Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	earl_n	justice_n	sir_n	25,559	5	6.8295	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49986	The arguments of the Right Honourable the Earl of Danby the second time, at the Court of King's Bench at Westminster, upon his lordship's motion for bail, the 29th day of June, term. Trin. 1682	Leeds, Thomas Osborne, Duke of, 1631-1712, defendant.	1682 (1682)	Wing L922; ESTC R11803	14,163	15

THE ARGUMENTS OF THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE EARL of DANBY The Second Time At the COURT of KING'S-BENCH AT WESTMINSTER Upon his Lordship's Motion for BAIL The 29th day of June Term. Trin. 1682. As they were then Exactly taken LONDON Printed for Richard Tonson within Grayes-Inn Gate next Grayes-Inn Lane 1682. THE Earl of Danby's ARGUMENTS At the Court of KING'S-BENCH Upon his Lordships Motion for BAIL The 29th Day of June Term. Trin. 1682 c. The Right Honourable the Earl of Danby appearing in the Court of Kings-Bench the 29th Day of June upon his Writ of Habeas Corpus the Return of the Writ was read by the Clerk of the Crown and then his Lordships Councel Moved the Court That the Return might be Filed and his Lordship might be Enlarged from his Imprisonment upon Bail his Lordship having very good and sufficient Bail ready in Court and thereupon the Earl applying himself to the Lord chief-Chief-Justice spoke to this Effect EArl of Danby My Lord When I last attended your Lordships and this Court the Judges or most of them were of opinion That what I then said to your Lordship might deserve further Consideration and therefore my Lord I doubt not but that your Lordship has been pleased to consider further thereof At that time my Lord none of the Judges but your Lordship I think made any very particular Objections against my being Bailed and if I am able to offer any thing to your Lordship that may give a sufficient Answer to those Objections I do not doubt but that your Lordship is so just that you will not adhere to any Opinion only because you have been once of that Opinion if any thing can be shewed to convince you to change it In confidence therefore that I am before a Court which is not to be Influenced by any Body how great soever nor by any thing but by the Laws of England and by your Oaths to do Justice according to those Laws and being well assured of the Care which your Lordship will always have to maintain the English Liberties with which your Lordship is Intrusted by the King and by the Laws and Invested with Power enough by both to defend them at all times and against all Opinions whatsoever My Lord I say presuming and not doubting of all this I shall take upon me to add something to what I have said already to the Objections which were then made by your Lordship and I hope I shall have liberty to Answer any new Objections that may be now made My Lord I take it for granted in the first place That the Order of the House of Lords is no Objection against my Bail because your Lordship was pleased to tell me so the last time I was here and then I do reckon that those Objections which have been made against my being Bailed may be summed up under these Three Heads The First My Lord as well as my memory will serve me was That as it was Incongruous for a Court which was Inferiour to this to Bail any Man that was Committed by this Court or to call in question the Process of this Court so it would likewise be for this Court to do in my Case for that if a Man were Committed by this Court no Inferior Court could Bail that Man in Case His Majesty should think fit to Adjourn this Court from time to time until this Court should sit again The Second Objection was That I am not Indefinitely Imprisoned for that when His Majesty shall please to call a Parliament I would have Remedy and therefore I must wait till His Majesty should please to call a Parliament The Third was That this Cause of mine was depending in a Superior Court which was too big for this Court and that the Supreme Court having laid its hands upon me therefore this Court could not Intermedle in that matter my Lord these to the best of my Remembrance are the Substance of the Objections then made The first of these I have been told without doors is taken to be one of the weightiest Objections against me and truly I should be very glad it should prove so because I think it may be so easily Answered For in the first place As to the calling in question the Process I conceive that Bail is no calling in question any Process and this Court did surely think so when in the Case of the Earl of Shaftsbury they did declare That had he not come to them in the time of an Adjournment of Parliament they would have Bailed him and my Lord as nothing is more evident then that this Court and other Courts do meddle with the Proceedings of that Superior Court so I do not doubt but to make appear that they do meddle in a much greater degree then what I desire of Bail and that the Consequences of what they do every Day practice may be far more dangerous to the Subject then the Bailing of me can be For that part of the Objection that compares a Commitment of this Court to a Commitment of the House of Lords and doth from thence conclude that because an Inferiour Court to this cannot Bail a Man who is Committed by this Court therefore this Court cannot Bail a Man who is Committed by a Superior Court This seems so very unequal a Comparison and the inequality of it so obvious that truly I thought it had not needed any Answer for I would desire no other Answer from your Lordship if you can give it me then what an Inferior Court may give to any Person that shall come before them with the like Request For they may give him good and sufficient Reasons why they do not Bail him they may not only tell the Party that he is Committed by the Superior Court of the the Kings-Bench and that he must go thither for his Relief but they can