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 COOK.   With the Objections by Sir Robert Heath Knight then Attorney General, and the Answers.  
3o. Apr. 4. Car. 1628.  
LONDON, Printed by A. N. for Matthew Walbancke, and Richard Best, and are to be sold at their shops at Graies-Inne Gate. 1642.   


THE INTRODUCTION.  Sir Dudley Diggs. 
MY LORDS,  
I Shall I hope auspiciously begin this Conference this day, with an observation out of the holy Story, 
2. Chro. Cham 34.  in the days of good King josiah, when the Land was purged of Idolatry, and the great men went about to repair the house of God, while money was sought for, there was found a Book of the Law which had been neglected, 
2 Kings Cham 22.  and afterwards being presented to the good King, procured the blessing which your Lordships may read in the Scriptures.  
My good Lords, I am confident your Lordships will ascheerefully join with the Commons, in acknowledgement of God's great blessing in our good King josiah, as the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, of the House of Commons, by me their unworthiest servant, do thankfully remember your most religiously and truly honourable invitation of them to the late Petition, for cleansing this Land from Popish abominations, which I may truly call a necessary and a happy repairing of the house of God, and to go on with the parallel, whilst we the Commons out of our good affections were seeking for money, we found I cannot say a book of the Law, but many and fundamental points thereof neglected and broken, which hath occasioned our desire of this conference, wherein I am first commanded to show unto your Lordships in general, that the Laws of England are grounded on reason more ancient than books, consisting much in unwritten customs, yet so full of Justice and true equity, that your most Honourable Predecessors, and Ancestors propugned them with a nolumus mutari, and so ancient, that from the Saxon days, notwithstanding the Injuries and ruins of time, they have continued in most parts the same, as may appear in old remaining Monuments of the Laws of Ethelbert, the first Christian King of Kent, Jna the King of the West Saxons, Offer of the Mertians, and of Alfred the great Monarch who united the Saxon Heptarchy, whose laws are yet to be seen published, as some think by Parliament, as he says to that end,  qui sub uno rege, sub una lege rege●entur. And though the Book of Litchfield speaking of the times of the Danes, says that then Ius sopitum erat in regno, leges & consuetudines sopitae sunt, and prava voluntas, vis, & violentia magis regnabant quam judicia vel justitia; yet by the blessing of God a good King, Edward, commonly called St. Edward, did awaken those laws, and as the old words are, Excitatas reparavit, reparatas decoravit, decoratas confirmavit; Which confirmavit, shows that good King Edward did not give those Laws which William the Conqueror and all his Successors since that time have sworn unto.  
And here my Lords, by many Cases frequent in our modern Laws strongly concurring with those of the ancient Saxon Kings, I might, if time were not more precious, demonstrate that our Laws and Customs were the same.  
I will only entreat your Lordship's leave to tell you, that as we have now, even in those Saxon times they had their Court Barons, and Court Leets, and Sheriffs Courts, by which, as Tacitus says of the Germans, their Ancestors Jura reddebant per pagos & vicos; and I do believe, as we have now, they had their Parliaments, where new laws were made cum consensu Praelatorum magnatum & totius communitatis; or as another writes, cum consilio praelatorum, nobilium, & sapientium laicorum. I will add nothing out of Glanvile that wrote in the time of H. 2. or Bracton that writ in the days of H. 3. only give me leave to city that of Fortescue, the learned Chancellor to H. 6. who writing of this Kingdom, says, Regnum istud moribus nationum, & Regum temporibus, eisdem quibus nunc Regitur legibus & consuetudinibus regebatur. But my good Lords, as the Poet said of Fame, I may say of our common Law; Ingrediturque solo caput inter nubila conduit. Wherefore the cloudy part being mine, I will make haste to open way for your Lordships to hear more certain Arguments, and such as go on more sure grounds.  
Be pleased then to know, that it is an undoubted and fundamental point of this so ancient common law of England, that the Subject hath a true property in his goods and poffessions, which doth preserve as sacred that Meum & tuum, that is the nurse of Industry, and mother of Courage, and without which there can be no Justice, of which Meum & tuum is the proper object. But the undoubted birthright of Free Subjects, hath lately not a little been invaded and prejudiced by pressures, the more grievous, because they have been pursued by imprisonment contrary to the Franchises of this Land, and when according to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm, redress hath been sought for in a legal way by demanding Habeas Corpus from the Judges, and a discharge or trial according to the law of the Land, success hath failed, that now enforceth the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, to examine by Acts of Parliament, precedents and reasons, the truth of the English Subjects liberty, which I shall leave to learned Gentlemen, whose learned Arguments I hope will leave no place in your Lordship's memories, for the errors and infirmities of your humblest servant, that doth thankfully acknowledge the great favour of your Honourable and patiented Attention.   

Sir Edward Littleton's Argument.  
The Argument made by the Command of the house of Commons out of Acts of Parliament, and authorities of Law, expounding the same, at the first Conference with the Lords concerning the liberty of the person of every Freeman.  Mr. Littleton. 

MY LORDS,  
Upon the occasions delivered by the Gentleman, your Lordships have heard the Commons have taken into their serious consideration the matter of personal liberty, and after long debate thereof on divers days, as well by solemn Arguments, as single propositions of doubts and answers, to the end no scruple might remain in any man's breast unsatisfied, they have upon a full Search, and clear understanding of all things pertinent to the question, unanimously declared; That no Freeman ought to be committed or restrained in prison by the command of the King or Privy Counsel, or any other, unless some cause of the commitment, detainer, or restraint be expressed, for which by law he ought to be committed, detained, or restrained. And they have sent me with other of their members, to represent unto your Lordships the true grounds of their resolution, and have charged me particularly, leaving the reasons of law, and precedents, for others, to give your Lordship's satisfaction, that this liberty is established and confirmed by the whole State, the King, the Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons, by several Acts of Parliament, the authority whereof is so great, that it can receive no answer save by interpretation or repeal by future Statutes. And those that I shall mind your Lordships of are so direct in point, that they can bear no other exposition at all, and sure I am they are still in force; The first of them is the grand Charter of the Liberties of England, first granted in the seventeenth year of King John, and renewed in the ninth year of Henry the third, and since confirmed in Parliament above 30. times, the words there are Chap. 29. Nullus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut disseisietur de libero tento suo vel liberis consuetudinibus so is, aut utlageretur, aut exuletur, aut aliquo modo destruatur, nec super eum ibimus, nec super eum mittemus, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terrae.  
These words nullus liber homo, etc. are express enough, yet it is remarkable, that Matthew Paris, an Author of special credit, doth observe, fol. 432. that the Charter of 9 H. 3. was the very same as that of 17. King John, in nullo dissimilis are his words, and that of King john he setteth down verbatim, Fo. 342. and there the words are directly, Nec eum in Carcerem mittemus, and such a corruption as is now in the print might easily happen 'twixt 9 H. 3. and 28. of Ed. 1. when this Charter was first exemplified, but certainly there is sufficient left in that which is extant to decide this question, for the words are, that no Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, but by the lawful judgement of his Peers, which is by a jury of Peers, ordinary jurors for others, who are their Peers, or by the law of the Land; Which words, Law of the Land, must of necessity be understood in this notion, to be by due Process of the Law, and not the law of the Land generally, or otherwise it would comprehend Bondmen (whom we call Villains) who are excluded by the word liber; For the general law of the Land doth allow their Lords to imprison them at their pleasure without cause, wherein they only differ from the Freemen in respect of their persons, who cannot be imprisoned without a cause. And that this is the true understanding of these words per legem terrae, will more plainly appeareby divers other Statutes that I shall use, which do expound the Law according. And though the words of this grand Charter be spoken in the third person, yet they are not to be understood of suits betwixt party and party, at least not of them alone, but even of the King's suits against his Subjects, as will appear by the occasion of getting of that Charter, which was by reason of the differences betwixt those Kings and their people, and therefore properly to be applied unto their power over them, and not to ordinary questions betwixt Subject and Subject. Secondly, the words per legale judicium parium suorum, immediately preceding the other of per legem terrae, are meant of trials at the King's suit, and not at the prosecution of a Subject. And therefore if a Peer of the Realm be arraigned, at the Suit of the King, upon an Indictement of murder, he shall be tried by his Peers; but if he be appealed of murder by a Subject, his trial shall be by an ordinary Jury of 12. Freeholders, as appeareth in 10. Ed. 4. 6. 33. H. 8. Brooke title trials 142. Stan. Cor. li. 3. ca 1. fol. 152. and in 10. Ed. 4. 6. it is said, such is the meaning of Magna Charta, for the same reason; 
Sinor indite ferra trie per pares auterment si soit appeal, Br. tit Corone 153. nota bien.  Therefore as per judicium parium suorum, extends to the King's Suit, so shall these words per legem terrae; And in 8. Ed. 2. rot. parliament. membrana 7. there is a Petition that a Writ under the privy Seal went to the Guardians of the great Seal, to cause lands to be seized into the King's hands, by force of which there went a Writ out of the Chancery to the escheator, to seize against the form of the grand Charter, that the King nor his ministers shall out no man of his Freehold-without reasonable judgement, and the party was restored to his land, which showeth the Statute did extend to the King. There was no invasion upon this personal liberty, till the time of King Ed. 3. which was eftsoon resented by the Subject, for in 5. Ed. 3. ca 9 it is ordained in these words; 
Sta. 5. Ed. 3. 9  It is enacted that no man from henceforth shall be attached by any occasion, nor forejudged of life or limb, nor his lands, tenements, goods nor chattels seized into the King's hands, against the form of the great Charter, and the law of the Land. 25. Ed. 3. cap. 4. 
Sta. 15. Ed. 3. 4.  It is more full, and doth expound the words of the grand Charter, and is thus; Whereas it is contained in the grand Charter of the franchises of England, that none shall be imprisoned, nor put out of his freehold, nor free custom, unless it be by the law of the Land, It is awarded, assented, and established, that from hence none shall be taken by Petition or Suggestion, made to our Lord the King, or to his Counsel, unless it be by Indictment, or presentment of his good and lawful people of the same neighbourhood, which such Deeds shall be done in due manner, or by Process made by Writ original at the Common law, nor that none be Out of his Franchises, nor of his Freehold, unless he be duly brought in answer, and forejudged of the same by the course of the law, and if any thing be done against the same, it shall be redressed and holden for none.  
Out of this Statute I observe, 
Lex terre expound ꝑ process dée faict ꝑ bre original all common ley.  that what in Magna Charta, and the preamble of the Statute is termed by the law of the Land, is in the body of this Act expounded to be by Process made by Writ original at the Common law, which is a plain interpretation of the words (Law of the Land) in the grand Charter. And I note that the Law was made upon the commitment of divers to the Tower, no man yet knoweth for what.  
28. Ed. 3. cap. 3. 
Sta. 28. Ed. 3. ca 3.  It is more direct, this liberty being followed with fresh Suit by the Subject, where the words are not many, but very full and significant; That no man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands nor tenements, nor taken, nor imprisoned, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought in answer by due Process of law.  
Here your Lordships see the usual words of The law of the Land, are rendered by Due Process of the law.  
36. Ed. 3. Rot. parliament. numero 9 
36. E. 3. Rot. Parliam. nu. 9 Petition del Commons.  Amongst the Petitions of the Commons, one of them being translated into English out of French, is thus; First, that the great Charter, and the Charter of the Forest, and other Statutes made in the time of his Progenitors, for the profit of him, and his commonalty, be well and firmly kept, and put in due execution, without putting disturbance, or making arrest contrary to them by special command, or in other manner.  

Rns all petition.  The Answer to the Petition, which makes an Act of Parliament. Our Lord the King, by the Assent of the Prelates, Dukes, Earls, Barons, and the Commonalty, hath ordained or established, that the said Charters and Statutes be held and put in execution, according to the said Petition. It is observable that the Statutes were to be put in execution according to the said Petition, which is, that no arrest should be made contrary to the Statutes, by special command. This concludes the question, and is of as great force, as if it were printed, for the Parliament roll is the true warrant of an Act, and many are omitted out of the books, that are extant in the Roll.  
36. Ed. 3. Rot. Parliamenti num. 22. 
36. Ed 3. Rot. parl numb. 22. Petition d' Commons.  explaineth it further, for there the Petition is, Item, as it is contained in the grand Charter and other Statutes, that no man be taken or imprisoned by special command without Indictment, or other due Process to be made by the law, and oftentimes it hath been, and yet is, many are hindered, taken, and imprisoned without Indictment, or other Process made by the Law upon them, as well of things done out of the Forest of the King, as for other things, that it would please our said Lord to command those to be delivered, which are so taken by special command, against the form of the Charter and Statutes as aforesaid.  

