forsomuch that before this time the said Offences Extortions Contempts c. might not nor as yet may be conveniently Punished by the due Order of Law except it were first found and presented by the Verdict of Twelve â—â—en thereto duely Sworn who for the Causes before Recited will not find nor present the Truth wherefore be it by the Advice and Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in this present Parliament Assembled and by Authority of the same Enacted Ordained and Established That from henceforth as well the Iustices of Assize as the Iustices of the Peace in every County of the said Realm upon Information Note it was to be without any Presentment or Indictment found by any Grand or Petty Jury for the King c. shall have full Power Authority by their Discretion to hear determine all Offences c. Here you see Matters were left to be determined by Judges and Justices Without Iuries in a Summary Chancery-Method only according forsooth to their Discretion Yet still there was a Proviso THat no such Information should extend to Treason Murder or Felony nor to any other Offence for which any Person should lose Life or Member Nor to lose by or upon the same Information any Lands Tenements Goods or Chatteis to the Party making the same Information Which deserves Particular Notice Yet observe how the same Reverend Lord Coolt in the Place before-cited descants on this Act. By Pretext saith he of this Law Empson and Dudley did commit upon the Subject unsufferable Pressures and Oppressions and therefore this Statute was Justly soon after the Decease of Henry the Seventh Repeal'd by an Act of Parliament 1 H. 8. Cap. 8. A good Caveat to Parliaments to leave all Causes to be measured by that Golden and Strait-Mete-Wand of the Law and not to the incertain and crooked Cord of Discretion It is not almost Credible continues the same Judicious Author to fore-see when any Maxim or Fundamental-Law of this Realm He means as to this particular Case Tryals per Pais that is by Juries is Altered what dangerous Inconveniences do follow Which most expresly appears by this Most Vnjust Strange Act For hereby not only Empson and Dudley themselves but such Justices of Peace Corrupt Men as they caused to be Authorized Committed most grievous and heavy Oppressions and Exactions Grinding of the Faces of poor Subjects by Penal Laws be they never so Obsolete or unfit for the Time Suppose for a Parallel in our Times putting the Statutes against Popish Recusants in Execution against Protestant Dissenters at a Juncture when Popery was just ready to over-run us all by Information only without any Presentment or Tryal by Jury being The Antient Birth-Right of the Subject But to Hear and Determine the same by their Discretion These and other like Oppressions and Exactions by or by Means of Empson and Dudley and their Instruments brought Infinite Treasures to the King's Coffers whereof the King in the End with great Grief and Compunction Repented This Statute of 11 H. 7 We have Recited and shewed the Inconveniencies thereof to the end that the like should never hereafter be attempted in any Court of Parliament And that others might avoid the Fearful End of these Two Time-Servers Empson and Dudley Thus far that Oracle of our English Laws Wherein be pleased to observe First That he sticks not to call even an Act of Parliament most Vnjust and Strange And in the Second Part of his Institutes fol. 51. Vnjust and Injurious because it Altered a Fundamental-Law of the Realm viz. Denyed Tryal by Juries a most Essential Part of English Freedom and never to be parted with Secondly Observe what became of these Two Wicked Men though they had such a Colour of Law to bear them out They were in the Beginning of the Reign of King Henry the Eighth first Indicted for other base Practises in Finding of False Offices for the King to the Dammage and Disherison of His Subjects Which Indictment ran as follows see Cook 's Instit Part the Fourth fol. 198. Juratores praesentant quod Richardus Empson nuper de London Miles c. In English thus THe Jurors present That Richard Empson late of London Knight late Counsellor of the most Excellent Prince Henry the Seventh late King of England on the Tenth Day of May in the Twentyeth Year of the said late King and divers Times before and after at London c. Not having God before his Eyes but as the Son of the Devil imagining the Honour Dignity and Prosperity of the said late King and the Prosperity of His Kingdom of England not at all to Value or Regard But to the end that he might obtain to be a more Singular Favourite of the said late King whereby he Himself might be made a Noble or Great Man and Govern the whole Kingdom of England at his Pleasure Falsly Deceitfully and Treasonably Subverting the Laâ—y of England did amongst other Things the Day and Year afore-said at London in the Parish and Ward afore-said procure and cause to be found divers false Inquisitions and Offices of Intrusions and Alienations of divers Leige-Subject's Mannors Lands and Tenements that they held the Mannors Lands