Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n edward_n sir_n william_n 56,368 5 8.7171 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A47375 Sr. VVilliam Killigrew his answer to the fenne mens objections against the Earle of Lindsey his drayning in Lincolnshire Killigrew, William, Sir, 1606-1695. 1649 (1649) Wing K453; ESTC R14022 14,319 20

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Parchment and then to ride unto the Commissioners houses that made the Decrees to get their Hands and Seales and having such a number as the Law requires being fix the Clerke doth not trouble himselfe to ride over the whole Country to have every Commissioners hand that made the Decree nor is it necessary for all to signe it is enough that their names in the body of the Decree doe shew it to be their Act. And if one man or more should dissent they are included by the major part so that the major part be a number warranted by the Statute If any doubt be made of this we doe undertake to prove it all 2. They say The Earle did bribe the King and his Lords to take away their Fens We answer That the Earle might dispose of his Lands as he pleased whether he gave them or sould them I conceive concernes not the drayning nor those that adventured with the Earle if any injustice was done for bribes let that appeare and let them that did it answer for it 3. They say The Earle did drain these Fens by Prerogative Power by the Kings Letters and by the Lords Orders We answer That the Earle and we doe claime our Interest by the Lawes of Sewers as by the Decrees before you is proved and doe disclaime all Title or Right by any Prerogative Power and doe say that the Kings Letters did only excite the Commissioners to proceed in a publique good work which was his duty as it now is the Parliaments to further such a beneficiall undertaking to inrich the State and we say those Letters did but recommend the Earle to be the undertaker but did not injoyne the Commissioners to accept him We further say that by the date of all the Lords orders those from the Star-Chamber from the Councell-Table and lastly from the Parliament it doth appeare that no such order was used by the Earle to procure the drayning but to preserve the workes doing and done The first order was long after the work was begun and others after the Earle had possession to preserve Corne from being destroyed and houses from being puld downe and to deterre such rioters By all this we conceive it is cleare that the Earle did not force the Countrey to consent to draining by Prerogative Power as is alledged 4. They say the old Commissioners of the Country were put out and strangers put into Commission We answer That the Commission used of course to be renewed every three or five yeares And it was at the Lord Keepers pleasure to change the Commissioners And it was just and reasonable to put the chiefe of the Drayners into the Commission who were become a part of the Country by that interest And we further say that the Lord Keeper might be informed by the Earle that some eminent men of the Country who at first did seeke to advance this worke were turned against it because they could not have such shar●s in the adventure with the Earle as they desired or for some other private grudge which we conceive a just cause for the Lord Keeper to leave out such as would hinder a publique good for private ends And we further say that it is likely that some did desire to be put out for their owne case which is very usuall however it is evident there was no evill intended by altering the Commission because there are above two hundred able and sufficient Gentlemen most of that Country in the Commission by which authority the Earles contract was made with the Country and but two strangers who could not over-rule that great number to prejudice their own Country by any unjust act 5. They say that the Drayners were Parties and Iudges We answer That when the Tax of 13s 4d was laid on every acre drowned there could be no parties because the Earle had no interest nor at making the contract of 24000 acres until it was made the Earle had no interest and then of them that did make that contract betweene the Countrey and the Earle there was only two that had any relation to the Earle for the now Lord Cobham Sir Edward Heron and Mr. William Langton did some yeares after his Decree become purchasers of their owne Fens at 40s an Acre at which price those lands were publiquely offered to any of the Countrey to adventure for and only these three Gentlemen did thinke those drowned lands to be so much worth in those dayes The dates of these three Gentlemens deeds will shew how long after the contract they became Purchasers and therefore cannot be justly called Judges and Parties at the making of the Contract or laying the Tax three yeares before the Contract was made Nor can Sir Peregrine Bartu nor Mr. Long 's sitting on the Bench who were the only two that were afterwards concerned in the Earles interest be reasonably thought to over-rule the other thirty Commissioners that did make the Decree of Contract where the words are that no one man did dissent 6. They say That the Fens in question were not drowned and therefore did need no drayning We answer That by severall Records of that County now in Court it appeares that the Fens in question have been ever hurtfully surrounded with waters and that it hath bin for some hundreds of yeares the constant indeavours of the Commissioners of that Country and of many other eminent men to have drayned the same Fens in the same manner and by new works in the same places where the Earle hath made his Draynes It doth also appeare by our adversaries books lately printed and distributed to the Members in Parliament that a little before the Earles undertaking the Country did proffer Sir Anthony Thomas and Sir William Aylisse a fifth part to drayne these very Fens in question and that they demanded a fourth part by which it appears that these Fens were drowned and that the Country did desire to have them drayned and was sufficient argument to perswade the Earle to undertake the work and therefore no Project and may satisfie all indifferent men that the Earl had no Prerogative Power nor needed any nor Lords Orders to force the Country to a compliance with him It also appeares by our adversaries other printed books distributed to the Members of Parliament that our opposers themselves doe desire to become drayners of the Fens in question by all which it is evident that these Fens did require drayning 7. They say That if the Fens did need to be drayned yet not by such Malignants as we We answer That when we became Drayners there was no cause to call us so and we were fit to be drayners because in those dayes none in the Country did understand the Art of drayning which is evident by the unusefull drayns of the Country before the Earles undertaking and by their wilfull and ignorant cleansing of their old crooked draynes this last year hoping by so doing to have shewed the