Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	esquire_n	john_n	richard_n	12,495	5	9.7776	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88211	The lawes funerall. Or, An epistle written by Lieutenant Col. John Lilburn, prisoner in the Tower of London, unto a friend of his, giving him a large relation of his defence, made before the judges of the Kings bench, the 8. of May 1648. against both the illegal commitments of him by the House of Lords, and the House of Commons, ...	Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657.	1648 (1648)	Wing L2130; Thomason E442_13; ESTC R210612	38,933	34

convert all my zeale to presse all the Commons of England out of all the Counties thereof to hasten up to Westminster to the Lords House and there at their dore susser the Lordn to bore them through their cares as their Vass is and slaves being heir actions clearly and dayly declare they never intended them any freedom Law or Justice and absolutely it is a vaine thing and time meerely lost from their hands to expect any so Judge Roll concluded and said they were upon their Oathes and as Judges of the Law they could do no other bat remand me to prison againe unto which ipaciently stooped and came away but had much ados to get out of the Hall by reason of the extraordinary crowde And the next day sending to see what was entered in the booke about me the Clarke or Regester sents me a paper in these words Munday after five weekes of Easter in the 24. of King Charles Tower of London Iohn Lilburne Gentleman brought here into the Court upon an Habeas Corpus by Robert Titchburne Esquire Lieutenant of the Tower of London and the returne of the said Habeas Corpus being read he being committed by the Lords and Commons in this Parliament of England assembled it is ordered that he shall be remitted O superlative Justice was ever any man committed or remanded to prison before by those Judges that in open Court declare he hath been already almost 2. yeares in prison for nothing and now also they have no crime to lay to his charge which is my case but to draw to a conclusion I desire to fulfill my promise and give you a sight of the returne which thus followeth J Robert Titchbourne Esquire Keeper of the Tower of London according to a shore Writ of our Lord the King to this scedule annexed certifie That Iohn Lilbourne Gentleman in the said Writ mentioned was committed and is detained in my custody by vertue of an Order made the eleveth day of Iuly 1646 by the Lords in the present Parliament of England assembled and then sitting the tenour and scope of which Order followeth in these words Die Sabbati undecimo Iulii 1646. ORdered by the Lords in Parl. assembled That John Lilburn being sentenced by this House shall for his high contempt and misdemeanour done to this high Court according to the said sentence stand committed to the Tower of London for the space of 7. yeares next after the date hereof And that the Lioutenant of the said Tower of London his deputy or deputies are to keepe him in safe custody accordingly And that he do take care that the said L. C. John Lilburn do neither contrive publish or sptead any seditious or libellous Pamph lets against both or either Houses of Parliament Iohn Brawne Cler. Parl. To the Lieutenant of the Tower of London his Deputy or Deputies And further I certifie our Lord the King that afterward to wit upon the 18. day of Ian. 1647. It was ordained by the Commons in the said Parl. assembled as followeth in these words Die Martis 18. Ian. 1647. Resolved c. That the Licutenant of the Tower be hereby required to bring up to the Bar of this House to morrow morning at nine of the Clock L. Coll. Iohn Lilburne his Prisoner Hen. Elsynge Clar. Parl. D. Com. By vertue of which I the said Rob Tichbourn the said Iohn Lilbourn brought up to the laid House of Commons in the said Parl assembled by wh●●● afterward the said Iohn Lilburne was againe committed to wit upon the 19. day of Jan. 1647. to my custody and in like manner is detained by vertue of an order made by the said Commons in Parliament assembled the tenour of which order followeth in these words By vertue of an Order of the House of Common these are to require you to receive from the Sergeant at Armes or his Debutie the body of L. Col John Lilbourne into the Tower of London and him there to detaine in safe Custody as your Prisoner in Order to his tryall according to Law be being committed for treasonable and seditions practices against the state and for so doing this shall be your warrant Dated Jan. 19. 1647. Wil. Lenthall Sp●●●●● To the Lieutenant of the Tower of London The said Iohn Lilburn is also detained in my Custodie by vertue of another Order made by the said Cōmons in the said Parl assembled the tenour of which Order follovveth inthese words Die Martis 18 April 1648. Resolved c that the 4. Aldermen of London Col Lilburne for Iohn May and do continue in the Tovvervv thout being removed from thence H. Elsing Cler. Parl. D. C. These are the causes of the keeping and detaining the said Iohn Lilburne in my enstody whose bodie before our Lord the King at the day and place in the said vvrit contained I have ready as by the said vvrit is commanded Robert Titchburne Keeper of the Tovver of Lonodn So deare friend with my service presented to you I rest yours faithfully John Lilburne Tower the 15. of May. 1648. FINIS

