Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	great_a	parliament_n	time_n	3,414	5	3.4000	3	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69923	A conference desired by the Lords and had by a committee of both houses, concerning the rights and privileges of the subjects discoursed by Sir Dudley Digges, Sir Edward Littleton Knight, now Lord Keeper, Master Selden, Sir Edward Cooke ; with the objections by Sir Robert Heath, Knight, then Attorney Generall, and the answers, 3 ̊Apr. 4. Car. 1628.	England and Wales. Parliament.	1642 (1642)	Wing E1284C; ESTC R8061	70,161	93

the prisoner was not committed by the immediate command of the King but by the command of the Lord Chamberlaine and thence as it was said they made this rule but this kind of interpretation is the first that ever was supposed that Judges should take notice of the truth or falshood of the return otherwise then the body of the returne could informe them And the rule it selfe speakes plainly of them sufficiencie onely and not of the truth or falshood of it Emersons Case The seventh of these is the case of Iames Desmaistres Edward Emerson and some others that were brewers and were committed to the Marshalsea of the Houshold per mandat Dom. Regis and so returned upon habeas corpus and it is true that the roll shewes that they were remanded but the remanding was onely upon advisement and indeed the grave and upright Judges of the time were so carefull least upon the entry of the remanding any such mistake might be as might perhaps mislead posterity in so great a point that they would expresly have this word immediate added to the Remittitur that so all men that should meet with the roll might see that it was done for the present onely and not upon any debate of the question And besides that there is no quousque to it which is usually added when the highest award upon debate or resolution of this kind is given by them 12. Iam Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case The eighth of these is the Case of Saltonstall it is Hill 12. Iac. Sir Samuel Saltonstall was committed to the Fleet per mandatum Dom. Regis and besides by the Court of Chauncery for disobeying an order of that Court and is returned upon his habeas corpus to be therefore detained And it is true that a Remittitur is entred in the roll but it is onely a remittitur prisoner prodict ' without quousque secundum legem de liberatus fuerit and in truth it appeares on the Record that the Court gave the Warden of the Fleet three severall dayes at severall times to amend his returne and in the interim remittitur persone pred' Certainly if the Court had thought that the returne had beene good they would not have given so many severall dayes to have amended it for if that Mandatum Dom. Regis had beene sufficient in the Case why need it to have been amended 13. Iac. Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case The ninth and last of these is Tr. 13. Iac. Rot. 71. The Case of the same Sir Samuel Saltonstall he is returned by the Warden of the Fleet and in the Case before and generally remittitur is in the roll which proves nothing at all that therefore the Court thought he might not by law be inlarged and besides in both cases hee stood committed also for disobeying an order in the Chauncery These are all that have beene pretended to the contrary in this great point and upon the view of them thus opened to our Lordships it is plaine that there is not one not so much as one at all that proveth any such thing as that persons committed by the command of the King or the Lords of the Counsell without cause shewed might not be enlarged but indeed the most of them expresly prove rather the contrary Now my Lords having thus gone through the Presidents of Record that concerne the point of either side before I come to the other kind of Presidents which are the solemne resolutions of Judges in former times I shall as I am commanded also by the House of Commons represent unto your Lordships somewhat else they have thought very considerable with which they met whilst they were in a most carefull enquiry of whatsoever concerned them in this great question It is my Lords a draught of an entry of a judgement in that great case lately adjudged in the Court of Kings Bench when divers Gentlemen imprisoned per speciale mandatuÌ„ Dom. Regis were by the award and order of the Court after solemne debate sent back to prison because it was expresly said they could not in Justice deliver them though they prayed to be bayled The case is famous and well knowne to your Lordships therfore I need not further to mention it as yet indeed there is no judgement entred upon the Roll but there is room enough for any kind of judgement to be entred But my Lords there is a forme of a judgement a most unusuall one such a one as never was in any such case before for indeed there was never before any Case so adjudged and thus drawne upon by a chiefe Clerk of that Court by direction of M. Attorney generall as the House was informed by the Clerk in which the reason of the judgement and remanding of those Gent. is expressed in such sort as if it should be declared upon Record for ever that the Lawes were that no man could ever be inlarged from imprisonment that stood committed by such an absolute command The draught is onely in Sir John Heninghams Case being one of the Gent. that was remanded and it was made for a form for all the rest The words of it are after the usuall entry of a Curia advisare vult for a time That visis retur predict nec non diversis antiquis recordis in Curia hic remaveum consimiles casus continentibus maturaque deliberatione inde prius habita eo quod milla specialis causa captionis sive detentionis pred Iohanis ex primitur sed generalitur quod detentus est in prisona pred' per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis ideo pred' Iohanes remittitur prefat custodi Marr. Hospitii pred' Salvo custodiend quousque c. that is quousque legem deliberatus fuerit And if that Court that is the highest for ordinary Justice cannot deliver him secundem legem What law is there I beseech you my Lords that can be sought for in any other inferiour Court to deliver him Now my Lords because this draught if it were entred in the Roll as it was prepared for no other purpose would be as great a declaration contrary to the many Acts of Parliament already cited contrary to all Presidents of former times and to all reason of Law to the utter subversion of the highest liberty and right belonging to every free man of this Kingdome and for that especially also it supposes that divers ancient Records had been looked into by the Court in like cases by which Records their judgements were directed whereas in truth there is not any one Record at all extant that with any colour not so much indeed as with any colour warrants the judgement therefore the House of Commons thought fit also that I should with the rest that hath beene said shew this draught also to your Lordships I come now to the other kind of Presidents that is solemne resolutions of Iudges which being not of Record remaine onely in authentique copies but of this kinde there is but one in this case that is