and Tenements in those Inquisitions specified of our Lord the King in Capite or otherwise when in Truth it was not so And afterwards when the said Leige-Subjects of our Lord the late King would have tendered and alledged Traverses to the said Inquisitions in the Court of Him the said late King according to the Law of England they could not be admitted to those Traverses But he the said Richard Empson debar'd and delay'd them from the same 'till they had agreed with him to pay divers Great and Insupportable Fines and Redemptions as well for the Profit of the said late King as for the proper private Advantages of him the said Richard to the great Impoverishment of the said Subjects And that the said Richard the Day and Year afore-said in the Parish and Ward afore-said and several Times before and after divers Leige-Subjects of the said late King holding of out said Lord the King divers Mannors Lands and Tenements by Knight's-Service and themselves being by the Death of their Ancestors under Age and so in the Wardship of the King by Reason of their Tenure when they came to lawful Age and ought to have had due Livery of their Mannors Lands and Tenements according to the Custom and Law of England and would have Prosecuted the same according to the Course of Chancery did refuse them so to do and totally deny and erclude until they had made with him the said Richard divers great Fines and Redemptions more than they could bear as well for the Gain of the said late King as for the private Benefit of him the said Richard Whereby many of the said late King's People were by such Grievances and Vnjust Extortions many wayes vered Insomuch that the Subjects of the said late
Justice was in those days Administred in the Countrey in Neighbouring Courts which yet as appears by the nature of the offences alledged against them had jus vitae necis power of life and death and so may properly be called Judges whose Names and particular Crimes here follow in the words of that worthy Author p. 296. of the French and p. 239 of the English Edition It is an abuse that Justices and their Officers who kill People by false judgment be not destroyed which King Alfred caused to be done who caused Forty four Iustices in one year to be hanged as Murderers fer their false judgments 1. He hanged Darling because he judged Sidulf to death for the retreat of Edulf his Son who afterward acquitted him of the Fact 2. He hanged Segnar who judged Ulf to death after sufficient acquittal 3. He hanged Cadwine because that he judged Hachwy to death without the Consent of all the Jurors for whereas he had put himself upon a jury of Twelve-men because that three would havesaved him against the Nine Cadwine removed the three and put others upon the jury upon whom Hachwy put not himself 4. He hanged Cole because he judged Ive to death when he was a Mad-man 5. He hanged Malme because he Judged Prat to death upon a false suggestion that he committed the felony 6. He hanged Athulf because he caused Copping to be hang'd before the Age of one and twenty years It was against Law then but now nequitia supplet Aetatem 7. He hanged Markes because he judged During to death by twelve men that were not sworn 8. He hanged Ostline because he judged Seaman to death by a false Warrant grounded upon false suggestion which supposed Seaman to be a Person in the warrant which he was not 9. He hanged Billing because he judged Leston to death by fraud In this manner he said to the People sit all ye here but he who killed the man and because that Leston did not sit with the other he commanded him to be hanged and said that he did assist where he knew he did not assist to kill the Party 10. He hanged Seafoul because he judged Ording to death as not answering 11. He hanged Thurston because he judged Thurgner to death by a Verdict of Inquest taken ex officio without Issue joyned 12. He hanged Athelston because he judged Herbert to death for an offence not mortal 13. He hanged Rambold because he judged Leschild in a Case not notorious without Appeal and without Indictment 14. He hanged Rolf because he judged Dunston to dye for an escape out of prison 15. He hanged Frebern because he judged Harpin to dye whereas the July were in doubt of their verdict for in doubtful cases one ough rather to save than condemn 16. He hanged Seabright who judged Athebrus to death because he had discharg'd one that had given a false judgment in a Case Capital 17. He hanged Hale because he saved Tristrain the Sherif from death who took to the Kings use from another goods against his will for as much as any such taking from another against his will and Robbery hath no difference 18. He hanged Arnold because he saved Bailifs who robbed the people by colour of Distresses some by selling Distresses such and others by extortion of Fines because between such tortious Acts and Robbery there was no difference 19. He hanged Erkinwald because he hanged Frankling for nought else but because he taught to him who vanquished him by Battle-mortal to say the word Cravant 20. He hanged