me to cease all such expressions unto which I replied Mr Justice Bacon I cannot make my legal defence for my self unless I speak against the non-Jurisdiction of the Lords but to shew my respect to you I shall avoyd all harsh words as much as the weightiness of my business will suffer and therefore Mr Justice Bacon I humbly intreat you I may be suffered to go on and then when I have done pass your Judgment upon my defence so I went on Jurisdiction over them as appears First in Colonel Edward King of Lincolnshire committed by the Lords to the Fleet by the power and interest of his then professed adversarie the Lord Willoughby of Parham and upon his appeal to the House of Commons in high affront to the Lords pretended Jurisdiction they released him out of the Fleet about the year 1644. Secondly Captain Macy belonging to Colonel Manwaring of the City of London being upon his guard at the Works seised upon divers letters of the Scotch Commissioners and broke them open about which the Commissioners grievously complained to the Lords who thereupon clapt the said Captain by the heels in the Fleet and my self with divers others being Solicitors for the Captain to the House of Commons they honorably to him and in high contempt of the Lords usurpations delivered him out of prison about the year 1645. and were upon debate to give him a large sum of money for his unjust sufferings Thirdly upon the Lords committing and censuring of me I appealed to the House of Commons and they received my Appeal and ordered me my liberty De die in diem to follow my Appeal which in my understanding is in Law a supersedias both to their Commitment and Judgment Fourthly Mr Richard Overton who affronted the Lords as much as any man that ever came before them and protested to their faces against their Jurisdiction over Commoners and appealed to the House of Commons for Justice against them and after that appealed to all the Commons of England and particularly to the General and the whole Army and yet notwithstanding the Lords approved of his protestation c. against them by delivering him by their special order out of the prison of Newgate without over-ruling him or punishing him or his stooping to them Fifthly his Wife and his brother Thomas Overton walking in some measure in his steps were justified therein by the House of Commons in receiving their Appeals yea and by the Lords themselves by delivering them without any punishment or judgment out of prison and without any their stooping or submitting to them Sixthly these very proceedings were the case of Mr William Larner Book-seller his brother and maid so that laying all the premises together it is undeniably evident that the present House of Lords have not the least Jurisdiction in the world over me or the meanest Commoner of England in any case whatsoever for if not in Treason the highest much less in Misdemeanors the lowest and therefore all their fines upon b Here I was necessitated by reason of the Judges often falling foul upon me to express my self in general words in this manner and therefore all their fines upon any of the Commons of England for not obeying their Warrants or Orders in order to tryals before them and refusing to kneel at their Bat in contempt of their Jurisdiction are illegal and null and voyd in Law and all those Goalers Officers or Ministers that put them in execution are subject in Law to make the party molested satisfaction for their wrongful molestation Sir John Maynard Sir John Gayer Alderman Adams Alderman Langham and Alderman Bunce for refusing to kneel at their Bar are illegal and voyd and null in law and reason both for all the Lords proceedings with them from first to last are coram non Judice and the Lieutenant of the Tower c. liable at Law to make them satisfaction for his unwarrantable executing of their illegal and unbinding Orders and Warrants upon them And indeed to speak the truth of the arbitrary and tyrannical proceedings of the House of Lords they are so illegal and irrational c Here again the Judges interrupted me and told me they must not hear such language of the Lords and therfore prest me to keep close to my exceptions against the return or else they could not let me go on so after I had expostulated it pretty well with them and being in an extream longing desire to come to the main pinch of the business very well knowing I had a smooth but yet a sharp sting for them in the conclusion I told them at their commands I would at present so far obey them as skip over part of my matter and did it to the next line where you shall find this mark ☞ that to set them up in the way they have lately gone in is to pull down all the Judicatures of the Kingdom and to destroy all the Laws of the Land in the destruction of which there is a perfect levelling of meum tuum which is totolly overthrown thereby and it is also a re-edifying of an arbitrary tyrannical unlimited and unbounded Government worse then Empsons and Dudleys Straffords or Canterburies for which yet they all lost their lives many stories higher then ever the Star-Chamber High Commission or Councel Table were which yet were arbitrary enough as appears by the Acts made 17. Car. Rex for abolishing them and indeed it behoves all the rich men of England well to look about them in reference to the Lords For if a company of men by vertue of their being made Peers by the King or his will and prerogative may at their pleasure and wills without all shadow of Law or Justice fine one Commoner of England more then he either is or ever was worth as they have done me upon whom they have set a fine of 4000 l. by the same rule of right reason and Justice they may at their pleasures rob all the rich men of England by Fines of all that ever they are worth yea and by the same reason and justice share it and divide it amongst themselves and so have better places abundantly of it then ever the Earl of Dorset had by being a privy Counsellor and Judg of the Star-Chamber which yet if some that well knew him belie him not was worth many thousand pounds per annum to him in an underhand way and besides if the Lords can persevere and hold on as they have lately begun the King was very unwise to call a Parliament and of and from them to seek for subsidies seeing the workmanship of his own hands the Lords by vertue of their having his prerogative stamp upon them is able to fine by their wills a Commoner of England more then he is worth and therefore may much more legally fine all the Commoners of England at their pleasure a quarter half three quarters or all they are worth and so fill the Kings or their own

