Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	case_n	judge_n	law_n	3,858	5	4.9873	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90205	An indictment against tythes: or, Tythes no wages for Gospel-ministers: wherein is declared, I. The time when tythes were first given in England. II. By whom, and by whose authority and power tythes were first by a law established in England. III. To whom, and to what end and purpose tythes were first given, and after continued in England. IV. Ministers pretending a threefold right to tythes, 1. By donation. 2. By the laws of the nation. And 3. By the Law of God; examined and confuted ... To which are added, certain reasons taken out of Doctor Burgess his Case, concerning the buying of bishops lands, which are as full and directly against tythes, as to what he applied them. Likewise a query to William Prynne. By John Canne. By John Osborne, a lover of the truth as it is in Jesus.	Osborne, John, lover of the truth as it is in Jesus.; Canne, John, d. 1667?	1659 (1659)	Wing O525; Thomason E989_28; ESTC R203025	30,438	45

Selden in his Chap. 11. History of Tythes saith As Tythes are popish so are they likewise a Relique of Superstition Because given at the first out of a superstitious opinion of satisfaction for the sins of the Donor yea and as superstitiously paid at this day by many ignorant people who think Tythes to be due by the Law of God and so deceive themselves Let not any man think saith Sir Henry Spelman that he hath right to Tythes too hot c. Tythes because the Law of man hath given them to him for Tully himself the greatest Lawyer of his time confesseth That nothing is more foolish then to think all is just that is contained in the Laws or Statutes of any Nation Experience teacheth us that our own Laws are daily accused of imperfection often amended expounded and repealed Look back into times past and we shall finde that many of them have been unprofitable for the Commonwealth many dishonorable to the Kingdom some contrary to the word of God and some very impious and intolerable yet all propounded debated and concluded by Parliaments So Tully and the Roman Historians cry out That their Laws were often by force and against all Religion imposed upon the Common-wealth And forasmuch as it appeareth plainly as I have formerly shewed That Tythes were by Parliaments established for Massing-Triests to say and sing Mass and such other superstitious services and after confirmed for reading the Book of Common-Prayer Therefore an Idolatrous gift and establishment unlawfull in the Givers unlawfull in the Actors and Receivers and therefore ought to revert to the right Heirs of the Donors and all ought to repent of such an ungodly action The Prophet Isaiah proclaimeth against such Laws and Law-makers Wo be Isa 10. 1 2 unto them that make wicked Statutes and write grievous things So also in Micah 6. 16. God threatneth to punish such Law-makers and Law-observers The Statutes of Omri are kept and all the manner of the House of Ahab c. Therefore ye shall bear the reproach of my people Statutes of Princes are no excuse to transgress Gods Law God cannot be confined restrained or concluded by any Parliament Let no man therefore think that he hath right to Tythes because the Law of man hath given them to him for the Law of man can give him no more then the Law of God will permit The Law of man may Spel. 173. give a man jus ad rem right to a thing as to demand it or to defend it against another man but it cannot give him jus in re right in the thing to claim it in right against or without the Law of God Right to the thing is a lame title they must have Right in it that will have a perfect title The Law may make a man the possess●r or enjoyer of a thing but it cannot make him the very owner of the thing The Books of the Law themselves confess That all Prescriptions Statutes and Customs against the Law of Nature or of God be void and against justice Now I might here proceed to their third right but before I pass from this their second right as they call it I desire to answer one Objection which I have heard from the mouth of a Judge in this Nation made in defence of the Statute for Tythes of 2 Edw. 6. But saith he although some are of opinion that the Objection Act of 2 Edw. 6. doth not give power to sue for Tythes at the common-Common-Law Yet it hath been the constant practise and determination of the Judges for many years to maintain Actions at the common-Common-Law upon that Statute for the treble value of Tythes not set out and that a hundred Judgments have been given in that Case To which I answer If ten thousand Judgments have Answer been given in that Case upon a false ground must all succeeding Judges of necessity follow their example without a rule to guide them by Sir Edw. Coke saith That the Laws are the Judges Guides or Leaders their safest Teacher and Fortress and we know that Judges opinions are not alwayes to be taken for sound and good Law neither are we so to be bound up by them that we may not receive a better opinion when it is offered For saith Sir Edw. Coke No mans authority ought to be so prevalent with us that we should not approve a better opinion if any man offer it unto us And I have already shewed how inconvenient Instit part 1. and dangerous it is for Judges to judge by Cases and Presidents where there is no Law to guide them nor a just Rule to direct them For Judges are but men they are not infallible they are subject to failings And some of the chief Justices of both Benches and others very learned in the Laws of this Land have erred grosly Hub. de Bu●go Thorp Triscilian Belknap Lock●on c. and been punished severely ●ome by banishment and confiscation of goods and others by death as may appear by ancient Records in Henry the third's time in Edward the third's time and in Richard the second 's time But what need I look so far back for examples of this nature seeing that there is one to be found amongst us of late years yet fresh in our memories in the case of Ship-money wherein all the Judges that then were except two gave Judgement against Mr Hampden contrary to the known Laws of this Land And of what evil consequence that might have been and how destructive to this Common-wealth and to our Liberties I leave to the judgements of all understanding men For if that Judgement had continued upon Record and in force and not been reversed by the Parliament it might have been a President for all succeeding Judges to judge by in future times and so might we and future generations have been made meer Vassals and Slaves to the arbitrary will of our Governours And for the further manifestation of the invalidity of the first Branch of that Act of 2 Edward 6. I am able to make it appear that it lay dead and no action of debt brought upon it at the Common-Law for the penalty of the treble value for almost fifty years after the making of it and no Judgement given upon it until the fortieth year of Queen Elizabeth since which time the succeeding Judges being guided by the opinions of those former Judges without any other ground or warrant for their so doing make it a standing Law To the third Right as some do call it which say 3. Right answered they is by the Law of God I answer that some Pleaders for Tythes do cite several Texts of Scripture to prove what they would have but having seriously examined and considered those Scriptures I do not finde one that will stand by them to prove their assertion Their first Scripture is in Gen. 14. 2. and 21. 22. to 1. Scrip. prove that Abraham and Jacob by the Law of