Bermond because he caused Garbot to be beheaded by his judgment in England for that for which he was outlaw'd in Ireland 21. He hanged Alkman because he saved Cateman by colour of Disseisin who was Attaited of Burglary 22. He hanged Saxmond because he hanged Barold in England where the Kings Writ runneth for a fact which he did in the same Land where the Kings Writ did not run 23. He hanged Alflet because he judged a Clerk to death over whom he had no Cognizance 24. He hanged Piron because he judged Huntiny to death because he gave judgment in Appeal before the forty days pendant the Appeal by a Writ of false judgment before the King 25. He hanged Delani because he caused Eldons to be hanged who kill'd a man by misfortune 26. He hanged Oswin because he judged Fulcher to death out of Court 27. He hanged Mucdin because he hanged Helgrave by warrant of Indictment not special He hanged Horn because he hanged Simin at days forbidden 29. He hanged Wolmer because he judged Grant to death by colour of a Larceny of a thing which he had received by Title of Bailment 30. He hanged Therberne because he Judged Osgot to death for a Fact whereof he was Acquitted before against the same Plaintiffe which Acquittance he tendred to averre by Oath and because he would not averre it by Record Therbern would not allow of the Acquittal which he tendred him 31. He hanged Wolston because he adjudged Howbert to death at the suit of the King for a fact which Howbert confest and of which the King gave him his Pardon but he had no Charter thereof nevertheless he vouched the King to Warrant it and further tendred to averre it by Enrollment of the Chancery 32. He hanged Oskitell because he Judged Cutlinge to death by the Record of the Coroner where by Replication allowable the Plea did not hold And the Case was such Cutling was taken and Tortured so much as he confessed he had Mortally offended only to be quitted of the pain and Oskitell adjudged him to death upon such his Confession which he had made to the Coroner without trial of the truth of the Torture or the Fact And further the said King caused the Coroners and Officers Accessories to be apprehended who hanged the people and all those that might have hindred the false Judgment and did not hinder the same in all cases For he hanged all the Judges who had falsely saved any man guilty of Death or hath falsely hanged any man against Law or any reasonable Exception He hanged the Suitors of Calevot because they had adjudged a man to death in a case not notorious although he were guilty thereof for no man can Judge within the Realm but the King or his Commissaries except those Lords in whose Lordships the Kings Writ doth not run He hanged the Suitors of Dorcester because they Judged a man to death by Jurors in their Liberty for a Felony done out of it and whereof they had not the Conusance by reason of forraignty He hanged the Suitors of Cirencester because they kept a man so long in Prison that he dyed in prison who would have acquitted himself by Forraigners that he offended not Feloniously 'T is supposed these Suitors of each place were Four in Number which compleats the number of 44. Hanged in all In his time also the Suitors of Doncaster lost their Jurisdiction besides other Punishments because
they held Pleas forbidden by the Customs of the Realm to Ordinary Judges and Suitors to hold In this time Colgrin lost his Franchise of Enfangthief because he would not send a Thief to the common Gaole of the County who was taken within his Liberty and not Bailable In this time Buttolph lost his view of Frank-pledges because he charged the Jurours with other Articles than those which belonged to the View and Amerced people in personal Actions where one was not to be amerced by a pecuniary Punishment And accordingly he caused punishments of Death to Criminal Judges for wrongful mortal Judgements and so he did proportionably for wrongful Judgements of a lesser nature As Imprisonment for wrongful Imprisonments and and like for like with the other Punishments for he delivered Thelweld to Prison because he Judged men to Prison for Offences where they ought not to be Imprisoned He Judged Lithing to Prison because he imprisoned Herbote for the Offence of his Wife He Judged Rutwood to Prison because he Imprisoned Old for the Kings Debt Note In those days people were not to be Imprisoned for Debt but only their Goods distrain'd On the other side he Cut off the Hand of Haulf because he saved Armorks Hand who was Attainted before him that he had Feloniously wounded Richbold He Judged Edulfe to be wounded because he Judged not Arnold to be wounded who had Feloniously wounded Aldens In lesser Judgments he did not meddle with the Judgments but Disinherited the Justices and Removed them according to the Points of those Statutes where he could understand that they had Transgressed their Jurisdiction or the Bounds of their Delegacy or Commission or had concealed Fines or Amerciaments or ought that belonged to the King or had Released or Increased any Punishment contrary to