Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n king_n say_a sovereign_a 23,708 5 10.0425 5 false
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
A47102 An explanation of the laws against recusants, &c. abridged by Joseph Keble ... Keble, Joseph, 1632-1710. 1681 (1681) Wing K115; ESTC R1584 133,989 274

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

this is not like the Case of Jurors upon 2 H. 5. § 2. cap. 3. § 1. N. 2. where t is said that the Juror shall have Lands of the clear yearly value of 40 s. if the debt or damage declared amount to 40 marks in which Case altho it be in the disjunctive debt or damage yet it hath been adjudged that where the debt and damages doth amount to 40 marks it is sufficient and the Juror must have 40 s. per Annum 1 Inst 272. For in that Case the word or is cumulative and debt or damage both amount to no more than one intire thing viz. The value of the Cause or Action depending And it appears plainly to be the intent of the makers of the Law 2 H. 5. Sect. 2. Cap. 3. § 1. N. 2. that no Cause declared to be of the value of 40 Marks shall be tryed by Jurors of a less Estate But in our Case the Lands and Goods are things of different natures one real and the other personal and cannot be regularly reduced under one and the same head and therefore shall not be valued together unless 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 2. had expresly appointed such a valuation 2. But yet if a Popish Recusant hath a lease for years and personal Goods and both do amount in value to above 40. l. he shall be out of the danger of abjuration for altho the lease is in the realty and the goods are personal yet they shall in this Case be valued together For that by this Copulative and 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 2. expresly so appoints without distinguishing between the values of either but makes it sufficient if both of them be of that value 3. Mony secured upon a Mortgage of Lands is within the meaning of these words Goods and Chattels 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 2. And if the Popish Recusant hath above 40. l. owing to him upon such Mortgage he cannot be required to abjure CXXXIII Days Page 137. Within three months next after such person shall be apprehended or taken 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 3. Wingate Crown 80. clearly mistakes the meaning for he saith that a Popish Recusant whose Estate is under value must make the submission prescribed by this Act within three months next after his arrival at his place of abode which is a complicated Error for he quites leaves out him who is to repair to the place where he was born or his Father or Mother dwells he makes the party lyable to such submission before he becomes an offendor by not repairing or not presenting himself and giving in his true name or Travelling above five Miles He speakes nothing of his being apprehended whereas by the Act he cannot be required to abjure until three months after his apprehension and he turns the three months after his apprehension into three months after his arrival all great mistakes and fit to be taken notice of by Justices of Peace whose part it is to require the submission and abjuration that they may not be misled in the Execution of this part of their office by trusting to that abridgment Page 138. CXXXIV Being thereunto required by the Bishop c. 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 3. If the offendor be not before the end of the three months next after his appreliension required by the Bishop a Justice of Peace or the Minister or Curate to make such submission he cannot be required afterwards nor be compelled to abjure by force of this Act but if he be required within the three months to make submission and refuse he may be at any time afterwards warned or required to abjure CXXXV Exile Page 138 139. The Oath of abjuration 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 4. may be in this form or to this effect You shall Swear that you shall depart out of this Realm of England and out of all other the Kings Majesties Dominions and that you shall not return hither or come again into any of his Majesties Dominions but by the licence of our said Soveraign Lord the King or of his heirs So help you God 3 Inst 217. Stamford 119.120 Wilkinson 66. hath set down another form c. resembling that of a Felon c. This hear you Sir Coroner that I J M. of H. in the County of S. am a Popish Recusant and in the contempt of the Laws and Statutes of this Realm of England I have and do refuse to come to hear Divine Service there read and exercised I do therefore according to the intent and meaning of 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 4. c. abjure the Land and Realm of King Charles now King of England Scotland France and Ireland and I shall hast me towards the Port of P. which you have given and assigned to me and that I shall not go out of the high-way leading thither nor return back again c. If I do I will that I be taken as a Felon of our laid Lord the King and that at P. I will diligently seek for passage and I will stay there but one flood and Ebb if I can have passage and unless I can have it in such space I will go every day into the Sea up to my knees assaying to pass over So God me help and his holy Judgment But in alluding to the old Oath for Felony