Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
parliament_n	act_n	end_n	session_n	2,667	5	10.7638	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62698	Tam quam, or, A attaint brought in the supream court of the King of kings, upon the statutes, Exod. 20. 7, 16 and Levit. 19. 12 against those modern jurors, who have found any indictments upon the statutes of 23 Eliz., 29 Eliz., or 3 Jacobi, against Protestants, for monthly absence from church, without any confession of the parties, or oath of witness against them, or made any presentments of them : contrary to the express letter of their oaths taken in a Court of Judgment, the course of the law of England, or any right reason : wherein is discoursed, whether any Protetant be concerned in that part of those laws? : the contrary is proved : as also whether a grand-jury's finding and indictment, be any evidence to a petit-jury? : the absurdness, and most pernicious consequents of which are detected, and the vengeance of God agaisnt false-swearing is declared / by one who prosecutes, as well for his sovereign lord the King of kings, as for the lives, liberties, and properties of all the subjects of England.	One who persecutes as well for his sovereign lord the King of kings as for the lives, liberties, and properties of all the subjects of England.	1683 (1683)	Wing T133; ESTC R17	24,452	40

them against the Queen The Act 3 Jacobi came forth upon the Powder-Plot I appeal to any Man of ordinary sense whether he can think that the Parliaments of those Times ever intended to put Protestants into a far worse condition than Papists which they apparently are if these Statutes equally concern them as well as Papists and they then were liable to the Act 35 Eliz. out of which Papists are expresly excepted 4. Further yet I do very well know that Votes of Parliament repeal no Laws much less have the force of Laws in them nor are to be mentioned in legal Pleas But the Question here is not whether these Acts be of force or no It is on all hands granted that they are but what is the true sense and meaning of them And as to that under correction I think a great deference is to be given to the Parliaments Judgment declared in them the far greater part of all the gravest and most famous Lawyers of England being generally in every Convention or Session of Parliament It was as I remember either in the latter end of the Year 1677 or the beginning of the Year 1678 that upon the Petition of the Quakers the Parliament at that time sitting first took notice That the Laws made principally against Papists were executed princially upon Protestants and appointed a Committee who spent a great deal of time in examining the Returns of Convictions made upon those Statutes into the Office and applied themselves to his Majesty for favour to his Protestant Subjects as to those Laws About the middle of the Year 1678 the horrid Popish Plot was discovered from Michaelmas that Year till Decemb. 30. the Parliament had enough to do to search into the Popish Plot and they had made but little progress in it when they were Prorogued which was Decemb. 30. and soon after Dissolved The next Parliament began March 6. 1678 9 and sat until May 27.1679 their whole time was also spent in a further discovery of that Hellish Plot. All this while I met with no Declarations of the Parliament's mind or sense in the case of those Acts Nor as I believe were there any complaints of any prosecutions of Protestant Dissenters upon any of those Statutes The next Parliament began Octob. 21. and held unto Jan. 10. 1680. By this time the Popish Party had a little recovered their Courage and began to defame the very Report of a Popish Plot. They had eight months before began to sham it tho' with very ill success But before this time they had began to divert the prosecution of it by obtaining of their Friends who would be thought Protestants every where to prosecute Dissenters upon those Statutes The Parliament that sat down Octob. 21.1680 had intelligence of it The Term before Estreats were given out upon all Convictions upon those Statutes but with express Instructions from the Commissioners of the Treasury to leavy the Forfeitures upon none but known Popish Recusants which 't is likely that in many Counties the Sheriffs observed In others 't is certain they did not but levied them equally if not principally upon Protestants but were inforced to refund some of them and for a great while after this upon a Certificate into the Exchequer that the Persons were Protestants and had taken the Test proceedings against them by order out of the Exchequer were staid This is supposed to have proceeded from his Majesty's Goodness complying with the desires of his Parliament in the Case of the Quakers The House of Commons which sat in the Westminster Parliament Octob. 21. 