Law or procured Pleadings without Warrant c. Thus far Horns Mirrour Now that this Alfred was one of the Wisest and most Renowned Kings that ever this Land was happily Governed by appears as well by the Eulogies given him by the Ancients as those Encomiastick Verses Dedicated to his Memory by a present Ingenious Courtier Sir Winston Churchill Kt. in his Diri Britannici Fol. 140. Who would not follow him into the Field Who cannot choose but Conquer tho' he yield Whose Sword cut deep yet was his Wit more keen Some Fence ' gainst that But this did wound unseen To thee is due Great Elfrid double praise To thee we bring the Laurel and the Bayes Master of Arts and Arms Apollo so Sometimes did use his Harp sometimes his Bow And from the other Gods got this Renown To Reconcile the Gauntlet to the Gown But who did e're with the same Sword like Thee Execute Justice and the Enemy Keep up at once the Law of Arms and Peace And from the Camp Issue out Writs of Ease The next English Prince of Renown before the Norman Conquest was King Edgar about the year 960. Amongst whose Noble Acts 't is recorded as none of the least memorable that in his Circuits and Progresses through the Countrey he would take Account of the Demeanour of his Lords and especially of his Judges whom he severely Punished if he found them Delinquents Bakers Chron. Fol. 11. Nor have the best and wisest of our Princes since the Conquest been less ready to give up Ill Judges to just Punishment nor our English Parliaments wanting to bring them to it In the pear 1290. being saith Walsingham p. 54. the 17th year of Edw. 1. Justitiarios ferè omnes de falsitate deprehensos a suo Officio deposuit ipsos juxta merita puniens gravi Mulctâ He finding almost all his Judges guilty of Corruption put them out of their places and Punisht them according to their Demerits with heavy Fines Which the Lord Cook in the Second part of his Institutes Fol. 508. likewise takes notice of and tells us That this was done by a Parliament held after the Feast of St. Hillary and only two Judges scap'd scot-free But how severe the Fines of the other Delinquents were appears in Bakers Chronicle fol. 100. Sir Ralph de Hengham says he Chief Justice of the Kings-Bench for Corruption was Fined 7000 Marks Sir John Lovetot one of the Justices of the Common Pleas 3000 Marks Sir William Brompton 6000 Marks Sir Solomon Rochester 4000 Marks Sir Richard Boyland 4000 Marks Sir Walter Hopton 2000 Marks Sir William Saham in 3000 Marks Robert Lithbury Master of the Rolls in 1000 Marks Roger Leicester in 1000 Marks Hugh Bray Escheator and Judge for the Jews 1000 Marks But Sir Adam Stratton Chief Baron of the Exchequer who it seems had been a notable Bribe-fingerer four and thirty Thousand Marks A prodigious Summe allmost 400 years ago And Sir Thomas Wayland Chiefe Justice of the Common-Pleas being found the greatest Offender of all was Attainted of Felony for taking of Bribes and his Lands and Goods Forfeited as appears in the Pleas of Parliament 18 Edw. 1. And he was also Banisht the Kingdom as unworthy to live in that State against which he had so much Offended Sir William Thorp Chief Justice of the Kings-Bench in K. Edw. the Thirds time having of five several persons received five several Bribes which in all amounted to 100 l. was for this alone adjudged to be Hang'd and all his Goods and Lands Forfeited The reason of the Judgment is entred in the Roll in these words Quia praedictus Willielmus Thorpe qui Sacramentum Domini Regis erga populum suum habuit ad Custodiendum fregit malitiosè falsè Rebelliter quantum in ipso fuit Because that as much as in him lay he had broken the Kings Oath made to the People which the King had Intrusted him withall And so much did the then Collective Wisdom of the Nation respect Judges herein that 't is expresly entred that this Judgment should not be drawn into example against any other Officers who should break their Oaths but only against those Qui predictum Sacramentum fecerunt et fregerunt et habent Leges Angliae ad Custodiendum That is only to the Judges that violate their Oaths having the Laws of England Entrusted unto them This Iudgment was given 24 Edw. 3 d. The next year in the Parliament 25 Edw. 3. Numero 10. it was debated in Parliament Whether this Iudgment was Legal and Nullo Contradicente unanimously it was declared to be just and according to the Law and that the same Iudgment may be given in time to come upon the like occasion Which Case I humbly conceive resolves the Case in Law Point Blank thus That it is death for any Judge wittingly to break his Oath in any part of it This Oath of Thorp is entred in the Roll and is the same verbatim with the Iudges Oath in 18 Edw. 3 The same too as I humbly conceive which our Iudges now a days take and is herein afterwards punctually recited The Oaths of our Iudges of England as they bind them to the due
