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
A88190	The grand plea of Lievt. Col. John Lilburne, prerogative prisoner in the Tower of London, against the present tyrannicall House of Lords, which he delivered before an open committee of the House of Commons, the twenteth day of October, 1647. where Mr. Iohn Maynard the lawyer had the chaire.	Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657.	1647 (1647)	Wing L2112; Thomason E411_21; ESTC R202731	16,502	16

sentence vacated my liberties for future secured and the Lords exemplarily punished as well as the Star-Chamber High-Commission or Councel-●…d being they may more justly be charged then any of them for not keeping themselves to the points limited upon them by the Lawes and Statutes of the Kingdom but have not only with me but with multitudes of others undertaken to punish where no Law doth warrant and to make decrees for things for which they have no such authority and to inflict heavier punishments then by any Law is warranted which as the act it self expresseth were the principle causes of their abolition and may more justly be of the House of Lords for that there was hopes of remedy in case of injustice done by them by appeale to a Parliament which cannot in the least be expected against the House of Lords the appeal being still to themselves unlesse the House of Commons do instate appeales against them soly in themselves And by how much the more they judge their Court to be higher then other Courts by so much the more they ought in law justice equity conscience and honor to be transcendent in the equal legall just and impartiall administration of Justice an act of tyrany and oppression being ten times more odious in them then in any other inferior Court as learned Sir Edw. Cooke well observes in his Instituts And also I demand as my right and due ample reparations from the Lords for all their tyranny illegally without remorse pitie and compassion exercised upon me to the apparent hazzard of my life and being and that I may also have from them so much money for my legall maintenance as in all ages for these three or foure hundred years hath been allowed to men in my condition and prison and may be provided for for the time to come during my stay there And that I may freely be left to take my course at Common Law upon all Jaylors Keepers of Prisons and the Sheriffe of London as have most illegally and unwarrantably executed their illegall arbitrary and unbinding tyrannicall Orders and Decrees upon me and that now after seven yeares delay by you I may also immediatly be put by your House into a certain capacity to receive of the Earl of Salisbury old Sir Henry Vane the Lord Chief Justice Bramston and Doctor Allife who have visible and plentifull estates in being my long-since decreed reparations against my Star-Chamber Judges with just additions for my long stay large expences and great troubles therefore and not be put to seek it from the Lord Cottington Sir Francis Windebank and Mr. Ingram late Warden of the Fleet whose estates are so wasted and destroyed by sequestration c. that I know not where to find them and may be hereafter as I have been already seven years in obtaining my just right and due from them And lastly I earnestly desire and presse that speedy care by your House be taken to put the Earl of Manchester and Col. Edward King upon their thorough Trialls upon the foresaid Impeachments either to their justifications or condemnations and that all Suits of theirs at Common Law against me for words spoken about or concerning the said Impeachments may be stopped as in Justice Law and Equity they ought to be till they be either condemned or justified upon the said Impeachments And now Sir I have done with all and every thing that in point of Law I have to say aga●nst the Lords irregular dealings with me till they reply some other things in reference to the House of Commons I think as essentiall to my own welfare as any thing I have already said I have ready to say but that my present strength and voice is in a manner quite 〈◊〉 so that I cannot well go on at present though I have all my matter ready and therefore I earnestly intreat a new day to say out the rest and so leave it to your judgment and Tuesday next being the 26. of October 164● at two a clock in the afternoone in the same place being your own appointed time I earnesty desire your presence there when and where I doubt not but I shall demeane my selfe with as much honour and respect towards you as you upon Wednesday last with justice candor and fairnesse did demean your self towards me and the Kingdome so much concerned in me in giving me so faire publike free and uninterrupted a hearing which can not but in ingenuity be acknowledged a great obligation to him that in sincerity subscribes himself Sir Yours and the Kingdoms faithfull Servant John Lilburne FINIS

