Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n chancellor_n sir_n thomas_n 2,557 5 7.7167 4 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
A91243 A plea for the Lords: or, A short, yet full and necessary vindication of the judiciary and legislative power of the House of Peeres, and the hereditary just right of the lords and barons of this realme, to sit, vote and judge in the high Court of Parliament. Against the late seditious anti-Parliamentary printed petitions, libells and pamphlets of Anabaptists, Levellers, agitators, Lilburne, Overton, and their dangerous confederates, who endeavour the utter subversion both of parliaments, King and peers, to set up an arbitrary polarchy and anarchy of their own new-modelling. / By William Prynne Esquire, a well-wisher to both Houses of Parliament, and the republike; now exceedingly shaken and indangered in their very foundations. Prynne, William, 1600-1669. 1648 (1648) Wing P4032; Thomason E430_8; ESTC R204735 72,921 83

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

which they never yet read nor understood there remaines nothing but to answer some Presidents and Objections The Principall president insisted on by Lilburne Object 1. is the Protestation of the Lords in the case of * Cooke 2. Instit p. 50. Sir Simon Beresford 4. E. 3. nu 6. which I have already fully answered retorted and shall therefore here pretermit The second is Sir Edward Cookes Authority Object 2. and the presidents cited by him in his 4. Institutes p. 23. 24. of Judicature in Parliament where thus he writes It is to be knowne THAT THE LORDS IN THEIR HOUSE HAVE POWER OF JUDICATURE And the Commons in their House have power of Judicature and both Houses together have power of Judicature But the handling thereof according to the weight and worth of the matter would require a whole Treatise of it selfe and to say the truth it is best understood by reading the Judgements and Records of Parliament at large and the Journalls of the House of the Lords and the Booke of the Clerke of the House of Commons which is a Record as it is affirmed by Act of Parliament in An. 6. H. 8. c. 16. To which he addes these marginall Notes Vide Placita in Parlians Anno 33. E. 1. rot 33. Nicholas Seagrave adjudg● Par Praelatos COMITES BARONES ET ALIOS DE CONCILIO At the Parliament at Yorke Ap. 12. E. 3. Consideratum est per Praelatos Comites BARONES ET COMMVNITATEM ANGLIAE the Lord Audleys care At the Parliament at Westm 15. E. 2 Hugh le pier adjuge per les SEIGNIEURS COMMONS Rot. Parl. 50. E. 3. n. 34. Lord Nevils case Then he a●des See Rot. Claus 1 R. 2. n. 5. 8. 38. ●0 A tresage Councell le Roy Les SEIGNIORS COMMONS c. Rot. Parl. 2. H. 5. nu 1● Err●ra sinned THAT THE LORDS gave Judgement WIT●OVT PETITION OR AS●●NT OF THE COMMONS Rot. Parl. 28. H. 6. nu 10. and many others in the Reigne of King H. 6. and Kin E. 4. And of later times see divers notable Judgements at the prosecution of the Commons By THE LORDS at the Parliaments ●●●den 18. and 21. Iac. Regis against Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michell Viscount St. Albon Lord Chancellor of England the Earle of Middlesex Lord Treasurer of England whereby the due proceedings of Iudicature in such Caces doth appeare Then hee cites the cases of * 8. Eliz. Thomas Long * 23 Eliz. Arthur Hall * 2. A●●●l 1. Ma●●● and Muncton censured by the House of Commons only and by them fined and imprisoned without the Lords A●d concludes thus If any Lord of Parliament spirituall or temporall have committed any Oppression Bribery extortion or the like the HOUSE OF COMMONS BEING THE GENERALL INQUISITORS OF THE REALME comming out of all parts thereof may examine the same and if they find by the Vote of the House the charge to be true then they TRANSMIT THE SAME TO THE LORDS WITH THE WITNESSES and PROOFES From which passages of his some ignorantly have concluded That the Lords have no power of Judicature without but only joyntly with the Commons That all Commoners ought to be judged only by the Commons not by the Lords and That the Commons have a sole power of Judicature in cases of Commoners and the Lords no power but joyntly with them or upon their preceding Petitions and impeachments neither in case of Commoners nor Peers I answer that Sir Edward Cookes words are much mistaken and rightly understood warrant no such inferences but the contrary For first he clearely confesseth in direct termes That the Lords in their House have a power of judicature even without the Commons ha he de●med particularly in whose and in what cases out of the Judgements Records and Journals of Parliament at large to which he refers the Reader a being best understood by reading them which warrant the Lords judging fining imprisoning and condemning to death not only of Peers but of Commoners themselves without the Commons as I have fully manifested their could no such inference have been made Secondly ●e adde● That the Commons in their House have a power of Judicature From whence Lilburne and others inferre That they are and ought to be the sole Judges of all Commoners and not the Lords in all cases triable in Parliament But