Rns all Petition.  The answer is,  

St. 27. Ed 3. ca 18.  The King is pleased, that if any man find himself grieved, that he come and make his complaint, and right shall be done unto him. 37 Ed. 3. cap. 8. agreeth in substance with them, it sayeth, Though it be contained in the great Charter, that no man be taken nor imprisoned, nor put out of his Freehold without Process of the law; Nevertheless divers people make false suggestions to the King himself, as well for malice as otherwise, whereof the King is often grieved, and divers of the Realm put in damage against the form of the same Charter; Wherefore it is ordained, that all they which make Suggestions, shall be sent with the same Suggestions to the Chancellor, Treasurer, and his grand Counsel, and that they there find surety to pursue their Suggestions, and incur the same pain that the other should have had, if he were attainted, in case that the Suggestion be found evil, and that then Process of law be made against them without being taken or imprisoned, against the form of the said Charter, and other Statutes; here the law of the Land in the grand Charter is explained to be without Process of law.  

Sta. 42. Ed. 3. ca 13.  42. Ed. 3. cap. 13. At the request of the Commons by their Petition put forth in this Parliament, to eschew mischief and damage done to divers of his Commons by false accusers, which oftentimes have made their accusasions, more for revenge and singular profit, then for the profit of the King, or of his people, which accused persons, Some have been taken and caused to come before the King's Counsel by Writ, and otherwise upon grievous pains against the Law, It is assented and accorded for the good governance of the Commons, that no man be put to answer without presentment or matter of record, or by due Process and Writ original according to the old law of the Land, And if any thing from hence be done to the contrary, it shall be void in the Law, and holden for Error.  

Sta. 42. Ed. 3. Rot. Parliam. num. 12.  But this is better in the Parliament roll, where the Petition and answer, which make the Act, are set down at large. 42. Ed. 3. Rot. Parliamenti, numero 12.  

Petition des Commons.  The Petition.  
Item, Because that many of your Commons are hurt and destroyed by false accusers, who make their accusations more for their revenge and particular gain, then for the profit of the King, or of his people. And those that are accused by them, some are taken, and others are made to come before the King's Counsel by Writ, or other commandment of the King, upon grievous pains contrary to the Law. That it would please our Lord the King, and his good Counsel, for the just government of his people, to ordain, that if hereafter any accuser purpose any matter for the profit of the King, that the same matter be sent to the justices of the one bench or of the other, or the Assizes, to be inquired and determined according to the Law; and if it concern the Accuser or party, that he take his Suit at the common law, and that no man be put to answer without presentment before justices or matter of Record, and by due Process and original Writ, according to the ancient law of the Land. And if any thing henceforward be done to the contrary, that it be void in law, and held for error.  
Here by due Process and original Writ, according to the ancient Law of the Land, is meant the same thing, as per legem terrae, in Magna Charta, and the abuse was, they were put to answer to the commandment of the King.  

Rns all petition.  The King's Answer is thus.  
Because that this Article is an Article of the grand Charter, the King willeth that this be done, as the Petition doth demand. By this appeareth that per legem terrae, in Magna Charta, is meant by due Process of the Law.  

Obi. horse d' l' Sta. de Westm. 1. cap. 15.  Thus your Lordships have heard act of Parliament in the point. But the Statute of Westminst, 1. cap. 15. is urged to disprove this opinion, where it is expressly said, 
Que ne sont repleviseable que sont commit per le command le Roy.  that a man is not repleviseable, who is committed by the command of the King, therefore the Command of the King, without any cause shown, is sufficient to commit a man to prison. And because the strength of the Argument may appear, and the Answer be better understood, I will read the words of the Statute, which are thus. 
Les parols d' Sta.  And forasmuch as Sheriff, and others, which have taken and kept in prison persons detected for Felony, and oftentimes have let out by Replevin, such as were not repleviable, and have kept in prison such as were repleviable, because they would gain of the one party, and grieve the other, And forasmuch as before this time it was not certainly determined what persons were repleviable, and what not, but only those that were taken for the death of a man, or by the commandment of the King, or of his justices, or for the Forest, It is provided, and by the King commanded, that such prisoners as were before outlawed, and they which have abjured the Realm, provers, and such as be taken with the manner, and those which have broken the King's prison, Thiefs openly defamed and known, and such as be appealed by approvers, so long as the approvers are living, if they be not of good name, and such as be taken for burning of houses feloniously done, or for false money, or for counterfeiting the King's Seal, or persons Excommunicate taken at the request of the Bishop, or for manifest offences, or for treason touching the King himself, shall be in no wise repleviable by the common Writ, or without Writ; But such as be indicted of Larceny by inquests taken before Sheriffs or Bailiffs by their office, or of light suspicion, or of petit Larceny, that amounteth not above the value of twelve pence, if they were not guilty of some other Larceny afore-time, or guilty of receipt of Felons, or of commandment, or of force, or of aid of felony done, or guilty to some other trespass, for which one ought not to lose either life or member, and a man appealed by an approver, after the death of the approver, if he be no common thief or defamed, shall from henceforth be let out by sufficient surety, whereof the Sheriff will be answerable, and that without giving aught of their goods; and if the Sheriff, or any other, let any go at large, by surety, that are not repleviable, if he be Sheriff, or Constable, or any other Bailiff, or such as hath a Fee, which hath keeping of prisons, and thereof be Attainted, he shall lose his Office and Fee for ever. And if the under Sheriff, Constable or Bailiff, or such as hath Fee for keeping of Prisons, do it contrary to the will of his Lord, or any other Bailiff being not of Fee, they shall have three year's imprisonment, and make a Fine at the King's pleasure; And if any man withhold Prisoners repleviseable, after that they have offered sufficient Surety, he shall pay a grievous amercement to the King, and if he take any reward for the deliverance of such, he shall pay double to the Prisoner, and also shall be in the great mercy of the King.  
The Answer.  
It must be acknowledged, that a man taken by the commandment of the King is not repleviseable, for so are the express words of this Statute, but this maketh nothing against the Declaration of the Commons; For they say not the Sheriff may replevy such a one by sureties, silicet manucaptores, but he is bailable by the King's Courts of Justice; for the better apprehending whereof, it is to be known, that there is a difference between repleviseable, 
Diversity enter bailable & repleviseable.  which is always by the Sheriff upon pledges or Sureties given, and bailable, which is by a Court of Record, where the Prisoner is delivered to bail, and they are his Gaolers, and may imprison him, and shall suffer for him body for body, as appeareth 33. & 36. Ed 3. titulo mainprize 12. &. 13. where the difference betwixt Bail and Mainprize is expressly, take, and if the words of the Statute themselves be observed, it will appear plainly that it extends to the Sheriff and other inferior Officers, and doth not bind the hands of the Judges. The preamble which is the key that openeth the Entrance into the meaning of the makers of the Law is; Forasmuch as Sheriffs and others have taken and kept in prison persons detected of felony. Out of these words I observe that it nominateth Sheriffs, and then if the Judges should be included, they must be comprehended under that general word, other, which doth not extend to those of an higher rank, but to inferiors, for the best by all courses is first to be named. And therefore if a man bring a Writ of Customs and services, and name rents and other things, the general shall not include homage, which is a personal service; and of an higher nature, but it shall extend to ordinary annual service, 31. E. 1. Droit. 67. So the Statute of 13. El. cap. 10. which beginneth with Colleges, Deans and Chapters, Parsons, Vicars, and concludes with these words, and others having spiritual promotions, shall not comprehend Bishops that are of an higher degree, as appeareth in the Archbishop of Canterbury's Case, 2. Reports, fol. 46. B. And thus much is explained in the very Statute towards the end; when it doth enumerate those were meant by the word, other, namely under Sheriffs, Constables, Bailiffs, etc. Again, the words are Sheriffs, and others which have taken and kept in prison; Now every man knoweth, Judges do neither arrest, nor keep men in prison, that is the office of Sheriffs and other inferior Ministers. Therefore this Statute meant such only and not Judges. The words are further, that they let out by replevin such as are not repleviable, that is the proper language for a Sheriff; Nay, more express afterward in the body of the Statute, that such as are there mentioned, shall be in no wise repleviseable by the common Writ, which is de Homine replegiando, and is directed to the Sheriff, nor without Writ which is by the Sheriff Ex officio. But that which receives no answer is this, that the command of the Justices, who derive their authority from the Crown is the equalled and to this purpose with the command of the King. And therefore by all reasonable construction, it must needs relate to Officers that are subordinate to both, as Sheriffs, undersherifes, Bailiffs, Constables, and the like. And it were a harsh exposition to say that the Justices might not discharge their own command, and yet that reason would conclude as much; And that this was meant of the Sheriff and other ministers of Justice by the recital 27. Ed. 1. cap. 3. and likewise by Fleta a manuscript so called, because the Author lay in the Fleet when he made the book, for he lib. 2. cap. 52. in his Chapter of turns, and the views of the hundred Court in the Country setteth down the Articles of the Charges that are there to be inquired of, amongst which, one of them is De Replegibilibus injuste detentis & irreplegiabilibus dimissis; which cannot be meant of not bayling by the Justices, for what hath the inferior Courts in the Country to do with the acts of the Justices? and to make that more plain, he setteth down in that chapter, that concerneth Sheriffs only, the very Statute of Westminster 1. which he translates verbatim out of the French into the Latin, save that he renders, taken by the command of of the Justices, thus, per judicium Justiciariorum, and his Preface to the Statute plainly showeth, that he understood it of replevine by Sheriffs, for he saith, Qui debent per plegios hoc dimitti, qui non declarat hoc Statutum, and per plegios is before the Sheriff. But for direct authority, 
22. H. 6. 46. ꝑ Newton Chief justice.  it is the opinion of Newton, Chief Justice, 22. H. 6 46. where his words are these; It cannot be intended that the Sheriff did suffer him to go at large by Mainprize, for where one is taken by the Writ of the King, or the Commandment of the King, he is irrepleviseable, but in such case his friends may come to the Justices from him if he be arrested, and purchase a Supersedeas; This Judge concludes that the Sheriff cannot deliver him that is taken by the command of the King, for that he is irrepleviseable, which is the very word of the Statute: but, saith he, his friends may come to the Justices and purchase a Supersedeas; So he declares the very question, that the Sheriff had no power, but the Justices had power to deliver him that is committed by the King's command; and both the ancient and modern practice manifest as much, for he that is taken for the death of a man, or for the Forest, is not repleviable by the Sheriff, yet they are ordinarily bailed by the Justice, and were by the King's Writs directed to the Sheriffs in the times of Ed. 1. and 2. as appears in the close rolls, which could not be done if they were not bailable. And it is every day's experience, that the Justices of the King's Bench do bail for Murder, and for offences done in the Forest, which they could not do, if they were irrepleviseable, if Westminst. 1. were meant of the Justices, aswell as of the Sheriffs. For authorities that have been offered to prove the contrary, are in number three, the first is 21. Ed. 3. Rot. 2. which also is in the Book of Pleas in Parliament at the Tower, upon an action there brought, fol. 44. It is not an Act of Parliament, but a resolution in Parliament upon an action there brought, which was usual in those times. And the case is, that Stephen Rabaz, the Sheriff of the Counties of Leicester and Warwick, was questioned, for that he had let at large by Surety, amongst others, one William, the son of Walter le Pesons, against the will and command of the King, whereas the King had commanded him by Letters under the Privy Seal, that he should do no favour to any man that was committed by the Earl of Warwick, as that man was, whereunto the Sheriff answered, that he did it at the request of some of the King's household upon their Letters, and because the Sheriff did acknowledge the receipt of the King's Letters, thereupon he was committed to prison according to the form of the Statute. To this I answer, the Sheriff was justly punished, for that he is expressly bound by the Statute of Westminst. 1. which was agreed from the beginning, but this is no proof, that the judges had no power to bail this man.  
The next Authority is 33. H. 6. in the Court of Common Pleas, fo. 28. b. 29. where Sobert Poyning Esquire, was brought to the Bar upon a Capias, and was returned, that he was committed Per Duos de Consilio, (which is strongest against what I maintain) pro diversis causis regem tangent. and he made an Attorney there in an action, whence it's inferred, that the return was good, and the party could not be delivered. To this the answer is plain.  
First, no opinion is delivered in that book, one way or other, upon the return, neither is there any testimony whether he were delivered, or bailed, or not. 2. It appears expressly, that he was brought thither, to be charged in an action of debt, at another man's suit, and no desire of his own to be delivered, or bailed, and then if he were remanded, it is in no way material to the question in hand. But that which is most relied upon, is the opinion of Stan. in his Book of Pleas of the Crown lib. 2. cap. 18. fol. 72. 73. in his Chapter of Mainprize, where he reciteth the Statute of Westminst. 1. cap. 15. and then saith thus; 
Rns all Obi. horse de Stan. pl. Cor' 72.  By this Statute it appears, that in four cases at the Common law a man was not repleaviable, to wit, those that were taken for the death of a man, by the command of the King, or his Justices, or for the Forest, thus fare he is most right, than he goeth on, and saith, as to the command of the King, that is understood by the command of his own mouth, or his counsel, which is incorporated unto him, and speak with his mouth, or otherwise every Writ or Capias to take a man, which is the King's command, would be as much; and as to the command of the Juces, that is meant their absolute commandment, for if it be by their ordinary commandment, he is repleviable by the Sheriff, if it be not in some of the cases prohibited by the Statute.  
The answer that I give unto this is, that Stanford had said nothing whether a man may be committed without cause by the King's command, or whether the Judges ought not to bail him in such Case, only that such a one is not repleviseable, which is agreed, for that belongs to the Sheriff. And because no man should think he meant any such thing, he concludes the whole Sentence touching the Command of the King and the Justices, that one committed by the ordinary command of the Justice, is repleviseable by the Sheriff, or at least it appears not that he meant, that a man committed by the King, or by the Privy Counsel without cause, should not be bailable by the Justices, and he hath given no opinion in this case; what he would have said, if he had been asked the question cannot be known, neither doth it appear, that by any thing that he hath said, he meant any such thing as would be inferred out of him. And now my Lords I have performed the Commands of the Commons, and as I conceive shall clear the Declaration of personal liberty, an ancient and undoubted truth, fortified with seven Acts of Parliament, and not opposed by any Statute or authority of law whatsoever.   

