as grievances as may appeare by the petition of Remonstrance the Iudges could not be ignorant of this and do take notice of the same in their preamble My Lords In the third place no man is more unwilling to discover the nakednesse of my Fathers if any be then I am yet the question being not whether the Arke should be rescued from the Philistines but whether it should be preserved against the negligence of some Ophni and Phines in their hands that have the custodie of it Therefore I must obey and as I am Commanded I will offer unto your Lordships how the preamble and answers of the Iudges might bee sufficient and wherein they are both defective and dangerous The Iudges in the first reason of their preamble insist much upon the want of president in this kinde onely one president in the raigne of King Richard the seconds time which they pray may not be drawne into example My Lords This reason requires a more cleere explanation which wee hope shall be demaunded in due time It urgeth us to this just protestation that before the best flower in his Majesties Royall garland should wither wee shall be ready to water the same with showers of our bloud even to the last drop in his Majesties service and with our lives and substance will mantayne the just prerogative of our gracious Lord King Charles and his posteritie whom wee pray God to flourish on earth over us and ours untill all flesh bee convoked before the last great Tribunall Yet My Lords that president might be spared by the Iudges of this no more for the present I will not exasperate had they pleased more naturall presidents might be stood upon and easily found and even in that ill remembred president if the Iudges in Richard the seconds time had made direct and lawfull answers they had escaped punishment and prevented many inconveniences which ensued My Lords if presidents be necessarie of many I will enumerate a few Deutronomy cap. 17 vers. 8. Si difficile ambiguum c. Almightie God directs us the way to truth Deutronom cap. 32. vers. 7. Interroga patrem tuum c. The Romanes sent to Greece for a declaration of their lawes in causes like to happen Tit. Liv. decad. 3. fol. 45. g. Lancelotus de Ecclesiasticis Constitutionibus tit. 3. Canonum alij sunt decreta Concjliorum alij statut ' îalij dicta sanctorum Rottoman de Iure Civili tit. 4. Praetorum dicta responsa prudentum which cannot bee without questions venerable Bede lib. 1. cap. 27. S. Augustine demaunded generall questions M. Sleiden super Eadmerum fol. 171. VVilliam the Conqueror did call to the Iudges to declare and compile Edgars lawes and S. Edwards lawes which were buried and forgotten by the interruption of the Danish governement In the time of King Henr. 3. certaine knights of Ireland desired resolutions in England concerning Coparcenerie and received resolutions according to the lawes of England and this in Parliament as appeares in the statute called statut de Hiber 14. Henr. 3. in the printed Booke Ordinationes factae de statut ' terr' Hiberniae at large in the Roll of 7. Edw. 2. parte prima memb. 3. 18. Rot ' Claus. anno 2. Edw. 3. membr. 17. Rex concedit quod ad primum Parliamentum omnes Hiberni qui volueâ—int legibus utantur Angliae sine Cartis inde fiendis Rot. Claus. anno 5. Edw. 3. parte prima membr. 25. The same law in Case of wardships Ordinationes pro Regimine Hiberniae 5. Edw. 3. Pat ' membr. 25. 35. Edw. 3. parte prima memb 9. which Consilium ought to bee understood of the Parliament as hereafter I will declare Ordinatio facta de ministris Regis in Hibernia Claus. 18. Edw. 3. parte secunda memb. 9. 17. ann. 20 Edw. 3. parte prima in dorso anno 25. Edward 3. membr. 30. My Lords I have not yet learned how Sillogismes can be made or answers Cathegoricall without propositions I am as ignorant after what manner Ordinances or reformation could bee made without questions or propositions It may be objected that the word Quere or Question is new that word was nothing strange in Edward the thirds time Rot. Parliament 21. Edw. 3. num 41. The Commons in Parliament prayed that it may be inquired how it comes to passe that the King hath no benefit of his land of Ireland considering hee had more there then any of his ancestors may it not be as lawfull to inquire in this Parliament wherefore the King is in debt and yet his people here gave him more supplies then to any of his ancestors or wherefore his lawes are not observed I find no difference In the printed yeare Booke 2. Rich. 3. fol. 9. the King propounded severall questions to the Iudges in the Star-chamber in Cases not then depending Their second reason is fully answered to the first and for more cleare satisfaction the words of the writ which bring them hither are viz. to give Counsell circa ardua urgentia negotia regni the matters now in agitation are maxime ardua maxime urgentia The yeare bookes of law doe prove Provisiones Ordinationes and no cause is said to bee depending f. N. B. 32. d. 39. Edw. 3. 7. b. Thorp The Lords being assembled can make Ordinances as strong as a statute by the opinion of that Iudge such Ordinances cannot be avoyded but in Parliament an act or statute may bee avoyded or repealed in Parliament Where they say that the Questions though in number but twenty two yet they include fifty two questions that all the affaires of Church Common-wealth may bee included in the resolution thereof and that they will not bee concluded by their answers to the same My Lords the house of Commons made the questions so many as they are for the more cleare explanation of their candid intentions and not for difficultie whereas they might reduce them to fewer but to the end the answers might be the more punctuall and satisfactorie unto positive points and knowne law and the custody of the law the great treasure of the Land being committed by his Sacred Majesty to their trust to the end they should declare how and after what manner they issued and dispensed that treasure and discharged that great trust and not to bee bound by their resolutions in Parliament For Iudges are and ought to bee bound by resolutions in Parliament and not Parliaments by them To their fourth reason what succeeding ages will doe we do well hope they will not do amisse that no occasion shall bee administred hereafter which may inforce the house of Commons to propound the like questions That by reason the Kings prerogative and the concernment of his other interests they cannot answer without his Majesties especiall direction considering the duties of their places and their Oathes My Lords It is
manifest that by their Oathes they are bound to interprete the lawes truely betweene the King and his people and betweene partie and partie and if in any Case granted it cannot be denyed when the Common-wealth desires a Declaration of the law in certaine points wherein they conceive their just liberties to have beene invaded least under colour of prerogative which the Parliament holds to be sacred some ministers may presume as of late they have endevored to destroy the peoples just liberties In the ordinarie Courts of Iustice the Iudges upon Oath are bound to afford the subject Iustice against the King and all others and are appointed by his Majesty for that purpose all writs are in his Majesties name in the Kings bench the pleas are styled Coram Rege Letters-patents and writs originall are Teste me ipso the King is therefore present in Parliament being the highest tribunall where in truely he sits in the exaltation of Royaltie and greatnesse Therefore the Commands of all his ordinary Courts are the commands of the King much more Commands in Parliament where his presence is more apparant and essentiall then in all other Courts of this kingdome It appeares copiously by the great Charter and by constant practise of all Parliaments since that time that all Courts and Iudges were regulated by Parliaments as for the Kings prerogative or revenue the Iudges cannot bee ignorant but the Parliament is and ever hath beene the best mantayner of his just prerogatives the best overseer of his revenue which if it fall short they onely are able and willing to supply It is true that the abuses of former times might be reformed for the future by Bils to bee past as statutes Yet that is away about and we may not loose the possession of our lawes and just liberties nor by new statutes admitt impunitie or give countenance to past offences statutes of this kind sufficient were already enacted and passed in former ages The declaration of a knowne law and the manifestation of wholesome statutes already established well may helpe the Common-wealth for the present but cannot in any probabilitie fall out hereafter to be prejudiciall to the state or Commonwealth and there is no president or example of any such prejudice It is confessed that most of the matters contayned in the Questions are alreadie voted for grievances in both houses and that very justly but how the law is therein remaynes yet to be declared as to this present Parliament which I hope in due time shall bee declared according to law and justice as in many Parliaments before the same or the like hath beene often done Where they doe againe insist upon the want of president and withall that in the preamble to the Questions the protestation cleares the law This word President strikes close unto us I have answered it before by presidents yet some more presidents I will offer as often as they speake the word president 7. 8. Elizabeth Dy. fol. 241. b. placit. 49. The Kings Atturney demanded the opinion of the Iudges 9. Elizab. Dy. 261. placit. 28 Casus Hiber where the Iudges of England signed their opinions to questions propounded by the Iudges of Ireland 11. Eliz. Dy. fol. 282. b plac 26. Casus Hiber 19. 