this is a most grosse mistake Sir Edward Cooke confining this Judicature of theirs only to these three c●ses First to matters and abuse concerning elections of Knights Citizens and Burgesses being Members of the Commons House the judgment and determination whereof the Commons alone of late times only have usually taken upon them without the Lords which he proves by Thomas Longs case 8. Eliz. and no greater antiquities of which elections the King and Lords in former times have been sole Judges for which I shall cite some memorable records worthy the Lords and ●●mmons consideration who now take upon them to suspend eje●● Judge their own Members elections without the Kings or Lords concurrence or privity a practice not heard of in former ages and of late originall In the Parliament holden at Westminster 5. H. 4. Rot. Parl. num 38. Thomas Thorpe his case Item because that the writ of summons of Parliament returned by the Sheriffe of Roteland was not sufficiently nor duely returned as the Commons conceived the said Commons prayed our Lord THE KING and THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT that this matter might be duly examined in Parliament and that in case their shall be default found in this matter that such a punishment might be inflicted which might become exemplary to others to offend againe in the like manner Whereupon our said Lord the King IN FULL PARLIAMENT commanded THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT TO EXAMINE THE SAID MATTER and to doe therein AS TO THEM SHOULD SEEME BEST IN THEIR DISCRETIONS And thereupon the SAID LORDS caused to come BEFORE THEM IN PARLIAMENT as well the said Sheriffe as William One by who was returned by the said Sheriffe for one of the Knights of the said County and Thomas Thorpe who was elected in full Countie to be one of the Knights of the said Shire for the said Parliament and not returned by the said Sheriffe And the said parties being duely examined and their reasons well considered in the said Parliament IT WAS AGREED BY THE SAID LORDS that because the said Sheriffe had not made a sufficient returne of the said writ THAT HE SHALL AMEND THE SAID RETURN and THAT HE SHALL RETURN THE SAID THOMAS FOR ONE OF THE SAID KNIGHTS as he was elected in the said Countie for the Parliament and moreover that the said Sheriffe for this default SHALL BE DISCHARGED OF HIS OFFICE and COMMITTED PRISONER TO THE FLEET and that he should MAKE FINE and RANSOME AT THE KINGS PLEASURE Loe here the Lords in Parliament at the Commons request and by the Kings command examining and giving judgement in case of undue election even without the
at all because some of the Lords were not come by reason of foule weather shortnesse of warning or other publike imployments all their personall presence in Parliament being reputed necessary and expedient And 20. R. 2. N. 8. The Commons themselves in Parliament required the King to SEND FOR SUCH BISHOPS and LORDS WHO WERE ABSENT to come to the Parliament before they would consult of what the Chancellor propounded to them in the Kings name and behalfe to consider of To recite no more ancient Presidents in the Parliament of 2. Caroli the Earle of Arundell sitting in the Parliament being committed by the King to the Tower of London about his sonnes marriage May 25 1626. without the Houses privity and consent whereby their Priviledges were infringed and the House deprived of one of their Members presence thereupon the Houses of Peeres adjourned themselves on the 25 and 26. of May without doing any thing and upon the Kings refusall to release him they adjourned from May 26. till June 2. refusing to sit and so that Parliament disolved in discontent his imprisonment in this case being a breach of Priviledge contrary to Magna Charta And not long after the beginning of this Parliament upon the Kings accusation and impeachment of the Lord Kimbolton and the five Members of the Commons House * An Exact collection part 1. both Houses adjourned and sate not as Houses till they had received satisfaction and restitution of those Members as the Journals of both Houses manifest it being an high breach of their Priviledges contrary to the Great Charter If then the Kings bare not summoning of some Peares to Parliament who ought to sit there by their right of Perage or impeaching or imprisoning any Peere unjustly to disable them to sit personally in Parliament be a breach of the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme and of Magna Charta it selfe confirmed in above 40. succeeding Parliaments then the Lords right to sit vote and Judge in Parliament is as firme and indisputable as Magna Charta can make it and consented to and confirmed by all the Commons people and Parliaments of England that ever consented to Magna Charta though they be not eligiable every Parliament by the freeholders people as Knights and Burgesses ought to be and to deny this birth-right and Priviledge of theirs is to deny Magna Charta it selfe and this present Parliaments Declarations and proceedings in the case of the Lord Kimbolton a member of the House of Peers Fifthly The ancient Treatise intituled * See Cooke ● Justit p. 12. for the Antiquity and for the Authority of this Treatise The manner of holding Parliaments in England in Edward the Confessors time before the Conquest rehearsed afterwards before William the Conqueror by the discreet men of the Kingdome and by himselfe approved and used in his time and in the times of his Successors Kings of England if the Title be true and the Treatise so ancient as many now take it to be determines thus of the Kings and Lords right to be personally present in all Parliaments The King IS bound by all meanes possible TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT unlesse he be detained or let there from by BODILY SICKNESSE and then he may keep his Chamber yet so THAT HELYE NOT WITHOUT THE MANOUR OR TOWNE WHERE THE PARLIAMENT IS HELD and then he ougth to send for twelve persons of the greatest and best of them that are summoned to the Parliament that is two Bishops two EARLES two BARONS two Knights of the Shire two Burgesses and two Citizens to looke upon his person to testifie and witnesse his estate and in their presence he ought to make a Commission and give Authority to the Archbishops of the Peace the steward of England and Cheife Justice that they joyntly and severally should begin the Parliament and continue the same in his name expresse mention being made in that Commission of the cause of his absence then which ought to suffice and admonish the OTHER NOBLES cheife men in the Parliament together with the evident testimony of the twelve Peers of theirs The reason is BECAVSE THERE WAS WONT TO BE A CRY OR MURMVR IN THE PARLIAMENT FOR THE KINGS ABSENCE BECAUSE HIS ABSENCE IS HURTFULL and DANGEROUS TO THE WHOLE COMMONALTY OF THE PARLIAMENT and KINGDOME WHEN THE KING SHALL BE ABSENT FROM HIS PARLIAMENT Neither indeed OUGHT OR MAY HE BE ABSENT BUT ONELY IN THE CASE AFORESAID After which it followes The Archbishops Bishops and other cheife of the Clergy ought to be summoned to come to the Parliament and Also EVERY EARLE and BARON and their PEERS OUGHT TO BE SUMMONED and COME TO THE PARLIAMENT c. Touching the beginning of the Parliament The Lord the King shall sit in the mi●st of the great bench and is bound to be present in the first and last day of Parliament And the Chancellors Treasurer and Barons of the Eschequer and justices were wont to record the defaults made in Parliament according to the order following In the third day of the Parliament the Barons of the Cinqueports shall be called and after wards the BARONS of England after them the EARLES Whereupon if the Barons of the Cinqueports be not come the Barony from whence they are shall be amerced at an hundred markes and an Earle at one hundred pounds After the same manner it must be done to those who are Peers to Earles and Barons After which it relates the manner of place of the Earles Barons and Peers in Parliament Then addes The Parliament may be held and OVGHT every day to begin at one of the clocke in the afternoone at which time THE KING IS TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT and ALL THE PEERS OF THE KINGDOME None of all the Peers of the Parliament MAY OR OUGHT TO DEPART alone from the Parliament unlesse he have obtained and that in full Parliament leave from the KING and of ALL HIS PEERS so to doe and that with all there be a remembrance kept in the Parliament roll of such leave and Liberty granted And if any of the Peers during the terme of the Parliament shal be sick or weake so as he is not able to come to the Parliament then he ought three dayes together send such as may excuse him to the Parliament or else two Peers must go and view him and if they finde him sicke then he may make a Proxy Of the Parliament the King is the Head the beginning and ending So this ancient Treatise The Statute of 5. R. 2. Parl. 2. ch 4. enacts by COMMAND of the King and ASSENT of the Prelates LORDS and COMMONS in Parliament That all and singular persons and Commonalties which from henceforth shall have the Summons of the Parliament shall come from henceforth to the Parliament in the manner AS THEY BE bound TO DOE and hath been ACCVSTOMED within the Realme of England OF OLD TIME And every person of the said Realme which from henceforth shall have the
said Sommons be he Archbishop Bishop Abbot Prior DUKE LORD BARON Baronet Knight of the Shire Citizen of City Burgesse of Burgh or other singular person or Commonalty do absent himselfe or come not at the said Summons except he may reasonably or honestly excuse himself to our Soveraigne Lord THE KING HE SHALL BE AMERCED and OTHERWAYES PVNISHED ACCORDING AS OF OLD TIME HATH BEEN USED TO BE DONE within the said Realme in the SAID CASE Which relates unto and agrees expresly with that forecited out of Modus tenendi Parliamentum If then all the Judges and Peares in Parliament are bound to attend the Parliament not to depart without the Kings and Houses leave under paine of Amercement and other punishment as this Statute resolves and 3. Ed. 3. 19. Fit 2. C●ron 161. Stamford l 3. c. 1. f. 153. Cooke Instit p. 15. 16. 17. 43 18. E. 3. Mo. 1. 