Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	france_n	king_n	prisoner_n	4,350	5	8.4560	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25871	The arraignment, tryal & condemnation of Algernon Sidney, Esq. for high-treason ... before the Right Honourable Sir George Jeffreys ... Lord Chief Justice of England at His Majesties Court of Kingsbench at Westminster on the 7th, 21th and 27th of November, 1683	Sidney, Algernon, 1622-1683, defendant.; Jeffreys, George Jeffreys, Baron, 1644 or 5-1689.; England and Wales. Court of King's Bench.	1684 (1684)	Wing A3754; ESTC R23343	69,533	67

not have his Pardon but he must first do this drudgery of swearing I need not say that his Son should say That he was sorry his Father could not get his Pardon unless he did swear against some others Col. Sidney Call Mr. Blake who appeared My Lord I desire he may be asked whether my Lord Howard did not tell him that he could not get his Pardon yet and he could ascribe it to nothing but that the drudgery of swearing must be over first Then my Lord Chief Iustice asked the Question Mr. Blake My Lord I am very sorry I should be called to give a publick account of a private Conversation how it comes about I don't know My Lord sent for me about six Weeks ago to come and see him I went and we talked of News I told him I heard no body had their Pardon but he that first discovered the Plot he told me no but he had his Warrant for it And says he I have their Word and Honour for it but says he I will do nothing in it till I have further order and says he I hear nothing of it and I can ascribe it to no other reason but I must not have my pardon till the drudgery of swearing is over These words my Lord said I believe my Lord won't deny it Then Mr. Sidney called Mr. Hunt and Burroughs but they did not appear Col Sidney 'T is a hard case they don't appear One of them was to prove that my Lord Howard said he could not have his Pardon till he had done some other Jobs L. C. Iust. I can't help it If you had come for assistance from the Court I would willingly have done what I could Then Col. Sidney mentioned the Duke of Buckingham but he was informed he was not subpaena'd Col. Sidney Call Grace Tracy and Elizabeth Penwick who appeared I ask you only what my Lord Howard said to you at my House concerning the Plot and my being in it Tracy Sir he said that he knew nothing of a Plot he protested and he was sure Col. Sidney knew nothing of it And he said If you knew any thing of it he mustneeds know of it for he knew as much of your concerns as any one in the World Col. Sidney Did he take God to Witness upon it Tracy yes Col. Sidney Did he desire my Plate at my House Tracy I can't tell that he said the Goods might be sent to his House Col. Sidney Penwick What did my Lord Howard say in your hearing concerning the pretended Plot or my Plate carrying away Penwick When he came he asked for your Honour and they said your Honour was taken away by a man to the Tower for the Plot and then he took God to Witness he knew nothing of it and believed your Honour did not neither He said he was in the Tower two years ago and your Honour he believed saved his Life Col. Sidney Did he desire the Plate Penwick Yes And said it should be sent to his House to be secured He said it was only Malice Mr. Wharton stood up Mr. Wharton 'T is only this I have to say That if your Lordship pleases to shew me any of these sheets of Paper I will undertake to imitate them in a little time that you shan't know which is which 'T is the easiest hand that ever I saw in my life Mr. Att. Gen. You did not write these Mr. Wharton Mr. Wharton No but I will do this in a very little time if you please L. C. Iust. Have you any more Witnesses Col. Sidney No my Lord. L. C. Iust. Then apply your self to the Jury Col. Sidney Then this is that I have to say Here is a huge Complication of Crimes laid to my Charge I did not know at first under what Statute they were now I find 't is the Statute of 25 of Ed. 3. This Statute hath two Branches one relating to War the other to the Person of the King That relating to the Person of the King makes the Conspiring Imagining and Compassing his Death criminal That concerning War is not unless it be Levyed Now my Lord I cannot imagine to which of these they refer my Crime and I did desire your Lordship to explain it For to say that a Man did meet to Conspire the King's Death and he that gives you the account of the business does not speak one word of it seems extravagant for Conspiracies have ever their Denomination from that point to which they tend as a Conspiracy to make false Coin infers Instruments and the like A Conspiracy to take away a Woman to kill or rob are all directed to that end So Conspiring to kill the King must immediately aim at killing the King The King hath two Capacities Natural and Politick that which is the Politick can't be within the Statute in that sense he never dies and 't is