give him good Reasons why he must do so for they can tell him that the Court of Kings-Bench will sit next Term they can tell him when that Term will begin and they can tell him how long that Term will last and they can tell him that the Court of Kings-Bench cannot be Dissolved as the Parliament may be And my Lord this takes away all that Prisoners pretences to say that he is an Indefinite Prisoner and if your Lordship can give me any such Answers as these I shall be as well satisfied as that Man ought to be but if no such certain Answers as these can be given me then I must beg Pardon to tell your Lordships that it cannot be denied but that my Imprisonment is Indefinite and if it be so I do as an English Man affirm that no Law in England can support it For the saying that if the King should Adjourn this Court from time to time the Party could not be Bailed till such time as this Court should sit again My Lord If this should be admitted as a reasonable supposition which under favour I do not

may be tried by his People as well as he can try them My Lord there are a great many of Consequences attending upon that Doctrine which I am sure will ne'er be countenanced by the King's Courts but I shall not wonder that such Men as these be trying their Projects and think themselves in the Right to do so If they find his Majesty cannot doe so much as a lesser Act of Grace for his Prisoner which is but to give him ease from too long or perhaps a perpetual Imprisonment for if he hath not power so much as to Bail his own Prisoner I shall not wonder if others question whether he hath power to Pardon him My Lord I have seen such Keepers of our Liberties from whom I should expect such Doctrines but I thank God that by our Laws the King is the Keeper of our Liberties and therefore I hope I shall not hear any such Doctrine by which he can only be the Keeper of us in Prisons but shall have no more power than another Man to set his Prisoner at liberty although his Will be only to give his Prisoner Ease as the Law intends against Indefinite Imprisonment Lastly My Lord If I should die in Prison with this Pardon by me which I have shew'd Your Lordship or suppose that the House of Commons if it were but with a design to destroy the Pardon would give some other reason than the Pardon as being better satisfied concerning me or any thing else why they would prosecute me no more of which there be divers Precedents What a Wound would thereby be given to the King's Prerogative and pray how is it possible almost to give it a greater blow than this would be What a Precedent would it be to Posterity to say that a Man had lain Three four or five years or more in Prison notwithstanding a Pardon that signified nothing all that time for that the King would have Eased him if he could and hath shewed his Court that he would do so but was not able so much as to have him Bailed would not this put that Prerogative in great hazard I confess I do wonder that some others besides Your Lordship have not taken more care of the Prerogative of the King for their own Sakes as well as the King 's For it would be very convenient it should be usefull if ever it should become necessary And it is not improbable but if the King should hereafter find such a Prerogative diminish'd he would not only reflect upon his Loss but upon those who might have advised better or might have better defended this Prerogative of the King And for the Subjects Liberties there will never be Eyes wanting to inquire after any invasion which shall be made of that kind Upon the whole I have troubled Your Lordship too long but it hath been upon a Subject of the greatest Concern to English-men I have such Bail to offer to Your Lordship as I am sure cannot be denyed and I am in my own Conscience sufficiently satisfied that I am detained a Prisoner from Bail neither by the King by the Lords nor by the Laws and therefore my Lord I do humbly pray your Lordship you would please to accept my Bail and as I here offer your Lordship my Pardon again so I again pray the benefit of it and I desire your Lordship it may be read in Court THE Lord Chief Justice then spoke and so did all the rest of the Judges upon the Earls desiring that they would severally deliver their Opinions And the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Dolbin did deliver their opinions that the Earl could not be relieved by that Court Mr. Justice Jones concluded his Discourse with saying that he could not give his Judgment that the Earl should be Bailed AT THAT TIME Mr. Justice Raymond did say he could not see but that there would be a failure of Justice if so be his Lordship should not have Liberty upon Bail but that he had not had time to view Precedents and therefore it would be very unfit for him at present to be positive in what he did say And then the Lord Chief Justice did tell the Earl he must be contented to be Remanded I Have not dared to set down the Particulars of what was spoken by the Judges the Writer not having well heard what was said by some of them but some are said to have taken Exact Notes which may perhaps be Published hereafter by themselves And it is likewise reported that the Earl not having been permitted to reply in Court to the Reasons given by the Judges against his Lordship's being Bailed does likewise intend to put forth his Answer to the Reasons which were then Objected against him FINIS