2 8. and 31. H. 6. n. 46. What fine were imposed on absent Lords manifest then questionlesse they ought of right to sit in Parliament else it were the height of Injustice thus to fine them In the tenth yeare of King ● * Graf●o●● Cron. p. ● 〈◊〉 350. 2. this King absented himselfe from his Parliament then sitting at Westminster residing at Eltham about forty dayes and refusing to come to the Parliament and yet demanding from them foure fifteenes for maintenance of his Estate and outward Wars Whereupon the whole body of the Parliament made this answer THAT VNLESSE THE KING WERE PRESENT THEY WOULD MAKE THEREIN NO ALLOWANCE Soone after they sent the Duke of Gloucester and Bishop of Ely Commissioners to the King to Eltham who declared to him among other things in the Lords and Commons behalfe how that by AN OLD ORDINANCE THEY HAVE AN ACT if the King absent himselfe 40. dayes not being sicke but of his owne minde not heeding the charge of his people nor their great paines and will not resort to the Parliament they may then lawfully returne to their Houses And now sir said they you have beene absent a longer time and yet refuse to come amongst us which is greatly to our discontent To which the King answered Well we doe consider that our owne people and Commons goe about to rise against vs wherefore we thinke wee can doe no better then to aske ayd of our Cosen the French King and rather to submit us to him then unto our owne subjects The Lords answered Sir that Counsell is not best but a way rather to bring you into danger c. By whose good perswasions the King was appeased and Promised to come to the Parliament and condiscend to their Petitions and according to his appointment he came and so the Parliament proceeded which else had dissolved by the Lords departure thence in discontent and the Kings wilfull absence Andrew Horne in his Mirrour of Justices in the raigne of King Edward the first writes That our Saxon Kings divided the Realme into 38 Counties over which they set so many Counts or Earles and though the King ought to have no Peers in his land but PARLIAMENTS all Writs and Plaints of the Moneys of the King Queene and their Children and of those especially who otherwise could not have common right of their wrongs These Companions are now called Counts after the latine word Comites For to the Estates of the Realme King Alfred assembled the COVNTS or Earles and ordained by a Perpetuall Law that twice a yeare or oftner they should assemble at London in Parliament to consult of the Government of the people of God Fleta l. 2. c. 2. p. 66. writes thus in the same Kings raigne Habet enim Rex curiam suam in concilio suo in Parliamentis suis PRAESENTIBUS Praelatis COMITIBUS BARONIBUS PROCERIBUS alijs viris peritis vbi terminatae sunt dubitationes judiciorum moris injuriis eversis nova constituuntur remedia And l. 17. c. 17. he writes thus Rex in populo regendo superiores habet Vidilicet legem perfactus est Rex Curiam suam to wit of Parliament videlicet COMITES BARONES Comites enim a Comitia dicuntur qui cum viderint Regem sine froeno Froenum sibi apponere TENENTVR ne clament sabditi Domine Jesu Christe in Chamo froeno maxillas eorum constringe Sir Thomas Smith in his Common-wealth of England * Bracton l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 l. 3. c 9. 〈◊〉 the like in the same words in Henry the 3. his reigne l. 2. c. 1. John Vowel and Ralph Hollinshed vol. 1. c. 6. p. 173. Mr. Cambden in his Britania p. 177. John Minshew in his Dictionary vuell in his Interpreter Title Parliament Powell in his Attornyes Academy and others unanimously conclude That the Parliament consisteth of the KING the LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPORALL and the Commons which STATES represent the body of all England which make but one assembly or Court called the Parliament and is of all other the Highest and greatest Authority and hath the most high and absolute power of the Realme And that no Parliament is or can be holden without the King and Lords Mr. Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts affirmes particularly of the High Court of Parliament f. 1. c. This Court is the highest Court of England in which the King himself fits in person and comes there at the beginning and end of the Parliament and AT ANY OTHER TIME WHEN HE PLEASETH ORDERING THE PARLIAMENT To this Court come ALL THE LORDS OF PARLIAMENT as well spirituall a● temporall and are severally summoned by the Kings writ at a certaine day and place assigned The Chancellour of England and other great officers or Judges are there likewise present together with the Knights Citizens and Burgesses who all ought to be personally present or else to be amerced and otherwise punished if they come not being summoned unlesse good cause be shewed or in case they depart without the Houses or Kings speciall license after their appearance before the Sessions ended And he resolves that the King Lords and Commons doe all joyntly make up the Parliament and that no Law nor Act of Parliament can be made to binde the subject without all their concurrent assents Sir Edward Cooke not onely in his Epistle before his ninth Report and Institutes on Littleton p. 109. 110. But likewise in his 4. Institutes published by Order of this present Parliament c. 1. p. 1. 2 c writes thus of the high Honorable Court of Parliament This Court consisteth OF THE KINGS MAJESTIE sitting there as in his royall politick capacity and of the three Estates of the Realme viz. Of the Lords Spirituall Archbishops and Bishops being in number 24. who sit there in respect of their Counties or Barronies parcell of their Bishopricks which they hold also in their politick capacity and every one of these when the Parliament is to be holden ought exdebito Justitiae to have a writ of summons The LORDS TEMPORALL Dukes Marquesses Earles