The objections of the King's Counsel, with like answers made thereunto, at the two other Conferences touching the same matter.  
IT was agreed by the Attorney general, that the 7. Statutes urged by the Commons were in force, and that magna Charta did extend most properly to the King, but he said, 
1. Object.  1. That some of them are in general words, and therefore conclude nothing, but are to be expounded by the Precedents, and others that be more particular, are applied to the Suggestions of Subjects, and not to the Kings command simply of itself; 
Le Rns.  Hereunto it was answered, that the Statutes were as direct as could be, which appeareth by the reading of them, and that though some of them speak of Suggestions of the Subjects, yet others do not, and they that do are as effectual, for that they are in equal reason, a commitment by the command of the King, being of as great force, when it moveth from a Suggestion from a Subject, as when the King taketh notice of it himself, the rather for that Kings seldom intermeddle with matters of this nature, but by information from some of their people.  

2. Object.  2. Master Attorney objected that per legem terrae in Magna Charta (which is the foundation of this question) cannot be understood for Process of the Law and original Writs, for that in criminal proceed no original Writ is used at all, But every Constable either for Felony or breach of the Peace, or to prevent the breach of the Peace, may commit without Process or original Writ, and it were hard the King should not have the power of a Constable. And the Statute cited by the Commons, make Process of the Law, and Writ original, to be all one.  

Le Rns.  The answer of the Commons to this Objection was, that they do not intent original Writs only by the Law of the Land, but all other legal Process, which comprehends the whole proceed of Law upon cause, other than trial by Jury, Judicium parium, unto which it is opposed, thus much is imported ex vi termini out of the word Process, and by the true acceptation thereof in the Statutes which have been used by the Commons to maintain their Declaration, and most especially the Statutes of 25. Ed. 3. cap. 4. where it appeareth that a man ought to be brought in to answer by the course of the Law, having former mention of Process made by original Writ. And in 28. Ed. 3. cap. 3. by the course of the Law is rendered by the due Process of the Law. And 36. Ed. 3. Rot. Parliamenti numero 20. The Petition of the Commons saith, that no man ought to be imprisoned by special command without Indictment or other due Process to be made by the Law. 37. Ed. 3. cap. 18. calleth the same thing Process of the Law, and 42. Ed. 3. cap. 3. styleth it by due Process and Writ original, where the conjunctive must be taken for a dis-junctive, which charge is ordinary to an exposition of Statutes and Deeds to avoid inconveniences, to make it stand with the rest, and with reason, as it may be collected by the law of the Land in Magna Charta, by the course of the Law in 25. Ed. 3. by the due Process of Law in 28. Ed. 3. other due Process to be made by the Law in 36. Ed. 3. Process of the Law in 37. Ed. 3. and by due Process and Writ original in 42. Ed. 3. are one and the same thing, the later of these Statutes referring always to the former, and that all of them import any due and regular proceed of law upon a cause other than the trial by Jury. And this appeareth 10. Rep. 74. in the Case of the Marshalsea, and 11. Rep. 99 James Baggs Case, where it is understood of giving Jurisdiction by Charter or prescription which is the ground of a proceeding by course of law. And in selden's Notes on Fortescue, fol. 29. where it is expounded for Law wager, which is likewise a trial by law by the oath of the parties, differing from that by Jury. And it doth truly comprehend these and all other regular proceed in law upon cause, which gives authority to the Constable to arrest upon cause. And if this be not the true exposition of these words per legem terrae, the King's Counsel were desired to declare their meaning, which they never offered to do, and yet certainly these words were not put into the Statute without some intention of consequence. 
3. Objection.  And thereupon Mr. Sergeant Ashley offered an interpretation of them thus, namely; that there were divers Laws of this Realm, as the Common law, the law of the Chancery, the Ecclesiastical law, the law of the Admiralty, or Marine law, the law of Merchants, the Marshal law, and the law of State, and that these words per legem terrae do extend to all these Laws. 
Rns a ceo.  To this it was answered, that we read of no law of State, and that none of these Laws can be meant there save the Common law, which is the principal and general Law, and is always understood by the way of Excellency, when mention is of the law of the Land generally, and that though each of the other Laws, which are admitted into this Kingdom by Custom or Act of Parliament, may justly be called a law of the Land, yet none of them can have the pre-eminence to be styled the Law of the Land. And no Statute, Law book, or other authority, printed or unprinted, could be shown, to prove that the Law of the Land, being generally mentioned, was ever intended of any other than the Common Law, and yet even by these other Laws a man may not be committed without a cause expressed. But it standeth with the rule of other legal expositions, that per legem terrae must be meant the Common Law, which is the general and universal Law, by which men hold their Inheritances, and therefore if a man speak of Escuage generally, it is understood as Littleton observeth, Sect. 99 of the incertain Escuage, which is a Knight's service tenure, for the defence of the Realm, by the body of the tenant in time of wars, and not of a certain Escuage which giveth only a contribution in money, and no personal service. And if a Statute speak of the King's Courts of Record, it is meant only of the 4. at Westminster by way of excellency, 6. Rep. 20. Gregory's Case; So the Canonists by the Excommunication simply spoken, do intent the greater excommunication. And the Emperor in his Institutions saith, that the Civil Law being spoken generally is meant of the Civil law of Rome, though the Law of every City is a Civil Law; as when a man names the Poet, the Grecians understand Homer, the Latinists Virgil. 2. Admit per legem terrae extend to all the Laws of the Land, yet a man must not be committed by any of them, but by the due proceed that are executed by those Laws, and upon a cause declared. 
4. Object.  Again, it was urged that the King was not bound to express a cause of imprisonment, because there may be in it matter of State, not fit to be revealed for a time, lest the confederates thereupon make means to escape the hands of Justice. And therefore the Statute cannot be intended to restrain all commitments unless a cause be expressed, for that it would be very inconvenient and dangerous to the State, to publish the Cause at the very first. 
Le Rns.  Hereunto it was replied by the Commons, that all danger and inconvenience may be avoided by declaring a general Cause, as for Treason, suspicion of Treason, misprision of Treason or felony, without specifying the particular, which can give no greater light to a confederate, then will be conjectured by the very apprehension upon the imprisonment, if nothing at all were expressed. 
5. Object.  It was further alleged that there was a kind of contradiction in the position of the House of Commons, when they say a party committed without a cause shown, aught to be delivered or bailed, Bayling being a kind of imprisonment, delivery a total freeing. 
Le Rns.  To this it hath been answered, that it hath always been the discretion of the Judges, to give so much respect to a commitment by the Command of the King, or the Privy Council, which are ever intended to be done in just and weighty causes, that they will not presently let them free, but bail them to answer what shall be objected against them on his Majesty's behalf; but if any other inferior Officer do commit a man without showing cause, they do instantly deliver him, as having no cause to expect their leisure. So the delivery is applied to an imprisonment by the command of some mean minister of Justice, Bayling when it is done by the command of the King or his Counsel.  

6. Object.  It was urged by Mr. Attorney, that Bayling is a grace and favour of a Court of Justice, and that they may refuse to do it. 
Le Rns.  This was agreed to be true in divers cases, as where the cause appears to be for felony or other crimes expressed, for that there is another way to discharge them in convenient time by their trial, and yet in these cases the constant practice hath been anciently and modernly to bail men, but where no cause of the imprisonment is returned, but the Command of the King, there is no way to deliver such persons by trial or otherwise, but that of the Habeas Corpus. And if they should be then remanded, they might be perpetually imprisoned without any remedy at all, and consequently a man that had committed no offence might be in worse case than a great offender, for the later should have an ordinary trial to discharge him, the other should never be delivered. 
7. Objection.  It was further said, that though the Statute of Westminster 1. cap. 15. be a Statute which by way of provision did extend only to the Sheriff, yet the recital of that touching the four causes wherein a man was not repleviseable at the common law, namely those that were committed for the death of a man, by the command of the King, or of his Justices, or for the Forest, did declare that the Justices could not bail such a one, and that repleviseable and bailable were Synomina all one, and that Stanford a Judge of great authority doth expound it accordingly, 
Stan. pl. Cor. 72.  and that neither the Statute nor he say repleviseable by the Sheriff, but generally without restraint; And that if the chief Justice committed a man, he is not to be enlarged by any other Court, as appeareth in the Register. 
Le Rns.  To this it was answered, That the recital of the body of the Statute, relateth only to the Sheriff only, as appeareth by the very words. 2. That Repleviseable is to the Sheriff, for that the word imports no more, but a man committed by the chief Justice, is bailable by the Court of King's Bench. 3. That Stanford meaneth all of the Sheriff, or at least he hath not sufficiently expressed that he intended the Justices. 4. It was denied that Repleviseable and bailable was the same, for they differ in respect of the place where they are used, bail being in the King's Court of record, Repleviseable before the Sheriff, and they are of several natures, repleviable being a letting at large upon surety, bayling being when one traditur in Balliv. the bail are his jailors and may imprison him, and shall suffer body for body, which is not of replevying by Sureties, and differeth from Mainprize in this, 
Diversity enter bail & mainprize.  Mainprize is an undertaking in a some certain, Bayling to answer the condemnation in Civil causes, and for criminal, body for body. And the reasons and authorities in the first Conference were then renewed, and no exceptions taken to any save that in 22. H. 6. it doth not appear that the command of the King was by his mouth, which must be intended, or by his Counsel, which is all one, as is observed by Stanford, for the words are that a man is not repleviseable by the Sheriff, who is committed by the Writ or the commandment of the King, 21. Ed. 1. Rot. 2. Dors. was Cited by the King's Counsel, that it was answered, that it concerned the Sheriff of Leicester shire only, and not the power of the judges, 33. H. 6. the King's Attorney confessed was nothing to the purpose, and yet that Book hath been usually cited by those that maintain the contrary to the Declaration of the Commons. And therefore such sudden opinions as have been given thereupon are not to be regarded the foundation failing. And where it was said that the French of 36. Ed. 3. Rot. parliamenti numero 9 which can receive no answer did not warrant what was inferred thence, but that these words Sans disturbance mettre, ou arrest fair, & le contre per special mandement ou autre mannere must be understood, that the Statute should be put in execution without putting disturbance, or making arrest to the contrary by special command or in other manner, The Commons did utterly deny the interpretation given by the King's Counsel, and to justify their own, did appeal to all men that understood the French, and upon the 7. Statutes did conclude, that their Declaration remained an undoubted truth, not controlled by any thing said to the contrary.   

Sir Edward Littleton's Precedents. The true Copies of the Records not printed, which were used on either side of that part of the Debate.  
Inter Record. Domini Regis Caroli in Thesaurario receipt. Scacarij sui sub custodia Thesaurar. & Camerar ibidem remanent. viz. pl. Coram ipso Domino Rege, & consilio suo, ad Parliamentum suum post Pasch. apud London in Maner' Arch-Episcopi Ebor', Anno Regni Domini Regis Ed. 3. 21. inter alia sic continetur ut sequitur, Rot. 2. indorso.  

