Selected quad for the lemma: peace_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
peace_n commission_n justice_n session_n 2,519 5 10.6842 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
A32252 The reading of that famous and learned genrleman, Robert Callis ... upon the statute of 23 H.8, Cap. 5, of Sewers, as it was delivered by him at Grays-Inn in August, 1622. Callis, Robert, fl. 1634. 1647 (1647) Wing C304; ESTC R23882 167,039 246

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the charge for the erecting maintaining of the new ones are to be laid on the Level So that it behoveth Commissioners to be careful in these affairs else things in the conclusion may fall out contrary to their expectations for it is well said That Rerum progressus ostendunt multa quae in initio nec praecaveri aut praevideri possunt In making new Laws and Ordinanes these things are also considerable First what the matter of the Law is which is to be Enacted Secondly when the matter is known then to weigh it well whether if it be made if then it will prove necessary and behoofful for the good of the people and this necessary point is to be scanned by the counsel and advise of the most discreet and experienced persons and of the best tryed judgements in matters of this native And thirdly to consider what charge the work will cost for the which this Law must be made for in Scriptures he is not counted sapient that before he build a house will not first count the charge of it And fourthly what persons must bear this charge least it prove too burthensome and this must be directed by the ability of the people which are to be charged and by the the safety and commodity they are to have by the work I observe also that this Statute useth three words which are all powerful in signification and operation videlicet Laws Ordinances and Decrees and I think it fitting for me so near as I can both to deliver the definitions of them and the differences between them A Law A Law is properly a matter which hath taken his essence and power by a Custom time out of memory as the Common Laws have done Or else is a matter Acted and Enacted in Parliament by the King and the great Counsel of the Realm and by the Authority thereof for the ordering of mens Bodies Lands and Goods and such a Law is hereby intended because the Laws which the Commissioners shall make have the power of an Act of Parliament to strengthen and assist them and they are to receive life and perfection from this Statute I read on Ordinance AN Ordinance is a word having a more private and less powerful signification then the word Law hath for it is a Law but of a secundary power enacted by a Corporation Company or Commission proceeding meerly out of the Power and Prerogative of the King by Charter Grant or Commission warranting the same as those Corporations Societies and Companies which have power by Charters or Patents to make the same as is set forth in the cases of the City of London and of the Chamberlain of Londons Case in Sir Edward Cooks Reports Also Ordinances may be made by the power of a Court as in a Court Baron to make Orders or by the Inhabitants of a Town by Custom for the ordering of their Commons Repairing of their Churches and Highways And these are more properly by-Laws then Laws for a Law is either the Common Law Customary Law or an Act of Parliament all which are of greater force then any Laws made by these secundary means which of themselves are of little or no strength but as they are assisted by other primary powers Decree A Decree is neither a Law nor Ordinance in proper definition but is only a Sentence or Judgement in a Court of Justice delivered or declared by the Judges there by and through the power strength of a general former Law for Decretum est Sententia lata super Legem So that a Law is a general direction for a multitude An Ordinance is a subordinate direction proceeding out of a more general power And a Decree is a Sentence delivered for or against a particular person grounded upon the said Laws and Ordinances Continuance of Laws IT comes now fitly for me in turn and course to declare the continuance of these Laws Ordinances and Decrees for it is to be observed that some of them be but temporary though others perpetual The words in our Statute are That every Statute and Ordinance made before the Statute of 23 H. 8. concerning the things and matters therein mentioned as well in the time of H. 8. as of any of his Progenitors not being contrary to this Statute or heretofore repealed shall stand in force for ever and are commanded to be put in due Execution But this clause is intended of all Acts of Parliament made touching the Sewers and be not intended or meant of Laws and Ordinances made by the Commissioners of Sewers themselves Laws and Decrees made for sale of Lands by the Powers and Authorities of this Statute are to be made and ingrossed into Parchment and certified under the Seals of the Commissioners into the Chancery and the Kings Royal assent had