50. by the King and all the grandees in full Parliament That that judgement should never be drawn into example or consequence for the time to come And they there gave the reason of it because it was against the Lawes of the Land for them to judge those that were not their peeres and equals From whence I observe That if it be illegall for the House of Lords with the Kings presence consent and concurrence as they here confesse to condemne Sir Simon de Berisford for Treason and murdering the King because he was none of their peeres although vigorously put upon it by King Edw. the Third in the behalf of his father who in his own person sate and concurred with them in it much more is it unlawfull for the Lords to presume to passe judgment upon me a Commoner for a triviall supposed case without the King their creators presence Commission or Concurrence which by their own principles and by the principles of the Law yet in force gives life power and strength to all such their Judiciall actions and therefore all their proceedings with me are most illegall and unjust and utterly null and void in Law 5 My Fifth Argument against them is That by the Lawes of this Land no man is to be Judge in his own case 8. H. 6. fol. 21. 5. El. Dier 220. and Doctor Bonbams case 8 part of Cooks Reports yea and an Act of Parliament in such a case is a void Act by Law Therefore the Lords ought not to have judged this cause of mine for that it concerns themselves or at least the Earl of Manchester who was Speaker all the three severall times I was before their House who with the rest of his fellow Lords were not only Parties but Complainants Persecutors Witnesses Jury and Iudges which practise is against all the Lawes of England and the formes thereof as you your selves notably confesse and declare in the case of the five Members 1 part Book Decl. pag 201. and a greater act of injustice then ever I heard done by either the Starre-Chamber Councell-Board or High Commission Court in the dayes of their greatest tyranny and oppression 6 If the Lords judgement originally were binding in my case then a few Lords would bind not onely me but all the Commons of England who all one after one may be so served by them as I am and that without any hope of redresse in the world which both Law and reason abhorres either by Writ of Error or Appeale Attaint or Certificate of Assize to any Court whatever no not to the Parliament it selfe for then it would come before themselves againe who would never condemne themselves nor their owne Decrees And if the House of Commons suffer the Lords to excercise such an arbitrary illegall tyranny as they have done upon me and without all grounds rules or formes of Law suffer them to send for whom of the Commons of England they will and at their will and pleasure condemne them in what and how they please then the House of Commons stands for meere cyphers the Judges in Westminster-Hall for cyphers and all the Lawes in England for cyphers and we the Commons of England are become the perfectest slaves this day upon the face of the earth and by this practice the end of all Government is overthrowne viz. the weale and safety of the people as your House declares it to be in your notable Declaration of 17. April 1646. 2. part Book Decl. pag. 879. where you also declare but I may say by your dealings with me without any intentions to performe it that you will not nor any by colour of any authority derived from you shall interrupt the ordinarie course of justice in the severall Courts and Judicatories of this Kingdome nor intermeddle in cases of private interest otherwhere determinable unlesse it be in case of male administration of justice wherein ye shall see and provide that right be done and punishment inflicted as there shall be occasion according to the Lawes of the Kingdome and the trust reposed in you Yea and hereby the people of the Kingdome are left without all meanes to preserve themselves which your selves say it never ought to be being as old a Law as any is in the Kingdome 1 part Book Decl. pag. 207. in that you suffer the House of Lords without controule to exercise at their pleasure such a power over the Lives Liberties and Estates of the Free-men of England as I confidently aver it cannot legally nor justly be exercised by King Lords and Commons joyned and agreeing altogether who are when the most is said that can be said of them but Magistrates as all other Magistrates are appointed for the protection and preservation but not ruine or destruction of the people 1 part Book Dec. pag. 150. yea and de facto habitually to doe that for but endeavouring of which the Earle of Strafford lost his head by the decree of this very Parliament and for which I doubt not but either I or my posterity shall see the proudest and stoutest of them to do theirs it being more just equitable and rationall to destroy a man for acting and doing of a mischiefe then