Selected quad for the lemma: money_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
money_n	penny_n	shilling_n	worth_a	1,764	5	10.1766	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42295	A guide to juries setting forth their antiquity, power and duty from the Common-law and statutes : with a table / by a person of quality ; also a letter, to the author, upon the same subject.	Person of quality.; Maynard, John, Sir, 1602-1690.	1699 (1699)	Wing G2186; ESTC R10120	53,071	146

or the Parties themselves agree first to be true What the Jury does is called Verdictum Veridictum the declaring of what is the Truth in the Matter What the Judges do is called Judicium Juris dictum the telling only of what is the Law Thus it is that every finding of the Jury as their Verdict c. must be positive what the Fact and Party's intent c. was and not saying only what their Evidence is that it was for the Judges can't even so far meddle with or take Conusance of the matter of Fact as but to say then the Fact Case c. is so and so if you agree your Evidence to be so and so and accordingly give Judgement Co. 9. Downham's c. Co. 10. Oxford c. Benlow 3 E. 6. Isaac Clerks c. Hob. 167. As A. delivers B. Goods and after demands them again of B. but he refuses to deliver them again if A. sues B. for finding these Goods and converting them to his own Use the Judges will tell the Jury since B. refuses to re-deliver them this is Evidence enough to find him Guilty of converting them to his own Use c. and is in Law a Conversion But if the Jury gave their Verdict c. specially as that A. delivered B. the Goods and after re-demanded them but B. refused the delivering of them back without saying positively B. converted them to his own Use or not saying generally we find for the Plaintiff which is tantamount the Judges cann't say and judge B. Guilty c. but must discharge him So where in a Tryal fraud is pretended by one Party done c. by the other the Judges will tell the Jury such and such parts of the Evidence prove the Fraud or in construction of Law are Fraud But if the Jury give their Verdict specially that such and such things are true which the Judges said prove the Fraud and not saying positively there was Fraud the Judges cann't say or judge Fraud nor take the least notice of any thing as such In the case of Roger Mortimer in Parliament Ao 1 E. 3. it was adjudged there 28 E. 3. n. 10. that the matters he was accused of though were notorious and known to them all in Parliament and all People else yet they could not give Judgment upon this nor any time ought proceed on any knowledge of their own One Condemned of Trespass in the Common-Pleas the Judges seeing him in Court and knowing him never so well yet it was adjudged if he deny himself to be the same Person they cann't say he is and so cause him apprehended because they cann't judge of any thing nor take notice but only of what is upon Record before them 33 H. 6. 55. Thus if A. be Indicted of stealing five shillings In Henry the Third's time 1 s. was as much as 40 now and before then more yet the Law was then one must steal above the value of 1 s. to be Gullty of Felony So that Merciful Juries now value by the Ancient shilling and save many not Guilty of above the value of 40 s. present Money the Jury may give a Verdict that he is Guilty of stealing the five shillings but only to the value of ten pence and the Judges here cann't say the five shillings were more worth or less though never so apparent King Henry the fourth asking Judge Gascoyn what if he saw A. kill B. and the Jury will find not that A. killed B. but that C. did He answered I can only Reprieve C and then intercede with your Majesty for his Pardon Pl. 83. The Infamous Empson and Dudley proceeding to judge as Judges of matters upon Information by Witnesses c. otherwise than by Juries this was one indelible blot in their Escutcheon though had an Act of Parliament 11 H. 7. c. 3. to warrant them in so doing Ander l. 1. 156. When a Prisoner is Arraigned he says he puts himself on God and his Countrey neither of which are the Judges for his Tryal which Countrey is the Jury So it is manifest Juries have the sole Power and Conusance of the matters of Fact as whether a thing be true or not c. and the Judges have at most only to do with matters of Law Jury men have also the determination of Law but with this difference from that of Fact that it 's necessary they determine the matter of Fact But they may either refuse to meddle with any thing of Law and leave it to the Judges or at their Election may take upon them knowledge of the Law and determine both Fact and Law themselves Lit. § 368. and so is every days Experience whereof see more anon speaking of general Verdicts and special Verdicts Only if a Jury give a Verdict setting forth specially or particularly how the matter was and then draw an ill Conclusion as to the matter of Law thereupon the Judges will judge against and so make the Judgment of the Jury in the matter of Law void Hob. 53. As suppose A. be Indicted of Murdering B. the 10th of Feb. c. And the Jury give their Verdict that A. gave the Wound at C. the 5th of Feb. and that B. died at D. the 10th of Feb. And conclude that A. murdered B. at C. or on the 5th of Feb. Now the Law saying the Murder was on and at the place and time when and where the Party died the Judges will judge against the Judgment of the Jury Co. 4. 42. So Anno 1654. in B. R. between the Protector and Somner the Court said the Jury had concluded contrary to their premises finding he killed two Men on the Road but calling it Manslaughter se defendendo and so the Judges ordered him to be Tryed again Thus we see Judges are unessential and needless in a Tryal by Jury further than to assist it by answering and informing what the Law is where difficulties arise or at least the Primitive Constitution might be thus Like as also yet they be in the House of Lords or when any Tryal is by the Lords but Assistants only when consulted and no Parties of or at the Tryal c. Or as it is and always has been in Courts Barons Hundred Courts Courts of Ancient Demesne and County Courts 6 E. 4. 3. Crompt 232 233. and where the Sheriff is made Judge though by the King 's Writ c. Co. 6. 11 12. The very form of special Verdicts to this day looks as if it were so As in Murder the Jury find and give their Verdict first how and in what manner particularly the Fact was committed and then say but whether upon the whole matter aforesaid the killing aforesaid of J. S. be Murder in construction of Law the Jury is ignorant and therefore ask the Advice of the Court and further saying if upon the whole matter aforesaid it seem to the Judges and Court that it is Murder then the Jury on their Oath say the said I. N. is Guilty in