thereto under the Privy Seal shall also stand good and effectual And all Laws and Ordinances written in parchment and indented and under the Seals of the Commissioners whereof the one part shall remain with the Clerk of the Sewers and the other part to remain in such places as the Commissioners should appoint notwithstanding the same be not certified into the Chancery nor the Kings Royal assent be had thereto shall continue in force till the same shall be altered 13 Eliz. cap. 9. repealed or made void by another Commission of Sewers although the former Commission by the which these Laws were made were determined by Supersedeas The Commission is to continue for ten years from the date thereof by force of the Statute of 13 Eliz. yet notwithstanding 13 El. all Laws and Ordinances which are written in parchment indented and sealed by the Commissioners of Sewers without certifying into the Chancery or the Kings Royal assent had thereto shall notwithstanding the determination of the Commission by the expiration of the said ten years continue in force for one whole year next insuing to be put in execution for that time by six Justices of the Peace whereof two to be of the Quorum but then the power of the Justices of the Peace is ceased by the corning of a new Commission of Sewers All other Laws and Ordinnces of Sewers which are but made and writ in paper or which be but in parchment and not Indented or which be indented also if not sealed continue in force no longer then that Commission continueth by the power whereof they were made And so by this short declaration I have made the Commissioners may the better observe how long time Laws and Ordinances of Sewers are to continue in force yet though they lose their vigor they may notwithstanding be revived by the power of a new Commission or remain for presidents for after ages to imitate Repealing of Laws IN this last place I intend to deliver my opinion what Laws Ordinances and Decrees may be repealed altered or made void by the Commissioners of Sewers Therefore it is first to be considered what grounds are to be observed in repealing or
do not repeal the Statute of Mortmain in my opinion And herein I shall end my Argument touching decrees and I take it though the interest of E. was intail yet the sale thereof might be made by this Statute for the causes and reasons aforesaid And now only remains under my censure to declare my opinion whether the Commissioners of Sewers did Justice in refusing to admit of Pleas of discharge which were tendred to them by A. and E. wherein may come justly into our considerations these things viz. Whether Traverses Pleas of Exemptions and other legal proceedings may be had in this Court of Sewers or not saving I adde this that these decrees of sale being binding must be certified into the Chancery with the Kings Royal assent had thereto Legal proceedings Traverse TO enter into these parts of my Law I think it fit to begin with Traverse and to deliver my opinion whether such Pleas and Proceedings are to be admitted into this Court for a Traverse is a Plea of the party containing matter to the contrary of that that the party stands accused of or which is laid to his charge And in some cases our books and authorities of Law admit the party to a Traverse and in other cases the same is to be denyed for in the 5 H. 7. fol. 9. 45 Ed. 3. fol. 28 H. 8. in Dier fol. 13. if one be presented in a Leet Court for a Blowipe or any other personal 5 H. 7. 45 Ed. 3. 28 H. 8. wrong this Presentment is not Traversable but the party is without remedy therein though the Presentment be false and the matter of it untrue and the Law is so also of such a Presentment made in a Sheriffs Turn and herewithall agreeth the books of 2 R. 3. 11. and 19 H. 8. 11. 2 R. 3 19 H. 8. 5 H. 7. 8 Ed. 4. Fitz Assiz plac 442. and 8 Ed. 4. 5. and the reason thereof is delivered in 5 H. 7. because no Processe is there awardable against the party to call him to answer Yet in the same Book of 5 H. 7. it is said That if a Presentment be made which toucheth a mans Freehold he may there Traverse the same But I take it the party must first remove the Presentment into the Kings Bench and there Traverse it for in the Court Leet in my opinion there can be no Traverse taken or tryed no more where the Presentment toucheth Freehold then where it only concerneth a personal wrong Therefore the reason alleaged in 5 H. 7. cannot be the true cause wherefore in personal wrongs the Presentments cannot be traversed but the very true reason therein is as I take it because these petty Presentments be of such petty trifling matters that in avoidance of trouble the Law esteemed them not worthy of Traverse and Tryal and Justice Fairfax in 5 H. 7. is of opinion That a Presentment made before Iustices of Peace in a Sessions is traversable and with this agreeth Stanford fol. 183. and in other Courts of Law there oftentimes fall out matters which one shall not be admitted to take a Traverse unto and in some other cases he shall as