Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	honourable_a	majesty_n	privy_a	10,396	5	9.6495	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50890	A true and plain account of the discoveries made in Scotland, of the late conspiracies against His Majesty and the government extracted from the proofs lying in the records of His Majesties Privy Council, and the high justice court of the nation : together with an authentick extract of the criminal process and sentence against Mr. Robert Baillie of Jerviswood / extracted by command of His Majesties most honourable Privy Council of Scotland ...	Mackenzie, George, Sir, 1636-1691.; Baillie, Robert, d. 1684.; England and Wales. Privy Council.	1685 (1685)	Wing M210; ESTC R19774	71,866	68

art and part of the famine which being found by ane Assize he ought to be punished with Forfaulture of Life Land and Goods to the terror of others to commit the like hereafter HIS Majesties Advocat produced an Act and Warrand from the Lords of His Majesties most Honourable Privy Council for pursuing and insisting against the said Mr. Robert Baillie of Ierviswood whereof the Tenor follows Edinburgh The twenty two day of December one thousand six hundred and eighty four years The Lords of his Majesties Privy Council do hereby give Order and Warrand to His Majesties Advocat to pursue a Process of Treason and Forfaulture before the Lords of His Majesties Justiciary against Mr. Robert Baillie of Ierviswood to morrow at two a clock in the afternoon preceisly and the said Lords do hereby Require and Command Sr. George Lockhart of Carnwath and Sr. Iohn Lauder Advocats to concur and assist in the said Process with His Majesties Advocat from the intenting until the end thereof as they will be answerable upon their alledgance Extract by me sic subscribitur Colin Mckenzie Cls. Sti. Concilij Pursuers Sir George Mckenzie of Roshaugh Our Soveraign Lords Advocat Sir George Lockhart Advocat Sir Iohn Lauder Advocat Procurators in Defence Sir Patrick Hume Mr. Walter Pringle Mr. Iames Graham Mr. William Fletcher Mr. William Baillie Advocats THE Pannals Procurators produced ane Act of His Majesties Privy Council in their favours whereof the Tenor follows Edinburgh the twenty third of December one thousand six hundred eighty four years The Lords of His Majesties Privy Council having considered ane Address made to them by Mr. Robert Baillie of Ierviswood now indited at the instance of His Majesties Advocat before the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary of Treason do hereby Require and Command Sir Patrick Hume Mr. Walter Pringle Mr. Iames Graham Mr. William Fletcher Mr. Iames Falconer Mr. William Baillie Advocats to Consult Compear and Debate for the Petitioner in the Process of Treason mentioned in his Address without any hazard as they will be answerable at their peril Extract by me sic subscribitur William Paterson Cls. Sti. Concilij AFter reading of the Inditement the Lord Justice General required the Pannal to make answer thereto The said Mr. Robert Baillie Pannal pleaded not Guilty MR. Walter Pringle Advocat as Procurator for the said Mr. Robert Baillie of Ierviswood Pannal alleadges that he ought not to pass to the knowledge of an Assize because he had not got a Citation upon fyfteen days or at least on a competent time which is usual and absolutely necessar in all Actions and much more in Criminal Pursuits especially seing if a competent time be not allowed to the Pannal he is precludit of the benefit of ane exculpation without which he cannot prove his Objections against Witnesses or Assyzers or any other Legal or competent Defences And by the late Act of Parliament concerning the Justice Court all Pannalls are allowed to raise Precepts of Exculpation and thereupon to cite Witnesses for proving the Objections against Witnesses and Assyzers which necessarily presupposeth that a competent time must be allowed to the Pannal to execut his diligence or otherwise how is it possible he can prove an Defence of alibi or any other just Defence and as this is most consonant to that clear Act of Parliament and to material Justice and to the Rules of Humanity so this point has been already fully and often decided and lately in the case of one Robertson in Iuly 1673. The Instance whereof is given by His Majesties Advocat in his Book of Criminals and Title of Libels where the Lords found that albeit Robertson got his Inditement in Prison yet he behoved to get it upon fifteen dayes HIS Majesties Advocat oppons the constant Tract of Decisions whereby it is found that a person Incarcerated may be Tryed upon twenty four houres and the late Act of Parliament is only in the case where a Summons or Libel is to be Raised but here there is no Libel or Summons but only an Inditement nor was any Exculpation sought in this case before