Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	word_n	writ_n	write_v	61	3	5.2847	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27848	Advice to grand jurors in cases of blood asserting from law and reason that at the King's suit in all cases (where a person by law is to be indicted for killing of another person) that the indictment ought to be drawn for murther, and that the grand jury ought to find it murther, where their evidence is that the party intended to be indicted had his hands in blood, and did kill the other person / by Zachary Babington, Gent.	Babington, Zachary.	1677 (1677)	Wing B248; ESTC R17389	86,057	253

upon the Country de bono malo the very words of the Act and that is upon a Jury of Life and Death and this he cannot do except the Grand Jury find the Bill of Indictment Murther or Manslaughter let the matter of fact be what it will for if the Grand Jury shall but find the truth of the fact as it appears in evidence to them or from their own knowledge which is that which they now so much stand upon that is the very special matter that makes it Manslaughter by misfortune or se defendendo the party can never come to be Arraigned upon such an Indictment for that is not Felony and if he shall be charged with it the Grand Jury having only found the special matter in the Indictment or Inquisition the party must either plead guilty or not guilty either confess and justifie the Fact or deny it if he confess he cannot Justifie it for mens lives are so precious in the eye of the Law that the death of a man cannot be Justified except in course of Justice in a lawful War or in a just defence of a mans life and property against such as would rob or designedly murther him The Defendant in Appeal cannot Justifie the death of a man at his own suit se defendendo but must plead not guilty Nay a Verdict of the Jury of Life and Death that A killed B se defendendo or per Infortunium is no good Verdict the special matter must be set down in writing by them that the Court may judge the killing to be upon inevitable necessity neither Grand Jury that hears but one side nor Jury of Life and Death that hear both sides are Judges in this case For upon the special matter found by the Jury of Life and Death if the Court shall not adjudge that special matter good in Law to acquit him of Murther or Manslaughter it may be either murther or manslaughter in him and the party may be hanged notwithstanding such Verdict of the Jury of Life and Death how can the Court be judge of the matter in Law when they hear not the matter in fact from the Witnesses on both sides and the Parties defence for himself which they can never do if the Grand Jury shall take upon them as they presume they may to find the Special matter themselves whereby the Party cannot be Arraigned that so he may put himself de bono malo super patriam as the Statute of Gloucester before-mentioned especially requires If the Party charged with such an Indictment from the Grand Jury where they will find only the Special matter shall confess it when he is charged with it as sure he may then the Evidence can never be heard in Court whereby the Judge may determine the point in Law whether the offence upon the whole matter be Murther or Manslaughter or as they find it and that is meer matter of Law whether super totam materiam of the Evidence and that must be Evidence on both sides it be murther Manslaughter in general Manslaughter upon the Statute per Infortunium se defendendo justifiable as against a Thief or in loco tempore belli and how exceeding dangerous and inconvenient were it for Grand Jurors so far to anticipate the Judgment of the Court and to take upon themselves upon the hearing only of Witnesses on one side and perhaps not all of them neither the sole Judgment of Law in all these Cases by not finding the Indictment which is but the Kings Declaration for the loss of his Subject in the same manner as it is advised by the Kings Council Ingrossed sworn in Court and delivered to them especially for that is alwaies intended where they have probable Evidence for they need no more to prove such a person killed by the hands of such a person such a day year and place Nay by the Statute of Gloucester they must either find the Indictment in such a case Murther for all Indictments about the killing of a man were so before that Statute and no Law since to alter it or the party can never have a Certiorari out of Chancery for his Pardon of Course whereby he may be discharged out of Prison for by the strictness of Law he ought to remain in Prison without Bail until his pardon be procured which Pardon saves not his Goods or personal Estate but only pardons his Offence his violation of the King's Peace which is violated in the loss of a Subject according to the Statute of Gloucester and procures his liberty and discharge out of Prison The words contained in the Writ of Certiorari out of Chancery in order to the obtaining of a Pardon of Grace and removing the Record into Chancery that there the King may see by the Record the truth and nature of the offence according to the Statute of Gloucester being well observed make it very plain that the Special matter of Fact must be found by the second Jury the Jury of Life and Death and which is so suggested in Chancery before the Issuing forth of such Writ as by the Writ more fully appears viz. Quia ut accepimus quòd A. B. indictatus per Inquisitionem patriae compert extitisset quod idem A interfecit praedict C. se def non per feloniam aut malitiam praecogitat unde dictus A. Gaol nostr praedict remiss est ad gratiam nostram iude expectand nos ea de causa super tenor Record process Inquisitionis praed Certiorari volentes vobis mandamus quod si ita est tunc tenor Record pro process praedict cum omnibus ea tangent in Cancell nostram sub sigillis vestris distincte aperte mittatis Observe how this ancient Writ complies with and explains the Statute of Glouc. in this case here is in it Indictatus that is by the Grand Jury and per Inquisitionem patriae compert ex●itisset that is the Jury of Life and Death for that is the only Trial in our Law by the Country per Patriam and whoever is tried by that Jury posuit se de bono malo super patriam which must be for Felony and Murther the very words of the Statute for this Jury is to find in their Writ that it was se defendendo non per felon aut malitiam praecogitat as it is in the Verdict and observe by the Writ he is not to be discharged out of Gaol before his pardon of Course procured for it is in the Writ Gaol nostrae praed remiss est it seems he was there before ad gratiam nostr inde expectand c. and further observe the Mandamus in this Writ si ita est if it be so that the Offence hath received such a trial by two Juries then Certifie the Record otherwise not and what Judge that doth not truly understand this si ita est which he can never truly do from a Grand Jury will Certifie such a