c. Wilkinson is mistaken in the very Offence for which the Popish Recusant is to abjure by force of 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 4. For the Offence is not his Refusal to hear Divine Service for that is but one of the precedent qualifications of the person but the Offence it self is of another nature viz. his not repairing to the place the Statute appoints him or his removal from thence contrary to the Statute or his not presenting himself and delivering his true name as aforesaid Either of these if he be a Popish Recusant within the meaning of this Act is a Crime for which he ought to abjure unless he prevents his abjuration by a timely Submission Nor is the Popish Recusant bound to swear that he will not go out of the high way or return back or will tarry but one Flood and Ebb or go into the Sea up to his knees Nor ought the Coroner or Justices of Peace to require any such Oath of him for this is a new Offence made by a Statute Law which doth not require the strict form of Abjuration as in Case of Felony and altho the Felon were tied to these Circumstances yet the Recusant is not nor shall be a Felon for omitting them but 't is sufficient if he simply abjure as 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 4. directs and go from the appointed Port within the time limited and not return without Licence into any of the Kings Dominions He that thus abjures the Realm doth yet owe the King his Ligeance and remaineth within the Kings Protection Qui abjurat Regnum amittit regnum sed non Regem amittit Patriam sed
and in such a case it is to be taken in divers other Cases Infra 173. XCVII Days Page 104. Upon 29 Eliz. 6. § 4 N. 1. That is the Term of Easter or Michaelmas which shall first happen and not the next Easter and Michaelmas Terms both for the Recusant ought to pay the whole penalty for the time conteined in the Indictment in the very first of thse Terms next after his Conviction 3 Jac. 4. § 8. N. 1. Infra 172. Page 104. Upon 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. Take seiz and enjoy But as to Lands and tenements there must first be an office found for the King XCVIII Seizure for regularly before the finding of such office Lands or Tenements cannot be seized into the Kings hands 2 Inst 573. and 8 Co. 169. Stoughters Case Br. tit Off. 17.55 Com. 486. Nichols Case Page 105. by 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. the Queen was to have and enjoy two parts of the Recusants lands and Hereditaments nomine poenae or districtionis XCIX until he had in some other manner satisfied her of the whole forfeiture of the twenty pound per month incuried for his Recusancy And the profits of those two parts should not have been accounted to go to the payment of any part of the said debt or forfeiture for the Statute 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. Inflicted this forfeiture upon him meerly as a further penalty for his neglect of payment of the twenty pounds per month as was resolved by the two Chief Justices and Chief Baron Trin. 43 Eliz. in Gages Case 3 Cro. 845.846 and by all the Judges 3 Jac. at Russel house Jones 24 Standen versus Vniversity of Oxford and Whitton but now the law is altered in this point by 1 Jac. 4. § 5. N. 1. Infra 153. Page 105 106. A Recusant is Indicted and convicted and then failes of payment of the twenty pound per month C. Chattels yet his goods are not forfeit to the King by 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. before seisure for the King hath his Election whither he will seize them or no by Coke Chief Justice B. R. 12 Jac. Cullom versus Sherman 1 Rol. 7. pl. 8. 2. A Recusant lends mony and for security hath a rent charge granted him in fee by deed indented with condition of Redemption and takes likewise a Recognizance for performance of Covenants in the said Indenture the Recognizance is forfeited and afterwards he is Indicted and convicted of Recusancy and failes of payment of the twenty pound per month in this Case the King shall have the recognizance by force of 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. for when forfeited to the Recusant it is but a Chattel personal and shall pass to the King by this word Goods for in an act of Parliament where the offendors goods are given to the King all debts and personal Chattels and actions are thereby given him as well as goods in possession and here in 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. as take and seize referre to two parts of the Recusants Lands and Tenements so enjoy referrs to goods and the King shall enjoy the debt due by the Recognizance Nor doth it alter the Case for that the Recognizance was acknowledged for performance of Covenants in an Indenture concerning a rent charge in fee which seems to savor of the realty for it was originally for the loan and forbearance of mony which is personal 12 Co. 1.2 Ford and Sheldon 3. If a man who is a Recusant take such a Recognizance in the name of another the King upon his Conviction shall have the Recognizance for when the Recusant was such at the time of the Recognizance taking it shall be intended that it was done by Covin and that he took it in the name of another with an intent to prevent the King of levying of the forfeiture And such Covin shall not Bar the King 12 Co. 2.3 4. If a Recognizance or obligation be forfeited to the King by force