is there any difference made betweene such coÌ„mitments by the Lords of the Counsel that are incorporated with him The second kind of Presidents of Record are such as have beene pretended to prove the law to bee contrary and that persons so committed ought not to be set at libertie upon bayle and are in the nature of Objections out of Record I shall deliver them summarily to your Lordships with all faith and also true Copies of them out of which it shall appeare cleerely to your Lordships that of those of the first kind there are no lesse then 12. most full and directly in the point to prove that persons so committed are to be delivered upon bayle and amongst those of the other kind there is not so much as one not one that proves at all any thing to the contrary I shall first my Lords goe through them of the first kind and so observe them to your Lordships that such scruples as have beene made upon them by some that have excepted against them shall bee cleered also according as I shall open them severally Pasc 18. Ed. 3. Bildestons Case The first of the first kind is of Ed. 3. time it is in Pasche 18. Ed 3. Rot. 33. The Case was thus King Ed. 3. had committed by Writ and that under his great Seale as most of the Kings commands in those times were one Iohn de Bildeston a Clergie man to the prison to the Tower without any cause shewed of the commitment The Lievtenant of the Tower is commanded to bring him to the Kings Bench where he is commited to the Marshall but the Court askes of the Lievtenant if there were any cause to keep this Bildeston in prison besides that commitment of the King he answered no whereupon the Roll sayes Quia videtur cur bre praed sufficient non esse causam praed Iohan de Bildeston in prisona Dom Regis hic detinend ' idem Iohannes admittitur per manucaptionem Willielmi de Wakefield and some others where the Judgement of the point is fully declared in the very point 22. H. 8. Parkers Case The second in the first kind of Presidents of Record is in the time of H. 8. one Iohn Parkers Case who was committed to the Sherife of London pro securitate pacis at the suite of one Brinton ac pro suspitione feloniae committed by him in Glocestershire ac per mandatuÌ„ Dom. Rs. he is committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench postea isto eodem termino traditur in Ball ' here were other causes of the commitment but plainly one was by the command of the King signified to the Sherife of London of which they tooke notice but some have interpreted this as if the commitment had beene for suspition of felonie by the command of the King in which case it is agreeable of all hands that the Prisoner is bayleable but no man can thinke so of this president that observes the context and understands the Grammar of it wherein most plainly ac per mandatuÌ„ Dom. Regis hath no reference to any other cause whatsoever but is as a single Cause enumerated in the returne by it selfe as the Record cleerely sheweth it is in 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. 35. H. 8. Bincks Case The third is of the same Kings time it is 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. Iohn Bincks Case he was committed by the Lords of the Counsell pro suspitioniae feloniae ac pro aliis causis illos moventibus qui committitur Mariscallo immediate ex gratia curiae speciali traditur in Ball ' They committed him for suspition of felonie and other causes them thereunto moving wherein there might be matter of State or whatsoever else can be supposed and plainly the cause of their commitment is not expressed yet the Court bayled him without having regard to these unknowne causes that moved the Lords of the Counsell But it is indeed some difference from either of those other 2. that precede and from the other 9. also that follow for it is agreed that if a cause be expressed in the returne insomuch that the Court can know why he is committed that then he may be bayled but not if they know not the cause now a man is committed for a cause expressed pro aliis causis Dominos de Consilio moventibus certainly the Court can no more know in such a case what the cause is then any other 2. 3. P Mar. Overtons Case The fourth of these is in the time of Queene Mary it is Pasche 2. 3. P. Mar. Rot. 58. Overtons Case Richard Overton was returned upon a Habeas Corpus directed to the Sherifes of London to have beene committed to them and deteyned per mandatum pranobilium Dominorum honorabilis consilij Dominorum Regis Reginae Qui committitur Marr. immediate traditur in Ball ' In answer to this President or by way of objection to the force of it It hath beene said that this Overton at this time stood indicted of high treason It is true he was so indicted but that appeares in another Roll that hath no reference to the returne as the returne hath no reference to that Roll yet they that object this against the force of this President say that because he was Indicted of Treason therefore though he were committed by the Command of the Lords of the Counsell without cause shewed yet he was bayleable for the Treason and upon that was here bayled Then which objection nothing is more contrary either to law or common reason It is most contrary to law for that cleerely every returne is to be adjudged by the Court out of the body of it selfe and not by any other collaterall or forraigne Record whatsoever Therefore the matter of Indictment here cannot in law be cause of bayling of the Prisoner And so it is averse to all common reason that if the objection be admitted it must of necessitie follow that whosoever shall be committed by the King or the Privie Counsell without cause shewed and bee not indicted of Treason or some other offence may not be inlarged for by reason of supposition of matter of State But that whosoever is so committed and withall stands so indicted though in another Record may bee inlarged whatsoever the matter of State be for which he was committed The absurditie of which assertion needs not a word for further confutation as if any of the Gent. in the last judgement ought to have beene the sooner delivered if hee had beene also Indited of Treason if so Traitours and Fellons have the highest priviledge in personall libertie and that above all other Subjects of the Kingdome 4. 5. Phil. Mar. Newports Case The fifth of this kind is of Queene Maries time also it is Pasch 4. 5. P. Mar. Rot. 45. the Case of Edward Newport hee was brought into the Kings Bench by Habeas Corpus out of the Tower of London Cum causa vizt

Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Text snippets containing the quad