20. Elizab. Dy. 360. The Case of arraignement of a Peere the like 13. CÃ roli by all the Iudges of England the Earle of Ormonds Case and yet in none of these Cases the matter was depending before them Notwithstanding the protestation may cleare the law yet in all precedent ages lawes cleare in themselves for their greater honor and countenance they have beene declared and enacted in Parliament The Law declared by Magna Charta was cleare before yet it was enacted 9. Henr. 3. and in thirty Parliaments since Cooke 8. 19. b. Primes Case the statute of praerog Regis And the statute of 25. Edw. 3. of treasons is declarative and so are many other statutes Adam eate the forbidden fruite Cain killed his brother God demaunded whether this was done yet he could not be ignorant of the fact The first article in the Civill and Canon law Courts is whether there is such a law all this is done for illustrations sake My Lords The ground of the Questions and the preamble to the writing styled an Answer kept me so long that I feare much to have trespassed upon your patience and yet the importance of the cause urgeth me to importune your Lordships favour a little further This Question is short and yet comprehensive that we are a free people is confessed to my hands to that part of the answer I doe not except the second part of the Question is whether wee are to be governed by the lawes of England and statutes of force in Ireland onely First though I need not prove it yet it is cleare we ought to bee so governed Matth. Paris historia maiori fol 121. Sir Iohn Davis discovery of Ireland fol. 100. King Henry the second held a Parliament at Lismore in Ireland in which Parliament Leges consuetudines Angliae fuerunt gratanter acceptae by the representative body of this whole Nation Magna Charta and other beneficiall statutes of England are here in the red Booke of the Exchequer in and since King Iohns time and so is Gervasius Tilberiensis of the Course and Officers of the Exchequer in the white booke of the Exchequer of Ireland leges consuetudines Angliae received in Ireland by Parliament otherwise this appeares 9. Iohn pat membr. 2. 1. Henr. 3. pat memb. 13. 10. Hen. 3. pat membr. 4. 12. Henr. 3. claus. membr. 8. by which words and by the constant practise of all ages since this kingdome was governed and ought to be so by the law of England as the law of the land which law as it was alwayes here received consists of three parts First the Common-law Secondly the generall customes of England Thirdly statutes here received The Common-law that is cleared already Customes as Tenant by the Curtesie Inne-keepers to be responsible for things within their houses or the like when we speake of a Custome in the law it must be intended a generall Custome over the Realme and no particular Custome And this appeares by the yeare bookes of 37. Henr. 6. fol. 5. 21. Henr. 7. 17. 18. Particular customes as Gavelkiâ—d Boreugh English-tenant right or the like are not to be intended when wee speake generally of Custome and these Customes are warranted by the Common-law of England being not contrary to the same but praeter legem so there may bee and are particular customes here praeter legem and yet not contrary to law as in many Corporations and Countries so the wives third of goods is good in England by the custome of many counties and places F. N. B. 122. 7. Edward 4. 21. 40. Edw. 3. 38. 17. Edw 2. f. detinue 58. Therefore it is not contrary to law that such a
custome is here over all the kingdome And yet if any man aske the question by what law wee are governed there is no proper answer other then by the law of England And for the statutes of England generall statutes were received in this kingdome some at one time some at another and all generall statutes by Poynings Act anno 10. Henr. 7. but no other statute or new introducting law untill the same be first received and enacted in Parliament in this kingdome and this may appeare by two declarative statutes the one 10. Henr. 4. the other 29. of Henr. 6. The law of England as it is the best humane law so it is a noble and sociable law and for the more cleere discerning of the truth and equall administration of Iustice it referres many causes to their genuyn and naturall proceedings as Maritime causes to the Court of Admiralty Co. Institutes 260. 361. Stamford 57. b. Co. 5. 106. 107 Constables Case and there the proceeding is by the Civill law Co 8 47. b. Matters beyond the Seas are determined in the Court of constable and Marshall Cookes institutes 391. b. matters of Latin the law referres to Grammarians Com. fol. 122. matters meerely Ecclesiasticall to bee tryed and determined in the proper Courts Coke 7. 43 b 8. Co. 68. 5. Co. 57. 1. R. 3. 4. matters of merchandize to Marchants 34. Henr. 8. Dy 52 54. Many other cases upon this learning are to be found Co. 9. fol. 30. 31. 32. Strat. Marclads case Yet in all these and the like Cases the tryall and determination thereof are bounded and controuled by the rules of the Common-law they are as Rivers which are necessary to run through the land to helpe the inhabitants thereof but if they overflow the bankes the bankes are made higher and stronger to suppresse their violent current so in all the cases aforesaid and the like The Common-law hath limitted the proceedings if they exceede their bounds witnesse the prohibitions in all our Bookes and the statutes of Provision and praemunire and cases there upon in many ages by which it is manifest that the Supreame and governing law are the Common-law Common-customes and statutes of the Realme and the rest but ministers and servants unto it brevia remediana are onely by the Common-law mandatoria may bee in the said other cases 7. Co. Calvins case Dy. 176. So that the answer as to the words in the generall is short and ought to be positive As to the Courtes of equitie they have beene ancient in England and the Courts of eqnity here ought to bee guided by the constant proceedings in England in ages past I meane not by this or that Chancellor but by that naturall and just equity in the Courts here observed This equitie is of absolute necessitie in many cases ipsae etenim leges capiunt ut jure regantur and therefore is included within the law of the Land and not to bee devided from it as out of this writing it may bee inferred As to the case of killing in rebellion to operate an Attaynder if this bee no law in England it cannot bee law here vide Dame-hales case com 263. a. 8. Edw. 3. 20. fitz Dower 106. Cromptons Iurisdiction fol. 84. a. by which it may be urged that it is an Attaynder for that hee prevented the judgement of law by fighting against the Crowne and by his killing therein which ensued his unlawfull and trayterous act but I observe to the contrary the books of 7. Henr. 4. 32 b. Cook 4. 57. Sadlers case I doe confesse that in England statutes may be obsolete as the statute of VVilliam Butler by which the heire may have an action of wast Rastall 5. 21. all the books are contrary and so is the statute of Merton of disparagment as to an action to bee brought for the same so are some antiquated lawes 40. Edw. 3. 42. 42. ass 8. 25. one present aiding to murder was accessary but now is principall 4. Hen. 7. 18. Com. 99. 100. a Vicar could not anciently have an action against a Parson 40. Edw. 3. 28. Finchden the law is now otherwise and so of an entry upon a feoffee with warranty sit fol. 23. 24. in the case of disparagement give the reason because that those statutes and lawes were never used therfore obsolete our case is nothing like for life liberty and propertie being in debate but an obsolete law is no law in force Therefore the answer as to that is defective As to the case of a fellon upon his keeping and terrifying of the people I conceive the answer is uncertaine and dangerous if such a fellon raise an armed power against the Crowne and terrifie that way no doubt this is treason within the statute of 25. Edw. 3. or the equity of it and by the statute of 10. Hen. 7. cap. 13. in Ireland statuto Hiberniae fol. 62. but if such terrifying be without raising armes or by committing the same or the like fellonies it is no more then the case of purse-takers by force in the high wayes of England many a man was terrified thereby in Salisbury-plaine and yet no treason and if there be no statute here which is not in England to make it treason certainly it cannot be treason since the Conquest writ of error have been brought for to reverse Iudgments given in the Kings Bench here in the Court of Kings Bench in England no course here which is contrary to law can alter the law of England therefore to what purpose is a declaration of Iudges here contrary to the law there This writ of error is a writ framed in the Register and appeares by common experience I will offer a notable case which I saw adjudged in the Kings Bench in England Pasc 18. Iacobi for Stafford against Stafford in a writ of error for to reverse a Iudgment given in the Kings Bench in Ireland when Sir VVilliam Iones was Chiefe Iustice here in an ejectione firme for that in the declaration there was contained among other things ducentas acras Montani Sir VVilliam Iones being in England affirmed the course here to have been so and vouched many notable Presidents thereupon an order was conceived that Sir Iames Ley Sir Humphry VVinch and Sir Iohn Denham knights who were formerly Chiefe Iustices here should certifie the course who made report that the course in Ireland was and ought to be in writts originall and Iudiciall to be directed by the Register in pleading to be guided by the books of entries and thereupon the Iudgement was reversed And the Chiefe Iustice Mountague said that if they did not proceed in Ireland according to law they should learne it And so I conclude that the answer to the first Question is insufficient As touching the second Question which is concerning the Oath which this Iudges doe take the question is whether the Iudges of the land doe take the Oath of Iudges And if so c.