absur'd to say it should be a fault to kill the King that can't die So then it must be the natural sense it must be understood in which must be done by Sword by Pistol or any other way Now if there be not one word of this then that is utterly at an end though the Witness had been good The next point is concerning Levying of War Levying of War is made Treason there so it be proved by Overt Act but an Overt Act of that never was or can be pretended here If the War be not Levyed 't is not within the Act for Conspiring to Levy War is not in the Act. My Lord There is no Man that thinks that I would kill the King that knows me I am not a Man to have such a design perhaps I may say I have saved his Life once So that it must be by Implication that is It is first imagined that I intended to raise a War and then 't is imagined that War should tend to the Destruction of the King Now I know that may follow but that is not Natural or necessary and being not Natural or necessary it can't be so understood by the Law That it is not it plain for many Wars have been made and the Death of the King has not followed David made War upon Saul yet no body will say he sought his Death he had him under his power and did not kill him David made War upon Ishbosheth yet did not design his Death and so in England and France Kings have been taken Prisoners but they did not kill them King Stephen was taken Prisoner but they did not kill him So that 't is two distinct things to make War and to endeavour to kill the King Now as there is no manner of pretence that I should endeavour to kill the King directly so it can't be by inference because 't is Treason under another Species I confess I am not fit to argue these points I think I ought to have Counsel but if you won't allow it me I can't help it but these things are impossible to be jumbled up together Now

Libel we instance in some particular Words of it But we shall shew you that the whole Design of this Treatise is to perswade the People of England that it is lawful may that they have a right to set aside their Prince in c●se it appear to them that he hath broken the Trust laid upon him by the People Gentlemen he does use in that Treatise several Arguments drawn from the most Rebellious Times that ever were in England from the late Rebellion I must needs use that word notwithstanding the Act of Oblivion when a Gentleman shall now attempt to do those things for which he was pardoned then and from other Kingdoms where Rebellion hath been prosperous against Princes Then he falls to Reasoning and uses great Reason in the Case That all the Power of the Prince is originally in the People and applies that Discourse that the power of the King was derived from the People upon Trust and they had already declared the King had invaded their Rights and therefore he comes to argue they might assume that original power they had conferred And he tells the King that is no hard condition if he thinks it so he should lay down his Crown if not he threatens the condition would be exacted or otherwise should be revenged by those he had betrayed and who but this Gentleman and his Confederates that thought himself not only able to govern this Nation but many Monarchies should call him to account for it For he lays down this Principle That tho all the People do rise against their Prince it is no Rebellion The whole Book is an argument for the People to rise in Arms and vindicate their wrongs He lays it down That the King has no Authority to dissolve the Parliament but 't is apparent the King hath dissolved many therefore he hath broken his Trust and invaded our Rights And at last concludes with that passage laid in the Indictment We may therefore shake off our Yoke for 't is not a Yoke we submitted to but a Yoke by Tyranny that must be the meaning of it they have imposed on us Gentlemen if we prove all these matters to you I doubt not you will do right to the King and Kingdom and shew your abhorrence of those Republican Principles which if put in practice will not only destroy the King but the best Monarchy in the World Mr. Sol. Gen. Pray call Mr. West Who appeared Col. Sidney I pray one word my Lord before Mr. West be sworn I have heard my Lord Mr. West hath confessed many Treasons and I desire to know whether he is pardoned or no. L. C. J. I don't know that Col. Sid. My Lord how can he be a Witness then L. C. Just. Swear him for I know no Legal Objection against him He was a good Witness in my Lord Russel's Tryal Col. Sidney My Lord if another did not except against him 't is nothing to me Mr. North. Pray give an account to the Court of what you know of a general Insurrection intended in England Col. Sidney What he knows concerning me L. C. J. We will take care of that that no Evidence be given but what ought to be Col. Sid. Is it ordinary that he should say any thing unless it be to me and my Indictment L. C. J. Mr. Sidney you remember in all the Tryals about