of 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. he may grant it over as he may any other Chattel in Action under his private Seal 1 Rol. 7. pl. 8. Cullom versus Sherman Page 106. A Rent of Inheritance CI. Forfeiture and an Advowson in gross are comprehended under this word Hereditaments 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. but whither the King may seize such an Advowson as part of his two parts and present by vertue thereof since 3 Jac. 5. § N. which gives the presentation to the Universities see Infra Page 106 107. CII Copy-hold It hath been much disputed whither Copyhold Lands are within this branch of the Statute 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. of all other the Lands Tenements and Hereditaments lyable to such seizure or to the penalties aforesaid For regularly in Acts of Parliment which are enacted for forfeiture of Lands Tenements and Hereditaments Copyholds shall not be forfeited but only Lands Tenements and Hereditaments which are such as the C. Law and not those which are such by custome only as Copyholds are And it was agreed in Heydons Case 3 Co. 8 Savil 66 pl. 138. that where an Act of Parliament alters the service or tenure or other thing in prejudice of the Lord there general words in the act of Parliament shall not extend to Copyholds And if the King should seize them by force of the general words 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. Lands Tenements and Hereditaments the Lord would during the time they are in the Kings hands lose his Seigniory customes and services But yet it was held by Manwood Chief Baron and Baron Clerk 1 Leonard 97. pl. 126. in the Case of Sulherd and Everet Mich. 30. Eliz. that Copyholders are within 29 Eliz. 6. § 4. N. 3. and altho Manwood seemed to grant that they are not within it directly by express words yet they both conceived they were within the intent of the Act by reason as Manwood said of these words all other the Lands c. liable to such seizure or to the penalties aforesaid 2. But it was granted on all hands that by these general words here 29 Eliz. 6. § 4 N. 3. the King hath not any estate given him in the Recusants Copyhold Lands but only a right and title to two thirds of the profits By the Kings receiving of which the Lord cannot be impeached of his customes and services as he would be if the King should seize the land it self And a difference was there taken 1 Leonard 98. pl. 126. between an Act of Parliament which transsers an Estate to the King and an Act of Parliament which gives him only the profits of the Estate for in the first Case the Rule 3 Co. 8. that Copy-hold Lands shall not pass by general words shall stand good for the prejudice that may otherwise accrew to the Lord But where the Lords Seigniory Custome and services are not to be impeached or taken away as here they will not by the Kings bare
non patrem patriae 7 Co. 9. Calvins Case Page 139. The Offender is 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 1. Strictly tied to depart from the same Haven assigned him CXXXVI and within the time appointed him by the Justices of the Peace or Coroner so that if he depart the Realm from any other Haven or Port or over-stay his time and depart afterwards yet he is a Felon within this Act. CXXXVII Ireland Page 139 140. Or returns or come again into any her Majesties Realms or Dominions 35 Eliz. 2. § 10. N. 1. An Offender within this act abjures in form aforesaid and departs this Realm and afterwards goeth into Ireland without licence and then returns into England with licence which going into Ireland seems to be Felony by this Act. But Quare how the offence shall be tried not in Ireland for this Statute binds not that Kingdom nor can he taken notice of there nor yet can it be tried in England for that the Offence was done elsewhere so that this is Casus omissus and cannot be punisht for that no way of trial is appointed Crompt 53.54 Page 140. CXXXVIII Suspected 35 Eliz. 2. § 11. N. 1. Altho the party be no Jesuit Seminary or Massing Priest yet if there be cause to suspect him and he refuse to answer whether he be so or no such suspition and refusal is ground enough for his Commitment Page 140. 141. Having lawful Authority in that behalf 35. Eliz. 2. § 11. N. 1. This Clause seems to refer to 27. Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. Which appoints that the discovery of a Popish CXXXIX Priest or Jesuit shall be made to some Justice of Peace or higher Officer who is to give Information thereof to some of the Privy Council c. under the penalty of two hundred Marks Which Statute of 27 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. tho it do not in express terms say that the Justices of Peace or other higher Officer shall examine the Priest or Jesuit so discovered yet in as much as it gives power to take Cognizance of the matter it seems Implicitely to impower him to inform himself of the truth whether the party be a Priest or Jesuit or not as well by examination of the party as otherwise that he may be the better enabled to give Information thereof to some of the Privy Council c. and one Justice of Peace having by 27 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. lawful Authority to examine him he hath authority likewise by this Statute 35 Eliz. 2. § 11. N. 1. to Commit him if he be suspected to be a Priest or Jesuit and refuseth