No Freeman shall be taken imprisoned put off his freehold liberties free customes c. other then by the lawfull judgement of his Peeres as by the law of the land This great assurance in the 38. Chap. of the same statute was granted for the King and his successors to all his people and was confirmed in thirty Parliaments as I said before Cooke 8. the Princes Case by the statute of 5. Edw. 3. cap. 9. 25. Edw. 3. Cap. 4. 28. Edw. â— cap. â— 42. Edw. 3. cap. 1 â— The great Charter is againe confirmed and not onely so but proceedings contrary to the same before the King or his Counsell are declared voyde The King is to observe and mantayne the law the Iudge by his Oath 18. Edward â— is bound to doe right betweene the King and his people and that right strengthens the Kings prerogative presidents or practise contrary to so many statutes are of no use in many ages past encroachments were made upon these just liberties which were alwayes removed by Parliaments Yet I must confesse that of all antiquity some pleas have beene held in the Kings Royall house as in the Court held by the Marshall of the Kings houshold for things arising within the Verge Fleta lib. 2. cap. 2. but when that Court exceeds its due bounds declaratory statutes were alwayes made to meete them as mischiefes in the common-wealth when they medled with land or the like as appeares by the statute of Articule super Chartam 28. Edw. 1. 15. R. 2. cap. 12. all these statutes My Lords and many more to this purpose are undenyably of force in this kingdome and none of them can be with impunitie said to be obsolete or antiquated My Lords they raise another doubt viz that as the King may grant cognizance of pleas to Corporations or the like and therefore to the Councell-table if this neede an answer I will answer it thus that a grant of cognizance never was neyther can it be otherwise then to proceede per legem terrae or per judicium parium in the same manner as Courts doe proceede at Common-law and not upon paper petitions or summary hearings such cognizance was never granted the King is at losse by such proceedings he looseth fines upon originals he looseth amerciaments and fines incident to every judgement at Common-law as I said before I he subject undergoeth an inconvenience First the law will decline writs originall will by disuse be forgotten Clerks who should draw them discouraged to learne legall proceedings out of doores being the foundation of the law and in stead of regular and orderly proceeding rudenesse and barbarisme introduced the subject will loose the benefit of his attaynte and writ of error by which the law might relieve him against false verdicts or erroneous judgments he will loose the benefit of his warranty which might repaire a purchaser in case his acquired purchase were not good Whereas if a Iudge or Iuror doe wrong the remedy is at hand but against the Lord Deputy and Councell who will seeke for it therefore the countenance of this Iudicature in Common-pleas is against the Kings prerogative and the peoples just rights both which the Iudges ought to maintaine and likewise against the intent of your Lordships order My Lords as in England the said severall statutes were made to prevent the inconveniences aforesaid one good statute was made in Ireland 28. Henr. 6. cap. 2. Irish statut fol. 15. which directs matters of Interest to be determined in the Common-pleas matters of the Crowne in the Kings-bench matters of equity in the Chancery This law if there were no more regulates the proceedings in this kingdome The Iudges insist upon the words in the end of that statute viz. Saving the Kings prerogative My Lords this was stood upon at the late great tryall in England and easily answered for by the Common-law the King may by his prerogative sue in any of the foure Courts for his particular interest although it be contrary to the nature of that Court for he may sue à Quare impedit in the Kings Bench the like yet so as the said suite be bounded by the rules of law I will demaund a question whether the King may bring à Quare impedit in paper at the Councell-board the Kings now Atturney I am confident will answer me he cannot The word salvo or saving is in construction of law of a thing in esse or existente and no creative word 26. Ass pla 66. and cannot in the Kings Case be construed to overthrow the law nor many expresse and positive acts of Parliament My Lords in all humblenesse and dutie I will and must acknowledge his Majesties Sacred and lawfull prerogative whereof the King himselfe is the best expositor in his answer to the Petition of right Poltons stat fol. 1433. he declares that his prerogative is to defend the peoples libertie and the peoples libertie strenghtens the Kings prerogative the answer was a Kingly answer and More â—ajorum this is conformable to the great Charter and to all the statutes before recited The government of England being the best in the world was not onely Royall but also politicke some other princes like Cain Nemrod Esau and the like hunters of men subverted lawes The Kings of England maintayned them and did never assume the power to change or alter the lawes as appeares by Fortescue that grave and learned Lord Chancellor in King Henry the sixts time de laudibus legum Angliae cap. 9. fol. 25. and in the same Booke cap. 36. fol. 84. nor to take his peoples goods nor to lay taxe nor tallage upon them other then by their free consent in Parliament this appeares by the Booke Cases in 1â— Henr. 4. fol. 14. 15. 16. the great case of the Awlnage of London and in the Case of toll-travers and toll-through 14. Henr. 4. 9 37. Henr. 6. 27. 8. Henr. 6. 19 all agreeing nor to alter the nature of land as by converting land at Common-law to Gavelkind or Borrough English or e conuerso as to the estate otherwise as to the person of the King Ple. Com. the Lord Barclyes Case fol. 246. 247. Yet it is most true that the law of the land gives the King many naturall and great prerogatives farre beyond all other men as may appeare in the said Case fol. 243. but not to doe wrong to any subject Com. 246. The person of the King is too sacred to doe a wrong in the intention of Law if any wrongs bee done his ministerâ— are Authors and not the King And the Kings just prerogatives by the Kings Royall assent in Parliament were bounded limited and qualified by severall Acts of Parliament as if Tenant in cap. did alien at Common-law without licence this was a forfeyture of his estate Plo Com. case of mines fol. 332. the statutes of 2. Edw. 3. cap 14. makes this only finable the statute of Magna Charta cap. 21.
sine licentia Domini Regis Fitz. Natur. br fol. 85 the words of this writ cleares the Common-law in the point it begins with a datum est nobis intelligi c. The King being informed that such person or persons in particular doe intend to goe whether ad partes exteras viz. foraigne Countries to what purpose to prosecute matters to the prejudice of the King his Crowne the King in such a case by his writ warrant or Command under the great Seale privie Seale privy Signet or by proclamation may command any subject not to depart the kingdome without the Kings licence this writ is worthy to be observed for the causes aforesaid therein expressed the writ extendeth only to particular person or persons not to all the subjects of the kingdome no man can affirme that England is pars extera as to us Ireland is annexed to the Crowne of England and governed by the lawes of England our question set forth the cause viz. to appeale to the King for Iustice or to goe to England for other lawfull causes whereas the said writ intends practises with foraigne Princes to the prejudice of the King and his Crowne At the Common-law if a subject in contempt of this Command went ad partes exteras his Lands and goods ought to be seized 2. 3. Philip Mary Dy. 128. b. and yet if the subject went to the parts beyond the Seas before any such speciall inhibition this was not punishable before the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. as appeares 12. 13. Elizab. Dy. 296. a. So that before the inhibition the law was indifferent now the question is at Common-law whether the subject of Ireland having no Office can be hindered to appeale or goe to the King for Iustice The King is the fountaine of Iustice and as his power is great to command so the Scepter of his Iustice is as great nay the Scepter hath the priority if any be for at his Coronation his Scepter is on his right side his Sword on his left side to his Iustice he is sworne therefore if any writ Commandement or proclamation bee obtayned from him or published contrary to his Iustice it is not the act of the King but the act of him that misinformed him then will I adde the other words of the question viz. or other his lawfull occasions as I said before in the case of a writ of error in the Kings Bench of England or in the Parliament of England which are remedies given by the law therefore the Common-law doth not hinder any man to prosecute those remedies which are given to everie subject by the same A scire facias may be brought by the King in England to repeale a patent under the great Seale of Ireland of lands in Ireland 20. Henr. 6. fol. a. An exchange of lands in England for lands in Ireland is a good exchange in law 8. ass placit. 27. 10. Edw. 3. fol. 42. tempor Edw. 1. Fitz voucher 239. What law therefore can prohibit any subject for to attend this scire facias in England or to make use of his freehold got by exchange The law being thus then it was considered what alteration was wrought by one branch of the statute of 5 Rich. 2. cap. 2. by which the passage is stopped out of the kingdome Lords notable Marchants and the Kings souldiers excepted I conceive this statute doth not include Ireland I never heard any Irishman questioned upon this statute for going into England nor any Englishman for comming into Ireland untill the late proclamation by the statute 34. Edw. 3. c. 18. in England all persons which have their heritage or possessions in Ireland may come with their beasts corne c. to and fro paying the Kings dues The statute of 5. Rich. 2. did never intend by implication to avoyde the said expresse statute of Edw. 3. betweene the Kings two kingdomes being governed by one law in effect the same people the words of the statute of 5. Rich. 2. are observable the principall scope of it is against the exportation of Bullion in the later part there is a clause for licences to be had in particular Portes by which I conceive that the Customers of those Portes may grant a let passe in such Cases It is therefore to be considered whether that branch of the said statute of 5. Rich. 2. was received in Ireland I thinke it is cleare it was not for by the statute 10. Henr. 7. cap. 22. in Ireland all the generall statutes of England were received in Ireland with this qualification viz. such as were for the Common and publicke weale c. And surely it cannot be for the weale of this kingdome that the subjects here be stayed from obtayning of Iustice or following other lawfull causes in England The statute of 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland excuseth absentes by the Kings command and imposeth no other penaltie so that upon the whole matter this question is not answered For so much as they doe answer of this question the answer is good for there is no doubt to be made but Deaneries are some donative some elective and some may be presentative according to the respective foundations I will only speake of a Deane de facto if a Deane bee made a Bishop and hath a dispensation Decanatus dignitatem in commenda in the retinere the confirmation of such a Deane is good in law This was the case of Evans and Acough in the Kings Bench in England Ter. 3. Caroli where Doctor Thornbow Deane of Yorke was made Bishop of Limmericke with a dispensation to hold in the retinere after his patent and before consecration it was adjudged his confirmation was good and yet if a Deane be made a Bishop in any part of the world this is a Cession Co. 5. 102. a. VVindsors case Davis Rep. 42. 43. c. The Deane of Fernes his case 18. Elizab. Dy. 346. the confirmation of a meere Laicus being Deane is good though he be after deprived 10. Eliz. Dy. 273. 12. 13. Elizab. Dy. 293. although the Deane be after deprived by sentence declaratorie yet his precedent confirmations are good So I conceive that a Deane who hath stallum in Choro vocem in Capitulo during all the time of his life and never questioned and usually confirmed all Leases without interruption is good And to question all such acts 40. 50. 100. yeares after is without president especially in Ireland untill of late yeares and in this kingdome few or no foundations of Bishopricks or Deaneries can bee found upon any Record therefore I conceive the Iudges ought to answer this part of the question My Lords I know you cannot forget the grounds I layd before for this question nor the time nor the occasion of the issuing of Quo warrantoes nor what was done thereupon in the Court of Exchequer Now remayneth to consider of the answer