intending it Strafford being a Saint and a just man upon their owne principles in comparison of themselves And therefore Sir if you or the Lords shall shew me as many Presidents as will fill Pauls that they have done to others as they have done to me I value them no more in comparison to the severall Acts of Parliament and the Common Law of the Land which are above Acts that I have cited which are point blank against their usurpations then I value a dirty rag on the dunghill and I say unto you that if the Lords in their House can make Presidents to destroy Acts of Parliament and plucke the fundamentall common Law of England up by the roots yea such Acts as have been confirmed by scores of Parliaments then why doe you cozen blind deceive and delude the people of England by sitting for cyphers in the House of Commons and therefore awake and rouze up like men and powerfully and effectually rescue our Liberties from them least we doe it our selues and punish you as justly you deserve for your cowardly or treacherous negligence 7. The Lords being the meere creatures of the King made by his will and pleasure and set there as Prerogative persons and yet in Law and by their own principles as Lords without the King they have no Prerogative and yet have acted upon mee without the King or his particular Commission which makes all they have done unto me to be null and void both in Law and reason yea and I may justly say that they both in reference to the King and people thereby have forfeited their power and honour and cannot justly by you the Trustees of the people and who should be the Guardians of their Lawes and Liberties any longer be owned or acknowledged either in equitie

upon the 12. of Iuly 1645. joyntly under both their hands send into the Speaker a most malicious false note by way of accusation against me about 60000. l that then was said to be sent to Oxford by the Speaker whereupon without being called into the House though then at the doore either to justifie or deny the charge fixed upon me I was by vote of the House committed a prisoner to the Serjeant at Armes and from thence by Mr. Lawrence Whitaker was sent to Newgate and being there there was an expresse order of the House of Commons for any thing I know to the contrary by Col. King procured for the arreigning of me at Newgate Sessions where I was acquitted by proclamation as guiltlesse of any crime and afterward by the certifying thereof by Mr. Glyn Recorder of London to the House of Commons I was by vote thereof the 14. of Octob. 1645. freely and cleerly discharged But King being conscious of his own guilt and judging himselfe not safe nor long lived unlesse he crushed me to peeces and therfore most maliciously and unjustly upon the 14. of April 1646. contrary to the just priviledge of Parliament and the Common law of England caused me at Westminster as I was following my businesse depending and then in agitation before the house of Commons by whom I ought therefore in justice and law to have been protected comming staying and going till I had beeen dispatched by them ☞ to be arrested by the Bayliffe thereof into the Court of Common Pleas in an action of trespasse for 2000. l. pretending that I the day I was delivered out of Newgate had said that he the said Col. Edward King was a Traytor and I would prove him one which according to your Articles of Warre or your own Ordinances had and still is easie to doe if you will doe iustice whereupon by petition to your House I pressed hard that he upon his impeachment might speedily come to his tryal or else that I as in justice law and equity ought to be might be protected and the Judges of the Common pleas might be commmanded to sease their proceedings till King upon his impeachment then depending in the house of Commons might either be condemned or iustified but I could get no answer to my petition although I followed it with all the interest might and strength I had wherupon being in very great straits I was necessitated to pen my plea my self to I. Reeves and print it in the penning of which I was necessitated for my own iustification to touch a little upon the Earle of Manchesters refusing to doe me and the kingdome iustice and right in an open Councell of War against Col. King and having by L. G. Cromwells meanes beene deeply with him engaged against the said Earle in actively prosecuting of that impeachment of Treason and breach of trust which he exhibited to your house about two yeares agoe against the said Earle of Manchester he the said Earle of Manchester being then Speaker of the house of Lords and so chief Iudge in his own case caused me as ● conceive though most illegally and uniustly upon the 10. of Iune 1646. to be summoned up to their barre to answer as by their warrant appeares such things as I should be there charged with for writing that book or plea which if there had been any thing in it scandalous it was only tryable by a Iury of my Peers or Equalls which are Commons or men of my own condition at the Common Law the house of Lords having not by law the least cognizance or iurisdiction in the world of it and therefore all their proceedings upon me from the beginning to the end are most illegall and uniust and coram non iudice And now in the third place I come unto my plea but by the way I desire to premise this unto you that by your own Declaration of the 15. of December 1641 and 17. of Ianuary 1641. and the 12. of Iuly 1642. I find the law of the land and the ordinary course of iustice called by you the common birth-right of all the free men or people of England 1. part book Decl. pag. 7. 