to answer whether he be so or no. As for Master Shepherd's opinion in his sure Guide Cap. 14. § 5. That there must be two Justices to commit a man by force of 35. Eliz. 2. § 12. N. 1. who is suspected to be a Jesuit or Priest CXL till he answers directly I see no ground at all for it Page 141. Answer to the said Questions 35 Eliz. 2. § 11. N. 1. That is whether he be a Jesuit Seminary or Massing Priest for he is not bound to answer to any other Question nor can be Committed by force of this Act for his refusal Page 141 142. CLXI Vrged by Process 35 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. If a Popish Recusant restrained by this act be summoned by Warrant of a Justice of Peace to appear before him the Recusant ought not to travil to such Justice out of his compass of five miles For altho a Justice of Peace's warrant be the Kings Process yet it is not intended here for these words Vrged by Process are restrained by the subsequent words 35 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. as requires the Recusants appearance in some one of the Kings Courts and extend not to all Cases of summons and Process as Wingate Crown 83. mistakes But if in the Case aforesaid the Warrant be to arrest the Recusant and by force thereof he be carried by the Constable c. out of the compass of five miles there he is excused and forfeits nothing for that it was done by Compulsion and yet if there be any Covin between the Recusant and the Justice of Peace or Officer it may be otherwise CXLII Courts Page 142. In any her Majesties Courts 35 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. All Courts wherein the Proceedings are directed by the Kings Laws are the Kings Courts and therefore a Court Leet tho of an Inferior nature and kept in the Lords name yet is the Kings Court 5 Co. 39. Cawdries Case Hetley 18. 2. If a Popish Recusant restrained by this Act be cited into the Ecclesiastical Court he may be force of this Proviso travel out of the compass of five miles to appear there 35 Eliz. 2. § 13. N. 1. For all Ecclesiastical Courts are the Kings Courts and the Laws by which they proceed there are the Kings Laws Page 142 143. This 35 Eliz. 2. § 14. CXLIII N. 1. Extends to all Cases in general where the Popish Recusant ought to render his body to the Sheriff upon Proclamation and is not restrained to a Proclamation upon an Indictment for Recusancy And therefore if a Popish Recusant confined by 35 Eliz. 2. had been proclaimed upon the Statute of Marlebridge 52. H. 3.7 § 1. N. 1. in a Plea de Custodia as a Deforceor he might lawfully have gone out of the compass of five miles the like he may do at this day upon any other Proclamation commanding him to render his body to the Sheriff Page 143. CXLIV Before he or they shall be thereof Convicted 35 Eliz. 2. § 15. N. 1. A Popish Recusant confined by this Act whose Estate is under value is apprehended for offending against this Act 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N. 1. and before the expiration of three months next after his apprehension is Convicted of such Offence and then before the three months expire conforms and makes such Submission and Declaration as 35 Eliz. 2. § 8. N 3. and § 16. N. 1. is appointed this Case altho he come too late after Conviction to save the forfeiture of his lands and goods yet he shall not be compelled to abj●re for the affirmative words here 35 Eliz. 2. § 15. N. 1. That upon such Conformity Submission and Declaration before Conviction he shall be Discharged of all Pains and Forfeitures do not carry in them the force of a Negative viz. that if it be after Conviction he shall not be discharged of any of them and by 35 Eliz. 2. § 8 N. 3. he is not compellable to abjure I at any time within three months next after his apprehension he conforms confesseth and submits as is there appointed CXLV Church Page 143 144. It seems clear that no Submission Confession or Declaration can discharge the Popish Recusant who is an Offender within this Act from any Pain or Forfeiture thereby inflicted unless it be performed in some Parish Church for
who takes the bond and oath is to certify them into the Court of Exchequer or to forfeit c. for where the literal sense will ingen der an absurdity or impossibility such a construction must be made as will stand with Reason and the intent of the Law-makers and in such Cases a Copulative shall be taken for a Disjunctive or contra Com. 289 363. But if the Deputy of the Customer or Controller take the bond or oath and no Certificate thereof is made the Customer or Controller himself whose Deputy he is shall forfeit for that default altho he had no notice from his Deputy of the taking of the said bond or oath for he is answerable for all the defaults of his Deputy See Dyer 238 239. where it was held that the Customer should forfeit the treble value of the Merchandize upon 3 H. 6 3. § N. for his Deputies concealing of the payment of the Customs so a Sheriff shall answer for all his Officers under him 4 Co. 33. Miltons Ca. Crompt Jurisd 110. And so generally shall all other Officers answer for their Deputies 9 Co. 48.98 Terms de Ley 111.32 H. 34. Forfeiture Br. 27. CXCIV Alien Page 185 186. withdraw any of the Subjects of the King's Majesty c. from their natural obedience 3 Jac. 4. § 22. N. 1. by the King's Subjects to be understood here Natural Subjects only that is such