processe of distringas out of the second remembrance Office to distrayne the tenants ad faciendum homagium or pro homagio suo respectuaÌ„do upon which processe the Shiriffes returneth issues And if the Tenant doe not therupon appeare and compound with the King to give a fine for respite of homage then the issues are forfeyted to the King for his contempt but if he appeare then the Court of Exchequer doth agree with him to respite his homage for a small fine wherein they regulate themselves under the rate expressed and set downe in England by vertue of a privie Scale in the 15. yeare of Queene Elizabeth whereby the rates are particularly set downe according to the yearely value of the Lands which rates are confirmed by act of Parliament in 1. Iacob Regis cap. 26. in England before which time there was not any such certayntie but the same rested in the discretion of the Court by the rule of Common-law and so it doth at this day in Ireland howbeit we conceive that the Court of Exchequer here doe well to regulate their discretions by those rates in England and rather to be under then to exceede the same which the Barons there doe as they doe informe us that are Iudges of the other Courts 13. To the 13. they say that they know no rule of Law or statute by which it should be ceÌ„surable in the subjects of this kingdome to repayre into England to appeale unto his Majesty for redresse of injuries or for other their lawfull occasions unles they be prohibited by his Majesties writ or proclamation or other his Command But they find that by the statute of 5. Rich. 2. the passage of the subject out of the Realme is prohibited without speciall licence excepting Noblemen others in the said statute specially excepted some inference to that purpose may be made upon the statute of 25. Hen 6 cap. 2. in this kingdome 14. To the 14. they say that some Deanries dignities not Deanes or dignitaries as the question propounds it are properly de mero jure donative by the King some Elective some Collative according to the first foundation usuage of such Churches they humbly desire that they may not be required to give any further answer to this question for that it may concerne many mens estates which may come judcially in question before them 15. To the 15. they say that they conceive that where priviledges are claymed by any body politicke or other the Kings Counsell may exhibite à quo-warranto to cause the parties clayming such priviledges to shew by what warrant they clayme the same that the Court cannot hinder the issuing of processe at the instance of the Kings Atturney or hinder the Kings Atturney to exhibite such informations But when the case shall upon the proceedings be brought to judgment then not before the Court is to take notice and give judgâ—ment upon the merite circuÌ„stances of the cause as upon due consideration shal be conceived to be according to law in which case the Iudges or the Kings Atturney as they conceive ought not to be punished by any ordinary rule of law or statute that they know But for the particular case of Quo-warranto for that it hath beene a great question in this present Parliament so concernes the highest Court of justice in this kingdome also concernes two other of his Majesties Courts of justice therin his Majesties prerogative in those Courts they say that they cannot safely deliver any opinion therein before it comes judicially before them and that they heare it argued and debated by learned Counsell on both sides 16. To the sixteenth they say that although the Iurors be sole Iudges of the matter of fact yet the Iudges of the Court are Iudges of the validitie of the evidence and of the matters of law arising out of the same wherein the Iury ought to be guided by them And if the Iury in any criminall cause betweene the King and party give their verdict contrary to cleere and apparent evidence delivered in Court they have beene constantly and still ought to be censured in the Star-chamber in England and Castle-chamber here for this misdemeanor in perverting the right course of justice in such fines and other punishment as the merites circumstances of the cause doth deserve according to the course of the said Courts for that their consciences ought to be directed by the evidence and not to bee misguided by their wills or affections And if the Iury know any matter of fact which may eyther better or blemish their evidence they may take advantage thereof but they ought to discover the same to the Iudges And they say that this proceeding in the Court of Castle-chamber is out of the same grounds that writs of attaint are against a Iury that gives a false verdict in a Court of Record at the Common-law betwixt partie and partie which false verdict being found by a Iury of twenty foure notwithstanding that the first Iurie were Iudges of the fact yet that infamous judgement was pronounced against the first Iury which is next or rather worse then judgment to death and did lay a perpetuall brand of perjury upon them for which reason it was anciently called the villanous judgement and they say that the law to direct the punishment for such offences is the course of the said Court which is a law as to that purpose the statute of 3. Henr. 7. cap. 1. and other statutes in force in this kingdome 17. To the seventeenth they say they can answer no otherwise then they have in their answer to the next precedent question 18. To the eighteenth they say that in a Legall construction the statute of Magna Charta in which the words Salvo contenemento are mentioned is only to be understood of amerciaments not of fines yet where great fines are imposed in terrorem upon the reducement of them regard is to be had to the abilitie of the persons 19. To the nineteenth they say that if one doth steale a sheepe or commit any other felony and after flyeth the course of justice or lyeth in woods or mountaynes upon his keeping yet doth he not thereby become a Traytor neyther doth a Proclamation make him so the chiefe use whereof in such a Case is to invite the partie so standing out to submit himselfe to justice or to forewarne others of the danger they may runne into by keeping him company or giving him mayntenance and reliefe whereby he may the rather submit to Iustice 20. To the twentieth they say that the testimony of Rebels or Traytors under protection of Theeves or other infamous persons is not to bee used or pressed as convincing evidence upon the tryall of any man for his life and so is his Majesties printed instructions as to persons condemned or under protectioÌ„ yet the testimony of such persons not condemned being fortified with other concurring
with other proofes is not materiall for other proofe will doe the deede without this bad concurrence and so will a violent presumption as if two goe safe into a Roome one of them is found stabbed to death the other may suffer this presumption is inevitable the law of God the lawes and statutes of the Realme protect and preserve the life of man it were therefore hard to take away by circumstance such a reall and noble essence This concurrence marrs the evidence it helps it not If one gives false testimonie once by the ancient law his testimonie shall never be received againe Leges Canuti Regis Lamb Saxons lawss fol. 113. p. 34. much lesse where they are notorious ill doers this and the reason and ground of this question already opened will I hope give your Lordships satisfaction For this question I will state it without any tenure reserved by expresse words as the question is put whether the reservation of rent or Annuall summe will rayse this to bee a tenure in capite I conceive it will not for sundrie reasons First from the beginning there have beene Fayres and Markets and no president booke-case or Record to warrant the new opinion in this Case before Trinitie terme 1639. in the Court of wards Secondly the practise of that Court was alwayes before to the contrary in the same and the like Cases Thirdly it is a thing as the question is of new creation and never in esse before for this see the Bookes of 3. Henr. 7. 4. 12. Henr. 7. 19. 15. E. 4. 14. 46. E. 3. 12. 21. Henr. 6. 11. Stamford prerogative 8. Therefore there is no necessitie of a tenure thereof upon the Conquest it was necessarie that all lands should be held by some tenure for the defence of the kingdome 1. The statute of Quia emptores terrarum c. praerogativa Regis speake of Feoffator Feoffatores c. therefore a tenure I meane this tacite or implyed tenure was originally onely intended of Land 2. The King may reserve a tenure in all things not mainerable by expresse reservation or Covenant 44. Edw. 3. 45. Fitz. natur brevium 263. c. but that is not our Case 3. Heere it is left to construction of Law which is aequissimus Iudex and lookes upon the nature of things and therefore in Cases that include Land or where land may come in liew therof a tenure may be by implication as a mesnalty a reversion expectant upon an intayle the like 10. Edw. 44. a. 42. Edw 3. 7. Fitz. Grants 102. and divers other bookes 4. No tenure can be implyed by reason of a rent if the rent be not distreynable by some possibility of its owne nature upon the thing granted as appeares by 5. Henr. 7. 36. 33. Henr. 6. 35. 40. Ed. 3. 44. 1. Henr. 4. 1. 2. 3. Fitz-cessabit 17. 5. The distresse upon other land is the Kings meere prerogative like the case of Buts Co. 6. 25. a distresse may be for rent in other land by Covenant 6. This is no rent because it issueth not out of land 7. If the Patentee here had no land there can be no distresse in this case 8. This is a meere priviledge it issueth out of no lands and participates nothing of the nature of land all the cases of tenures in our bookes are eyther of land or things arising out of land or some way or other of the nature of land or that may result into land or that land by some possibilitie may result into it Therefore I humbly conceive that new opinion is not warranted by law or president These My Lords are in part the things which satisfied the house of Commons in all the matters aforesaid they are now left to the judgement and Iustice of your Lordships QVESTIONS PROPOVNDED IN PARLIAMENT AND Declarations of the Law thereupon in Parliament WHither the Subjects of this kingdome bee a free people and to be governed onely by the Common-lawes of England and statutes of force in this kingdome The subjects of this his Majesties kingdome of Ireland are a free people and to be governed onely according to the Common-law of England and Statutes made established by Parliament in this kingdome of Ireland and according to the lawfull customes used in the same VVhither the Iudges of this land doe take the Oath of Iudges and if so whether under pretext of any Act of State Proclamation writ letter or direction under the great or privie Seale or privie Signet or Letter or other Commandment from the Lord Lieutnant Lord Deputy Iustice or other chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome they may hinder stay or delay the suite of any subject or his Iudgement or execution thereupon if so in what cases and whether if they doe hinder stay or delay such suite judgement or execution thereupon what punishment doe they incurre for their deviation and transgression therein That Iudges in Ireland ought to take the Oath of the