hill unto the Gallows at Tiburn there kenelled his bowels laid before him and after he should be hanged beheaded and quartered and his head sent to Calayes where the murther was committed and his quarters sent to other places where the King should please and thereupon command was given to the Marshall of England to make execution accordingly and it was so done the same day Lo here the Lords in Parliament g●ve judgement against a Commoner in case of a murther done at Calayes and so not triable at the Kings Bench but in Parliament and passe a judgement of High treason on him for murthering of a great Peere only And which is most remarkable all the Commons In this very Parliaments of 1 H. 4. nu 70. Nov 3. made their Protestation and further remonstrated to the King Nota. Com LES JVGGEMENTS DV PARLEMENT APEIRTEIGNENT SOVLEMENT AV ROY ET AS SEIGNEIVRS ET NIENT AS COMMVNES how the judgement of the Parl. appertained ONLY TO THE KING and TO THE LORDS and NOT VNTO THE COMMONS except in case it should please the King OF HIS SPECIALL GRACE to shew unto them the said JVDGEMENTS purcase de eux que null record soit fait in Parlement encoutreles ditz Communes quill soit ou serront parties ascunes juggements donez ouadoues en Apres in Parlement Whereunto it was answered by the Archbish of Canterbury by the Kings command how the said Commoners are petitioners and demanders and that THE KING THE LORDS de tont temps ont eves et aueront DE DROIT LES JVGGEMENT EN PARLEMENT en manere come me me les communes ount monstres HAVE ALVVAYES HAD AND SHALL HAVE OF RIGHT THE JVDGEMENTS IN PARLIAMENT in manner as the Commons themselves have declared except in making Statutes or in making Grants and Subsidies or such things for the common profit of the Realm wherein the King will have especially their advice and assent and that this order of proceeding shall be held and kept IN ALL TIMES TO COME By which record in Parliament it is apparent by the House of Commons own confession First that the Judgements in Parliament even in cases of Commoners appertain ONLY TO THE KING and LORDS in the affirmative Secondly that they appertain NOT TO THE COMMONS in the negative Thirdly that the King and LORDS HAVE ALWAYES HAD and ENJOYED THE RIGHT of Judgements in Parliament Fourthly that they should alwayes hold and enjoy this Right IN ALL TIMES TO COME Fifthly that the Commons speciall advise and assent was and is required by the King in Parliament only in making of Statutes Grants and Subsidies and such like things for the common profit of the Realm So full and punctuall a Parliamentary decision of the present controversie as is uncapable of any answer or evasion In the Parliament Roll of 17. y See Cook 3. Instit c. 2. p. 22. R. 2. num 20. 21. John Duke of Gayen and of Lancaster Steward of England and Thomas Duke of Glocester Constable of England the Kings Uncles complained to the King that Thomas Talbot Knight a Commoner and no Peere with other his adherents conspired the death of the said Duke in divers parts of Cheshire as the same was confessed and well known and prayed that the Parliament might judge of the faul● to wit whether it were treason according to the clause of the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. It is accorded that if any other case supposed Treason which is not above specified doth happen before any Justices the Justices shall tarry without any going to judgement of the Treason till the cause be shewed and declared before the King and His Parliament whether it ought to be judged Treason or Felony whereupon the KING and THE LORDS IN THE PARLIAMEN● without the Commons though in case of a Commoner ADJVDGED THE SAME FACT TO BE OPEN and HIGH TREASON and thereupon they award two writs the one to the Sheriffes of Darby to take the body of the said Sir Thomas retornable in the Kings Bench in the moneth of Easter then next following and open Proclamation was made in Westminster Hall upon the Sheriffes return and the next coming in of the said Sir Thomas that the same Thomas SHOVLD BE CONVICTED OF TREASON and incurre the losse and pain of the same and that all such as should receive him after the same Proclamation should incurre the same losse and paine Sir z 3. Instit p. 22. Edward Cooke relating this Judgement addes his own opinion at the end That this judgement wanting the assent of the Commons was no Declaration of Treason within the Act of 25. E. ● because it was not by the King and his Parliament according to this Act but by the King and Lords ONLY But the record of Parliament and the Judges and Commons then admitted it to be good and processe issued out and judgement was given accordingly the parties concerned taking no such exceptions to it See 21. R. 2. n. 15. 