the Tryal which is the case provided for by the Act of Parliament THe Lords Justice-General Justice-Clerk and Commissioners of Justiciary Repell the Defence in respect the Pannal is a Prisoner and that it has been the constant Custom of the Court and that the Pannal made no former application for an Exculpation SIR Patrick Hume for the Pannal alleadges alwas denying the Libel and whole Members and Qualifications thereof that in so far as the Libel is founded upon Harbouring maintaining and Intercommuning with the persons mentioned in the Dittay the Pannal ought to be assoylzied because it is res hactenus judicata he having been formerly pursued before the Lords of his Majesties Privy Council for the same Crimes and Fined in an considerable Sum and therefore that Crime cannot now ●e made use of as a ground of Treason against the Pannal HIS Majesties Advocat answers That he Restricts his Libel to the Pannals entering in a Conspiracy for raising Rebellion and for procuring Money to be sent to the Late Earl of Argile for carrying on the said Rebellion and for concealing and not revealing neither of which is referred to his Oath and consequently was not res judicata there being nothing referred to his Oath but his Converse and Correspondence with some Ministers and others within the Kingdom and his own Gardiner and his Writing Letters to my Lord Argile and oppons the Decreet of Council it self and restricts the Libel to all the Crimes not insisted on in the Decreet SIr Patrick Hume Replyes That as to the Corresponding with the late Earl of Argile at any time since his Forefaulture was expresly proponed as an Interrogator to the Pannal in that Pursuit at His Majesties Advocat's Instance against him before the Lords of His Majesties Privy Council and that not only his own Correspondence by himself but also by Major Holms Mr. Carstares Robert West Thomas Shepherd Richard Rumbold and Collonel Rumsay as the Interrogator bears as appears by a double of the Act of Council written by the Clerk of Councils Servant and is offered to be proven by my Lord Advocats Oath And as to any Correspondency with Mr. Veitch it is not Relevant since he was not Declared Rebel SIr Iohn Lauder for his Majesties Interest answers That he oppons th● Decreet of Privy Council where no such Interrogator was put to the Pannal and the Decreet must make more Faith than any pretended Scroll and cannot be taken away by His Majesties Advocats Oath to His Majesties prejudice and for Mr. William Veitch he stands expresly Forefault in anno 1667. and the Doom of Forefaulture is Ratified in the Parliament 1669. SIR Patrick Hume oppons the Reply That as to the Corresponding with Mr. Veitch it does not appear that he is the person mentioned in the Act of Parliament and albeit he were as he is not he having thereafter come

that Meeting and told he was sure the Englishmen intended so and that it was Discoursed at that Meeting amongst them that it were fit to seize Berwick and Stirling and that it was talked amongst them of bringing the Duke of York to Tryal and tha● the King would abandon him Sic Subscribitur Hugh Scot. Perth Cancel Queensberry George Mckenzie Io. Drummond George Mckenzie Edinburgh October 29. 1684. Sederunt Lord Chancellour Lord Secretary Lord President Lord Advocat THe Laird of Gallowsheils Prisoner in the Tolbuith of Edinburgh being Call'd and Examin'd upon Oath Depons that in the Moneth of May 1683. The E. of Tarras Hume of Polwort Elder and Laird of Philiphaugh came to the Deponents House himself being absent at his coming home they were speaking of the Security of the Protestant Religion and of a Party in England who would secure or seize the King or Duke and that if any should rise in Arms to Defend them or to rescue the King and Duke There was another Party who would rise in Arms against them it was proposed that some Countrey-men should be spoken to to try their Resolutions and that the Resolutions of England should be told them to see if they would concur But the Deponent does not remember that this proposition was approven or undertaken to be done by any present nor does he remember who manag'd the Discourse It was likewise propos'd to seize the Officers of State especially the Chancellour and Thesaurer and the said Sir Iohn Cochran was to come to the West from England for advancement of the Design and that the Earl of Argile was to Land in the West Highlands and to raise that Countrey Of these matters all these who were present Discoursed as of an Affair that they were agitating and wherein themselves were particularly concerned though at that time they did not conclude what their carriage should be The reason why the Deponent cannot be more particulars is because he was sometimes going out and sometimes walking up and down the Room and though the Deponent cannot be positive of the very words yet he is positive they were either these Words or Words to that purpose Sic subscribitur Hugh Scot. Perth Cancellarius Edinburgh December 23. 