England was to be done whereupon a Scire Facias issued out of the Exchequer reciting the said Writs to warn Mr. Hampden amongst others to shew Cause why he should not be Charged with this Money Upon this he being Summoned Appeared and demanded Oyer of those Writs and Schedule which being Entred he Demurr'd in Law that is demanded the Opinion and Judgment of the Court of Exchequer Whether this Writ were sufficient in Law to Force him to pay the said Twenty Shillings This being a Great and General Case the Barons of the Exchequer desired the Assistance of the rest of the Judges who did Joyn accordingly The Case was argued first by Councel on both Sides and next by the Judges severally of whom Sir Richard Hutton Knight one of the Judges of the Common-Pleas and Sir Richard Crook Knight one of the Judges of the King 's Bench in large and learned Arguments since Printed did shew the Illegality of such Writs and gave their Opinion That the Defendant Hampden ought not to be Charged But the rest of the Judges were resolved to carry the Point for the King and accordingly gave their Opinions That the Defendant ought to be Charged And then it was the Part of the Barons of the Exchequer to give Judgment which was Entred in these Words Quod seperalia Brevia predicta Retorn ' eorundem ac Schedul ' praedict ' eisdem Annex ' ac materia in eisdem content ' sufficient ' in Lege Exist ' ad praefat Johannem Hampdem de predictis viginti solidis super ipsum informa ex causa praedictae Assessae onerand Ideo consideratum est per eosdem Barones quod prâ—â—…ctus Johannes Hampden de eisdem viginti solidis oneretur inde satisfaciat That the said several Writs and Returns thereof and the Schedules thereunto annex't and the Matter in the same contained are sufficient in Law to Charge the said John Hampden with the Twenty Shillings upon him in the Form and by Vertue of the Assessment afore-said imposed Therefore it is considered by the said Barons That the said John Hampden shall be Charged and shall satisfy the same This Judgment was imposed as such an Infallible Determination of the Law in this Case that no further Dispute would be allow'd thereof to any others insomuch that a Person of Honour having a Case depending in the King 's Bench was denyed any Argument or Debate concerning the Right of Ship-Money for no other Reason but that it had been by the former Judgment decided already in the Exchequer It may perhaps be said This Imposition of Ship-Money was small and inconsiderable Mr. Hampden a Gentleman of a fair Fstare was Assessed but Twenty Shillings And Why should any Body-scruple such a petty Business when the King Commanded it Was not the Remedy far worse than the Disease Why should any Subject exspend a great deal of Money in Law to avoid Payment of so Trivial a Sum Or What Harm could accrue to the Publick by the Judges allowing the King Power to Impose such an Assessment when it was for the Defence of the Realm from Eminent and Imminent Danger and he exerted that Power so favourably c. In Answer to such Objections it must be said That true it is it was then only Mr. Hampden's Case but the whole Nation every individual Subject of England was concern'd in it nay so far concern'd that all his Estate and Liberty was therein given up The Question was not Quantum but Quo Jure If Publick Danger might give the King Title to lay Impositions without a Parliament and He alone were Judge of such Danger When might it not be alledged If Twenty Shillings were Assessed on Mr. Hampden that Year How did it appear but Twenty Pounds might be required the next and Two Thousand Pounds the Year following And What Use what Occasion would the Court have had for ever afterwards of a Parliament But as to the Illegality of these Ship-Writs I refer the Reader to Judge Crook's Argument where the same is Demonstrated to be against the Common-Law against divers Statutes not to be maintain'd by any Prerogative or Power Royal unwarrantable by any former Precedents c. Let us see then what were the Consequences of these Extrajudicial Opinions and this Illegal Judgment of the Judges First As to the King They thereby mis-led him as much as in them lay to Discompose the Harmony of Government to Entrench upon the Property of His Subjects and contrary to his Intentions by Colour of Right to violate the Laws which no doubt that Good Prince meant to have preserv'd Inviolable Secondly As to the Subjects They were not only hereby Injured but their Affections Alienated from their Sovereign which to occasion is no doubt a very High because almost Irreparable Treason The Genuine Sense of these Resolutions being no less than this That the King of England as often as Himself pleaseth may declare the Kingdom to be in Danger and that so often His Majesty for Prevention of such Dangers may by His Writ under the Great Seal of England alter the Property of the Subject's Goods without their Consent in Parliamen and that in such Proportions as His Majesty shall think fit And besides may deprive them of the Liberty of their Persons and that in such Manner as Himself shall please Thirdly As to the Judges themselves It prov'd deservedly Fatal For no sooner was a Parliament Call'd but they were call'd to Account for these their