1680. had sat but a Month and two or three odd days before they came to this Vote without one Man's contradiction in Nov. 1680. Resolved nemine contradicente That it is the Opinion of this House that the Acts of Parliament made in the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James against Popish Recusants ought not to be extended to Protestant Dissenters Accordingly they made their Application to his Majesty by the Members of their House which were of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council beseeching him That all the Protestant Dissenters prosecuted upon those Acts might be discharged without paying any Fees and that he would recommend this Business to the Judges Upon the 26th of Novemb. 1680. we find it thus in the Votes under the Speaker's Hand Mr. Secretary Jenkins acquainteth the House that his Majesty had been attended by the Members of his most Honourable Privy Council with an Address concerning Protestant Dissenters And that his Majesty's Answer is That they should be discharged and that without Fees as far as might be done according to Law and they shall be recommended to the Judges The Parliament which then sat hath the repute to have been short of none who ever sat within those Walls for Men of Honour Wisdom and Estates Here was plainly their Judgments declared That these Acts concern not nor ought to be extended to Protestant Dissenters After which certainly that single Country Justice or Lawyer who dareth to say they do must arrogate much more to himself than he ought to do considering how many of the greatest Lawyers of England unanimously concurred in that Vote which did not repeal those Laws nor stop or supersede the execution of them but only declared the sense of them If any Person after all this will affirm they do concern them as well as others I have nothing more to say against it but only wish That the Question might be determined by my Lords the Judges and not left to the various determinations of puny Lawyers and many Justices of the Peace who were never bred to the Studies nor exercised in the practice of our Laws This whole Discourse is but a Digression from my proper Theme for admit those Statutes do concern Protestants it is another Question Whether Grand-Juries finding such Indictments be Evidence to a Petit-Jury in the Case The Affirmative part of which I never look to find determined by Judges what-ever be determined as to the other Question CHAP. IV. A Pathetical Conclusion to Jurors to consider what they have done to repent and to their Ability to make satisfaction avoiding the like enormous practices for the future And to such as are Commissioners of the Peace not to be any Temptation to them to bring such Guilt upon themselves their Families and Country WHat can remain further but that as an Orator for the Great God of Heaven and Earth I should admonish all my Country-men who have been deluded by their own Lusts and Passions or over-awed by any others to make any such Presentments of things whereof they had no knowledg or which they could not do in Truth or to find any such Indictments without any Evidence and this after that in Judgment they had called God to Witness that they would present nothing but the Truth and what came to their knowledg and true Deliverance make according to their Evidence And after they had sealed this their

thing Either the Statute 23 or 29 Eliz. or that 3 Jac. Nay the Statute determineth the quite contrary and that for this Crime of not coming to some Church And that where the Punishment cannot exceed 4 s. it saith Vpon proof made of such default by confession of the Party or Oath of Witness 3 Jacobi 4. Now will not the Law of England in this Case allow so little a sum as 3 or 4 s. to be taken from any Subject without either the accused Person 's confession of his Fault or Oath of Witness And shall any pretending to know the Law impose upon a Jury to believe Or shall any reasonable Man that can but read be ever made to believe that there need no Proof no Confession but they must find the Indictment for 20 l. or it may be 200 l. according to the number of the Months especially when the consequence of their finding it will be the Party 's paying of 240 l. every Year after it or losing all his Goods and two thirds of his real Estate or lying in Prison all his Life unless the Party accused can prove himself Guiltless and this after that such Jury-Men have called God to Witness they will give in their Verdict according to their Evidence And the Law hath in this particular Crime made other Evidence necessary and no where directed or allowed any such thing as the accused Persons not clearing himself for Evidence Do such Jury-men believe there is a God or expect any thing from this God or advantage from his Gospel when they have dared God to shew them no Mercy if they do not do that the quite contrary to which they do in an hours time Will any Divine say these Men are not desperately forsworn Let any of them bring their Pleas and let