16. So that this Record is a pregnant evidence That the King and Lords are the sole Judges in Parliament in the case of Commoners even in declaring and judging what is or what is not treason within the Statute of 25. E. 3. because the Commons are no Iudges in Parliament and so cannot Iudge or declare unles in a legislative way by Act of Parliament what is Treason or Pelony but the King and Lords alone To put this out of question I shall cite one notable record more to this purpose a Cooke 3. Instit p. 22. c. 1. p. 10. In the Parliament of 5. H. 4. 11. 12. on the 8. of February the Earle of Northumberland came before the King Lords and Commons in Parliament and by his Petition to the King acknowledged that he had done against his Lawes and alegiance and especially for gather of power and giving of Liveries for which he put himselfe upon the Kings grace and prayed pardon the rather for that upon the Kings Letters he yielded himselfe and came to the King at Yorke whereas he might have kept himselfe away Which Petition by the Kings command was delivered to the Justices to be examined and to have their counsell and advice therein Whereupon the LORDS made a Protestation que le Juggement appertient aeux tout soulement THAT THE JUDGEMENT APPERTAINED ONLY TO THEM And after the said Petition being read and considered before the King and the said Lords as Peers of Parliament a queux tells ●uggementz apperteignent DE DROIT TO WHOM SUCH JUDGEMENT APPERTAINED OF RIGHT having had by the Kings command competent deliberation thereupon and having also heard and considered as well the Statute made in the 25. yeare of King Edward the Kings Grand-father that now is concerning the Declaration of treason as the Statutes of Liveries made in this Kings raigne ADJUDGED that that which was done by the said Earle contained within his Petition was neither Treason nor Felony but Trespas for which
awarded him to the custody of the Marshall and to make fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure Whereupon the Commons REQUIRED by way of petition that he might lose all his Offices and no longer be of the Kings Councell which the King granted The Commons not joyning at all with the Lords in his judgement neither could they so joyne he being a Peer And for the Lord Nevill in that Parliament num 33. he was only accused not judged by the Commons Sixthly The case of 2. H. 5. rot Parl. num 15. that Error is there assigned that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons is a grosse mistake For the record only recites That Thomas Mountague Earle of Salisbury Sonne and Heire of Iohn Mountague Earle of Salisbury exhibited his petition in Parliament to reverse a judgement given against his said father in the Parliament at Westminster in the second year of King Henry the fourth Whereupon he exhibited certaine reversals of Judgements given in Parliament as making on his behalfe to the Lords consideration reversed for some errors assigned in those jadgements to wit one judgement given against Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster before King Edward the second at Pomfract the monday before the feast of the Annuntiation in the fifteenth yeare of his reigne and another Judgement against Roger de Mortymer late Earle of March in the Parliament of King Edward the third the Monday after the Feast of St. Katherine in the fourth yeare of his reigne at Westminster Which judgements being distinctly and openly read and fully understood Jo seemed TO THE KING and LORDS that the case of the death and execution of the said John late Earle of Sarum and of the judgement aforesaid against him given is not nor was like to the case of the executing of the said Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster nor to the case of the killing of Roger Earle of March nor to any judgement given against the said Thomas and Roger as aforesaid but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said Iohn late Earle of Sarum WERE A GOOD JUST and LEGALL DECLARATION and JUDGEMENT Per quod CONSIDERATUM FUIT in praesenti Parliamento PER PRAEDICTOS DOMINOS tunc ibidem existentes DE ASSINSU dicti Domini nostri Regis quod praefatus nunc COMES Sarum NIHIL CAPIAT PER PETITIONEM aut prosecutionem suam praedictam Et ulterius TAM DOMINI SPIRITUALES QUAM TEMPORALE supradicti JUDICIUMET DECLARATIONEM praedicta versus dictum Ioannem quondam Comitem Sarum ut praem●ttitur habita five reddita DE ASSENSU IPSIUS DOMINI REGIS AFFIRMARUNT FORE ET ESSE BONA JUSTA ET REGALIA et ea pro hujusmodi EX ABUNDANTI DISCREVERUNT ADJUDICARUNT TUNC IBIDEM This is all that is mentioned in this Parliament Roll concerning this businesse It appeares by the Parliament Roll of 2 H. 4. num 30. That Thomas Holland Earl of Kent Iohn Holland Earle of huntingdo● Iohn Mountagne Earle of Sarum Thomas Lord de Dispencer and Ralph omely Knight were impeached of high treason before the King and Lords in Parliament