STephanus Rabaz Vicecomes Leic. & Warw. coram ipso Domino Rege & ejus Concilio arenatus & ad Rudom positus de hac quod cum I. B. E. H. & W. H. nuper balliv' ipsius Vicecomitis per Dom. Regem fuissent assign' ad Gaolas Domini Regis deliberand. eidem vic' quendam W. P. per quendam appellatorem ante adventum eorum Justiciariorum ibidem appellat. & capt. vivente ipso appellatore usque diem deliberationis coram eye fact. demissat. per pleviam contra formam Statuti, etc. Et etiam quendam R. de C. qui de morte hominis judicatus fuit, & per eundem Vicecomit' captus, Jdem Vic' per pleviam demisit contra formam Stat. & etiam idem R. sine ferris coram eisdem Iusticiar' ad deliberationem praed' produxit contra consuetudinem Regni, & similiter quendam Walterum filium Walteri le Persone qui per praeceptum Comitis Warwici captus fuit dimisit per pleviam contra vocem & preceptum Domini Regis Cum idem Dominus Rex sub literas suas sub privato Sigillo suo eidem Vicecomit precipiet quod nulli per preceptum praed. Com. Warwici capt. aliquam gratiam vel favorem fac. etc. Et super hoc praefat. I. B. qui presens est, & qui fuit primus Justiciar. pred. premiss. recordatur & pred. vicecomes dicit quoad. pred. W. P. ipse nunquam a tempore captionis ipsius W. per pred appellatorem demiss. fuit per pleviam aliquam ante advent. pred. Justiciar. Imo dicit quod per dimid. Anni ante Adventum eorum Justiciar. captus fuit. Et quoad pred. R. bene cognoscit quod ipse dimisit eum per pleviam, & hoc bene facere poterat ratione ac authoritate officij, sui, eo quod captus fuit pro quadam simplici transgressione, & non pro aliqua felonia, pro qua replegiare non potuit. Et quoad 3. vizt. W. filium Persone bene cognoscit quod ipse captus fuit per preceptum pred. Com. Warwici & quod dimisit eum per pleviam. Sed dicit quod hoc fecit ad rogatum quorundam de Hospitio & Curia Dom. Regis qui eum similiter inde rogaverint per literas suas. Et super hoc idem vicecom quesivit per Dom. Regem quis eum rogavit, & literas suas ei direxit, & ubi literae illae sunt, dicit quod Walterus de Langton eum per literas suas inde rogavit, sed dicit quod literae illae sunt in partibus suis Leic. Et super hoc idem Vicecomes profert bre. Dom. Regis de privato sigillo eidem vic. direct. quod testatnr quod Dominus Rex eidem Vic. precipit, quod omnes illos trans. contra pacem, & de quibus Comes Warwici ei Scire fecit, caperet, & Salvo Custodiret absque aliqua gracia eis facienda. Et quia pred. Justiciar' expresse recordata, quod ipse & socij sui per bonum & legalem inquisitionem de militibus & aliis communibus coram eye fact. invenerunt quod pred. W. de Petling dimissus fuit per pleviam per magnum tempus ante adventum eorundem Justic. usque adventum eorundem & per vic. pred. Et etiam quia pred. vic. cognoscit quod pred. R. dimissus fuit per pleviam per ipsum vic. & hoc dic. quod bene facere potuit, eo quod captus fuit pro levi transgression. & per record. ejusdem justiciar. compert. est quod captus fuit pro morte hominis quod est contrar. dict. pred. vicecom. & similiter quod idem Vicecom. cognovit, quod recepit literam Dom. Regis por quam Rex ei precepit, quod nullam gratiam fecerit illis qui capt. fuer. per precept. pred. Com. & idem vicecomes contra preceptum illud dimisit pred. Willielmum filium Walteri per pleviam qui captus fuit per pretextum pred. Comitis pro ut idem Vicecomes fatetur. Et sic tam ratione ipsius transgr. quam aliorum pred. incidit in pe●…am Stat. Concest. quod pred. Vicecomes comittatur prisonae juxta formam Statuti, etc.   

Ex Rot. Parliamenti de Anno 36. Regis Ed. 3. Numero 9  
Primerment & la grand Chartre, & le Chartre de Forrest, & les autres Statuts fait en son temps de ses Progenitores per profits de luy, & de la Commenalty soient bien & ferment garder, & mice en due execution sauns disturbance mettre ou arrest fair le contre per special mandement, ou en autre manere. 
Le Rns.  Nostre Seignior le Roy per assent Prelates, Dukes, Comites, Barons, & la Comenaltie ad ordain & establish que les dits Chartres & Statuts soient tenus & mice en execution so lon le dit Petition.   

Numero 12.  

Sta. 36. Ed. 3. num. 22.  
Petition.  Item, comme il soit conteine en le grand Chartre & autre Statut que nul home serra prise ne imprison per special mandement sans Indictment, ou autre Process a fair per le ley & sovent foits ad estre, & uncore est que pleasures gents' sont emperches prize, & imprison sauns indictement ou autre Proces fait per le ley sur eux, cibien del choose fait hors de le forest Dom. Regis cum per autre Cause que please avaut dit par le command. & deliv. ceux que sont auxi prise per tiel special mandement contre le forme de Chartres & Statutes avaut dits.  

Le Rns.  Item, plest ou Roy & si nul de sent greine veigne, & fait le plaurt & droit serra fait a luy.   

Parliament. Anno 42. Ed. 3. Numero 12.  

Sta. 42. Ed 3. numero 12.  
Petition.  Item, pur ceo que plusors de vostre common sont disworts pur faux accusance queux sont lour accusants' plus pur lour vengences & singles profits que pur le profit del Roy ou de son people, & lafoy accusoits pur eux ascuns ou en prison, & ascuns fait venire devant le consual le Roy per brief ex autre mandement de Roy all grief Relme du contre government de son people ordain que si delores purpose ascun mattre pur profit del Roy que cil matire soit mando a les justices del un Banks, ou del autre, ou del Assizes deut inquire ou terminere solon la ley. Et si touch la accuser ou parte dit sont scient all Common ley, & nul home soit mise a respondere sans presentment devant Iustices en chose de records, & per due Process & brief original solon lafoy ancient ley de la tere & si rien de sore avaunt. ou soit fait e ' le contre soit void en ley & deem pur error. 
Le Rns.  Pur ceo que cest Article est Article de le grand Chartre le Roy voit ceo ley soit fait en la Petition demand.   

Ex Rot. claus. de Anno Regni Regis Ed. 1. primo numero, Membrano 10.  

Anno 1. Ed. 1. Pro transgr. Forr.  Thomas de Clere de Beckwith, captus & detent. in prisona de Northampton pro transgressione forest. habet literas Rogero de Clifford Iusticiar' citra Trent quod ponatur per Bali ' Dat. apud Sanct. Martin. Magn. London 20. die Octobr.   

Membrano 7.  

Pro transgr. Forrest.  Stephanus de Lindsey capt. & detent. in prisona pro transgress. per ipsum fact. in Forrest. Regis de Lindley habet literas Regis Galfrido de Nevil justiciar. ultra Trent. quod ponatur per ballium.   

Membrano 8.  

Pro morte hominis.  Tho. Spademan capt. & detent. in prisona de Oxon. pro morte Willielmi Winne unde rectat. est habet literas Regis Vicec. Oxon. quod ponatur per ball'.   

Membr. 9  
Willielmus de Deane, Matheus Crust, Roger de Bedell, W. ●alfefrench, Robertus Wyatt, Alexander Harcing, Harry de Shorne, Nicolas de Sindilonde, Turgesius de Hertfield, Robertus de Pole, & Richardus Galias, capti & dent in prisona de Cant. pro morte Galfridi de Cottiller unde appellati sunt habent literas Regis Vic' Can. quod ponantur per Ball' Dat. 23. Martij.   

Claus. Anno 2. Ed. 1. Membr. 12.  

Anno 2. Ed. 1.  
Pro transgr. Forrest.  Rex Roger de Clifford, justiciar. Forrest. citra Trent mandamus nobis quod si Robertus Vnwin, Capt. & detent. in prisona nostra de Aylesbury pro transgr. Forrest. nostri invenerit nobis 12. probos & legales homines de Ball. vera qui manucapiant cum habere corum justiciar. nostr. ad placita Forrest. cum in parts, etc. ad Stand. inde rectat. hunc ipsum Robertum si secundam Assisam Forrest. fuer. repleg per dictos disodecim interim traditur in Ball sicut praed. est & habeatis nomina illornm 12. hominum. Et hoc bre. etc. Dat. 27. Februar.   

Claus. Anno 12. Ed. 1. nu. 14.  

De ponend. in Ball'.  
Pro transgr. Forr.  Winimus de Brirot, Galfridus de Wickeram, & Hugo de Stone, detent. in prisona Regis de Ailesbury pro transgr. venationis habuit bre. direct. Rogero de Clifford justiciar. Forrest. quod si secundum Assiss. Foristacerunt repleg. usque advent. justiciar. Regis ad plita Forrest. cum in parts illas venerunt. dat. apud Coddington 28. die Decembr.   

Nu. 15.  

Pro morte hominis.  Guilbert Courvey de Keddington, & Hugo le Taylor de Keddington Capt. & detent. in prison●… sancti Edmundi pro morte Bunting unde rectati sunt habuerint literas Regis Vic' Suff. quod ponantur per Ball'.   

Claus. Anno 3. Ed. 1. num 11.  

Anno 3. Ed. 1.  
Pro morte hominis.  Galfridus de Hairton captus & detentus in prisona Regis Ebor' pro morte Adel' Clerk unde rectatus est habet literas Regis vic' Ebor. quod ponatur per Ball' Dat apud Westminst. 14. Junij.   

Num. 20.  

Pro morte hominis.  Robertus Belbarbe captus et detentus in prisona de Newgate pro morte Thomae Pollard unde rectatus est habet literas Regis Vic. Midd. quod ponatur per Ball' Dat. 28. Februar.   

Claus. nu. 4. Ed. 1. Membr. 5.  

Pro transgr. Forrest.  Mandatum est Rado de Sandwico quod si W. de Pattare, & johannes filius ejus, Walterus Home, Walterus Corwen, Henricus Path, & W. Cadegan, capt. & detent. in prisona Regis de Sct. Brionell pro transgr. Forr. unde rectati sunt invenerint sibi 12. probos & legales homines de Ballia sua, vizt. quilibet eorum 12. qui eos manuc ap' habere coram justiciar. Regis ad plita Forrest. cum in parts illas venerint ad stand. inde rectat. tunc ipsos Willielm. johannem, Walterum, Walterum, Henricum, & Willielm. pred. 12. si secundum Assiss. fuer. repleg. tradantur in Ball' ut pred. est si habent ibi nomina illorum 12. hominum & hoc bre. Test. Rege apud Bell' locum Regis 29. die Augusti.   

Claus. Anno 4. Ed. 1. membr. 16.  

Pro morte hominis.  Henricus filius Rogeri de Kemi & Cottesbrooke capt. & detent. in prisona nostra Northampton promorte Symonis de Charrettell unde appellatus est habet literas Regis Vic' Northampton quod ponatur per ballium.   

Claus. Anno 5. Ed. 1. membr. 1.  

Pro transgr. Forrest.  Mandatnm est Galfrid. de Nevil justiciar. Forrest. ultr. Trent. quod S. Walterus de le Greene Captus & detentus in prisona de Nottingham pro transgr. For ' invenerit sibi 12. probos & legales homines qui eum manucapiant, etc. ad stand' inde rectat. secundum assiss. Forr' Regis tunc ibidem Walter. pred. 12. traditur in Ballium sicut praed. est. Dat. 16. Novemb.   

Membrano 2.  

Pro morte hominis.  Thomas de Vpwell, & juliana uxor ejus Capt. & detent. in prisona de Wynbotesham pro morte Stephani Southet unde rectat. sunt habent literas Vic' Norff. quod ponantur per Ballium. Dat. apud Rothelm 28. die Septembr.   

Claus. Anno 6. Ed. 1 nu. 2.  

Pro morte uxor.  Bitherus Pestle captus & detentus fuit in prisona Rs de Norwici pro morte julianae quondam uxor' suae unde rectatus est & habet literas Vic' Norff. quod ponatur per Ball' Teste Rege apud Westminst. 12. Novemb.   

Membr. 4.  

Pro transg. Forr.  Mandatum est Vic' Nottingham quod si Tho. de Cudart rectat. de transgr. Forrest. quod fecisse dicebatur in Forrest. de Sherwood invenerit sibi sex probos & legales homines de Ballia sua qui eum Manucap' habere coram rege ad mandatum regis ad Stand. rect. coram rege cum Rex inde cum eo loqui voluerit tunc praed. Tho. praed. 6. hominibus trad. in Ball' juxta manucapt. praed. Dat. 12. die Decembr.   

Membr. 4.  

Pro morte hominis.  Tho. Burrell captus & detent. in prisona Regis Oxon. pro morte Galfrid. Geffard unde rectat. est habet literas Dom. Regis Vic' Devon. quod ponatur per Ball'.   

Claus. Anno 1. Ed. 2. Membr. 1.  

Pro morte hominis.  johannes Brynn de Rollin Writh capt. & detent. in prisona Regis Oxon. pro morte Johannis de Sutton unde rectat. est habet literas Regis Vic. Oxon. quod ponatur per Ball. usque prim. Assiss. si ea occasione, etc. Teste Rege apud Bristol 28. junij.   

Membr. 2.  
W. Spore Capell. captain. & detent. in prisona Regis Oxon. pro morte Johannis Spore unde Jndictatus est, & habet literas Regis Vic D'evon. quod ponatur per Ballium usque ad prox. Assis. si ea occasione, etc. Teste rege apud Windsor 28. die Maij.   

Numero 10.  

Pro morte hominis.  Guilbertus Fairchild capt. & dotent. in Gaole Regis Dorcester pro morte Heneri de Langton unde indictat. est habet literas quod ponatur per Ballium usque ad prim' assiss. Teste Rege apua Westminst. 28. Februar'.   