Iustices or Iudges declared and established in severall Parliaments of force in this kingdome and the said Iudges or any of them by colour or under pretext of any act of state or proclamation or under colour or pretext of any writ Letter or direction under the great Seale privie Seale or privie Signet from the Kings most Excellent Majestie or by colour or pretext of any Letter or Commandement from the chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome ought not to hinder or delay the suite of any subject or his judgement or execution thereupon and if any letters writs or commaunds come from his Majestie or any other or for any other cause to the Iustices or to other deputed to doe the law and right according to the usage of the Realme in disturbance of the law or of the execution of the same or of right to the parties the Iustices and other aforesaid ought to proceed and hold their Courts and processes where the pleas and matters bee depending before them as if no such letters writs or commaundments were come to them and in case any Iudge or Iudges Iustice or Iustices bee found in default therein he or they so found in default ought to incurre and undergoe due punishment according the law and the former declarations and provisions in Parliament in the case made and of force in this kingdome or as shall be ordered adjudged or declared in Parliament And the Barons of the Exchequer Iustices of assize and Goale-delivery if they be found in default as aforesaid it is hereby declared that they ought to undergoe the punishment aforesaid VVhether the Kings Majesties privie Councell eyther with the chiefe Governor or Governors of the kingdome or without him or them be a place of Iudicature by the Common-lawes and wherein causes betweene party and party for debts trespasses accompts possession or title of Lands or any of them and which of them may bee heard and determined and
AN ARGVMENT DELIVERED BY PATRICKE DARCY ESQVIRE By the expresse order of the House of Commons in the Parliament of IRELAND 9. Iunii 1641. Printed at Waterford by Thomas Bourke Printer to the Confederate Catholicks of Ireland 1643. 5. Iunii 1641. By the Commons House of IRELAND in Parliament assembled FOrasmuch as M. PATRICKE DARCY by a former order of this House was appointed Prolocutor at the Conference with the Lords touching the Questions propounded to the Iudges and their pretended answers to the same It is hereby ordered and the said M. DARCY is required to declare and set forth at the said Conference the manifold grievances and other causes and grounds that moved this House to present the said Questions to the Lords House to be propounded as aforesaid and to give particular reasons for every of the said Questions Copia vera Extract per Phil. Fern Cleric Parl. Com. AN ARGVMENT DELIVERED BY PATRICKE DARCY ESQVIRE By the expresse orders of the Commons-House of the Parliament of Ireland at a conference with a Comittee of the Lords House in the dyning roome of the Castle of Dublin 9. Die Iunij 1641. upon certaine Questions propounded to the Iudges of Ireland in full Parliament and upon the answers of the said Iudges to the said Questions And in the conclusion a declaration of the Commons House upon the said Questions THE QVESTIONS Questions VVherein the House of Commons humbly desired that the House of the Lords would be pleased to require the Iudges to deliuer their resolutions IN asmuch as the Subjects of this kingdome are free loyall and dutifull Subjects to his most Excellent Majesty their naturall Liege Lord King And to be governed only by the Common Lawes of England Statutes of force in this kingdome in the same manner forme as his Majesties Subjects of the Kingdome of England are and ought to be governed by the said Common Lawes and Statutes of force in that kingdome which of right the Subjects of this kingdome doe challenge and make their protestation to be their birth-right and best inheritance yet in asmuch as the unlawfull actions and proceedings of some of his Majesties Subjects Ministers of Iustice of late yeares introduced and practised in this kingdome did tend to the infringing and violation of the lawes liberties and freedome of the said Subjects of this kingdome contrary to his Majesties Royall and pious intentions Therfore the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in Parliament assembled not for any doubt or ambiguity which may be conceived or thought of for or concerning the premisses nor of the ensueing questions but for manifestation and declaration of a cleere truth and of the said Lawes and Statutes already planted and for many ages past setled in this kingdome The said Knights Citizens and Burgesses doe therefore pray the House of the Lords may bee pleased to command the Iudges of this kingdom forthwith to declare in writing their resolutions of and unto the ensuing Questions and subscribe to the same 1. Whether the Subjects of this kingdome be a free people and to be governed only by the Common Lawes of England and Statutes of force in this kingdome 2. Whether the Iudges of this Land doe take the oath of Iudges and if so whether under pretext of any Act of State Proclamation Writ Letter or Direction under the great or privie Seale or privie Signet or Letter or other Commandment from the Lord Lieutenant Lord Deputy Iustice Iustices or other Chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome they may hinder stay or delay the suite of any Subject or his Iudgment or execution thereupon if so in what Case and whether if they doe hinder stay or delay such Suite Iudgement or Execution thereupon what punishment doe they incurre for their deviation and transgression therein 3. Whether the Kings Majesties privie Councell either with the Chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome or without him or them be a place of Iudicature by the Common Lawes and wherein Causes betweene partie and partie for debts trespasses accompts possession or title of land or any of them may be heard and determined and of what Civill Causes they have Iurisdiction and by what law and of what force is their order or decree in such Cases or any of them 4. The like of the chiefe Governors alone 5. Whether grants of Monopolies be warranted by the Law and of what and in what cases and how and where and by whom are the pretended transgressors against such grants punishable and whether by fine mutillation of members imprisonment losse and forfeiture of goods or otherwise and which of them 6. In what Cases the Lord Lieutenant Lord Deputy or other Chiefe Governor or Governors of this kingdome and Councell may punish by fine imprisonment mutillation of members pillorie or otherwise and whether they may sentence any to such the same or the like punishment for infringing the Comands of or concerning any Proclamations or Monopolies and what punishment doe they incurre that vote for the same 7. Of what force is an Act of State or proclamation in this kingdome to bind the libertie goods possession or inheritance of the Natives thereof whether they or any of them can alter the Cōmon Law or the infringers of them loose their goods chattells or leases or forfeite the same by infringing any such Act of State Proclamation or both and what punishment doe the sworne Iudges of the Law that are Privy Councellors incurre that vote for such Acts and execution thereof 8. Are the Subjects of this kingdome subject to the Marshall law and whether any man in time of peace no enemy being in the field with Banners displaied can be sentenced to death if so by whom and in what Cases if not what punishment doe they incurre that in time of peace execute Marshall law 9. Whether voluntary oathes taken freely before Arbitrators for affirmance or disaffirmance of any thing or the true performance of any thing be punishable in the Castle Chamber or in any other Court and why and wherefore 10. Why and by what law or by what rule of policie is it that none is admitted to reducement of fines and other penaltie in the Castle Chamber or Councell-Table untill he confesse the offence for which he is censured when as Revera he might be innocent thereof though suborned prooffes or circumstance might induce a censure 11. Whether the Iudges of the Kings Bench or any other Iudges of Gaole delivery or of any other Court and by what law doe or can deny the copies of Indictments of Felony or Treason to the parties accused contrary to the lawes 12. What power hath the Barons of the Court of Exchequer to raise the respite of homage arbitrarily to what rate they please to what value they may raise it by what law they may distinguish betweene the respite of homage upon the diversitie of the true value of the fees when as Escuadge is the same for great and small fees
fall out that may alter the reason of the Lawes in such a case which could not be included or foreseene in a generall question or answer thereunto And therefore they desire your Lordships to consider of what use such answers may be to the present and future times 5. Fifthly many of the said questions as they are propounded as the said Iudges humbly conceive doe concerne his Majesty in a high degree in his Regall and prerogative power in his Government in his Revenue in the Iurisdiction of his Courts in his Martiall affaires and in his Ministers of State so that the said Iudges considering their Oathes the duty which by their places they owe unto his Majesty humbly conceive they may not with safety give answer thereunto without speciall licence from his Majesty and therefore they still humbly pray your Lordships as formerly they did not to presse any answers from them untill his Majesties princely pleasure therein be signified 6. Sixtly if the matters of these questions which ayme at some abuses of former times were reduced into Bils they conceive it were the speedy way to have such a reformation which might bind the present times and posteritie and in such proceeding they ought and would most cheerefully contribute their opinions best endevors but in such a course as they apprehend it which points at punishment they have reason to bee sparing in giving any opinion further then the duty of their places doth command from them 7. Seventhly although it may be conceived that the answering of such and so many generall questions by the now Iudges may contribute some helpe to the reformation now so much desired yet no man knoweth but this new president in propounding of such questions to Iudges in succeeding times as the Iudges frame constitution of the Common-wealth may be may fall out to bee most prejudiciall to the State and Common-wealth 8. Eightly most of the matters in severall of the said questions are already by your Lordships and the said house of Commons voted and represented to his Majesty for grievances and therefore no opinions of the Iudges under favour are needfull or to bee required thereunto unlesse the same shall come in further agitation and discussion in this honorable House 9. The Iudges opinions are not usually called upon in Parliament but when upon debate great and difficulte points in Law doe arise where this most honorable house doth thinke fit to command their opinions but no resolutions doe belong unto the said Iudges in Parliament but unto your Lordships Yet in the front and preamble of the said questions the resolution of the said questions by the Iudges is forthwith desired to be required by your Lordships in writing although the first question viz. Whether the subjects of this kingdome be a free people c. be positively resolved by the preamble to the said questions in which it is likewise declared that the said Iudges answers thereunto are not desired for any doubt or ambiguitie which may be conceived or thought of for or concerning the premisses nor of the said questions but for manifestation and declaration of a cleere truth and of the Lawes and Statutes already planted and setled in this kingdome And they say that it is impossible to make any manifestation or declaration of Law or statutes which may hold or be usefull upon such generall questions as most of these are namely By what Law in what cases of what and which of them of what power of what force how where by