Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	lord_n	servant_n	serve_v	7,269	5	6.9164	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86443	The reading in Lincolnes-Inne, Feb. 28. 1641. Vpon the stat. of 25. E.3. cap. 2. being the statute of treasons. / By Robert Holborne, Esq.	Holborne, Robert, Sir, d. 1647.	1643 (1643)	Wing H2374; Thomason E246_14; ESTC R19470	15,208	17

135. as there is in felonies and he is Enz. titl Coron 55. Bro. tit Coron 135. and for expresse authority it is in 1. H. 6.5 for if this Statute had made felony treason and one doth commit that treason and A. succours him knowing of it it had binabsurd for to have said that the succorour should have bin onely a felon but our case is stronger for this Law doth not make any one treason but onely declares what shall be adjudged treason but if this statute had exprest that all abettors should have beene traytors that then the receivers or succourers should not have beene traytors within this Law for then the intent of the makers would plainly appeare that it was not intended that the receivers or succourers after the fact should not have beene within this Law but onely the Abettors before and at the fact The third Lecture This Lecture is of petty treason and petty treason do very little differ from felonies for by the pardon of all felonies all petty treasons are pardoned Stam. as it is fol. 2.6 Stam. fo 2.6 But it hath some correspondency with other treasors and that is in respect of the duty and obedience that is dueeach to other as it is from the Subjects to the King so from the servant to the Master All servants although they receive no wages but onely meat and drinke are within this Law a servant that is not compellable to serve by this Statute yet if he doeth serve he is within this Law and so is a Bailiffe of a Mannor for if he kill that Lord of the Mannor it is p●tty treason within this Law Steward of a Court Leet or Court Barron is not within this law a wife divorced for adultery is within this law although a Queene divorst for adultery be not within this law as ye have heard before Ordinaties are of two sorts Ordinarius loci ordinarius Dioces Ordinarius loci Ordinarius Dioces and the superiour Ordinares they are all within this law Ordinarius loci as that of the Deane of Westminster Ordinarius Dioces is the Bishop of the Diocesse and the superiour Ordinary is the Archbishop they are all within this law in respect of the obedience that is due to them A childe killing his Father or his Mother he is within this law as you heard before although he he not named in it yet there is a majority of treason in it more then that of a servant and therefore is within that intent and reason of the law and so it is in Dalton If one command another to kill his Master who doeth it yet it is not treason within this law unlesse he be there present when the fact is done 40. Ass 25. 40. Ass 25. If a wife command a servant to kill her husband and he doeth it it is treason in both within this law and so it appeares that Abettors and Partners are within the last part of this Statute concerning petty treasons although they are not named If a servant goes from his Master and then kils him this is petty treason within this law for it shall be intended that he had such an intention to kill him before he departed out of his service Bro. Titl treason 15.33 Ass 7. 33. Ass 7. And so is a quarrell in Westminster Hall the Courts sitting and then goe out of the Hall into the Pallace-Yard and then one strikes the other this is punishable with the same punishment as if he had struck him in the Hal for the punishment shal be to the losse of his hand and the forfeiture of his goods and perpetuall imprisonment as it is in Dacies case 1. and 2. Eliz. Diar 188.21 E. 3.17.21 Ass 30. in the 1. and 2. of Eliz. Diar 188. but some of these offences were treason at the Common-law as the sonne killing of the father 21. E. 3.17 and of a maid-servant killing her Mistris 21. Ass 30. if a servant kill his Mistris this is petty treason within this Law and yet she is not named but is to be intended upon the same reason with his Master 19. H. 6.47 and the obedience is due to the one aswell as to the other 19. H. 6.37 Treason ought to be fully proved as it appeares by the words of the statute and that is to be by two witnesses the proving of every treason 1. E. 6. and the statute of 1. E. 6. is not repealed as to this point by the statute of Ph. and Mary but onely the triall in the Counties and not concerning witnesles as by that statute more at large appeares and in the 14. of Eliz. in the Lord Lumlyer case 14. Eliz. Lumlies case 13. H. 8. 11. 12. Bro. tit tre 29.33 it was agreed that the statute 1. E. 6. was not reversed by the old statute The triall of Lords of Parliament ought to be per pares but in some cases he shall not have his triall per pares as in an appeale but in an indictment he shall and the indictment shall be received into Parliament because an Indictment is the Kings suit and the statute of Magna Charta is nec super cun ibimus nec super eum mittimus and this is to be intended in the Kings suit the 10. Ed. 4.6 10. E. 4.6 But a Lord may refuse his tryall per paces if he will as it was adjudged 1. of Phil. and Mar. Br. in the Lord Grayes case 1 Phi. Ma. Bro. Lo. Gr. case Pa. 13. Jac. but in the Lord of Castlehavens case it was held the contrary if a man be kil'd in rebellion he shall forfeit his lands and is a traytor but there ought to be an inquisition taken of him ond that shall be a sufficient triall As the case in Pa. 13. Jac. Br. if a man doe cast himselfe into the water and never is found after yet if it be presented by the Justice of Peace this is sufficient to make him forfeit his goods As for those treasons which are not here declared the Judges authority take indictments of them but they ought not to be proceeded to judgement for nothing is to be done in point of judgement in such a case till it be adjudged and declared in Parliament and all other treasons that are not here declared ought to be felonies at the least because felonies were made treasons before the statute and because the words of the statute are that it ought to be treason or felony but if it be but once declared in Parliament unlesse there be a Proviso that the Judges shall not proceed upon the like cases they may afterwards proceed by force of this statute They are treasons at Common-law notwithstanding the statute 1. Q. Mary for that did take away those treasons and Declarations of treasons that were made in Parliaments from the time of our statute to the 1. of Q. Mary but doth not take away the declarative power in our statute mentioned nor the Common-law but they doe remains still as before FINIS