Illegal Opinions and Judgment And after a long Debate on Monday the Seventh of December 1640. these Four several Votes Passed upon them without so much as One Negative Voice to any of them viz. First THat the Charge imposed upon the Subjects for the Providing and Furnishing of Ships and the Assessments for Raising of Money for that purpose commonly called Ship-Money are against the Laws of the Realm the Subjects Right of Property and contrary to former Resolutions in Parliament and to the Petition of Right Secondly That the Extrajudicial Opinions of the Iudges Published in the Star-Chamber and Inrolled in the Courts at Westminster before Recited in the whole and in every part of them are against the Laws of the Realm the Right of Property and the Liberty of the Subjects and contrary to former Resolutions in Parliament and to the Petition of Right Thirdly That the Writ to the Sheriff of Bucks particularly Recited and the other Writs commonly called Ship-Writs are against the Laws of the Realm the Right of Property and the Liberty of the Subjects and contrary to former Resolutions in Parliament and to the Petition of Right Fourthly That the Iudgment in Mr. Hampden's Case as before Recited in the matter and substance thereof and in that it was conceived that Mr. Hampden was any way Chargeable is against the Laws of the Realm the Right of Property the Liberty of the Subjects and contrary to former Resolutions in Parliament and to the Petition of Right These
Votes being Transmitted by the Commons to the House of Lords Their Lordships did Concur therein And on Fryday the 26. of February 1640. It was Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in the High Court of Parliament Assembled That the Lord-Keeper or Master of the Rolls the Two Lord Chief Justices and the Lord Chief Baron and likewise the Chief Clerk of the Star-Chamber should bring into the Upper House of Parliament the Records of the Judgment against Mr. Hampden concerning Ship-Money in each of those several Courts and that a Vacat thereof should be made And that a Copy of the Judgment of the Parliament concerning the Illegality thereof should be Delivered to the several Judges of Assize and that they should be required to Publish the same in all the Circuits Which on the 27. of the same February was done accordingly the said Records being Vacated and the Rolls Cross'd with a Pen in the House of Lords and Subscribed with the Clerk of the Parliament's Hand And soon after several of the before-named Judges were Impeached for the same in Parliament And not daring to stand the Shock some of them as the Lord Chief Justice Finch Fled beyond the Seas and others Absconded And soon after came on the Unnatural Civil-Wars so Destructive to King and Kingdom which though no way Justifiable yet it cannot be denyed but they were not a little Occasion'd and the Animosities of the People blown into an Untameable Flame by these base Traiterous Proceedings of those Sycophant Judges And Woe unto those say Sacred Oracles by whom Offences come However after so many dismal Experiences and fair Warnings and the Miraculous Restauration of His present Majesty our Gracious Soveraign whom God long Preserve a Prince of Incomparable Lenity and Good-natur'd beyond Example it might be hoped that none Preferr'd to the Publick Seats of Justice durst to have Acted â—o contrary to His Royal Incimations as to violate those Laws which He Himself has Sworn to Maintain and Intrusted them to Administer Yet so Base and Extravagant are some as even to abuse the Favours of the Best of Princes and puff't up with Preferment will take no Admonition from the Falls of their Head-strong Predecessors but still presume to sully those Ermins the Emblems of Innocency and Integrity which they wear and adventure on the same Destructive Precipices You have heard how heinously our Prudent Ancestors resented the Violation of their Liberties though by an Act in Tryals of the Free-born People of England Without Iuries Next to which is the Ruffing Hectoring and Over-awing of Juries For What real Difference is there betwixt allowing no Juries at all and Menacing them into a Compliance contrary to Law and their own Consciences with the Corrupt Humours and Time serving Interests of ill Judges Of this Crime the Lord Chief Justice Keeling about the Year 1666. a Time when God's General Judgments on this Sinful Land might have awakened them to greater Circumspection and Uprightness was not only Guilty but Question'd for the same even by That very Parliament which was never extraordinarily Celebrated for bringing Publick Vermine to Punishment Yet such a Sense they had of these ill Practises that in their Journal we find the following Votes on this Occasion Die Mecurii 11º Decembris 1667. THE House Resuming the Hearing of the rest of the Report touching the Matter of Restraint upon Juries and upon the Examination of divers Witnesses in several Cases of Restraints put upon Juries by the Lord Chief Justice Keeling Resolved as followeth First That the Proceedings of the said Lord