by these succeeding authorities may appear In the 37 Assiz plac 7. a Presentment was taken before Green and Ingham Justices of the Kings Bench That I. S. who had killed A. had goods to the value of Eighty pounds in the hands of one John Lombard and upon this Presentment a Scire-facias was awarded against John Lombard to shew cause wherefore these goods should not be seized to the Kings use John Lombard came in and tendred a Plea to the Presentment that these goods were not the felons but that they were delivered to him to keep to the use of a Cardinal of Rome and he was there admitted to this Plea and with this agreeth 45 Ed. 3. fol. 26. expresly Yet in that book and Mr. Stanford fol. 185. it is holden for Law That if it be presented before a Coroner that I. S. killed A. B. and fled for the same fact and after upon his tryal he is acquit yet he shall forfeit his goods upon the Fugam fecit before the Coroner and he shall not be received to take any traverse to the said Presentment in that point The difference in which two cases is this in my opinion that a stranger as Iohn Lombard was in the the first Case shall not be peremptorily concluded for it were no reason one mans goods should be forfeited in another mans default and he should have no answer thereunto But in the other Case in Terror of Felons though he be acquitted of the Felony yet he is not acquitted of the flying and he may be guilty notwithstanding his acquittal There be other cases in the Law which admit no Traverse as in James Bags case Cook 11. Rep. James Bag● Case where a Writ was directed to the Major and Burgesses of Plymouth to restore Bag to his Aldermans place there which they had put him from and they return a cause sufficient to bar him which notwithstanding is false yet he shall not be received to his Traverse therein neither could a Traverse be admitted in the Certificate of the Bishop wherein was contained that I. A. Parson of Dle had refused to pay his dismes to the King by means whereof the Parson lost his benefice which case is in Br. cases temp He. 8. pl. 332. Br. Case 7 H. 4. 21 H. 7. and Dier fol. 116. and 7 H. 4. fol. 4. and 21 H. 7. 8. and many other Books be that no Averments shall be taken to the returns of Sheriffs to take any Issue thereupon And in Dr Bonhams case upon a Habeas corpus the Physitians returned the cause of his imprisonment which was false yet he could not be admitted to traverse the same But yet by the opinion of these Books an Action upon the case lieth against the Major and Aldermen against the Bishop for their certificates and against the Sheriff for their false returns and if Justifications be made by them they may be traversed But these will not reduce the parties to their former liberties viz not the Alderman to his place nor the Parson to his Church but damages in those cases are only recoverable These cases I have put as Reasons and Arguments against our Case of Sewers But yet I am of opinion that a Traverse may be taken to a Presentment made in this Court of Sewers and herein this Court may be resembled to a Sessions of the peace And this Commission of Sewers gives the Commissioners of Sewers power to hear to determine at the Kings suit as well as at the suit of the party and a Traverse lyeth of a Presentment found before Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer and is triable before them by the Books of 29 Assiz pl. 33. and 12. lib. Assiz 21. and 29 Assiz 12 Assiz pl. Com. the Earl of Leicesters Case in Plow Com. fol. 397. and
the words of this Statute are sufficient to yield the party the benefit of a Traverse if there be cause and for president in the point Chart. of Romney Marsh pag. 23 and 24. one Godfrey Ro. Marsh being presented that he ought to repair a Bank or Wall and that he did neglect to do the same and he came in and pleaded a Plea thereto before the said Commissioners and in 19 lib. Assiz plac 6. there were divers Presentments before Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer for Nusances done in the River of Lee and the same were there traversed and tryed And the Statute of 1 H. 4. cap. 12. 1 H. 4. doth plainly admit of a Traverse wherein the words be That in case if any feel himself greived by execution or otherwise against right and reason let him pursue and he shall have right But I verily suppose that those things which the Justices of Sewers do by their view or by survey and discretion are so binding as in those cases no Traverses are to be admitted because these things are meerly the acts of the Court and of the Justices themselves and if they Fine a man for his contempt in Court by a Record of their own view and not upon a Presentment the party shall not be received to Traverse this and in Doctor Bonhams Case it is said That the act of a Judge is not Traversable if he be the absolute Judge of the Cause But in cases done or certified by such as be no absolute Judges of the Cause as Commissioners of Bankrupts which certifie one a Bankrupt he may Traverse this in an action brought as was done in the Case of Cut and Delaber in 7 Jac. in the Cut and Delaber 7 Jac. common place and Vernies Case 1 Mar. Dier fol. 89. no Averment could be taken to the certificate of a Judge and with this agreeth 7 H. 7. fol. 4. 