whose Subjection is Natural and absolute Due by Nature and Birth-right and which begins with their Birth and not Aliens altho they are Naturalized or made Denizens much less those who are only local Subjects for none but Natural Subjects can be said to be withdrawn from their natural obedience and as the King of England cannot be said to be a Natural Lord or King to an Alien born so neither can an Alien be said to be his Natural Subject Natural Prince and Natural Suject being correlatives And an Indictment of high Treason against an Alien born who resides here altho it shall be contra ligeantiae suae debitum contra Dominum Regein in respect of his local Ligeance yet naturalem shall be omitted out of the Indictment and so it was 2 3 Ph. Mar. in the Case of Sherley a French man 36 Eliz. in the Cases of Stephano Ferara de Grana and Emmanual Lewis Tmore two Portugals who conspired with Doctor Lopes against Queen Elizabeth And so as it seems it ought to be for the same reason if the Alien were indenized or naturalized for Naturalization it self which is by Act of Parliament and the highest priviledg an Alien is capable of yet cannot create this natural Subjection or Obedience which is not due by any Law or Constitution of Man Naturalization being but a fiction in Law which confers the priviledges of a Natural Subject but cannot make him a Natural Subject who was none before for then he would have two natural Princes one where he was born the other where he was naturalized Vaughan 279.283 Crane and Ramsey 7 Co. 567.25 Calvins Ca. 2 and 3 Ph. and Mar. Dyer 145 Heb 171. Courteens Ca. So that to absolve persuade withdraw or reconcile an Alien born whose Subjection to the King began not with his Birth or for any such to be absolved persuaded withdrawn or reconciled seems not to be Treason within this Act 3 Jac. 4. § 22. N. 1. But this Subjection is not to be understood locally or in respect of the place of a man's birth but in respect of the Prince to whom Subjection is due at the time of his birth and therefore if a Scot or Irish-man be absolved or reconciled in England altho the Offence be committed in another Kingdom than where his Subjection began yet being born a Subject to the King of England it's Treason in the absolver or person reconciling and in him that is absolved or reconciled nor is it necessary in all Cases that the Party be born in the King's Dominions but that he may be a natural Subject notwithstanding and consequently within this Act 3 Jac. 4. § 22. N. 1. as in the Case of an Ambassador 7 Co. 18. Calvins Ca. CXCV. Page 186 187. which shall hereafter be reconciled 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. in the late Additions to Dalt Cap. 140 Sect. 12. is intimated that this Clause extends to no Cases of Treason or Misprision of Treason for there in reciting 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. the Cases of Treason and misprision of Treason are excepted which is a great mistake for the Submission here spoken of 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. is only in the Case of a declared Treason seil being reconciled to the Pope or Sea of Rome CXCVI. Page 187. For and touching the poynt of so being reconciled only 3 Jac. 4. § 23. N. 1. there are three several sorts of Offences made Treason 1 To be willingly absolved or withdrawn from a man's natural obedience 2 To be willingly reconciled to the Pope or See of Rome 3 To promise obedience to any pretended Authority of that See or to any other Prince State or Potentate But in 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. only the second of these Offences is remitted in case of Submission viz the being reconciled to the Pope or See of Rome by which I conceive to be meant the forsaking of the Religion established by Law and embracing that which is professed and maintained by the Pope and Sea of Rome and in that sense these words 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. are commonly taken at this day And that this is the meaning of 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. appears by 23 Eliz. 1. § 2. N. 1. which makes it Treason to absolve or withdraw the Subjects from their natural obedience or 23 Eliz. 1. § 2. N. 3. to move them to promise obedience to the See of Rome or any other Prince c. to answer which follows in that Act 23 Eliz. 1. § 2. N. 5. three other Sorts of Treason viz 1 To be absolved or withdrawn Or 2 To be reconciled Or 3 To promise such Obedience so that the Offence of being reconciled answers to the Offence of withdrawing the Subjects from the Religion establisht to the Romish Religion which explains what is meant by such Reconciliation viz the being so withdrawn from the one Religion to the other But by this Chance 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. if a Person be thus reconciled that is change his Religion and become a Papist yet if he be capacitated to submit as is required by this Act and submit accordingly and take the oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance such offence of being reconciled shall not be Treason But as for being absolved or withdrawn from his natural Obedience Or 2 promising obedience to the pretended authority of the See of Rome or any other Prince State or Potentate besides his Natural King such Submission and taking the Oaths by 3 Jac. 4. § 24. N. 1. shall not absolve him