whom why wherefore what punishment by what rule of policy in what condition of persons in regard that the next succeeding Iudges may be of another opinion and that a circumstance may alter the reason of this Law in many particular cases which the wit of man is not able to forsee or give a generall rule in And they say that to give answers unto such questions as might give any satisfaction to your Lordships or to the honorable house of Commons would make up a great volume and require more time than your Lordships have afforded unto the said Iudges considering their great toyle in their Circuites the last short vacation their other imployments in the Common-wealth and their daily attendance on your Lordships in Parliament and the ordinary Courts of Iustice And yet least they might seeme to come any way short in performance of that duty which they confesse to be due unto your Lordships or be wanting in promoting or advancing the Common-wealth which they beleeve to be aymed at by the said questions though it may seeme to drawe damage or prejudice upon their particulars they doe in all humblenesse present unto your Lordships the ensuing answers unto the said questions which is as much as by their Oathes or in the duty they owe unto his Sacred Majesty before his princely pleasure bee therein signified they can answer thereunto 1. To the first they answer that the subjects of this kingdome are a free people and are for the generall to bee governed onely by the Common-lawes of England and statutes of force in this kingdome yet they say that as in England many statutes are growen obsolete and out of use and some particular ancient Lawes aswell in criminall as in Civill causes have beene changed by interpretation of the Iudges there as they found it most agreeable to the generall good of the Common-wealth and as the times did require it So our predecessors the Iudges of this kingdome as the necessitie of the times did move them did declare the law in some particular cases otherwise than the same is practised in England which the now Iudges cannot alter without apparent diminution of a great part of his Majesties standing revenue and opening a gap for the shaking and questioning of the estates of many of his Majesties subjects and the overthrowing of severall Iudgements Orders Decrees which depend thereupon For example If it be found by office of Record sufficient for forme that a man was killed in actuall rebellion and at the time of his death was seized of lands hereditaments goods or chattels by the constant declaration of Law and practise of former times here the Crown was intituled to such lands goods and chattels and many mens estates depend thereupon and yet the law is not so taken in England So if one or more commit Felony and then stand out upon his or their keeping and hee or they will not submit themselves to be tryed by the law but being in that state doe robbe or spoyle and terrifie his Majesties people wherby the countrie is disquieted this by the constant opinion of our predecessors in this kingdome hath beene adjudged a leavying of warre within the Statute 25. Edw. 3. and so consequently treason Also by the common received opinion practise in this kingdome the VVife is to have a third of all the goods chatels and credits of her husband the debts being payed although he dispose of all by his will
from her And yet the constant practise is otherwise in England and other instances of that kind might be made so that the words onely must receive a benigne exposition before the first question can receive a generall answer in the affirmative Secondly many causes of great weight and consequence in this kingdome are to bee decreed and ordered by equitie in the proper Courts of equitie and in course of State at the Councell-board and by particular customes and contrary to law for which the Common-law and statutes of force in this kingdome give no remedie Thirdly there are severall other lawes of force in England and Ireland so farre as they have been received which though some would have to be part of the Common-law of England yet we find them particularly distinguished from it in our Printed Bookes in Parliament Rolles in England as Lex est consuetudo Parliamenti jura belli Ecclesiasticall or Canon law in certaine cases Civill law in some cases not onely in Ecclesiasticall Courts but in the Courts of Constable and Marshall and of the Admiralty and upon particular occasions in the other Courts lex Mercatoria c. 2. To the second They say that the Iudges of this kingdome doe take the Oath of Iudges which Oath is specified amongst the statutes in 18. Edw. 3. and is after explaned by the statute of 20. Edw. 3. and that they may not stay hinder or delay the suite of any subject or his judgement or execution thereupon otherwise then according to the law and course of the Court where they sit under pretence of any act of state proclamation writ letter or direction under the great or privy Seale or privie Signet or Letter or other Commandement from the Lord Lieutenant Lord Deputy Iustice Iustices or other chiefe Governor of this kingdome most of which doth appeare by their Oath expressed in the said statutes and the said statute of 2â— Edw. 3. cap. 8. and the statute of 28. Edw. 3. cap. 2. as to Barons of the Exchequer And that as they know no punishment due to Iudges for their deviations transgressions without other aggravation So they know no punishment layd downe by any law against them for their deviations and transgressions in hindering staying or delaying of Iustice contrary to their said Oath other then what is declared in their said Oath and the statute of 20. Edw. 3. 3. To the third they say that it is part of their said Oath as Iudges that they shall not counsell or assent to any thing that may turne to the damage or disherison of our Soveraigne Lord the Kings most Excellent Majestie by any manner of way or colour And that they shall give no advice or counsell to any man great or small in no cases wherein the King is a party And they shall doe and procure the profit of the King and his Crowne in all things where they may reasonably doe the same And that in the explanation of their said Oathes by the statute of 20. Edw. 3 cap. 1. It is declared that they shall give no counsell to great men nor small in case where the King is party or which doth or may touch the King in any point And as your Lordships have beene honorably pleased by an order of this honorable house bearing date the first of March Anno Dom. 1641. Annoque Regni Caroli decimo sexto to give way that they should not be compelled to answer any part of those questions which did concerne his Majesties prerogatives or were against their oathes so they humbly represent unto your Lordships that they conceive that the answering of the particulars of this question doth concerne both for that the Kings privie Counsell as the question tearmes it or the Councell-board is a Court of his Majesties high prerogative where all proceedings are before him and his Counsell or before his Governor who doth immediately to many purposes represent his Majesties person and the Counsell And where the great affaires of state concerning his Majesties honor government profit and of great persons and causes concerning the Common-wealth which may not conveniently be remedied by the ordinary rules of Common-law and many other causes have beene treated of and managed And as his Majesty is the fountayne of all Iustice with in his kingdomes and may grant Cognizance of pleas unto his subjects and Corporations and may by his Commission authorize whom he shall thinke fit to execute many branches of his authoritie so they humbly conceive it doth not stand with their Oathes or duties of their places who are but Iudges of the ordinary Courts of Iustice before his Majesties pleasure signified in that behalfe to search into the Commissions or instructions of the chiefe Governor and Counsell or to give any opinion concerning the limits jurisdiction orders decrees proceedings or members of that high Court and that the King hath a prerogative for the hearing some of the matters in this question specified before his chiefe Governor We beseech your Lordships to cast your eyes on the statute of 28. H. 6. cap. 2. in this kingdome where after mâ—â—ters are directed to be sent to the ordinary Courts yet the Kings prerogative is expressely saved notwithstanding all which his gracious Majesty for whom it is most proper hath of late beene pleased to limit the proceedings of that Board by his instructions in print 4. To the fourth they answer as to the Third 5. To the fift they say that generally all grants of Monopolies whereby trading manufacture or commerce is restrayned the profit which should goe to many hindred brought into a few hands are against law the liberty of the subject and the good of the Common-wealth though they carrie never so faire a pretence of reforming abuses and that the pretended transgressors against such grants are not at all punishable by any rule of law that they know of And yet they say that they conceive that his Majestie that is the head and father of the Common-wealth may restrayne the use and importation and exportation of certaine commodities or confine the same into a few hands for a time where there may be likelyhood of his Majesties profit which is the profit of the Common-wealth and no apparent prejudice to the Common-wealth doth appeare and that when time shall discover such prejudice then such restraints ought to cease So if a man by his owne invention at home or travell observation or charge abroade doth introduce a new profitable and usefull trade or profession into the Common-wealth in such cases his Majesty may lawfully grant licence the only making of such commoditie or teaching or using of such trade for a certayne time and the transgressors against such warrantable grants may be punished by payment of damages unto the Patentee in an ordinary course of Iustice or otherwise as the nature of the offence and matter doth deserve and as the consequence and importance of the matter may be to the King State or
proofe or apparant circumstances may be pressed upon any tryall and for discovering of their fellowes abetors or relievers as the circumstances may offer themselves in their examinations especially if before they confesse themselves guiltie of the offence in imitation of the approver at the Common-law whereof no certaine rule may be given And it neede not be made a question here whether the Iurors or Iudges ought to be Iudges of the matter of fact it being positively layd downe in the sixteenth question that they are And though their false verdict doth convince or not convince the prisoner yet they may be questioned and punished for a false verdict as in their answer to the sixteenth is already declared 21. To the twentie one they say that that question is now judicially depending and hath beene already solemnely argued in his Majesties Court of VVardes in which Court their assistance for declaration of the law therein is already required And therefore they humbly desire they may not be compelled to give any opinion touching that point untill it be resolved there 22. To the twentie two they say that they doe conceive that there is no matter of Law contayned in the said question yet for the further satisfaction of your Lordships they say that upon view of an Act of state bearing Date at his Majesties Castle of Dublin the twenty fourth of December 1636. grounded upon his Majesties Letters of the fift of Iuly then last past it appeared unto them that foure shillings in the pound as of his Majesties free gift and reward out of the first payment of the increase of rent reserved to his Majestie was allowed to the Iudges that were Commissioners and attended that service And we humbly conceive that the receiving of that foure shillings in the pound of his Majesties bountie stands well with the integrity of a Iudge and those Iudges did informe them that they did not avoyde any Letters-Patents upon the Commission of Defective Titles but received such to compound as submitted for the strengthning of their defective Patents and Titles and such as would