7 H. 7. But although a Traverse may be taken to a Presentment in the Court of Sewers yet times and seasons must be observed for if a Presentment be there made it may be Traversed for the reasons cause presidents formerly mentioned Yet if the cause have been there so far proceeded in as the Commissioners make a decree thereupon I take it then no Traverse at all can be taken because a decree is the final Judgement of the Court and is an act Judicial which cannot be traversed and tryed by a Jury for that were to refer the Judgement of the Court to be examined by a Jury which may not be admitted and at the Common Law after Judgement no Traverse can be taken And if one be Indicted at the general Session of the Peace this is traversable but if the party suffer himself to be Outlawed upon the said Indictment there no Traverse lieth but a Writ of Error So if in our Sessions of the Sewers the cause proceed to a decree the party grieved is to take his way by preferring a Bill of Reversal in maner as is done in the High Court of Chancery and so he may have the cause here throughly examined Other legal proceedings THe words of the Statute which give the legal proceedings be these viz. That the Commissioners of Sewers may hear and determine all and singular the Premises as well at our suit as at the suit of any other complaining before them after the Laws and Customs aforesaid or otherwise by any other ways or means these words give the party remedy to sue before the Justices of Sewers for such things as are contained within these Laws and which have their dependency thereon In Colshils case in Dier fol. 175. the party preferred his Colshils case Bill of complaint to the Commissioners containing the effect of his Title to the Office in question and these were special Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer Justices of the general Oyer and Terminer may hear and determine Usury by the Statute of 13 Eliz. cap. 8. yet if I. S. be bound 13 Eliz. in a Bond of Ten pounds principal debt and for Forty shillings for Interest although this Bond be for payment for usury yet an Action of Debt doth not lie thereupon before the said Commissioners but an information may be preferred against the lender there to punish him So by our Statute of Sewers an Action of Trespass lieth not for a Trespass done within the reach of this Commission yet Distinguendum est for put the case a sesse is laid upon a man and the goods of I. S. not chargeable thereto be taken and distrained who is not chargeable to the payment thereof I. S. in my opnion though this case have but the countenance of this Commission may have his Action or prefer his complaint before the Commissioners in this Court of Sewers for the recovery of his damages And although this be but a private Action yet the Distress being taken by an authority drawn from the power of this Commission the party distrained may have his remedy in this Court by his private Action because it sprung by the colour of the general power of this Court If A. B. have a several Pischary in the River of Witham which is a River within the Commission of Sewers and the said Pischary by these Laws is chargeable to the repairs thereof if C. D. disseiz him thereof or commit a Trespasse by Fishing therein A. B. can neither have an Assize nor Action of Trespasse within this Court So if a Royal or common River hath his current through the town of Dale and one A. B. is tyed to repair the Banks there by Tenure Prescription or otherwise which notwithstanding in his default are broken down and the waters breaking out overflow the grounds of C. D. thereto adjoyning yet C. D. hath not any remedy to recover his damages against A. B. in this Court for the losse of his grounds but he is put to his private Action therefore at the Common Law and with this agreeth the Case of Keighley But if A. B. be presented therefore before our Commissioners of Sewers they may order A. B. to repair the breach but cannot award damages to C. D. for our Commissioners of Sewers are herein like to Justices of Peace and to Stewards of Leets and Law-days which have power originally to meddle only with the publike wrong Yet by the power of their Commission and of this Statute they many times accidentally meet with private injuries as by the insuing cases may appear If a Township be assessed by a Law of Sewers and the goods of one of the Inhabitants be taken for the sesse that party upon his complaint to these Justices of Sewers may have processe out of this Court to call before them the rest of the Inhabitants which were subject to the said sess to cause them to contribute towards the parties damage who was solely distrained for them all for otherwise this Court should fail of justice in his own proper materials the Statute of 1