38. 39. 459. and in your Declaration of the 23. of October 1642. you aver that it is the birth right of the meanest of the Commonalty of this Kingdome to inioy the freedome and libertyes of the lawes of the land being as there you say intituled unto it with the greatest Subiect The inviolable preservation of which in divers of your Declarations you declare is the maine and principall end of all your undertakings mannaged both by your swords and councells And this is that for which you have compelled the kingdome to sweare divers oaths to maintaine with the uttermost hazzards of their lives and estates and you have also imprecated in your Declarations the fearce wrath and vengeance of the great God of heaven and earth to fall upon you when you decline th●se ends And therefore Mr Maynard considering all these your own words and considering your own deepe knowledge and understanding in the lawes of England by the practize of which you have got a great part of your estate and by the destruction whereof you are not worth a groate in all the world having no propriety in that you possesse being subject every moment of time to have all you have taken from you without remidie by him that is stronger then you and therefore well did Mr. Iohn Pym say in his speech against the Earle of Straford recorded in your own booke of Declarations 1 part page 140. that the law is that which puts a difference betwixt good and evill betwixt just and unjust if you take away the law all things will fall into confusion every man will become a law unto himself which in the depraved condition of human nature must needs produce many great inormities Lust will become a law envy will become a law coveteousnesse and ambition will become a law and what dibates what divisions such lawes will produce may easily be discern'd And truly Sir neither the Lords nor you can lay it to my charge that I am leagally convicted of the least crime that doth disfranchise me or render me in the least uncapable of injoying the utmost benefit and priveledge that the Law of England will afford to a freeborne Englishman neither can the Lords nor you justly pretend against me that I have drawne my sword against or otherwise publickly or privatly engaged with any interest in England for the destroying the lawes and liberties thereof nay so farre have I beene from any of those things that I doe with confidence avere it that I have as freely with my sword in my hand upon your and their primitive declared principles adventured my life and blood for the preservation of the lawes and liberties of England with as much resolution as any Lord in England and though it may unjustly be bruted abroad to my disgrace by

own declaration of the 19. May 1642. 1. part booke Decl. pag. 208. where you affirme against the King that he hath wayes enough in his ordinary Courts of justice to punish such seditious pamphlets and sermons as are any way prejudiciall to his rights Honour and authority and if any of them have been so insolently violated and vilified his Majesties own Councell and officers have beene to blame and not the Parliament who did never restraine any proceedings of that kind in other Courts and what you there avere of the King I much more avere of the Lords that their remedie in case of libilling which yet I deny mine to be is onely at common law where there is a writte and action by the law ordained de scandalis magnatum as also for libells only triable by a Jurie upon an indictment at common law and not others wise and this also seemes to me to be very cleare and evident by the Statutes 3. E 1. 33. and ●… E. 3. 18. and 38. E. 3. 9. and 42. E. 3 3. and 2. R. 2. 5. and 12. R. 2. 