Claus. Anno 2. Ed. 2. Membr. 1.  

Pro morte hominis.  Willielmus Sandie de Cobham Capt. & detent. in prisona Regis Cant. pro morte johannis de Sprink, johannis Ermond de Dunberke unde rectatus est habet literas Regis Vic' Kanc' quod ponatur per Ball' usque ad primam Assiss. Si ea occasione, etc. Teste rege apud Cestre. 29. junij.  

Pro morte hominis.  Raduns Corynn capt. & detentus in Gaol Regis de Lincoln pro morte Willielmi Filij Symonis Porter unde rectat. est & habet literas Regis Vic' Lincoln quod ponatur per Ball' usque ad primum Assiss. Si ea occasione, etc. Teste rege apud Sheen 3. die junij.   

Membrana 7.  

Pro morte hominis.  johannes de Githerd Capt' & detent. in prisona Regis Ebor' pro morte Mathei Samson de Ebor' unde rectatus est habet literas Regis Vic' Ebor' quod ponatur per Ball' usque ad prim' Assiss. Dat. apud Langele 50. die Aprilis.   

Claus. 3. Ed. 2. Membr. 3.  

Pro morte hominis.  Adam de Pepper captus & detent. in Gaol Regis Ebor' pro morte Henrici de Syner' de Eastrick unde rectatus est habet literas Regis Vic' Ebor' quod ponat' per Ball' usque ad primum Assiss. Teste rege apud Westminst. 7. die Febr.   

Numero 14.  

Pro morte 2. femes.  Margareta uxor Willielmi Colbot capta & detenta in Gaol Regis Norwici pro morte Agnetis filiae Willielmi Colbot, & Matildae sororis ejusdem Agnetis unde rectata est habet literas Regis Vic' Norff. quod ponatur per Ball' Teste rege apud Sheen 22. januar.   

Numero 16.  

Pro morte hominis.  johannes Frere Captus & detent. in Gaol Regis Oxon. pro morte Adae de Egeleigh unde rectata est habet literas Regis Vic' Devon. quod ponatur per Ball' Teste rege apud Westminst. 8. Decembr.   

Claus. Anno 4. Ed. 2. Membr. 7.  

Pro morte hom.  Robertus Shrenes Capt. & detent. in Gaol Regis de Colchester pro morte Roberti le Maigme unde rectat. est habet literas Regis Vic' Essex quod ponatur per Ball' usque ad prim' Assiss. Dat. 22. die Maij.   

Numero 8.  

Pro morte hom.  W. Filius Robertile Fishere de Shirborne capt. & detent. in Gaol Regis Ebor' pro morte Roberti le Monus de Norton unde rectatus est habet literas Regis Vic. Ebor. quod ponatur per Ball. usque ad primam Assiss. Dat. 25. April.   

Claus. Anno 4. Ed. 2. Numero. 22.  

Pro morte hom.  Thomas Ellis de Stanford capt. & detent. in prisona Regis Lincolne pro morte Michaelis filii Willielmi de Fodering unde rectat. est habet literas Regis Vic. Lincoln quod ponatur per Ball' usque ad prim. Assiss. Teste Rege apud novum monasterium 8. die Septembr.     

Mr. Seldens Argument.  
The Argument which by the Command of the House of Commons was made at their first conference with the Lords, touching the personal liberty of the person of every Freeman, out of Precedents of Record, and resolutions of Judges in former times.  

MY LORDS,  
YOur Lordships have heard from the Gentleman that last spoke a great part of the grounds upon which the House of Commons upon mature deliberation proceeded to that clear resolution touching the right of the liberty of their persons. The many Acts of Parliament, which are the written laws of the Land, and are expressly in the point, have been read and opened, and such Objections as have been by some made to them, and some Objections also made out of another Act of Parliament, have been cleared and answered. It may seem now perhaps (my Lords) that little remains needful to be further added, for the enforcement and maintenance of so fundamental and established a right and liberty belonging to every Freeman of the Kingdom. But in the examination of questions of Law of right, besides the Laws or Acts of Parliament, that ought chief to direct and regulate every man's judgement, whatsoever hath been put in practice to the contrary, there are commonly used also former Judgements or Precedents, and indeed have been so used sometimes, that the weight of reason, of law, and of Acts of Parliament, hath been laid by, and resolutions have been made, and that in this very point, only upon the interpretation and apprehension of Precedents. Precedents my Lords are good media or proofs of illustration or confirmation where they agree with the express Law, but they can never be proof enough to overthrow any one law much less seven several Acts of Parliament as the number of them is for the point. The house of Commons therefore taking into consideration that in this question being of so high a nature that never any exceeding it in any Court of Justice whatsoever all the several ways of just examination of the truth should be used, have also most carefully informed themselves of all former judgements or precedents concerning this great point either way, and have been no less careful of the due preservation of his Majesty's just prerogative then of their own rights. The Precedents here are of two kinds, either merely matter of record, or else the former resolutions of the Judges after solemn debate in the point.  
This point that concerns precedents the House of Commons have commanded me to present to your Lordships, which I shall as briefly as I may, so I do it faithfully and perspicuously. To that end my Lords, before I come to the particulars of any of those Precedents, I shall first remember to your Lordships, that which will seem as a general key for the opening and true apprehension of all them of Record, without which key no man unless he be versed in the entries and course of the King's Bench can possibly understand them.  
In all cases my Lords where any right or liberty belongs to the Subjects by any positive law written or unwritten, if there were not also a remedy by Law for the enjoying or regaining this right or liberty when it is violated or taken from him, the positive law were most vain and to no purpose, and it were to no purpose, for any man to have any right in any land or other inheritance, if there were not a known remedy, that is an action or writ, by which in some Court of ordinary Justice he might recover it. And in this case of right of liberty of person, if there were not a remedy in the Law for regaining it when it is restrained, it were of no purpose to speak of laws that ordain it should not be restrained. Therefore in this case also I shall first show you the remedy that every Freeman is to use for the regaining of his liberty when he is against law imprisoned, that so upon the legal course and form to be held in using that remedy, the Precedents or Judgements upon it, for all Judgements of Record rise out of this remedy, may be easily understood. There are in law divers remedies for enlarging of a Freeman imprisoned, as the writts of Odio & Atia, and of Homine replegiando, besides the common or most known Writs of Habeas Corpus, or Corpus cum causa, as it is called also.  
The first two Writs are to be directed to the Sheriffs of the County, and lie in some particular Cases, with which it would be untimely for me to trouble your Lordships, because they concern not that which is committed to my charge. But that Writ of Habeas Corpus, or Corpus cum causa, is the highest remedy in Law for any man that is imprisoned, and the only remedy for him that is imprisoned by the special command of the King, or the Lords of the Privy Counsel, without showing cause of the commitment, neither is there in the law any such thing, nor was there ever mention of any such thing in the Laws of this Land, as a Petition of right to be used in such cases for liberty of the person, nor is there any legal course for enlargement to be taken in such cases, howsoever the contrary hath upon no ground or colour of law been pretended. Now my Lords, if any man be so imprisoned by any such command, or other wise, in any prison whatsoever through England, and desire by himself, or any other in his behalf, this Writ of Habeas Corpus for the purpose in the Court of the King's Bench, the Writ is to be granted to him, and ought not to be denied him, no otherwise then another ordinary original Writ in the Chancery, or other common Process of law may be denied, which amongst other things the House resolved also, upon mature deliberation, and I was commanded to let your Lord sh. know so much. This Writ is directed to the Keeper of the Prison in whose custody the prisoner remains, commanding him that after a certain day he bring in the body of the prisoner, ad Subiiciend. & recipiend. juxta quod curia conceda verit, etc. una cum causa Captionis, & detentionis, and oftentimes una cum causa detentionis only, captionis being omitted.  
The Keeper of the prison thereupon returns by what warrant he detains the prisoner, and with his return filled to his Writ, brings the prisoner to the Bar at the time appointed; When the return is thus made, the Court judgeth of the sufficiency or insufficiency of it, only out of the body of it, without having respect to any other thing whatsoever; that is they to suppose the return to be true whatsoever it be, if it be false, the prisoner may have his action on the Case against the Gaoler that brought him. Now my Lords, when the prisoner comes thus to the Bar, if he desire to be bailed, and that the Court upon the view of the return think him in Law to be bailable, than he is always first taken from the keeper of the Prison that brings him, and committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, and afterwards bailed, and the entry perpetually is Committitur Mariscallo & postea traditur in Ball', for the Court never bayles any man, until he first become their own prisoner, and be in Custodia Marriscall ' of that Court. But if upon the return of the Habeas Corpus it appear to the Court, that the prisoner ought not to be bailed, nor discharged from the prison whence he is brought, than he is remanded or sent back again there to continue, until by course of law he may be delivered, and the entry in this Case is Remittitur quousque secundum legem deliberatus fuerit, or Remittitur quousque, etc. which is all one, and the highest award or judgement that ever was or can be given upon a Habeas Corpus. But if the Judges doubt only whether in Law they ought to take him from the prison whence he came, or give a day to the Sheriff to amend his Writ, as often they do, than they remaund him only, during the time of their doubt, or until the Sheriff hath amended his return, and the Entry upon that is Remittitur only, or Remittitur prisonae praed, without any more. And so remittitur generally is of fare less moment in the award upon the Habeas Corpus, then remittitur quousque, etc. howsoever the vulgar opinions raised out of the late Judgement be to the contrary. All these things are of most known and constant use in the Court of King's Bench, as it cannot be doubted but your Lordships will easily know from the grave and learned my Lords the Judges.  
These two courses, the one of the entry of Committitus marshal. & postea traditur in Ballium, and the other remittitur quousque, etc. & Remittitur generally, or Remittitur prisonae pred, together with the nature of the Habeas corpus, thus stated, it will be easier for me to open, and your Lordships to observe, whatsoever shall occur to the purpose in the Precedents of record, to which I shall come now in the particular. But before I am come to the Precedents, I am to let you know the resolutions of the house of Commons touching the enlargement of a man committed by the command of the King, or the Privy Counsel, or any other, without cause showed of such commitment, it is thus; That if a Freeman be committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by the command of the King, the Privy Counsel, or any other, and no cause of such commitment, deteiner, or restraint, to be expressed for which by law he ought to be committed, detained, or restrained, and the same be returned upon a Habeas Corpus granted for the party, than he ought to be delivered and bailed.  
This resolution as it is grounded upon the Acts of Parliament already shown, and the reason of the law of the Land, which is committed to the charge of another, and anon also to be opened to you, is strengthened also by many Precedents of Record.  
But the Precedents of Record that concern this point are of two kinds, for the House of Commons hath informed itself of such as concern it either way. The first such as show expressly that persons committed by the command of the King or of the Privy Counsel without other cause showed have been enlarged upon bail when they prayed it, whence it appeareth clearly, that by the law they are bailable, and so by Habeas Corpus to be set at liberty, for though they ought not to have been committed without a cause showed of the commitment, yet it is true that the reverend Judges of this Land did such respect to such commitments by the command of the King or of the Lords of the Counsel (as also to the commitment sometimes of inferior persons) that upon the Habeas Corpus, they rarely used absolutely to discharge the persons instantly, but only to enlarge them upon Bail, which sufficiently secures and preserves the liberty of the Subject according to the laws that your Lordships have already heard, nor in any of the cases is there any difference made between such commitments by the Lords of the Counsel, that are incorporated with him. The second kind of Precedents of Record are such as have been pretended to prove the law to be contrary, and that persons so committed ought not to be set at liberty upon bail, 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 appear clearly to your Lordships, that of those of the first kind there are no less than 12. most full and directly in the point to prove that persons so committed are to be delivered upon bail, 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 go through them of the first kind, and so observe them to your Lordships, that such scruples as have been made upon them by some that have excepted against them shall be cleared 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 Seal (as most of the King's commands in those times were) one john de Bildeston a Clergy man to the prison to the Tower without any cause showed of the commitment. The Lieutenant of the Tower is commanded to bring him to the King's Bench, where he is committed to the Marshal, but the Court asks of the Lieutenant, if there were any cause to keep this Bildeston in prison, besides that commitment of the King, he answered no, whereupon the Roll says, Quia videtur cur bre. praed. sufficient. non esse causam praed. johan, 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. Parker's Case.  The second in the first kind of Precedents of Record is in the time of H. 8. one john Parker's Case, who was committed to the Sheriff of London, pro securitate pacis, at the suit of one Brinton, ac pro suspitione feloniae committed by him in Glocestershire, ac per mandatum Dom. Rs. he is committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, & postea isto eodem termino traditur in Ball ' hear were other causes of the commitment, but plainly one was by the command of the King, signified to the Sheriff of London, of which they took notice, but some have interpreted this, as if the commitment had been for suspicion of felony by the command of the King, in which case it is agreeable of all hands, that the Prisoner is bailable, but no man can think so of this precedent that observes the context and understands the Grammar of it, wherein most plainly ac per mandatum Dom. Regis hath no reference to any other cause whatsoever, but is as a single Cause enumerated in the return by itself, as the Record clearly showeth, it is in 22. H. 8. Rot. 37.  