Juratores super Sacramentum suum praesentant not dicunt there being as much difference between praesentant and dicunt as betwixt a known truth and the report and fame of a fact done And this will the better appear if it be well observed what Grand Jurors write or Indorse upon the back of those Bills they find for though they Indorse such Bills Billa vera yet they never Indorse upon those Bills they do not find Billa falsa as if one were true and the other false for should they do so it would be like an Accusation against the Prosecutor that prefers the Bill and a great discouragement to the Kings Evidence but they modestly write Ignoramus which signifies to the Court they are ignorant of the matter in the Bill and that they find no cause either from what they have heard from the Witnesses or know of their own knowledge to commend it to a farther Enquiry the Verb Ignoro coming from Ignarus not to know to be ignorant And this doth further evince that the Grand Jurors Presentment cannot properly be called a Verdict because a Verdict doth in Law either convict or acquit which neither their Billa vera nor Ignoramus doth the first is always put to a farther enquiry the last is no acquittal to the party for although there be many Ignoramus's against any person yet may more Bills be preferred against the same person for the same offence for it may be they did not find the Bill in regard some Witnesses were absent or corrupted or the matter in the Bill mistaken happily it may be no Felony but something done in jest or in the nature of a Trespass or a Natural death instead of a Murther or the Witnesses of no Credit or the like But if there be any thing of Truth in the Bill proved to them to make a Crime although not so fully as is laid in the Bill they must not in such case write Ignoramus as if they knew nothing of a Crime as if it be a Murther in the Bill and the Proof reacheth but to an Infortunium or se defendendo or to any degree of unlawful killing they must not write Ignoramus upon the Bill or if Burglary and the Proof makes it but a single Felony and no Burglary they must not Indorse it Ignoramus but in all such cases where they are in any doubt the best way for them will be to advise with the Learned Judge to move the Court for directions therein It is too great a Scandal to a Grand Jury Persons in that quality highly to be esteemed to say that their Ignoramus that is their Ignorance is their Verdict It is very safe for Grand Jurors before they find an Ignoramus to examine every Witness produced but if they have many Witnesses in Murder or Felony if any one Witness induce a strong and pregnant Presumption it is enough without perplexing themselves in hast of business they need not examine any more but put Billa vera unto it If a Grand Jury find upon an Indictment of Murther that A. killed B. what is it to them as hath been said before whether it be Murther or Manslaughter whether it were done Ex malitia praecogitata per Infortunium se defendendo in loco tempore belli or otherwise this is Special matter and Special matter ought to be found when it is at Issue by another Jury and must arise I mean the truth of it super totam materiam of the Evidence or proof on both sides which can never be found and determined by a Grand Jury that hear but one side for very seldom is matter of Fact truly stated in a matter of difficulty by one side and therefore as before is said the Statute of Gloucester provides that every Man-slaughter per Infortunium or se defendendo shall be found per Patriam after the Prisoner hath joyned Issue with the King and put himself de bono malo of good or evil that is either for his Acquittal or Conviction super Patriam to be tried by his Country And the Jurors of Life and Death themselves are not tied as not strictly to the form of an Indictment so not to the whole matter of it not to the form as it was well urged by Sergeant Montague Reader at the Arraignment of the Earl of Somerset for Murther by poysoning of Sr. Thomas Overbury in the Tower who told the Jury That they must not expect visible Proofs in a work of darkness that many things were laid in an Indictment only for form that they must not look that the proof should follow that but only that which is substantial and the substance in that Case must be this Whether my Lord of Somerset procured or caused the poysoning of Sr. Thomas Overbury or not The Lord Coke then Chief Justice and other Judges present at the Trial stood up and said The Law is clear in this point that the Proofs must follow the Substance not the Form that the Law gives forms in Indictments but substance in proofs And yet this was spoken to a Jury of Life and Death who are more carefully to look into Circumstances and Forms because their error is incurable if they Convict a man to lose his life wrongfully than Grand Jurors are And I cannot but further observe in this Case of Sr. Thomas Overbury that which I would have all Grand Jurors and Jurors of Life and Death observe as an Instance to guide them in other Cases of like nature that although it was laid in the Indictment That the ninth of May Anno 11 Jac. Regis Richard Weston who was procured by the Earl of Somerset gave to the said Sr. Thomas Overbury a poyson of green and yellow colour called Rosacre in Broth and the first of June Anno 11 Jac. Regis supradict gave him another poyson called white Arsenick and that the tenth of June Anno 11. supradict gave to him a poyson called Mercury sublimate in Tarts and the fourteenth day of September Anno 11. supradict gave him a Glister mixt with poyson called Mercury sublimate Vt praedict Thomam Overbury magis celeriter interficeret murdraret Et praedictus Thomas Overbury de separalibus venenis praedictis operationibus inde a praedictis separalibus temporibus c. graviter languebat usque ad 15. diem Decembris Anno 11. supradict quo die dict Thomas de praedict separalibus venenis obiit venenatus c. And albeit it did not appear or could appear of which of the said poysons he died yet it was Resolved by all the Judges of the Kings Bench that the Indictment was good for the substance of the Indictment was whether he was poysoned or not and it appeared that Weston within that time aforesaid had given unto Sr. Thomas Overbury divers other poysons as namely the powder of Diamonds Cantharides Lapis Causticus and powder of Spiders and Aquafortis in a Glyster And it was resolved by all the said Judges that albeit all