Chief Justice in the Cases now Reported are Innovations in the Tryals of Men for their Lives and Liberties and that he hath used an Arbitrary and Illegal Power which is of dangerous Consequence to the Lives and Liberties of the People of England and tends to the Introducing of an Arbitrary Government Secondly That in the Place of Judicature the Lord Chief Justice hath Undervalued Vilified and Contemned Magna Charta the great Preserver of our Lives Liberties and Property Thirdly That he be brought to Tryal in Order to Condign Punishment in such Manner as the House shall judge most Fit and Requisite And again Die Veneris 13º Decembris 1667. Resolved THat the Precedents and Practice for Fining or Imprisoning of Jurors for Giving their Verdicts is Illegal Here you see the ill Practices of that Chief Justice were Branded in Parliament and he was ordered to be Prosecuted though by reason of the Houses being Prorogued and he himself not long after Dying in Discontent we do not find there were any further Proceedings made therein At the Sessions for London Sept. 1670. William Penn and William Mead Two of the People commonly called Quakers being Indicted For that they the Fourteenth of August before did with others to the Number of Three Hundred in Grace-Church-Street Unlawfully and Tumultuously Assemble c. by reason whereof a great Tumult did there happen in Contempt of the King great Disturbance of the Peace Terror of the People c. And the Jury after having been several times sent back and kept close from the Saturday till the Monday Morning bringing them in Not Guilty Sir John Howel then Recorder of London presumed to Fine the said Jury Forty Marks a Man and to Lye in Prison till paid Being thus in Custody Edward Bushel one of the said Jury-Men brought his Habeas Corpus in the Court of Common-Pleas and upon a long Argument it was Adjudged by the whole Court That the said Fining and Commitment was Illegal Whereupon the said Bushel was Discharged and left to bring his Action for False Imprisonment against the said Recorder Which Case is Reported by Vaughan at that time Chief Justice of the said Court in his Reports Licensed and Approved of by the present Lord Chancellor of England Sir William Scroggs since Lord Chief-Justice of the King 's Bench my Lord North Chief-Justice of the Common-Pleas and all the Judges of England But as to the Illegality of any Courts Imposing upon Menacing Fineing or Imprisoning Juries see a small Treatise Entituled The English-Man's Right Printed for R. Janeway 1680. and another called The Grand Iury-Man's Oath and Office Explained Sold by Langley Curtis on Ludgate-Hill both well worthy the Perusal of every True English-Man What Proceedings have been since or rather are at this instant pendent against Judges for Hectoring of Juries and other Illegal Arbitrary Proceedings are too fresh in every Bodies Memory to need a Recital Instead of which I shall rather Insert the Form of the Oath Taken by Judges at their first Admittance to that Office which runs as follows The OATH of a JUDGE In Dorso Claus ' de Anno 20. Edw. 31. Part. Prima YE shall Swear That Well and Truly ye shall Serve our Sovereign Lord the King and His People in the Office of Justice And that ye shall Counsel our Sovereign Lord the King in His Needs And that ye shall not give any
Administration of Iustice to the Subject according to the Laws which are every Free-mans Birth-Right so also as they be of the Kings Council they are by such their Oaths oblig'd lawfully to counsel him that is whenever their opinions are demanded they are sworn and bound to deliver them according to the Law Let us see how our Ancestors resented these matters In a Parliament held in the 11th year of Richard the 2. there was Iudgment of High-Treason given against 18 several Persons and all save one of them of Eminent Rank Three Privy Counselors viz. The Archbishop of York The Duke of Ireland and Earl of Suffolk the Bishop of Exeter the Kings Confessour Five Knights of whom some had been Servants to Edw. the 3. and all but one Servants to the then King and some of them of Noble Descent but that which I more particularly observe there were amongst them Six Judges and Locton the Kings Serjeant at Law Blake of the Kings Council at Law and Usk the under Sheriff of Middlesex Of these 18 8 were Executed that is Sir Robert Tresilian the Lord Chief Iustice was drawn from the Tower through the midst of London to Tyburn and there Hanged so likewise were Usk and Blake and Sir Iohn Salisbury but the other 4 Knights had the Favour to be Beheaded Three that is the Archbishop of York the Duke of Ireland and the Earl of Suffolk died miserable Fugitives in forreign Parts The other seven whereof five were Judges with much ado got a Pardon as to Life but were banished and their Lands and Goods all forfeited and it was made Felony for any to procure their Recalling home and themselves forthwith to be executed as Traytors if at any time they should presume to return And of these eighteen Persons all save three were impeached by the Commons