35. H. 8. Bincks Case.  The third is of the same King's time, it is 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. john Bincks Case, he was committed by the Lords of the Counsel pro suspitioniae feloniae ac pro aliis causis illos moventibus qui committitur Mariscallo & immediate ex gratia curiae speciali traditur in Ball ' They committed him for suspicion of felony 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 bailed him without having regard to these unknown causes that moved the Lords of the Counsel. 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 return, insomuch that the Court can know why he is committed, that then he may be bailed, 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, than any other.  

2. & 3. P & Mar. overton's Case.  The fourth of these is in the time of Queen Mary, it is Pasche 2. & 3. P. & Mar. Rot. 58. overton's Case, Richard Overton was returned upon a Habeas Corpus, directed to the Sheriffs of London, to have been committed to them and detained per mandatum pranobilium Dominorum honorabilis consilij Dominorum Regis & Reginae, Qui committitur Marr. & immediate traditur in Ball'. In answer to this Precedent, or by way of objection to the force of it, It hath been said that this Overton at this time stood indicted of high treason. It is true, he was so indicted, but that appears in another Roll, that hath no reference to the return, as the return hath no reference to that Roll, yet they that object this against the force of this Precedent, say that because he was Indicted of Treason, therefore though he were committed by the Command of the Lords of the Counsel without cause shown, yet he was bailable for the Treason, and upon that was here bailed; Then which objection nothing is more contrary, either to law or common reason. It is most contrary to law, for that clearly every return is to be adjudged by the Court out of the body of itself, and not by any other collateral or foreign 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 necessity follow, that whosoever shall be committed by the King, or the Privy Counsel, without cause shown, and be not indicted of Treason or some other offence, may not be enlarged, for by reason of supposition of matter of State, But that whosoever is so committed, and withal stands so indicted though in another Record may be enlarged, whatsoever the matter of State be for which he was committed. The absurdity of which assertion needs not a word for further confutation, as if any of the Gent. in the last judgement, aught to have been the sooner delivered, if he had been also Indicted of Treason, if so, Traitors and Felons have the highest privilege in personal liberty, and that above all other Subjects of the Kingdom.  

4. & 5. Phil. & Mar. Newports Case.  The fifth of this kind is of Queen Mary's time also, it is Pasch. 4. & 5. P. & Mar. Rot. 45. the Case of Edward Newport, he was brought into the King's Bench by Habeas Corpus out of the Tower of London, Cum causa, vizt. Quod Commissus fuit per mandatum Concilii Dominae Reginae qui committitur Marr. & immediate traditur in Ballium.  

Vn objection Rnde.  To this the like answer hath been made, as to that other Case of overton's next before cited, they say that in another roll of another term of the same year, it appears he was in question for suspicion of Coining, and it is true he was so, But the return and his Commitment mentioned in it have no reference to any such offence, nor hath the Baylement of him relation to any thing but to the absolute commitment by the privy Counsel: So that the answer to the like objection made against overton's Case satisfies this also.  

9 El. Lawrences Case.  The sixth of these is of Queen Elizabeth's time, Mich. 9 El. Rot. 35: the case of Tho. Laurence; this Laurence came in by Habeas Corpus, returned by the Sheriffs of London to be detained in prison per mandat. Consilij Dominae Regina qui Committitue Marr. & super hoc traditur in Ballium.  

Objection Rend.  An objection hath been invented against this also, it hath been said that this man was pardoned, and indeed it appears so in the Margin of the roll, where the word pardonatur is entered, but clearly his in largement by Bail was upon the body of the return only, unto which that note of pardon in the Margin of the roll hath no relation at all, and can any man think, that a man pardoned (for what offence soever it be) might not as well be committed for some Arcanum, or matter of State, as one that is not pardoned, or out of his innocence wants no pardon?  

9 El. Constable's Case.  The seaventh of these is in the same year, and of Easter Term following, it is P. 9 El. Rot. 68 Ro. Constable's Case, he was brought by Habeas Corpus out of the Tower, and in the return it appeared he was committed there, per mandatum privati Consiliidictae Dominae Reginae qui Comittitur Marr. & posteae isto eodem ter. traditur in Ball. The like objection hath been made to this, as that before of Laurence, but the self same answer clearly satisfies for them both.  

20 El. browning's Case.  The 8. is of the same Queen's time in Pas. 20 El Rot. 72. john browning's Case. This Browning came by Habeas Corpus out of the Tower, whether he had been committed, and was returned to have been committed, per private. Consil. Dominae Reginae qui comittitur Marr. & postea isto codem termino traditur in Ball. 
Objection Rnde.  To this it hath been said, that it was done at the chief Justice Wrayes Chamber, and not in the Court: and thus the authority of the Precedent hath been lessened or slighted. If it had been done at his Chamber, it would have proved at least this much, that Sir Christopher Wray then chief Justice of the King's Bench, being a grave learned and upright Judge, knowing the Law to be so, did Bail this Browning, and enlarge him, and even so fare the Precedent were of value enough; but it is plain, that though the habeas corpus were returnable, as indeed it appears in the Record itself, at his Chamber in Sergeants Inn; yet he only committed him to the King's Bench presently, and referred the consideration of enlarging him to the Court, who afterward did it: For the Record says, Et postea isto eodem termino traditur in Ball. which cannot be of an enlargement at the chief Justice Chamber.  

40 El. Harecourts Case.  The ninth of this first kind is Hill. 40. El. Rot. 62. Edward Hare Courts Case, he was imprisoned in the Gatehouse, and that per Domines de private Consilio Dominae Reginae pro certis causis eos moventibus & ei ignotis, And upon his habeas corpus was returned to be therefore only detained, Qui Comittitur Marr. & postea isto eodem termino traditur in Ball. To this never any colour of answer hath been yet offered.  

43 El. Catesbies' Case.  The tenth is Catesbies' Case in the vacation after Hill. Term 43. El. Rot. Robert. Catesby was committed to the Fleet per war rantum diversor. pro nobilium viroy de privato Consilio Domine Regina: He was brought before justice Fenner, one of the then justices of the King's Bench by Habeas Corpus at Winchester house Southwark, Et homiss. fuit Marr. per prefat. Edwardum Fenner & statim traditur in Ball.  

12 jac. Beckwiths' Case.  The eleventh is Rich Beckwiths' Case, which was in Hill. 12 of K. james Rot. 153. He was returned upon his Habeas corpus to have been committed to the Gatehouse by divers Lords of the privy Counsel, Qui committitur Marr. & postea esto eodem termino traditur in Ball.  

Objection Rnde.  To this it hath been said by some, that Beckwith was bailed upon a letter, written by the Lords of the Counsel to that purpose to the judges, but it appears not that there was ever any letter written to them to that purpose, which though it had been, would have proved nothing against the authority of the Record: for it was never heard of that judges were to be directed in point of law by letters from the Lords of the Counsel, although it cannot be doubted, but that by such letters, sometimes they have been moved to bail men that would or did not ask their enlargement without such letters, as in some examples I shall show your Lordships among the precedents of the second kind.  

14 jac. Sir Tho. Mounsons' Case.  The 12 and last of these, is that of Sir Tho. Mounsons' Case, it is Mich. 14. Jac. Rot. 147. He was committed to the Tower per warrantum a diversis Dominis de privato Consilio Domini Regis locum tenenti directum, And he was returned by the Lieutenant to be therefore detained in prison, qui committitur Marr. & super hoc traditur in Ball.  

Objection Rnde.  To this it hath been answered, that every body knows by common fame, that this Gentleman was committed for suspicion of the death of Sir Tho. Overbury, and that he was therefore bailable; a most strange interpretation, as if the body of the return, and the warrant of the privy Counsel, should be understood, and adjudged out of fame only; was there not as much a fame why the Gentlemen that were remanded in the last judgement were committed, and might not the self same reason have served to enlarge them, their offence (if any were) being I think much less than that for which this Gentleman was suspected?  
And thus I have faithfully opened the number of 12 Precedents most express in the very point in question, and cleared the objections that have been made against them.  
And of such precedents of Record as are of the first kind, which prove plainly the practice of former ages, and judgement of the Court of King's Bench, in the very point, on the behalf the Subject, my Lords hitherto.  
I am come next to those of the second kind, or such as are pretended that persons so committed are not to be enlarged by the judges upon the habeas corpus brought, but to remain in prison still at the command of the King or the privy Counsel.  

Precedents deal 2. sort. vouch ꝑ le Roy.  These are of two natures, the first of these are where some assent of the King or the privy Counsel appears upon the enlargement of a prisoner so committed, as if that because such assent appears, the enlargement could not have been without such assent.  
The second of this kind are those which have been urged as express testimonies of the judges denying bail, and in such cases, I shall open these also to your ships, which being done, it will most clearly appear, that there is nothing at all in any of these that makes any thing at all against the resolution of the house of Commons touching this point: nay, it is so fare from their making any thing against it, that some of them add good weight also to the proof of that resolution.  

Temps H. 7 Brugs Case.  For those of the first nature of this second kind of Precedents, they begun in the time of H. 7. Tho. Brugge, and divers others were imprisoned in the Kings ad mandatum Dom. Regis, they never sought remedy by habeas corpus, or otherwise, for aught appears: But the Roll says, that Dominus Rex relaxavit mandatum, and so they were bailed. But can any man think that this is an Argument either in Law or common reason, that therefore they could not have been bailed without such assent? It is common in Cases of common persons, that one being in prison for surety of the peace or the like, at the suit of another, is bailed upon the release of the party plaintiff; Can it follow, that therefore he could not have been bailed without such release? nothing is more plain than the contrary. It were the same thing to say, that if it appear, that if a plaintiff be non suit, therefore unless he had been non suit, he could not have been barred in the suit. The Case last cited is, Mich. 7. H. 7 rot. 6.  

7 H. 7. bartholomew's Case.  The very like is in the same year, Hill 7. H. 7. Rot. 13. The Case of Will. Bartholomew, Will. Chase and divers others, and the self same answer that is given to the other clears this.  

7 H. 7. Beomonds' Case.  So in the same year Pas. 7. H. 7 rot. 18. john Beomonds' Case is the same in substance with those other two, and the self same answer also satisfies that clears them.  

12 H. 7. Yews Case.  The next Case is, Mich. 12. H. 7. rot. 8. Tho. Yews Case, he was committed ad sec. pacis, for the security of the peace, at the suit of one Freeman, and besides, ad mandatum Dom. Regis, And first, Freeman relaxavit sec. pacis, and then Sir James Hubbard, the than King's Attomey General relaxavit mandatum Dom Regis, And hereupon he is bailed, the release of the King's Attomy, no more proves that he could not have been enlarged, without such release or assent, then that he could not have been bailed, without release of surety of the peace by Freeman.  

9 H. 7. Bochers' Case.  The very like is in Hill. 9 H. 7. rot. 14. The Case of Humphrey Boch, which proves no more here then the rest of this kind already cited.  

39 Eliza. Brooms case  Then for this point also Brooms Case of Queen Elizabeth's time, is Trim. 39 El. rot. 128. Laurence Broome was committed to the Gatehouse per mandatum Dom. Consilii Dominae Reginae, And being returned so upon the habeas corpus, is first committed to the marshalsea as the course is, and then bailed by the Court, which indeed is an express precedent, that might perhaps well have been added to the number of the first 12, which so plainly show the practice of enlarging prisoners in this Case, by judgement of the Court upon the habeas corpus, But it is true, that in the scrolls of that year where the bails are entered, but not in the Record of the Habeas Corpus, there was a note, that this Broom was bailed per mandatum privati Consilii, but plainly this is not any kind of Argument, that therefore in law he might not have been other wise bailed.  

40 Wendens Case.  The self same is to be said of another of this kind, in Mich. 40. El. rot. 37. Wendens Case, Tho. Wenden was committed to the Gatehouse by the Queen and the Lords of the Counsel procertis causis generally, he is brought by Habeas corpus into the King's Bench, and bailed by the Court. But it is said, that in the Scrolls of that year it appears, that his enlargement was pro consensum Dom. privati Consilii, and it is true that the Queen's Attorney did tell the Court, that the Lords of the Counsel did assent to it. Follows it therefore that it could not have been without such assent.  

43 Eliz.  Next is Hill. 43. El. rot. 89. when divers Gentlemen of special quality were imprisoned by the command of the Privy Counsel, the Queen being graciously pleased to enlarge them, sends a commandment to the judges of the King's Bench, that they should take such a course, for the delivering of them upon bail as they should think fit, and they did so, and enlarged them upon Writs of hab. corpus. Follows it therefore, that this might not have been done by law, if the parties themselves had desired it.  

jac. Sir Io. Brockets Case.  So in Tr. 1 Jac. rot. 30. Sir Io. Brocket being committed to the Gatehouse, is returned to stand committed pro mandatum pravati Consilii, and he is enlarged virtute warranti. a Consilio predicti. But the same answer that satisfy for the rest before cited, serves for this also.  