for levying actuall Warre against the King to destroy the King and his Subjects and for this taken and beheade and hereupon ALL ●●E LORDS TEMPORALL BEING IN PARLIAMENT BY ASSENT OF THE KING DECLARED AND ADJVDGED all the said persons TRAITORS for leavying Warre against the King and that as Traytors they should forfeit all the lands they had in fee simple the 5 day of Jannary the first yeare of the raigne of the King or after according to the Law of the Land with all their goods and chattells notwithstanding they were slaine upon the said levying of Warre without processe of Law So this Record To reverse this judgement was this Petition of Thomas Earle o● Sarisbury in 2. H. 5. exhibited without the errour assigned as appeares by the Par●iament roll but if it were that the Lords only gave Judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons as Sir Edward Cooke imagins 〈◊〉 the King and Lords who upon solemned bate over-ruled the errour abuses and Petitions and found this judg●ment and Declaration of 2. H. 4. given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent without the Commons TO BE GOOD JVST and LEGALL as they did ex abund●nti is a most undeniable proofe of the King and Lords sole right of JVDGEING and DECLARING HIGH TREASON in Parliament without the Commons as well in case of Commoners as Lords Ralph Lomely being but a Commoner and Knight though the rest were Peers and yet all joyntly adjudged Traytors and declared such only by the King and Lords without the Commons and the Judgement assured to be good by the Commons who in the Parliament of 13. H. 4. num 19. Petitioned the Iohn Lomley might be restored by act of Parliament and made capable to inherit his fathers lands thus attainted to which the King by ASSENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPORALL consented Seventhly the Parliament Roll of 28. H. 6. num 18. c. containes onely an Impeachment of High Treason against the King and other great misdemeanors against the Kingdome and wrongs to particular persons comprised by way of Articles in two distinct Bills brought up by the Commons and presented by William Tresham their Speaker to the King in the Lords House the 7. day of February against William de la Pole Duke of Suffolke to which they desired the Duke might give in his Answer by a certaine day which he did absolutly denying the Treason against the King and denying and excusing himselfe of the rest without putting himselfe upon the Tryall of his Peeres The Chiefe Iustice thereupon the 14. day of March by the Kings command asked this Question of the LORDS WHAT ADVISE THEY WOULD GIVE THE KING what is to doe futrher in this matter which advise was deferred till Monday then next following whereon nothing was done in that matter On Tuesday the 17. of March the King sent for all the Lords Spirituall and Temporall then being in Towne being 42. in all into his Inner Chamber within his Palace of Westminster where when they were all assembled hee then sent for the Duke thither who comming into the Kings presence kneeled downe and continued kneeling till the Chancellour of England had delivered the Kings command to him and demanded of him what he said to the Commons Articles not having put himselfe upon his Peerage Whereupon the Duke denyed all the Articles touching the Kings Person and state of the Realme as false and scandalous And so not departing from his said Answers submitted himselfe wholly to the Kings Rule and Governance without putting himselfe upon his Peerage Where thus the Chancellour told him That as touching the great and horrible things contained in the first Bill the King holdeth him neither declared nor charged And as touching the second Bill containing misprisons which are not criminall the King by force of his submission by his owne advise and
Lords who are Freemen of the higest degree may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen very learned nonsence we all know that the Lord Chancellour of England Lord Keeper Lord Treasurer Master of the Court of Wards and some of the Iudges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times with the Chiefe Iustic●ar and Iustices in Eyre were anciently and of late too as the Earle of Holland and others Peeres of the Realme not Commoners and that all the Peeres of the Realme are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace yet did wee never heare of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery Kings Be●ch the Exchequer Chamber Eyres Assises or Sessions Sir I am a Commoner and you are a Peer of the Realme but no Commoner as I am besides you sit here onely in the Kings right doing all in his name and representing his person who is not any Peer but Soveraigne Therefore you ought not to judge my cause not condemne my person nor give any sentence for or against mee it being contrary to Magna Charta which enacts That no freeman should be judged or pressed upon or condemned but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lilburne And if Lords and Peers may judge the persons and causes of Commoners in the Cancery Kings Bench Exchequer Court of Wards Eyre and at Assises and S●ssions