11. none of which I am sure gives the House of Lords any cognizance of my pretended crime therefore for them to meddle with me having no iurisdiction of my cause it being neither about errour or delay of iustice in inferier courts their proceedings are thereupon all Coram non iudice and so void and null in law from first to last it being a maxime in law that that which from the beining is not valid can never be made good by tract of time or those things which are begun from an evill principall can never attaine to a legal Issue 3. My third argument against all the Lords proceedings with me is this that no man what ever he be is to be imprisoned but by the established lawes of the land they are the very words of the excellent Petition of Right but there is no established Law for the iudgement of the Lords in any thing where the King their Creator is not concurrant 14. Edward 3 5 for the Lords as I said before are only there not by any election or power from the people but as persons of honour created and made by the will of the King to assist him as before and let their Lawyers or any of their Proctors shew me one president before this Parliament to the contrary without the Kings Writt for Execution For in the Writ of Error wherein lyes the main and principal power of the Lords there must be a Petition to the King for the allowance thereof and the King must give them a particular Commission and power to take Cognizance of it before they can have Jurisdiction of it as is clear and plain by the express words of the 14. E. 3. 5. which Statute is the principal strength and basis of the Lords power but my case is neither delay of Justice in an other Court nor corruption of Judgement in another Court which is all the cases the Lords have jurisdiction of by Law which is as binding to them as to any other Courts of Justice in England as is cleer by the 4. H. 4. 23. which Statute positively declares it is a subversion of the Law of the Land for the Lords originally to take cognizance of causes or to over-rule the just and ordinary proceedings of the Law in other inferior Courts * As was lately fully pleaded at the Lords Bar as I am from very good hands imformed both by Mr. Recorder Glyn and your self Mr. Maynard in the remarkable case of Limbry against Alderman Langham unto which Plea concurred the opinion of all the Judges then in England which they were commanded to give by the Lords speciall command upon which very Plea as I am told the cause is since dismissed from before the Lords as not legally proper for their Jurisdiction which at least serves thus far to my end that an Act of Parliament is as binding to the House of Lords as to any other Court of Justice in England I might here also make use of the Duke of Epernoones case about 2 years agoe if I wanted matter Law against the Lords Neither was there made in my case any Petition to the King nor any Commission of his granted to the Lords to authorize them to meddle with me and therefore all their proceedings against me are illegall from first to last in the highest nature Again it is plain by the Law of the Land That no man shall be put to Answer without presentment before Justices or matter of record or by due processe and writ originall according to the old Law of the Land See the 5. E. 3. 9. 25. E. 3. 4. 28. E. 3. 3. 37. E. 3. 18. 42. E. 3. 3. and the Petition of Right the 3d of the King and the Act that abolished the Star-Chamber the 17. of the King And Sir Edward Cookes Exposition of Magna Charta but not any of this was done in my case for the Lords summoned me Oretenus before my charge was filed against me and examined me Viva voce upon interrogatories against my self without letting me know either Accuser Prosecutor Witness Jury or Charge and therefore all their proceedings with me from first to last are totally illegall and most unjust 4 My fourth Argument against the illegal proceedings of the Lords with me is from the 29 Chap of Magna Charta and the 3 E. 1. 6. and the Petition of Right which expresly declares That no man is to be judged but by his peeres and by due processe according to the Law of the Land see Clarks case in 5 part Cooks Reports that is as learned Sir Edward Cook in his Exposition of Magna Charta published for good Law by two speciall Orders of your House saith by his equals that is men of his own condition Commons only being peeres to commons as Barons of Parliament are peeres to Barons of Parliament 2 Part Institut fol. 28 29. 46. 50. where also he declares what title they bear that are comprehended within the name of peeres of Parliament and also what titles they have that are comprehended within the title of Commons And notable to this purpose is the Record of Sir Simond de Berisford in the 4. E. 3. Ro. 2. which M. Henry Martin had from me at large last year under the hand of the Record-Keeper of the Tower of London the substance of which Record is That E. 3. in his own person did charge the House of Lords to give right and lawfull Judgment against Sir Simond de Berisford for his treason and murder in murdering his Father King Edw. 2. but the Lords to the King in Parliament said all with one voice That the aforesaid Sir Symon was not their peer wherefore they were not bound by the Law to give judgment against him yet neverthelesse at the Kings importunity they did but it was assented agreed and enacted saith Sir Ed. Cook 2 part Inst fol.