12 jac. James Reynar Case  The last of these, is Reynars case, in Mich. 12. jac. rot. 119. he was committed to the Gatehouse, by the Lords of the Counsel, and being brought into the King's Bench by Habeas Corpus, is enlarged upon bail, but this they say was upon a letter written from one of the Lords of the Counsel to the judges. It is true that such a letter was written, but the answer to the former precedents of this nature, are sufficient to clear this also.  
And in all these observe:  
1 That it appears not, that the party ever desired to be enlarged by the Court, or was denied it.  
2 Letters either from the King or Counsel cannot alter the law in any case: So that hitherto, nothing hath been brought on the contrary part, that hath any force or colour of reason in it.  
We come now my Lords to those precedents of the other nature cited against the liberty of the Subject: That is, such as have been used to mislike, that persons so committed may not be enlarged by the Court.  
They are in number eight, but there is not one of them that proves any such thing, as your Lordships will plainly see uponopening them.  
The first four of them are exactly in the same words, saving that the names of the persons and the prisons differ, I shall therefore recite them all one after another, and then clear them together.  

7 H. 7. Everards' Case.  The first is Richard Everards' case, Hill. 7. H. 7. rot. 18. he and others were committed to the Marshalley of the Household per mandatum Dom. Regis, and so returned upon a habeas corpus into the King's Bench, whereupon the entry is only Qui committitur Marr. etc.  

8 H. 7. Cherries Case.  The second is Hill. 8. H. 7. Richard Cherries case he was committed to the Major of Windsor per mandatum Dom. Regis, and so returned upon a habeas corpus, and the entry is only Qui committitur Marr. etc.  

9 H. 7. Burtons' Case.  The third is Hill. 9 H. 7. rot. 14. Christopher Burtons' case, who was committed to the marshalsea of the Household, per mandatum Dom. Regis, and so returned upon his habeas corpus, and the entry is likewise Qui committitur Marr. etc.  

19 H. 7. Vrswicks Case.  The fourth is George Vrswicks case, Pas. 19 H. 7 Rot. 19 he was committed to the Sheriffs of London per mandatum Dom. Regis, and returned so upon his habeas corpus, Qui committitur Marr. etc.  
These four have been used principally, as express precedents, to prove that a prisoner so committed cannot be enlarged, and perhaps at the first sight, to men that know not, and observe not the course and entries of the Court of King's Bench, they may be apprehended to prove as much, but in truth they rather prove the contrary, at least there is no colour in them of any such matter as they have been used for. To which purpose I beseech your Lordships to call to your memories, that which I first observed to you touching the course of that Court. Where a prisoner is brought in by habeas corpus, he is (if he be not to be remanded) first committed to the Marshal of the Court, and then bailed as his case requires. This is so certain as it can never be otherwise. Now these men being thus committed express command of the King, are first you see taken from the prisons whither they were first committed, wherein you may observe my Lords, that if a general suspicion of matter of State were of force in such a case, it might be as needful in point of State to have the prisoner remain in the prison where the King by such an absolute command committed him, as to have him at all committed; when they have taken them from the prisons where before they were they commit them to the Marshal of their own Court, which is but the first step to bayling them: now it appears not indeed that they were bailed, for than Traditur in Ball. had followed, but nothing at all appears that they were denied it, perhaps they never asked it, perhaps they could not find such as were sufficient to bail them. And in truth whensoever any man is but removed from any prison in England (though it be for debt or trespass only) into that Court, the entry is but in the self same syllables as in these four cases.  
And in truth if these proceed did prove, that any of the prisoners named in them were not bailable, or had been thought by the Court not to have been bailable, it will necessarily follow, that no man living that is ordinarily removed from any prison into the King's Bench, or that is there upon any ordinary action of debt, or action of trespass, could be bailed, for every man that is brought thither, and not remanded, and every man that is arrested but for a debt or trespass and was returned into that Court, is likewise committed to the Marshal of that Court, and by the self same entry, and not otherwise; yet these four havebeen much stood on, and have strangely misled the judgement of some that did not, or would not seem to understand the course of that Court.  

7 H. 8. Page's Case.  The fifth of this nature is, Edward Page's case, it is Tr. 7. H. 8. this might have been well reckoned with the former four, had not the misentry of the Clerk only made it vary from them. Ed. Page was committed to the Marshalsea of the Household, and that per mandatum Dom. Regis, and returned to be therefore detained, and the entry is Qui committitur Marr. Hospitii Dom. Regis, This word Marr. is written in the Margin of the roll; this hath been used to prove, that the Judges remanded this prisoner, if they had done so, the remanding had been only while they advised, and not any such award which is given when they adjudge him not bailable; but in truth the word Committitur shows, that there was not any remanding of him, nor doth that Court ever commit any man to the Marshalsea of the Household: and besides the word Marr. for Marrescallo in the Margin, shows plainly that he was committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, and not remanded to the Marshalsea of the Household, for such entry of that word in the Margin, is perpetually in cases of that nature, when they commit a man to their own prison, and so give him the first step to baylement, which he may have if he ask it, and can find bail; and doubtless these words of Hospitii pred. were added by the error of the Clerk for wnat of distinction in his understanding from the Marr. of the King's Bench to the Marshal of the Household.  

8 jac. Caesar's Case.  The sixth of these is Tho. Caesar's Case, it is 8 jac. rot. 99 This Caesar was committed to the Marshalsea of the Household per mandatum Dom. Regis, and returned to be therefore detained, and indeed a remittitur is in the roll, but not a remittitur quousque, but only that kind of remittitur which is only used while the Court advises. And in truth this is so fare from proving any thing against the resolution of the House of Commons, That it appears that the opinion of the reverend Judges of that time was, that the return was insufficient, and that if it were not amended, the prisoner should be discharged. For in the Book of Rules in the Court of Mich. Term (when Caesars Case was in question) they expressly ordered, that if the Steward's Marshal did not amend their return, the prisoner should be absolutely discharged, the words of the Rule are Nisi Seneschalus & Maniscal. Hospitii Dom Regis sufficientur returnaverint brevem de Habeas Corpus Thome Caesar dier. mercur. prox. per . quindenam scilicet Martium. def. exonerabitur. And this is also the force of that Precedent, but yet there hath been an interpretation upon this rule. It hath been said that the Judges gave this rule, because the truth was, that the return was false, and that it was well known, that the prisoner was not committed by the immediate command of the King, but by the command of the Lord Chamberlain, 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 falsehood of the return otherwise, than the body of the return could inform them. And the rule itself speaks plainly of them, sufficiency only, and not of the truth or falsehood of it.  

Emersons Case.  The seventh of these is the case of james Desmaistres, Edward Emerson, and some others that were brewers, and were committed to the Marshalsea of the Household per mandat. Dom. Regis, and so returned upon habeas corpus, and it is true, that the roll shows that they were remanded, but the remanding was only upon advisement, and indeed the grave and upright Judges of the time were so careful, least upon the entry of the remanding, any such mistake might be, as might perhaps misled posterity in so great a point, that they would expressly 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 only, 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. jam Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case.  The eighth of these is the Case of Saltonstall, it is Hill. 12. jac. Sir. Samuel Saltonstall was committed to the Fleet, per mandatum Dom. Regis; and besides, by the Court of Chancery, 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 entered in the roll, but it is only a remittitur prisoner prodict '. without quousque secundum legem de liberatus fuerit, and in truth it appears on the Record, that the Court gave the Warden of the Fleet, three several days at several times, to amend his return, and in the interim remittitur person pred'. Certainly if the Court had thought that the return had been good, they would not have given so many several days to have amended it, for if that Mandatum Dom. Regis had been sufficient in the Case, why need it to have been amended.  

13. jac. Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case.  The ninth and last of these is, Tr. 13. jac. 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 enlarged; and besides in both cases he stood committed also for disobeying an order in the Chancery.  
These are all that have been pretended to the contrary in this great point, and upon the view of them thus opened to our Lordships, it is plain, 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 Counsel without cause shown, might not be enlarged, but indeed the most of them expressly prove rather the contrary.  
Now my Lords, having thus gone through the Precedents of Record, that concern the point of either side, before I come to the other kind of Precedents, which are the solemn 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 careful 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 King's Bench, when divers Gentlemen imprisoned per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis, were by the award and order of the Court, after solemn debate, sent back to prison, because it was expressly said, they could not in Justice deliver them, though they prayed to be bailed. The case is famous, and well known to your Lordships, therefore I need not further to mention it, as yet indeed there is no judgement entered upon the Roll, but there is room enough for any kind of judgement to be entered. But my Lords, there is a form of a judgement, a most unusual one; such a one as never was in any such case before (for indeed there was never before any Case so adjudged) and thus drawn upon by a chief Clerk of that Court (by direction of M. Attorney general) 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 Laws were, that no man could ever be enlarged from imprisonment that stood committed by such an absolute command.  
The draught is only 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 usual 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. johanis ex primitur sed generalitur quod detentus est in prisona pred'. per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis ideo pred'. johanes remittitur prefat. custodi Marr. Hospitii pred'. Salvo custodiend. quousque etc. 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 inferior Court to deliver him. Now my Lords, because this draught, if it were entered 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 Precedents 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 Kingdom, 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 been said show this draught also to your Lordships, I come now to the other kind of Precedents, that is, solemn resolutions of judges, which being not of Record, remain only in authentic copies: but of this kind there is but one in this case, that is the resolution of all the judges in the time of Queen Elizabeth. It was in the 34 of her reign, when divers persons had been committed by absolute command, and delivered by the justices of the one Bench or the other, whereupon it was desired, that the judges would declare in what cases persons committed by such command were to be enlarged, hath been variously cited, and variously apprehended.  
The House of Commons therefore desiring with all care, to inform themselves as fully of the truth of it, as possibly they might, got into their hands from a member of their House, a Book of selected cases, collected by a reverend and learned chief justice of the common place, that was one of them that gave the resolution, which is entered at large in that book: I mean the Lord chief justice Anderson, it is written in the book with his own hand, as the rest of the book is, and howsoever it hath been cited, and was cited in that great judgement upon the habeas corpus in the King's Bench, as if it had been, that upon such commitments the judges might not bail the prisoners, yet it is most plain that in the resolution itself, no such thing is contained, but rather expressed the contrary, I shall better represent it to your Lordships by reading it, then by opening it.  
Then it was read here.  
If this resolution doth resolve any thing, it doth indeed upon the jury resolve fully the contrary to that which hath been pretended, and enough for the maintenance of the ancient and fundamental point of liberty of the person, to be regained by habeas corpus when any is imprisoned. And I the rather thought it fit now to read it to your Lordships, that it might be at large heard, because in the great judgement in the King's Bench, though it were cited at the bar, as against this point of personal liberty, as also at the Bench, yet though every thing else of Record that was used, were at large read openly, this was not read either at Bar or Bench; for indeed if it had, every hearer would easily have known the force of it, to have been indeed contrary to the judgement.  
My Lords, having thus gone through the Charge committed to me by the House of Commons, and having thus mentioned to your Lordships, and opened the many Precedents of Records, and that draught of the judgement in this like case, as also this resolution, I shall now (as I had leave and direction given me, lest your Lordships should be put to much trouble, and expense of time in finding or getting Copies at large of those things which I have cited,) offer also to your Lordship's authentic Copies of them all, and so leave them, and whatsoever else I have said; to your Lordships further consideration.   

Mr. Seldens Presidents.  
The true Copy of the Precedents of Record, in one of the Arguments made at the first conference with the Lords touching the liberty of the person of every Freeman.  
Inter Record. Dom. Regis Caroli in Thesauro receipt. Scaccarij sui sub custodi Dom. Thesaurar & Camerar ibidem Remane●. vizt. Placita coram Domino Rege apud Westmonasterium de Ter' Pasche Anno Regis Edwardi 3. post conquest Angliae 18. inter alia sic continetur ut sequitur.  

Rot. 33. Adhuc de termino Pasche.  