without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it who are certainly Peers to Commoners though Commoners be not Peers to them within the meaning of Magna Charta ch 29. Forthly If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners cause without breach of this clause in Magna Charta then why did b See his Innocency and truth justified Lilburne himselfe sue and petition to the Lords as the onely competent Iudges to reverse his sentence in Star-Chamber and give him dammages because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds without expresse violation of this Law then h●mselfe in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Starre Chamber Sentence because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta was as great a violation of it as his Starr-Chamber censure and his sentence in Starre-Chamber remaines still unreversed because the Lords examining and reversing of it they being no Commoners as hee is but Peers was Coram non judice and meerly void by the Statute of 25. E. 3. St●t 5. ● 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it selfe as hee now expounds it Let him therefore unriddle and assoyle thi● his owne Dilemma or for ever hold his tongue and pen from publishing such absurdities to seduce poore people as he hath don● and exa●perate them to clamour against the Lords for being more favourable in their censure of him then his transcendent Libels and contempts against them deserved Fifthly This Statute is in the dis-junctive by the Lawfull of his Peers OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND which this Ignoramus observes not 〈…〉 Now by the● Law of the Land every Inferiour Court of justice may fine and imprison men for contempts and misdemeanors against them and their authority therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest and supreamed Tribunall may much more doe it and have ever done it even by this expr●●●e clause of Magna Charta the Law and Custome of Parliament as well as they may give c 〈…〉 judgements in writs of Errour againster for Commons without the Commons consent as himselfe ●oth grant Fifthly It is granted by Lilburne that by this expresse Law ●o f●eeman of England ought to be judged or censured but onely by his Peers and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobl●men nor Noblemen Peer● to Commoners Then by what Law of reason dared he to publish to the world d 〈…〉 That the House of Commons are the Su●reme Power within this Realme and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JVDGES certainly this is a Note beyond Ela a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein hee placeth his strength and subverts his very ground work against the Lords jurisdiction in their censure of him For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords ●udges then by Magna Charta c. 29. they are and ought to bee their Peers and if the Commons bee the Lords Peers then the Lords must bee the Commons Peers too and if so then they may lawfully be his judges even by Magna Charta because here he grants them to bee no other then his Peers Loe the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers cut off with his owne sword and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and ●●ttish contradictory Glosses on it and to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to bee by right the Lords judges I might informe him that Magna Charta it selfe ● 1. 20 and Sir Edward Cooke his chiefe Authour in his commentary on them are expresse against him that in the Parliament of 15. c. 3. ch 2. in print it was enacted That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and imprisoned and their Temporalities Lands and Tenements Goods and 〈◊〉 seised in the Kings hards and some put to death WITHOVT IVDGEMENT OF THEIR PEERS that NO PEER OF THE LAND Officer or other by reason of his office nor of things touching his office nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement to lose his Temporalities Lands Tenements Goods Chattels nor to bee arrested or imprisoned outlawed exiled nor forejudged nor put to answer NOR TO BE IVDGED BVT BY AWARD OF THE SAID PEERS IN PARLIAMENT which Priviledge of theirs was both enjoyed and claimed in Parliament 4. E. 3. n. 14. 15. E. 3. n. 6. 8. 44. 49. 51. 17. E. 3. n. 22. 28. F. 3. n. 7. ●0 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7. 8. c. and sundry other Parliament Rolls e See Cook 4. Instit p. 15. ●7 E. 3. 19. And in 11. R. 2. n. 7. All the Lords in this Parliament as well Spirituall as Temporall claimed this their liberty and franchise that all weighty matters in the same Parliament to be after moved TOVCHING THE PEERS OF THE LAND ought to bee determined and judged and discussed BY THE COVRSE OF THE PARLIAMENT and not by the Civill Law nor BY THE COMMON LAWES used in other inferiour Courts of the Relame The which claime and liberty the King most willingly allowed and granted thereto IN FVLL PARLIAMENT And hereupon in the Parliament of 14. R. 2. n. 13. The King and LORDS without the Commons ADIVDGED the Earledome and Seigniory of Richmond to bee forfeited by reason that Iohn Duke of Br●●tany then