stand upon the validity of their grants were left to the tryall at law And that the Compositions made after the said grants of the foure shillings in the pound were made according to rules and rates agreed upon by all the Commissioners before his Majesties said Letters or the said Act of State and not otherwise George Shurley Hu. Cressy VVilliam Hilton Edw. Bolton Iames Barry Sa. Mayars Iam. Donellan Copia vera Extract per Phil Percivall Mr DARCIES REPLY TO THE ANSWER OF THE IVDGES MY LORDS His Majesties most humble and faithfull subjects the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in Parliament assembled representing the whole Commons of this Realme calling to mind the late invasion made upon the Lawes and just rights have heretofore presented unto the Lords House certaine questions of great weight and moment to the end their Lordships might thereunto require the answer of the Iudges in writing which being long sithence accordingly commaunded by their Lordships the Iudges have of late delivered in a writing to the Lords House by them styled an Answer unto the said Questions which being sent to the Commons house to be taken into consideration and the same all the partes thereof being weighed in the ballance of the grave judgement and knowledge of the said house of Commons the said answer was upon question voted to be minus pondus habens and not to merit the name of an answer This my Lords being the occasion of this conference the house of Commons appointed me a feeble Organ to utter part of their sense of the style and manner of this writing and to declare part of those reasons which satisfied their judgements that the said writing was short and insufficient o utinam that were all My Lords the Iudges had divers Moneths time to answer plaine questions plaine I speake of those who would be plaine the house of Commons a few dayes onely to consider of that intricate writing My powers are weake and the infirmities of my body are visible both in part occasioned by an high hand I should therefore faint under the weight of this burden but that the taske is not great I doe represent to your Lordships by way of rehearseall onely some partes of those reasons and authorities which were gathered and ripened to my hands by the house of Commons My Lords in matters of importance the course hath beene ancient and not yet deserted to begin with Prologues or Exordiums the worke is not mine I will onely In nomine sanctissimae Trinitatis make my entrance upon the matter of this Conference which is a generall concernment a great concernment of the whole kingdome And to that purpose I will declare the causes and reasons which moved or rather inforced the house of Commons for to disgest and propound the said Questions and to make it appeare that none of them is Idea Platonica none of them circumventing and all depending now or of late To mantayne the preamble to Questions viz. That this Nation ought to bee governed by the Common-lawes of England that the great Charter and many other beneficiall statutes of England are here of force by reasoning or argumentation were to alter a foundation layd 460. yeares past and to shake a stately building thereon erected by the providence and industrie of all the ensuing times and ages This is so unanswerable a truth and a principle so cleere that it proveth all it needeth not to be proved or reasoned Reasons why the Questions were propounded The reason for the first was the late introduction of an arbitrary government in many cases by some Ministers of estate contrary to the lawes and statutes aforesaid a government contrary to the just freedome property of his Majesties people in their lives estates and liberties whereas the subjects governed by the lawes of England are and ought to be free subjects the late disuse therefore of those lawes in execution and the measure of justice being squared by the Lesbian line of uncertaintie as contrary to the lawes aforesaid as any oppositum is in objecto produced the first question and I hope not improperly The reason for the second in part ariseth out of the Oath of a Iudge 18. Edw. 3. to be found among the Printed statutes Polton fol. 144. and out of the statutes of 20. Edw. 3. cap. 1. 2. 3. Polton fol. 145. This Oath is comprehensive and extends to the Iudges the Barons of the Exchequer and Iustices of Gaole-delivery and their associats This great and sacred Oath contaynes severall branches First well lawfully to serve the King his people in the Office of a Iustice Secondly not to Counsell or consent unto any thing tending to the Kings damage or disinherison Thirdly to warne the King of his damage when hee knowes it Fourthly to doe equall Iustice to rich and poore c. without respect of persons Fiftly
or penaltie upon the libertie goods or lands of him that would bring an assize of Daren presentment for a prebendary I doe finde that a provision was made in haec verba Promissum est à Consilio Regis quod nullus de potestate Regis Franciae respondeat in Anglia antequam Anglici de jure suo in terra Regis Franciae c. Yet by that provision no forfeyture upon the lands or goods of him who sued a Frenchman in England at that time It is true that a Custome may bee contrary to the law and yet allowable because that it may have a lawfull commencement and continuall usage hath given it the force of a law Consuetudo ex certa rationabili causa vsitata privat communem legem but no proclamation or act of state may alter law For example sake at Common-law a Proclamation cannot make lands devisable which are not devisable by the law nor alter the course of descent The King by his Letters-patents cannot doe the same nor grant lands to bee ancient demesne at this day nor make lands to be descendible according the course of Gavelkind or Borrough English unlesse that the custome of the place doth warrant the same nor Gavelkind land to be descendible according the course of law à fortiori an act of state or proclamation which I hold to bee of lesse force then the Kings patent under the great Seale cannot doe it And in the case of Irish Gavelkind it is not the proclamation or act of state that did abolish or alter it but the very custome was held to be unreasonable and repugnant to law If an act of state bee made that none within the kingdome shall make Cards but Iohn at Stile this act is voyde for the King himselfe cannot grant a Patent under his great Seale to any one man for the sole feazance of Cards So it is of all proclamations or acts of state that are to the prejudice of Trafficke trade or Merchant affaires or for raysing of Monopolies or against the freedome and libertie of the subjects or the publicke good as I said before Also if proclamations or acts of state may alter the law or bind the libertie goods or lands of the subjects then will acts of Parliaments bee to no purpose which doe represent the whole body of the kingdome and are commonly for creating of good and wholesome lawes Therefore I conceive that all proclamations made against law are absolutely voyde and that the infringers thereof ought not to loose or forfeyte their liberty goods or lands And for the punishment of such Iudges that vote herein I referre to the sixt they deny to answer to this question This answer is generall and dangerous withall it is generall viz. they know no ordinary rule of law for it they ought to declare the law against it the right use of it here they commend and yet they doe not describe that right use therefore they commend two things the one the life of a subject to be left to Marshall law in time of peace the other they leave it likewise discretionary when they describe not the right use their last resort is to the Kings prerogative I have said before that Lawyers write the King can doe no wrong and sure I am our King meanes no wrong the Kings of England did never make use of their prerogative to the destruction of the subject nor to take away his life nor libertie but by lawfull meanes I conceive this advise should become the Iudges other advise they find not in their law Bookes The statute of Magna Charta cap. 29. and 5. Edw. 3. cap. 9. the petition of right the third of King Charles in full Parliament declared Tell them nay doe convince them that no man in time of peace can bee executed by Marshall law My Lords I could wish the Iudges had timely stood in the right opposition to the drawing of causes proper for the Kings Courts to an aliud examen the improper and unlawfull examen thereof on paper petitions whereby the Kings Iustice and Courts were most defrauded whereas an arbitrement being a principall meane to compose differences arising betweene neighbours and to settle amitie betweene them without expence of time or money was a course approved by law all our Bookes are full of this It is by consent of parties by arbitrators indifferently chosen bonds for performance thereof are not voyde in law and Iudgements given upon arbitrements and such bonds in our Bookes without question or contradiction to the lawfullnesse of an arbitrement or bond in proper Cases the principall good wrought by them was the hindering of suites debates at law therfore that exception fals of it selfe then I am to consider how far an Oath in the particular is punishable I will not speake of an Oath exacted or tendered that is not the question the question is of a voluntary Oath which the arbitrator cannot hinder I speake not to the commendation of any such Oath nor doe I approve of any Oath other then that which is taken before a Magistrate who derives his authoritie from the King the fountaine of Iustice but onely how farre this Oath is punishable by the late statute 10. Caroli fol. 109. a prophane Oath is punished by the payment of twelve pence no more vide stat of Marl. cap 23. 52. Hen. 3. viz. Nullus de caetero possit distringere liber ' tenentes suos c. nec jurare faciat libere tenentes suos contra voluntatem suam quia nullus facere potest sine praecepto Domini Regis which statute teacheth us that an exacted or compulsive Oath is by the Kings authority a voluntarie Oath is not reprehended 19. Edw. 4. 1. a. It was not reprehended in the case of an arbitrement this voluntarie Oath is punishable in the Star-chamber as the Iudges would affirme which I conceive to bee against the law First for that wee cannot learne any president in England for it It was but lately introduced here therefore the house of Commons is unsatisfied with the answer to this question in Boyton and Leonards case in the Star-chamber in Ireland Boyton was dismissed in a Case to this purpose about the yeare 1630. or 1631. It hath beene the late introduced course of the Castle-chamber and Councell-table not to admit the party censured to the reducement of his fine before hee acknowledged the justnesse of the sentence pronounced against him and that for divers reasons First the course of a Court being as ancient as the Court and standing with law is Curiae lex as appeareth by our bookes 2. Co. 16. b. Lanes case 17. Long 5. Edw. 4. 1. but if it be a course introduced de novo in mans memorie or a course that is against law it cannot be said to be lex Curiae for consuetudo licet sit magnae authoritatis nunquam tamen praejudicat manifestae veritati
