duke of Monmouth the Lord Gray and Sir Thomas Armstrong went one Night as ke remembred to the Mewes or thereabouts to see the Guards and the next time they came to his House he heard Sir Thomas Armstrong say the Guards were very remiss in their places and not like Souldiers and the thing was feasible if they had but strength to do it he remembred but two Meetings there they came in the Evening he heard nor saw any Coaches at his Door when they came in as he remembred the Lord Russel was both times there he had no business with the Lord Russel nor the Lord Russel with him at that time but since he had he did not remember Coll. Rumsey discourst the Lord Russel about any private business nor remembred any farther Discourse he remembred no Writings nor Papers read at that time upon Recollection he remembred one Paper read by Mr. Ferguson in the nature of a Declaration setting forth the Greivances of the Nation the Particulars he could not tell It was a pretty large Paper it was shewed for Approbation as he supposed when to be set out was no discoursed 't was shewed to Sir Thomas Armstrong and as he remembred the Duke of Monmouth was present and he thought Coll. Rumsey was present Coll. Rumsey said he was not present it was done before he came Mr. Sheppard went on and said the design of the Paper was in order to a rising as he supposed by the Purpose of it he would not say the Lord Russel was there when that Paper was read but he was there when the talk was about seising the Guards he could not be positive as to the times of those Meetings but it was when the Lord Shaftsbury was absent from his House he absented about Michaelmas Day he could not be positive that my Lord Russel was at both Meetings he thought he was at both he was sure he was at one the last Witness was the Lord Howard he said he brought Captain Walcot acquainted with the Lord Shaftsbury and upon his account Captain Walcot soon gained a confidence with the Lord Shaftsbury Walcot told him the People were sensible all their Interest was going to be lost by the violence offered to the City in the Election of Sheriffs and that they were resolved to take some Course to put a stop to it that there was several meetings about it and some Persons begun to prepare to Act that some had good Horses and kept them in private Stables and he resolved to be one in it he having an Estate in Ireland he dispatch't his Son thither and ordered his Son to turn his Stock into Mony the Son went

not to be believed on his Oath and insinuated that he meant what he said to be meant of a Design of Murthering the King which he did not believe the Duke of Monmouth or the Lord Russel guilty of This being the sum of the Evidence given against or for my Lord Russel let us consider how far it will justify the Verdict given against him first consider the improbability of Rumsey's Evidence if my Lord Cavendish said true that he should trust Rumsey to hear the debate about seizing the Guards when the Lord Russel had an ill Opinion of Rumsey as for Rumsey's delivering the Message there was no great Matter in that it is impossible to hinder Peoples speaking and it is not Treason to conceal what 's said besides it was well known it was Rumsey's way to talk extravagantly in order to accuse those that heard him if they did not discover it but besides the improbability of the Evidence in respect of the Person the manner of delivering the Evidence and the Evidence if self was such as carryed no Colour of Truth with it he said he delivered his Message and had an answer to it and being asked what the Company said further answered that was all that was said at that time that he remembred and gives a very good reason for it for he stayed not above a quarter of an hour and added that he was not certain whether he then heard something of a Declaration there or whether Mr. Ferguson reported it to my Lord Shastsbury that they had debated it and yet when Sheppard said Rumsey was there when the Declaration was read he denyed it and said it was read before he came in being asked to what the Declaration tended he answered to another Matter viz. that there was some discourse about seeing in what Posture the Guards were in and said that all the company debated it and being drawn on by questions said it was in order to seize the Guards if the Rising had gone on now how doth that Part of the Evidence agree with what he said before that there was nothing more said then the delivering his Message and the answer to it and how doth it agree with the time he said he staid which was not above a quarter of an hour whereas that debate if all the Persons present being six debated it as he said they did it would certainly have taken up a larger time how does the first and last part of his Evidence agree when he said my Lord Russel agreed to the answer of his Message and being askedd whether and what he spoke to it said he spoke about the Rising at Taunton but doth not say what and yet in thefirst part of his Evidence he said when asked who sent the Message back Mr. Ferguson delivered the answer the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Russel were present and he thought the Lord Gray said something to the same purpose but what credit could be given to any part of a Mans Evidence whose memory was so shallow that he could not remember whether he was at two Meetings or whether Mr. Ferguson related one of them to the Lord Shaftsbury yet both were supposed to be within the compass of a Year whereas a Man of Sence is supposed to remember all his own Acts for seven Years past which it the reason why the Chancery obliges a Man to answer as to his own Acts possitively for seven Years without saying as he believeth or as he remembreth or the like what credit is to be given to a witness who testifieth what was said in company and by whom when his memory doth not serve to answer possitively whether he was in the company or whether another told him what was there said he might as well have said he was there or dreamt he was there or that he heard the discourse or dreamt of it had carryed equal credit with it It was plain the Man was not of sane memory enough to make a Will much less to be a witness in the Tryal of a Man's Life and nothing can be said for him but that he was a witness for the King that is to say a mad Man may be a witness to take away a Man's Life which is as good law as a great deal of other Cant vented as a part of the Prerogative It is true one of the Kings Councel recommends Rumsey to the Jury as a very credible witness under the notion of an unwilling witness but had the same Person been a Councel for the Prisoner he would have called Rumsey a dancing witness for he said backwards and forwards and an amazed winess for being asked one thing he answered another being asked as to the Declaration he answered to the seizing of the Guards being asked whether my Lord Russel assented to the answer of the Message he replied yes because he talked of the Rising c. which might be as well against as for it Sheppard's Evidence was to the Design of seizing the Guards and as to the Declaration he remembred but two Meetings at both which he said a he remembred my Lord Russel was present but he could not be positive in that and the times of the Meetings he did not remember he said the substance of the Discourse was how to surprise the Kings Guards and that the Duke of Monmouth the Lord Gray and Sir Tho Armstrong went to see the Guards as he remembred and the next time they came to the House Sir Tho. Armstrong said the Guards were very remiss c. Taking this Evidence by it self without tacking Rumsey's Evidence to it it was so far from being Evidence of Treason that it was no Crime for he doth not say it was intended to be put in practice notwithstanding all said by him both the Discourses and the Persons viewing the Guards which last was not Evidence not ought to have been given in Evidence might be a Matter to try each others Judgments as well as an Evidence of a thing designed and if it be capable of two Interpretations the Law hath said it shall be taken in mitiore sensu in favour of Life that distinction was taken by the Chief Justice in Blagues Case the day after this Tryal where the Evidence against him was a discourse about taking the Tower as High a Crime as seizing the Guards and upon that Blague was acquitied it is true Rumsey said it was in order to be put in Practice when the Rising should be in the Country but that he did not say at first but was afterwards lead to it by question nor doth he speak it as a thing at that or at any other time determined but as his own surmise or guess because he knew of an intended Rising yet how foolishly did he contradict himself for says Rumsey it was to have been put in Practice if the intended Rising had gone on and yet at the same Meeting he had said before the Rising was put off how contradictory therefore is it to