us see if they can speak sense in the Case let them produce their Divines that dare justify this not to be false-swearing and the most abominable forswearing to the prejudice of their Brother as well as the most impudent pollution and prophanation of the most holy and dreadful Name of God and what wickedness may be presumed they will startle at who in such a degree proclaim they have no fear of God before their eyes nor any belief of the Being Power Omniscience Truth or Justice of God in their Hearts 9. But they will say The Petit-Jury hath Evidence for the finding of the Indictment by the Grand-Jury is sufficient Evidence to the Petit-Jury This new Notion is so false in it self and of so dangerous Consequence as it perfectly subverteth the whole Law of England in Criminal Causes and destroyeth one of the greatest pieces of the English Liberty 1. It is a fundamental Point in our Government that unless it be by Parliament No Man's Life shall be touched but by the Judgment of 24 Men twelve of which make the Grand-Inquest and are the Jury to inquire of Facts whereof any are accused twelve make the Petit-Jury for trial of the Issue None can at Assizes or Sessions for their Life or any part of their Estate be put upon trial before the Grand-Inquest hath found the Indictment to be a true Bill So as it is impossible that the Grand-Jury as a Grand-Jury should be any Evidence to the Petit-Jury for they have no Oath of Witnesses administred to them they are only sworn to enquire and to make a true Presentment to the Court. If any Persons know any thing of their personal knowledg they may leave their capacity of Grand-Jury-Men and come down and give their Oaths in Court before the Petit-Jury and may be Witnesses but as a Grand-Jury they can be no Evidence nor have they any Oath administred to them to that purpose nor can the Petit-Jury propound any Questions to them a liberty allowed them as to all their Evidence to make a Grand-Jury Evidence is to allow the Persons to be Judges and Witnesses a thing never heard of in any just Court. The Work of Witnesses is to prove a Fact the Work of Judges is to determine according as the proof is made 2. This were to make Petit-Juries perfectly needless and of no use for if the Grand-Juries finding an Indictment be Proof sufficient Reason will tell us they are the fittest Men to determine the Fact being ordinarily both a greater number and Men of more Reason and Vnderstanding and of better Quality than those who appear on Petit-Juries And if Petit-Juries have no power to bring in Not Guilty as a Verdict upon any Indictment by them found they are perfectly of no use at all Thus this seems a new Art to deprive the Subjects of all Trials by Juries 3. The Grand-Juries who find these Indictments find them of course ordinarily without the least proof of the truth of them and know no more than that a former Grand-Jury upon their Oaths made such Presentments whether true or false is still left to a Proof before the Petit-Jury 4. The Indictments as they come to the Petit-Jury have ordinarily more in them than the Presentments of the first Grand-Jury in the Case The first Grand-Jury either presenteth upon some of their own particular Knowledg of the Thing or upon some Constable's Presentment brought into them let it be the one or the other they are only for not coming to their Parish Church No Constables will upon their Oaths present more nor can it be presumed of any Grand-Jury-Man because it is impossible for them to know that they neither came to their own nor to any other These words Nor unto any other Church which are essential words to the Charge upon the truth of which the heavy Penalty lieth are put in by the Clerks who draw up the Indictments in Form and neither sworn before or to one Grand-Jury or another So as of them there is not the least Evidence to the Petit-Jury 5. Nor is it reasonable that the finding of an Indictment by a Grand-Jury which is formed upon a Presentment by a former Grand-Jury should be allowed as the least Evidence of the Truth of the Fact contained in the said Indictment because Grand-Juries tho' by their Oath they are bound to present the Truth and nothing but the Truth and what is given them in Charge and shall come to their Knowledg yet with what faithfulness to their Oaths deserves their second Thoughts and may hereafter come to be examined take upon them to present what none of them doth know nor can know nor is made by the Oaths of any to appear to them but what they suspect or have heard from others not upon Oath counting that a thing comes to their knowledg tho they have catched it from the tittle tattle of the Town or the mouths of any malicious Persons not considering that they also swear to present the Truth and nothing but the Truth and have disclaimed all hopes of Salvation if they do otherwise than according to such an Oath Many of them have been so easily deluded to invoke