Cofers at their pleasure full and get in to them all the money of England therefore let rich men look about them in this particular and in a second regard also more dangerous then this forasmuch as it concerns life let all men I say look well about them for I am confident of this that I suffer so much Barbarism from Cromwel and his Creatures who are not willing to come to a tryal with me for the Leiutenant of the Tower hath already denyed me the benefit of the Law of England in not obeying my first Habeas Corpus and would not suffer me without fresh strugling to come to a legal tryal and thereby have before the sun convicted themselves of wickedness and unrighteous dealing with me for saith Christ John 3.20 Every one that doth evil hateth the light neither commeth to the light lest his deeds should be reproved or discovered I say I am confident I suffer so much from Cromwel c. for opposing and throwing down the Lords Tyranny which he did and still is evident he doth intend to make the arbitrary yet seeming legal ax to chop off the head of every man in England he hath a mind to destroy any otherwise then by wilful murder as he did Richard Arnal at Ware and having been under God the chief Instrument to break him of that damnable and wicked design he and his Creatures therefore are as mad at me as so many mad men c. Although they have done so much already in destroying the Law and setting up Arbitrary Tyranny that I will make it good with my life divers of them viz. of the House of Lords c. better deserve Tower hill therefore then ever Srafford did but what a company of foolish silly Creatures are Cromwel and his confederate Grandees who would pretend to give those Commoners of England a tryal according to Law and Justice ☞ whose lives they would take away by a tryal before the Lords * Here I began and said Sir what an errational thing is it for the Lords to go about at their bar to try Commoners for their lives when as men that know the Law c. when as men that know the Law of England fully knows that if the present Lords were a true House of Lords as before I have fully proved they are not yet they were not able legally to try one of themselves for though the body of their House in case they were twelve or eighteen and under they cannot be should be in the nature of a grand Jury and petty Jury and so the Judges of matter of Fact yet they must have a Judg of matter of Law too and that must be a Lord high Steward which they neither have nor are able legally to make and therefore have no colour of power in Law to try one of themselves much less a Commoner that is none of their Peer or equal whom the Law hath again and again expresly prohibited them to meddle with but enough for the Lords at present and now two things more distinctly for the House of Commons First admit they had a Jurisdiction in executing the Law which I have before already fully proved they have not yet all Courts of Justice established by Law in England are bound and tyed to Judg no man but by witnesses sworn according to the Law they being the evidence to the Jury and Judg 3. part instit fol. 163. But they never put Masterson my accuser to his oath in his Information he delivered against me although he were but a single informer never any man of all the large company besides himself appearing against me and therefore no shadow or colour for the House of Commons to adjudg or condemn me to prison thereupon seeing no man whatsoever can be condemned by any Court in England without witnesses sworn against him according to Law but if he had delivered what he did deliver against me upon his oath it had been never the legaller because they have no power nor never had to administer an oath and therefore cannot by the Law of England in the least pretend any Jurisdiction over me in cases Criminal or any power at all to commit me to prison for where the Court hath no authority to hold plea of the Cause there all proceedings are Coram non Judice and there perjury though Masterson had sworn never so falsly cannot be committed and so against all reason a man is left at liberty to say without fear of punishment what he please because it being not in a Judicial Proceeding no perjury can be committed by Law and that the House of Commons hath no power to administer an oath is evident in that the Law gives them none nor they never practised it and therefore if they would now put it in use they cannot legally of themselves now begin to do it For as learned Cook saith in his Chapter of perjury 3. part instit fol. 165. An oath is an affirmation or denyal of any thing lawful and honest before one or more that have authority to give the same for advancement of truth and right calling Almighty God the searcher of all hearts to witness that his Testimony is true so that saith he an oath is so sacred and so deeply concerning the Consciences of Christian men as the same cannot be administred to any unless the same be allowed by the Common Law or by some Act of Parliament neither can any oath saith he allowed by the Common Law or by Act of Parliament be altered but by Act of Parliament no nor a new oath raised and therefore he declares it to be a high contempt of the Law of England for any man to administer an oath without warrant of Law and to be punished by fine and imprisonment and of all a And here I skipped seven or eight lines to this mark ☞ oaths in use in England This oath of Confirmation for deciding and ending of Controversies is the only and alone warrantable oath by the Law of God Mat. 5.34 35 36 37. and Heb. 6.16 17. James 5.12 And as for other oaths I know no use in the world of them for those men that do not love things that are excellent for the excellency inherent in them will never love nor honor them for oaths sake But ☞ the House of Commons wanting a legal power to administer an oath it is a clear demonstration and proof that they have no power or Jurisdiction at all in Law to decide Controversies betwixt a man and his neighbour especially in times of peace when all the ordinary Courts of Justice are open and therefore have no shadow or colour in Law to adjudg or commit any man that is not a Member of them to prison And in b But all this president to avoid disputes I skipt over for the Judges prest that the House of Commons owned the Lords Jurisdiction in some cases to which I answered I owned it as well as they and