1684. HVgh Scot of Gallowsheils being solemnly Sworn in presence of the Justices and Assize adheres to the Depositions within and above-written in all points Sic subscribitur Hugh Scot. Linlithgow I. P. D. HIs Majesties Advocat in fortification of the former Probation adduces the Printed Copy of Mr. William Carstares Depositions emitted before the Officers of State and other Lords of Privy Council and leaves the same to the Assise and uses it as an Adminicle of Probation for though it was capitulat that he should not be made use of as a Witness yet it was agreed that the Deposition should be published and likewise produces the Principal Deposition signed by himself and the said Lords THe Lords Justice-General Justice-Clerk and Commissioners of Justiciary admit the Paper produced as an Adminicle and refers the import thereof to the Inquest and ordains the Printed Paper as it is Collationed to be taken in and considered by the Inquest SIr William Paterson and Mr. Colin Mckenzie Clerks of His Majesties Privy Council being Interrogat if they heard Mr. William Carstares own the Depositions Read Depons they saw and heard him Swear and own the same upon Oath and they Collationed the Printed Copie with the Original formerly and now they heard it Collationed Sic subscribitur Will. Paterson Colin Mckenzie THe Deposition of Mr. William Carstares when he was Examined before the Lords of Secret Committee given in by him and renewed upon Oath upon the 22. of December 1684. in presence of the Lords of His Majesties Privy Council Edinburgh Castle September 8. 1684. MR. William Carstares being Examined upon Oath conform to the Condescention given in by him and on the Terms therein-mentioned Depons That about November or December 1682. Iames Stuart Brother to the Laird of Cultness wrot a Letter to him from Holland importing That if any considerable sum of Money could be procur'd from England that something of importance might be done in Scotland The which Letter the Deponent had an inclination to inform Shepherd in Abb-Church-lane Merchant in London of but before he could do it he wrot to Mr. Stuart above-nam'd to know from him if he might do it and Mr. Stuart having consented he communicat the said Letter to Mr. Shepherd who told the Deponent that he would communicat the Contents of it to some persons in England but did at that time name no body as the Deponent thinks Sometime thereafter Mr. Shepherd told the Deponent that he had communicat the Contents of the Letter above-named to Colonel Sidney and that Colonel Danvers was present and told the Deponent that Colonel Sidney was averse from imploying the late Earl of Argile or medling with him judging him a man too much affected to the Royal Family and inclin'd to the present Church-Government yet Mr. Shepherd being put upon it by the Deponent still urg'd that one might be sent to the Earl of Argile but as Mr. Shepherd told him he was suspected upon the account of his urging so much yet afterwards he press'd without the Deponents knowledge that the Deponent being to go to Holland however might have some Commission to the Earl of Argile which he having inform'd the Deponent of the Deponent told him that he himself would not be concern'd but if they would send another he would introduce him but nothing of this was done upon which the Deponent went over without any Commission from any body to Holland never meeting with Iames Stuart above-named He was introduc'd to the Earl of Argile with whom he had never before conversed and did there discourse what had past betwixt Mr. Shepherd and him and particularly about remitting of Money to the said Earl from England of which the said Mr. Stuart had written to the Deponent namely of 30000 pounds Sterling and of the raising of 1000 Horse and Dragoons and the securing the Castle of Edinburgh as a matter of the greatest importance The method of doing this was proposed by the Deponent to be one hour or thereby after the relieving of the Guards But the Earl did not relish this Proposition as dangerous and that the Castles would fall of consequence after the Work abroad was done Iames Stuart was of the Deponents Opinion for seizing the Castle because it would secure Edinburgh the Magazines and Arms As to the 1000 Horse and Dragoons my Lord Argile was of Opinion that without them nothing was to be done and that if that number were rais'd in England to the said Earl he would come into Scotland with them and that there being so few Horse and Dragoons to meet them he judg'd he might get the Country without trouble having such a standing Body for their Friends to Rendezvous to and the said Earl said he could show the Deponent the