The Offences which procured these Exemplary Punishments were briefly these King Richard the II. being an unthinking dissolute Prince by the ill counsel of some near his Person there had during his minority happened divers miscarriages in the Government To redress which in a Parliament holden in the tenth year of his Reign and the twentieth of his Age a Commission was awarded to Twelve Peers and others of greatest Wisdom and Ability impowering them to inspect the past management of the Houshold the Revenue the Courts of Justice and in a word all things that did concern the Good of the Realm with full power finally to determine and put all things in excution so as might most tend to the Honour of the King Relief of the People and Safety of the Land which Commission was to endure onely one year Now come five of the Persons above-named viz. the Archbishop the Duke the Earl of Suffolk the Chief Justice and Brembre who seeing themselves like to be called to Account for their pernitious Counsels and Irregularities and to be brought to deserved shame and punishment to avoid the same and continue their Villanies for the future they insinuated to the King That this Commission intrenched upon the Royal Power and was derogatory to the Crown that the procurers thereof had extorted His Royal Assent thereunto in Parliament and that this was Treason for so the Chief Justice and Blake the Kings Council who was advised withal in the Writ declared it to be whereupon Blake was commanded to prepare an Indictment of Treason against all the said Commissioners and against such others as had been most active in procuring that Authority Accordingly he draws the Indictment which stands entred in the Roll and is to this effect That they the said Commissioners c. had Traiterously conspired among themselves to make this Commission by Authority of Parliament against the Royalty of the King to his disherison and in derogation of the Crown and that they forced the Kings Consent and confederated themselves to maintain one another in so doing It was designed that they should be tryed upon this Indictment in Middlesex or London and therefore some of the parties to be prosecuted not being Peers Usk the Under-Sheriff of Middlesex was acquainted with the business who was to return a Pack'd-Iury you see that 's a very old Game that might be sure to do the business which he performing accordingly was therefore hang'd But further the five grand Favourites that the King might the more confide in their Counsels for so are the words of the Record and that under colour of Law they might cover their malice from the King and the Kingdom before the Trials were to be brought on advise the King to demand the Opinion of some of the Judges that is of the two Chief Justices and Chief Baron and the Judges of the Common-Pleas six in all in number and of Locton the Kings Serjeant Blake of the Kings Council at Law was commanded to draw up those Questions who did it accordingly and for drawing the same and the before-mentioned Indictment he was himself Drawn and Hanged The Questions being prepared in Writing the Iudges were sent for to Nottingham Castle where in the Kings own Presence they were commanded upon their Allegiance to deliver their Opinions 1. Whether the Commission was derogatory to the Rights of the Crown They answered It was 2. Whether the persuading and urging the King to consent thereunto in Parliament was Treason They answered That it was Here were other Questions ask'd but these were the Main and those for which they were condemned as appears by the Replication of the Commons to the Iudges Answer and by the Words of the Iudgment That they the said Iudges knew that this Commission was awarded in Parliament c. that it was for the Publick Good That they knew of the Traiterous Intent to destroy the Procurers of this Commission That they knew the Law and that it was not Treason and had delivered such Opinions thereby under colour of Law to cover their Treasonable Intent and therefore Iudgment of High-Treason was given against them and against Locton the Kings Serjeant who had Subscribed these False Opinions with the Iudges And though there be other Articles against the Rest yet this alone is adjudged Treason in the several Iudgments against every one of the Eighteen And 't is observable That in all these Iudgments they are adjudged Traitors as well against the Person of the King as against the Common-wealth And it is there declared upon great Advice taken That in Treasons which concern the King and Kingdom they are not bound to proceed according to the Rules of the Common-Law but according to the Course of Parliaments so as may be for the Common-Good Nor were these Iudgments huddled up in haste but given upon long and mature Deliberation the Work of a Whole Parliament And it is declared in the Roll That they spent long time and took great pains in examining the Evidence the better thereby to satisfie their own Consciences and the World Their Proceedings against the five Plotters were begun the 14 of Novemb. and the