onely in the time of the Levitical Law in the Land of Canaan and not elsewhere and by the Jews onely but never by the Gentiles But it is objected by the pleaders for Tythes in these Objection our dayes That Tythes are due to the Receivers thereof by a threefold Right First by ancient donation thereof to the Church for maintenance of Christianity Four hundred years 1. Right before the Donation in times of Popery but they prove it not Secondly by the Law of the Land And thirdly by the Law 2. Right of God all which I shall by Gods assistance seriously examine and according to my best understanding give a brief 3. Right and satisfactory Answer thereunto in order as they are propounded To the first viz. Donation I shall not need to make Answer any long answer because I have formerly proved first the time when and by whom Tythes were first given in England Secondly By whom and by whose authority they were by a Law first established And thirdly To whom and to what end and purpose Tythes were first given in England and since continued If they were first given to the Church for maintenance of Christianity as is by some pretended Four hundred years before the time of Popery Then I desire to know who were the first Donors of them and to what Church they were dedicated whether to the Church of Christ or to some Idol-Temple For I finde it reported by Sir Henry Spelman that the Heathens and Pagans before the conversion of the Saxons in England to Christianity gave In his larger work of Tythes Tythes to their Idol-Gods and Goddesses as the Arabians to their God Sabin the Siphnians to their God at Delphos the Romans to Hercules the Ephesians to Diana and others to Jupiter and Apollo c. So that if any man will boast of the Antiquity of Tythes to have been Four hundred years before the time of Offa then he must claim them by an Heathenish Donation for I am confident that there was no such donation in England until the year of our Lord 786. For in the Primitive times for Three hundred years after Christ no Tythes were paid in England as I have already proved although there were many Christians then in England and many Churches gathered in Asia and elsewhere And whereas it is alledged that Constantine the great who was the first Christian Emperour upon whose Donation some do much rely I cannot finde that he did ever command Tythes to be paid in any place or to any persons But I do read in the History of his life that he bestowed Houses Lands large favours and Possessions upon Bishops and Priests and large gifts and favours upon Christian people but no Tythes mentioned amongst all those gifts and favours And Sabellicus who was himself a Roman questioneth the truth of those large Donations Yet doubtless his bounty was so great to the Bishops and Priests of those times that thereby they became proud covetous and contentious the seeds whereof were so deep sown that they are not yet totally eradicated To the second right as some call it which say Answer to the second Right they is by the Laws of the Land I answer That I endeavour not to destroy but to maintain the Laws of the Land which are consonant to and grounded upon the Laws of God and desire that they may be rightly expounded and righteous judgement given upon them yea even those which are thought to make most for payment of Tythes I begin with the Statute of the 27 year of H. 8. whereby 1. Law for Tythes Ministers are enabled to sue for Tythes but where In the Ecclesiastical Court onely and not elsewhere For before that time I find no Law extant to compel men to pay Tythes or to be sued at Law for non-payment of them But onely a decretal Epistle of Pope Innocent the third which saith Sir Edward Cook was no binding Law Also Instit part 2. in the Two and thirtieth year of Hen. 8. another Act of Parliament was made especially for the benefit of Impropriators 2. Law for Tythes who before that time had no power given them to recover Tythes but in that Act is a special Proviso That no person Ecclesiastical or temporal shall sue for any Tythes in any temporal Court but onely in the Ecclesiastical Court Thirdly in the second year of Edward 6. another 2. Law for Tythes Act of Parliament was made whereby the two former Acts of the twenty seven and thirty two of Hen. 8. and every Article and Branch therein contained are ratified and confirmed but upon serious consideration of the several parts of this Act it will appear that it giveth no power to sue for Tythes at the Common-Law nor in any Court of Equity For in the first branch thereof which is a very imperfect one it is said that every Subject of the King 1. Imperfect shall set out and pay his predial Tythes and that no person shall carry away any such Tythes before he hath set out for the Tythes thereof the Tenth part of the same or agreed with the Proprietor c. upon pain of forfeiture of the treble value c. So that it appeareth to me that the forfeiture given by this Act is not the treble value of the Tenth part of all a mans Corn and Hay but a treble value of a Tenth part of the Tenth of Corn and Hay Secondly it is not therein declared who shall have 2. Imperfect sue for and recover that forfeiture of treble value And no private person can claim a forfeiture given by any penal Law except it be given him in express terms by the same Law Therefore I do conceive that the forfeiture if there be any such given by the first branch of this Act ought to be recovered and imployed to the use of the chief Magistrate or of the Common-wealth and not of any private or particular person whosoever Thirdly it is not thereby appointed how or where the said penalty shall be recovered as in all other penal 2. Imperfect Acts it is declared That the forfeture shall be either to the King solely or to the King and Informer or to the Party grieved to be recovered in some Court of Record by Action of debt bill plaint or information But there is no such limitation in that Branch of that Statute Therefore I do call it an imperfect branch because in two other branches of the same Statute of 2 Edw. 6. it is enacted and declared That no person shall be convented or sued for any Tythes before any other judge then Ecclesiastical And further in a latter branch of the same Act power is given to sue at the Common-Law for the penalty forfeited for not delivering in a Copy of the Libel and suggestion whereupon a Prohibition is granted And for these considerations and some other Reasons following I am perswaded that the makers of that