say that in this particular Case of my own I find only the word and name of Superior Court to be made use of against me but nothing in reality just as they were pleased in the House of Commons to use the word Traiterously in the Articles against me when there was not a tittle of Treason in them only that by calling it Treason it might serve to lay me where I am But my Lord I know no Court that is superior at this time to this Court where I am now and how any thing can be said to be depending in a Court that hath no Being I think will not very easily be defended from nonsence without having the Matter extreamly well explained and whenever that Superior Court shall have a Being my Cause will then be before it by my being Bailed to appear there And for saying it has laid its hand upon this Case of mine it ought to be shewn in what the Superior Court hath laid its hand upon me so as to keep me from Bail when neither that Superior Court it self though it were willing so to do is able to give me any Relief nor that I can get to be Tryed or Discharged elsewhere nor have any time prefixed when that Superior Court shall Sit as if there were no Justice left in England But if it be so that I shall neither be Bailed nor have it shewed what hand the Superior Court has laid upon me to hinder it then truly any man may be so concluded and the Argument may be decided by the will and pleasure of those who have men in their Power but the shadows of things when there is no substance in the Argument will not satisfie reasonable men for an Answer why so publick a Grievance shall not be remedied and I am confident that the Superior Court it self will never suffer its Name to be made use of nor themselves to be made Properties to support such a Grievance as may concern not only themselves but the whole Nation both in this Age and to all our Posterities and by which not only Magna Charta and the Petition of Right would be evaded but the late Act of Habeas Corpus may also be eluded by this device and the Parliament when it shall meet again will find that instead of securing their Liberties they have only been hedging in the Cuckow for that there is now a new way found out by which all Acts for our Liberties may be made of no effect And this cannot be contradicted unless as some would fancy the King could not Impeach as well as the Commons but there are so many Evidences to the contrary of that as there is no room left for the Dispute And amongst the Presidents of that kind there is one because it hath a double Consequence that I do desire to put your Lordship in mind of It is in the 5o. H. 4th in the Records of the Tower There you will find that the Commons came to Petition the King that his Majesty would be pleased not to Impeach the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury the Earl of Northumberland and some others that were at that time accused for being in the Confederacy of Sir Henry Piercy and the King grants their Request and does agree he would not Impeach them I have quoted this the rather because of the double President that is in this Case for again the same day the Commons came after his Majesty had granted their former request and did further Petition his Majesty that he would be pleased to affirm those Lords whom he had promised he would not Impeach to be his true Liege-men and the King did grant that also by which it was then taken for granted that he had set them Recti in Curia even though they were in that Conspiracy with Sir Henry Piercy and my Lord I give you this Instance that you may observe two things by it First That the Commons did Petition the King not to Impeach and when he had granted that it appears also that by the King 's declaring them to be his true Leige-men it was by the Commons conceived that the King did set them Recti in Curia by which it does appear what great regard the House of Commons had to the King 's bare Affirmation of men being his true Liege-men and I hope that neither this King's Power nor Credit shall be less with his own Court than that King 's was with his House of Commons and I am sure no King's Affirmation can be greater nor more publick both to his Parliament and Kingdom of any mans being a true Liege-man to use that old word than the King 's hath been concerning me My Lord there are some men very unable to distinguish though they would between sound and good sence and there are a great many that are as willing to let men remain under their mistakes but since it weighs a great deal with some who do not very rightly distinguish it will be of absolute necessity for me to explain-what it is that is meant by a Case depending in Parliament when there is no Parliament This will be best shewn by an Instance in a Writ of Error depending in Parliament in which Case when the Parliament is Sitting and so the Writ is really and truly depending in the Court that is in Being there can during such Sitting be no Execution sued upon the Judgment But my Lord no sooner is the Parliament dissolved but experience shews that Execution may be sued and Goods levyed and the properties of mens Estates changed and therefore it is by this sufficiently plain that depending is not then meant in the same sence or in the same manner as it was meant when the Parliament was actually Sitting for then there could have been no Execution sued Now my Lord When a Parliament shall meet again what does it meet with It meets it is true with the same Cause again as to the Merits but it meets it quite altered as to other Circumstances viz. as to the Execution that hath been granted by an inferior Court in the interval of Parliament And as to the change of property for a man's Estate and perhaps of great value may happen to be in another mans hands at the same time by the Execution so that when a Parliament doth meet again it doth meet it is true with the same Cause as to the Merits but indeed as to nothing else And therefore by this it is clear that a Parliament does only expect when it meets again to meet with the Cause in the same state as to the Merits of the Cause and doth not at all meddle or concern it self to find fault with those suppletory Acts that have been done by an inferior Court in the interval which was only to prevent failure of Justice but it commends them for not having delayed Justice and that men should not be kept too long out of their Rights even though there may have been prodigious Wrong done to the