the late Popish Plot how there was first a general account given of the Plot in Coleman's Tryal and so in Plunket's and others I don't doubt but you remember it And Sir William Jones against whose Judgment I believe you won't object was Attorney at that time Mr. North. Mr. West What do you know of the general Insurrection lately designed Mr. West My Lord I have had the honor to know Collonel Sidney several years but I don't remember that I ever saw him from the time I came acquainted with any part of the Conspiracy till the Discovery that was at the Council Mr. North. Pray give an account of what you know of the Plot in general Mr. West My Lord in October last Captain Walcot came to me and told me that my Lord Shaftesbury had designed an Insurrection in November I used some Arguments to disswade him from it But a little afterwards he came and told me the thing was wholly disappointed and then it went off and my Lord Shaftesbury went for Holland Collonel Romsey afterwards about Christmass said there were some Lords and Gentlemen intended to make an Insurrection the persons were the Duke of Monmouth my Lord of Essex my Lord Howard my Lord Russel the Prisoner at the Bar and Mr. Hambden Junior After some time he told me they had altered their measures and were resolved not to venture upon an Insurrection in England till they had a concurrency in Scotland Afterwards I was not privy to any thing else but what I had the Report of from Mr. Nelthorp and Mr. Ferguson Mr. Nelthorp told me the Prisoner had said Col. Sidney My Lord I am very unwilling to interrupt the Gentleman Lord Chief Iustice. You must not interrupt the Witness Go on Sir Mr. West Mr. Nelthorp told me the Prisoner at the Bar had sent Aaron Smith into Scotland and given him a sum of mony to bear his Charges and sent Letters to some Scotch Gentlemen to invite them to Town The Letter bore a Cant of settling some business in Carolina but the business was coming up about the Insurrection After this Mr. Smith returned and some Scotch Gentlemen with him and soon after Mr. Ferguson gave an account of that Affair and said the Scotch proposed if they might have thirty thousand pounds in ready money they would undertake to make an Insurrection in Scotland without the concurrence of England He said this Proposal was agreed to and money would be soon ready and he said that Sheppard would return the money That the Arms were ready bought and my Lord of Argile would go into Scotland and head the Scots He told me when things were thus settled some difference arose about raising the money and at last he told me my Lord Gray did offer to raise ten thousand pounds out of his own Estate if the rest would pay their proportion Then the Scots came down to ' less but that would not be complyed with The places for the Rising were Bristoll Taunton York Chester Exeter London That there had been some Debates whether they should begin at London or the other places and at last it was resolved they should begin at London with the rest of the places My Lord this was the Account I had of the matter in general of Mr. Ferguson but he said they were disappointed Afterwards he told me the Prisoner at the Bar and Major Wildman were very instrumental in working of it off because they could not agree upon the Declaration to be made upon the Insurrection The English were for a Common wealth but the Scotch Gentlemen answered Fairly it might come to it in time but

Fact you say well Col. Sidney I say there are several Judgments of Parliament that doe shew what ever is Constructive-Treason does not belong to any private Court that of 1 Mary 1 E. 6. 1 Eliz. 5 Eliz. 18. another 13 Car shew this Now my Lord I say that the business concerning the Papers 't is only a similitude of hands which is just nothing In my Lady Carrs Case it was resolved to extend to no criminal Cause if not to any then not to the greatest the most Capital So that I have only this to say That I think 't is impossible for the Jury to find this matter for the first point you proved by my Lord Howard that I think is no Body and the last concerning the Papers is only imagination from the similitude of hands If I had published it I must have answered for it or if the thing had been whole and mine I must have answered for it but for these scraps never shewed any Body That I think does not at all concern me And I say if the Jury should find it which is impossible they can I desire to have the Law reserved unto me Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord and you Gentlemen of the Jury The Evidence hath been long but I will endeavour to repeat it as faithfully as I can The Crime the Prisoner stands accused for is compassing and imagining the Death of the King That which we go about to prove that compassing and imagining by is by his meeting and consulting how to raise Arms against the King and by plain matter in writing under his own hand where he does affirm It is