Let us therefore examine the course alleadged here in both those points and if it be found to faile in eyther of them it is to be rejected As to the first I cannot find or read any president of it untill of late and the usage of it for a few yeares cannot make it to be cursus Curiae which ought to bee a custome used time beyond the memory of man As to the second it is confessed by the Iudges that they know no law to warrant this course let us see then whether it be against law or standeth with the law and I conceive it is against law for divers reasons First by the Common-law if a judgement be given against a man after a verdict of twelve men which is the chiefe and cleare proofe which the law looketh upon or upon a demurrer after solemne argument he shall in the one case have an attainte against the Iury in the other a writ of error to reverse the judgement but in this case by the confession of the justnesse of the sentence all the meanes to reverse the sentence is taken away and therefore contrary to law and reason Whereas by the Common-law fines ought to bee moderate secundum quantitatem delicti in reformationem non in destructionem of late times the fines have beene so high in destruction of the party in the Castle-chamber as his whole family and himselfe if hee did pay the fine should bee driven to begge and without performance of the sentence hee could not be admitted to reverse the sentence in respect of all which howbeit in his conscience he is not guiltie yet to gaine his libertie and save part of his estate hee is necessitated to acknowledge the justnesse of the sentence so that the confession is extorted from him and consequently is against law Third reason if the fine were secundum quantitatem delicti as it ought to be without danger of destruction the reducement of the fine had not been so necessarie and therefore no just ground for this confession Lastly the confession of the party after sentence doth rather blemish the sentence then any way cleare it for the confession comming after the sentence which ought to be just in it selfe can adde nothing to it but draw suspition upon it and in that respect a confession is strayned the racke used by the course of the Civill law in criminall causes to cleare the conscience of the Iudge to proceede to sentence is intollerable in our Common-law And therefore this course being an innovation against law without any reasonable ground the said Iudges ought in their said answer to declare so much to the end a course might bee taken for abolishing the same This answer I will not now draw into question I could wish the rest were answered no worse What power have the Barons of the Court of Exchequer to rayse the respite of homage arbitrarily c. Vnto this they answer that untill the Kings Tenant by knights service in capite hath done his homage the ancient course of the Exchequer hath beene and still is to issue processe to distrayne the tenants ad faciendum homagium or ad faciendum finem pro homagio suo respectuando upon which processe the Sheriffe returnes issues and if the tenant doe not appeare and compound with the King to give a fine for respite of homage then the issues are forfeyted to the King But if the Kings tenant will appeare the Court of the Exchequer doth agree with him to respite his homage for a small fine They say further that it resteth in the discretion of the Court by the rule of the Common-law to lay downe a fine for respite of homage according to the yearely value of the said lands which I conceive to be very unreasonable and inconvenient that it should lye in the power of any to assesse a fine for respite of homage such as to him shall be thought meete in discretion for if so hee may raise the fine to such a summe as may exceed the very value of the lands Neyther hath the same beene the ancient course for it appeares by severall ancient Records and by an Order of the Court of Exchequer made Termino pascae 1607. that there should be payed for respiting of homage for every Towneship xx d. Irish and for every Mannor xxxx d. Irish and that such as hold severall houses acres or parcels of land which are not Mannors nor Towneship shall pay for everie hundred and twentie Acres of Land Meadow and pasture or of any of them xx d. Irish and no more and according to that rate and proportion if a greater or lesser number of Acres and for every house without ground iiij d. Irish and of Cottages or Farme houses which bee upon the Lands no fine to bee payed for them solely alone And I conceive where a man holdeth severall parcels of land of the King by severall homages that in such case he is to pay but for one respite of homage onely and no more for that a man is to doe homage but once and consequently to pay for one respite of homage onely The late course in the Exchequer here hath been contrary whereas in their answer they goe in the Exchequer according to the statute of primo Iacobi cap. 26. in England under their favour they goe cleare contrary for that statute was made in confirmation and pursuance of former Orders in the Exchequer Whereas the Barons here goe directly contrary to the ancient course and Order of the Exchequer in this kingdome more of this in my reason or ground for this question So I conclude their answer to this is short My Lords the question contaynes two points First whether the subject of this kingdome is censurable for to repayre into England to appeale to his Majesty for redresse of injuries or for his lawfull occasions Secondly why what condition of persons and by what law The first part of the Iudges their answer is positive and full viz. They know no law or statute for such censure nor I neyther and could wish they had stayed there In the second part of their answer they come with an if viz. unlesse they be prohibited by his Majesties writ proclamation or command and make mention of the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. in England and 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland I will onely speake to the second part of this answer My Lords the house of Commons in the discussion of this point tooke two things into consideration First what the Common-law was in such cases Secondly what alteration was made of the Common-law by the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. in England and 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland as to the subjects of Ireland As for the first the Register hath a writ framed in the point viz. the writ De securitate in venienda quod se non divertat ad partes extras
and other penalty in the Castle-chamber or Councell-table untill he confesse the offence for which he is censured when as revera hee might bee innocent thereof though suborned proofes or circumstance might induce a Censure By the lawes and statutes of the Realme no man is bound or ought to be compelled to acknowledg the offence layd to his charge or the justnesse of any censure past against him in the Castle-chamber or at the Councell-table nor ought to bee detayned in prison or abridged of his liberty or the reducement of his fine stayed or delayed untill he doe acknowledge such offence or the iustnesse of such censure And it is further declared that no such inforced or wrested cōfession or acknowledgment can or ought to debarre or hinder any subject from his Bill of reversall or review of any sentence or decree past or conceived against him in the Castle-chamber or in any other Court VVhether the Iudges of the Kings-bench or any other Iudge of Gaole-delivery or of any other Court and by what law doe or can deny the Copies of indictments of felony or treason to the parties accused contrary to the law The Iudges of the Kings-bench or Iustices of Gaole-delivery or the Iudges of any other Court ought not to deny Copies of indictments of felonies or treason to the parties indicted VVhat power hath the Barons of the Court of Exchequer to rayse the respite of homage arbitrarily to what rate they please to what value they may rayse it by what law they may distinguish betweene the respite of homage upon the diversitie of the true value of the Fees when as Escuage is the same for great and small Fees and are proportionable by Parliament The Barons of the Exchequer ought not to rayse the respite of homage above the usuall rates appearing in and by the course and presidents of that Court continued untill the yeare of our Lord God 1637. and the raysing thereof since that time was arbitrary and against the law and the Barons of the Exchequer ought not to distinguish between the respite of homage upon any diversity of the true values of the knights Fees VVhether it be censurable in the subjects of this kingdome to repaire into England to appeale to his Majesty for redresse of injuries or for other lawfull occasions if so why what condition of persons and by what law The subjects of this kingdome may lawfully repayre into England to appeale to his Majesty for redresse of injuries or for other their lawful occasions for their so doing ought not to be punished or questioned upon the statute of 5. of K. Rich. the 2. nor by any other law or statute of force in this kingdome eminent officers ministers of state Commanders souldiers of his Majesties Army The Iudges and ministers of his Majesties Courts of Iustice and of his highnesse Revenue and customes whose attendance is necessary requisite by the lawes statutes of the realme only excepted VVhether Deanes or other dignitaries of Cathedrall Churches be properly and de mero jure donatiue by the King and not Elective or collative if so why and by what law and whether the Confirmation of a Deane de facto of the Bishops grant be good and vallid in law or no if not by what law Deaneries or other Ecclesiasticall dignities of this Realme are not de mero jure donative but some are donative and some elective and some are collative according to their respective foundations and the confirmation of the Bishops grant by a Deane de facto having actually stallum in Choro vocem in Capitulo together with the Chapter is good in law VVhether the issuing of Quo-warrantoes out of the Kings-bench or Exchequer against Borroughs that anciently and recently sent Burgesses to the Parliament to shew cause why they sent Burgesses to the Parliament be legall if not what punishment ought to be inflicted on those that are or hath beene the occasioners procurers and Iudges of and in such Quo-warrantoes The issuing of Quo-warrantoes out of the Court of Kings-bench Court of Exchequer or any other Court against Boroughs that anciently or recently sent Burgesses to the Parliament to shew cause why they sent Burgesses to the Parliament and all the proceedings therein are coram non Iudice illegal and voyde and the right of sending Burgesses to the Parliament is questionable in Parliament onely and the occasioners procurers and Iudges in such Quo-warrantoes and proceedings are punishable as in Parliament shall be thought consonant to law and Iustice By what law are Iurors that give verdict according their conscience and are the sole Iudges of the fact censured in the Castle-chamber in great fines and sometimes pillored with losse of eares boared through the tongue and marked sometimes in the forehead with a hot Iron and other like infamous punishment Iurors are the sole Iudges of the matter in fact and they ought not for giving their verdict to bee bound over to the Court of Castle-chamber by the Iudge or Iudges before whom the verdict was or shall be given By what law are men censurable in the Castle-chamber with the mutillation of members or any other brand of infamy and in what cases and what punishment in each case there is due without respect of the qualitie of the person or persons No man ought to bee censured in the Castle-chamber in the mutillation of members or any other brand of infamy otherwise or in other cases then is expressely limitted by the statutes of this Realme in such cases provided VVhether in the censures in the Castle-chamber regard be to be had to the words of the great Charter viz. Salvo Contenemento c. In the censures of the Castle-chamber especially regard ought to bee had to the words of the great Charter viz. Salvo Contenemento c. VVhether if one that steales a Sheepe or commits any other felony and after slieth the course of Iustice or lieth in woods or mountaines upon his keeping be a Traytor if not whether a proclamation can make him so A Felon who flies the course of Iustice lieth in woods mountaines or elsewhere upon his keeping is no Traytor and a proclamation cannot make him a Traytor VVhether the testimonie or evidence of Rebels Traytors protected Theeves or other infamous persons bee good evidence in law to be pressed upon the tryals of men for their lifes or whether the Iudges or Iurors ought to be Iudge of the matter in fact The testimony of convicted or protected Rebels Traytors or Fellons is no sufficient evidence in law upon the tryall of any person for his life and the credit of the testimony of persons accused or impeached and not convicted of felony or treason ought to be left to the Iury who are sole Iudges of the truth and validity of the said testimony By what law are