lawful to take away and destroy the King Gentlemen I will begin with the first part of it the Meeting and Consultation to raise Arms against the King The Prisoner Gentlemen hath endeavoured to avoid the whole force of this Evidence by saying that this in point of Law can't affect him if it were all proved for this does not amount to a proof of his compassing and imagining the death of the King and he is very long in interpreting the Act of Parliament to you of 25 E. 3. and dividing of it into several Members or Branches of Treason And does insist upon it that tho' this should be an offence within one Branch of that Statute yet that is not a proof of the other which is the Branch he is proceeded upon that is the first Clause against the compassing and imagining the Death of the King And sais he conspiring to Levy War is not so much as one Branch of that Statute but it must be War actually levyed This is a matter he is wholly mistaken in in point of Law It hath been adjudged over and over again That an Act which in one Branch of that Statute may be an overt Act to prove a man Guilty of another Branch of it As levying War is an overt Act to prove a man Guilty of Conspiring the Death of the King And this was adjudged in the Case of Sir Henry Vane so is meeting and consulting to raise to Arms. And reason does plainly speak it to be so for they that conspire to raise War against the King can't be presumed to stop any where till they have Dethron'd or Murdered the King Gentlemen I won't belong in citing Authoritys It hath been setled lately by all the Judges of England in the Case of my Lord Russel who hath suffered for this Conspiracy Therefore that point of Law will be very plain against the Prisoner He hath mentioned some other things as that there must be two Witnesses to every particular Fact and one Witness to one Fact and another to another is not sufficient it hath been very often objected and as often over-ruled It was over-ruled Solemnly in the Case of my Lord Stafford Therefore if we have one Witness to one overt Act and another to another they will be two Witnesses in Law to convict this Prisoner In the first part of our Evidence we give you an account of the general Design of an Insurrection that was to have been that this was contrived first when my Lord Shaftsbury was in England that after my Lord Shaftsbury was gone the business did not fall but they thought fit to revive it again and that they might carry it on the more steadily they did contrive a Counsel among themselves of six whereof the Prisoner at the Bar was one They were the Duke of Monmouth my Lord of Essex my Lord Howard my Lord Russel the Prisoner at the Bar and Mr. Hambden This Counsel they contrived to manage this affair and to carry on that designe that seemed to fall by the Death of my Lord of Shaftsbury and they met this we give you an account of first by Witnesses that gave you an account in general of it And tho' they were not privy to it yet they heard of this Counsel and that Col. Sidney was to be one of this Counsel This Gentlemen If it had stood alone by it self had been nothing to affect the Prisoner at all But this will shew you that this was discours'd among them that were in this Conspiracy Then my Lord Howard gives you an account that first the Duke of Monmouth and he and Col. Sidney met and it was agreed to be necessary to have a Counsel that should consist of six or seven and they were to carry it on That the Duke of Monmouth undertook to dispose my Lord Russel to it and Col. Sidney to dispose the Earl of Essex and Mr. Hambden that these Gentlemen did meet accordingly and the substance of their discourse was taking notice how the design had fallen upon the Death of my Lord Shaftsbury that it was fit to carry it on before mens Inclinations were cool for they found they were ready to it and had great reason to believe it because this being a business communicated to so many yet for all that it was kept very secret and no body had made any mention of it which they looked upon as a certaine argument that men were ready to ingage in it This incouraged them to go on in this Conspiracy Then when the Six met at Mr. Hambden's house they debated concerning the place of rising and the time the time they conceiv'd must be suddenly before Mens minds were cool for now they thought they were ready and very much disposed to it and for place they had in debate whether they should rise first in the Town or in the Country or both together And for the Persons they thought it absolutely necessary for them to have the United Counsels of Scotland to join with them and therefore they did refer this matter to be better considered of another time and they met afterwards at my Lord Russel's House in February and there they had Discourse to the same purpose But there they began to consider with themselves being they were to destroy this Government what they should set up in the room of it to what