London, 18. Ed. 3. Bildestons' Case cite devant, fo. 33.  DOminus Rex mandavit delicto & fideli suo Roberto de Dalton Constabullar' Turris suae London vel ejus locum tenent' bre. suum in haec verba Edvardus Dei gracia Rex Angliae, Franciae, & Dominus Hiberniae delicto & fideli suo Roberto de Dalton Constabular' Turris suae London vel ejus locum teneum salutem maudamus quod Johannem Bildeston capellan' quem vic. nostr. London ad mandatum nostrum apud pred. Turrim vobis liberavit ab eisdem recipiatis & in prisona nostra Turris London pred. Salvo Custodiar fac' quousque super hoc duxerimus emandand. Teste meipso apud Turrim nostram London 30. die Marcij Anno Regni nostri Angliae 16 Regni vero nostri Francie 30. Et modo sclt. in Craft Assen. Dom. anno Rege nuns 8. coram Domino Rege apud Westminst. venit johannes de Wynwicke locum teneus pred. Constabular & adduxit coram Iusticiar' hic in Cur. pred. johannem de Bildeston quem als a prefat. Vicecomit. virtute brevis pred. recepit. etc. Et dicit quod ipse a Dommo Rege huit mandat. ducend. & liber and corpus ipsius johannis de Bildeston prefat. justiciar. hic. etc. Et quesitum est de pred. johannem de Wynwicke si quam aliam detentionem prefat johannis de Bildeston habeat Camm. Qui dicit quod non nisi bre. pred. tantum, Et quia videtur cur. bre. pred. sufficien, non esse coram pred. Johannis de Bildeston prison. Marr' Regis hic retinen. etc. Idem de johannes dimittitur per manus Willielm. de Wakefield rectoris Eccill. de willingham johannis de Wynwicke in Com. Kanc. Johanis de Norton in Com. Norff. Nicolai de Blandefford in Com. Middl. & Rogeri de Bromley in Com. Stafford, qui eum manuceperunt Habend. in eum Coram Domino Rege apud in Octabis Sancti Trin. ubicunque etc. vizt. Corpus pro corpore, etc. Ad quos Octabis Sancte Trin. Coram Domino Rege apud Westm. ven. pred. per manus pred. Et super hoc mandavit justiciar. suis hic quoddam bre. suum Claus. in hec verba Edwardus Dei gracia Rex Anglia, & Franciae, & dominus Hiberniae, delictis & fid li suis Willielmo Scot, & socijs suis Justiciar' add placita coram nobis tenend. assignat saltem cum nuper mandaverimus delicto, & fideli nostro Roberto de Dalton Constabular' Turris nostre London vel ejus locum tenen. quod johannem de Bildeston Capellaum Capt. & decent. in prisona turris pred. hoc preceptum nostrum pro suspitione contra factionis magni Sigilli nostri cum Attachiat. & aelias Causis capcon. & detentionem pred. cangen. salvo & secur' duci fac' Coram nobis in Cron Ascen. Dom, ubicunque tunc fuissemus in Anglia person Marrescall. nostre coram nobis liberand. in eadem quousque per quendam informatorem essemus plenius informat. Custod. & tuta inde informatione pred. ulterius pred' super hoc fieri facerimus quod fore viderimus faciend. secundum legem, & consuetudinem Regni nostri Anglie nos in casu quod dictus Informator non verum, Coram nobis ad informand nos plenius super premiss. volentes eidem Jahannem ea de causa Iusticiar' deferferr' in hac parte vobis mandamus quod si pred Informator' in Quenden. Sanct. Trin. prox. futur. vel circa non venit non super hoc plenius informat. tunc advent. ejusdem informatoris minime expectat. eidem Iohanni super hoc fieri fac. justice. compliment. prout fort videritis faciend. secundum legem & consuetudinem Regni nostri Anglie Teste meipso apud Westminst. 12. Maij Anno Regni nostri Anglie 18. Regni vero nostri Franc' 5 to. Quo quidem bre. respect. fact. est proclamaco. quod siquis dictum regem super premiss. informare vel erga ipsum johannem profequi veluerit quod veniat Et super hoc venit pred. W. de wakefield, Nicholas de Wandsworth, Johannes Brynwyn, johannes de Longham, johannes de Norton, & Rogero de Bromly amnes de come Midd' & man ' pred. johannem de Bildeston habend Cum Coram Domino Rege de die in diem usque ad prefat' quinden. Sanct. Trin. ubicunque, etc. Ad quem diem Anno 18. coram Domino Rege apud Westminst. vonit pred. johannes de Bildeston per manus pred. & iterata facta est proclam. in forma qua superius, etc. Et nullus venit ad dictum regem informand' etc. per quod concess. est quod pred. Johannes de Bildeston erat inde sine die salva semper actione Dom. Regis si q ua, etc.   

De Ter' Sanct. Hillar' Anno 22. H. 8. & per cont. Rot. ejusdem Retul. 38.  

London. Glouc. 22 H. 8. Parker's Case. cite ante, fo. 33. b.  johannes Parker per Ricardum Choppin, & W. Daunsey Vic' London virtute brevis Dom. Regis de lattitat. pro pace versus ipsum johannem Parker ad sect. in Johannis Bruton eye inde direct & coram rege dust. cum causa, vizt. quod idem johannes Parker capt. suit in Civitate pred. pro secus pacis pred. & pro suspicion felony per ipsum apud Croweall in Com. Glocest. perpetrat per nomen johannis Parker de Thornbury in Com. Glocest. Corser alias dict. johannes Charbs de eodem come Surgeon ac per mandatum Dom. Regis nunciat. per Robertum Pecke gen' de Clifford's Inn qui committitur Marh ' etc. & postea isteo eodem termino traditur in Ballium Thomae Atkins de Thornebury pred. Weaver, & Willi. No le de eadem ville & Com. usque a die Pasche in unum men. Weaver ubicunque etc. Et quod idem johannes Parker citra eundem diem personaliter comparuit coram Iusticiar' Dom, Regis ad prox. general' Gaol de liberation' in Com. Glocest. prox. tenend. ad subijciend. & recipiend. ea omnia, & singula quod prefat. Iusticiar' de eo tunc ordinari contigerint, etc. vizt. Corpus procorpore etc. Ad quem diem pred. johannes Parker licet ipsi 4. placit selemniter exact ad comparend. non ven. ideo caperet cum pler' Trin. ad quem diem ex Octab. Trin. postea Trin. 24. H. 8. ex nostro quinden. Pasche. Ad quem diem bre. & vic' return' quoad Aust tent. apud London die lune prox' post fest. Sancte Scholastice Anno Regis H. 8. 25. Johannes Parker, & W. Nole vel'fuer. prout patet per bre. Regis de Ter' Pasche Anne 25. Rs. pred.   

De ter. Sanct. Mich. Anno 35. H. 8. & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 33.  

35. H. 8. Bincks, Case cite ante fo. 33. b.  johannes Binks per Ro. Baker Ar. Seneschal. Cur. Marr. & Radum Hapton Mar' ejusdem Cur. virtute brevis Dom. Regis de Habeas Corpus ad Subiiciend. & recipiend. etc. eye inde Direct. Coram Domino Rege duct' cum causa, vizt. quod ante adventum brevis pred. Johannes Bincks captus fuit per mandatum privati Consilij Dom. Regis pro suspitione feloniae, & pro alijs causis illos movent. & duc' add Gaol. Marr. & ibidem detent. virtute Gaol' pred. qui comittitur Marr, etc. Et imediate ex gra ' cur. special' pred. johannes Binckes de Magna Marlowe in Com. Buck Weaver traditur in Ball; Thomae Bignam de London Gent. & Johanni Woodward de Marlowe, de Marlowe pred. Taylor usque in Craft. Sanct. Martin. ubicunque etc. utque pleg. corpus pro corpore, etc. Ad quem diem comperuit & Robertus Drury ●…r ' & johannes Bosse gen. Domino Justiciar. Dom. Regis ad pacem in Com. Buck. virtute brevis Dom. Regis eye direct. Domino Regi certificaverunt quod nullum Indictiamentum de aliquibus felonis & transg. versus ipsum Johannem Byncks coram eis ad presons resident. Et ulterius de fama & Gestu ipsius johannis Byncks per Sacrum proborum & legalium homini Com. Buck. diligenter inquiri fecerunt, & nihil aliud preter bonum de eo coram eis est compertum. Ideo concess. est quod pred. Io. Byncks de premissis eat inde sine die deliberatur per proclamationem & jur. prout moris est.   

De Ter. Pas. Anno 2. & 3, Ph. & Mar. Rot. 58.  

2. & 3. P. & Mar Mar. overton's Case cite devant, fo. 33.  Ricus Overton nuper de London gen. per Tho. Letgh, & Johannem Machell vic' London virtute brevis duorum Regis & Reginae de Habeas corpus ad stand. rect. etc. eye inde direct. coram Willielmo Portman mil' captal justiciar. etc. dust. cum causa, vizt. quod pred Ricardus Overtan 9 die Octobr. ult. preter commiss. fuit prison de Newgate, & ibidem in eadem persona sub custod. dict. Vic. detent. ad mandatum per nobilium duorum honorabilis consil. pred Regis & regine quim committet. Marr. etc. Et imediate traditur in Ball. Willielmo Overton de London gen. & johanni Taylor de perechia Sanct. Martinum apud Ludgate London mero. usque Octab. Trin. vizt. uterque manucaptor pred. corpus pro corpore & postea Tr. 2. El. Regine, corpus Overton & pleg. suos Octabis Michael. Ad quem diem ex mens. Pasch. Ad quem diem vic. ret. quod ad Hust. suum tent. Guildhall Civitatis London die Lune post festum Sanct. Gregor. Epi. pred. W. Overton utl' est et per bre. Pas. Anno superd.   

De Te Sanct. Mich. Anno 2. & 3. P. & Mar. Rot. 16. Habet Chart. allocat. Trin. 2. & 3. Phil. & Mar.  
Ricardus Overton nuper de Lond. gen. captain. Octab. Hill. pro quibusdam altis prodic. unde indictat est, Ad quem diem Pasc. ad quem diem ex Cr. Animarum.   

De termino Pasche 4. & 5. P. & Mar. & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 45.  

4. & 5 P & Mar. Newports case cite ante 33  Edwardus Newport gen. per Robertum Oxenbridg mil' Constabular. Turris pred. virtute bre. Dominor. Regis & Regine de Habeas corpus ad Subiiciend. etc. eye inde direct. ad bar. Coram Domino Rege & Regina dust. cum causa, vizt. quod ipse sibi Commiss. fuit per mandat. council. Domine Regine qui Committitur Marr. & immediate traditur in Ball. prout. etc. Et postea sine die per proclamationem virtute brevis de gestis & fama prout. etc. Rot. 17. ejusdem Anni.  
De Ter. M. Anno 4. & 5. P. & Mar. per Cont. ejusdem Ratul. 17. Mem. quod 14. die Octobr. Anno 4. & 5. P. et. M. Edwardus Newport de Hanley in Com. Wigorun. Ac capt. fuit per Uxbridge in Com. pred. pro suspitione contra factionis quarundem pec. Auri vocat French crownes per ipsum & alibi in Com. Wigor. fire. supposit. (& eade causa per mandatum concill' Dominor. Regis & Regine add bar. tunc dust. fuit qui comittitur Marr. etc. Et super hoc idem Edwardus Newport traditur in Ball. Thomae Charge de Latton in Com. Essex gener. Edward Hales de perochia Sancti Olanri London gen. Johanni Baker. Clerico Ordinar. London, johanni Gill de perochia Sanct. Tho Apostoli London Clothworker, & Ricardo Parkes de Brownesgrave in Com Wigorn. yeoman usque Octabis Hill. ubicunque etc. vizt. qui libt. pleg. proceed. sub pena 100 l' & pred. Edwardus Sub pena 200 l'. quas, etc. Ad quem diem comperint & committitur Constabular. Turris London per mandatum Consil' Dom. Regis & Regine ibid. salvo custodiend quousque, etc. Et postea Pas. 4 & 5. P & M. traditur in Ball. prout. patet per Scrivect. finium istius ter. & postea M. 5. & 6. P et M. exonerat. per cur. eo quod tam per Sacrorun 12. probor. & legalium hominum de pred. Com. Midd. coram Dom. Rege, & Domina Regina hic in cur. mea parte jurat, & onerat. quam per Sacrament. 12. probor. legal. homin. de pred. Com. Wigor. coram Edwardo Saunders, & johanne Whiddon mil. & aliis Iusticiar' dictor' Dom. Regis & Regine ad pacem ac diversis felonis transgress. & aliis malefact. in eodem com' perpetrat. audiend. & terminand. assignat. virtute brevis dictor. Dominor. Regis & Regine eye inde direct. in ea parte Jurat & anerat ad in querendo de gestu & fama ipsius Edwardi compert. existit quod idem Edwardus est de bonis gestu & fama ideo proclamatio est inde fact a prout moris est secund. legem & consuetudinem Reg. Anglie, etc. Concess. est quod pred. Edwardus eat inde sine die.   

De Ter. Pas. 9 El. Rot. 35.  

9 El. Laurence Case cite devant, fo. 34. a.  Tho. Laurence per Christopher' Drape. majorem Civitatis London Ambrosium Nicholas, & Ricu ' Lambert vic. ejusdem Civitatis virtute brevis Dom. Regine de Habeas Corpus, etc. ad subiiciend. etc. eye inde direct. & coram Domina Regina dict. cum causa, vizt. qaod 7. die Novembr. Anno regni Dom. El' nunc Regine Anglie 8. pred. Thomas Laurence indicto brevinominat captus fuit in Civitate pred. & in prisona dom. Regine, Sub custod. pred. coram vic. detent. per mandatum Consil' dom, Regine qui committitur Mar. etc. & super hoc tradit. in Ball' prout patet per Scrivect. finum istius ter.   

De Ter, Pasch. 9 El. Rot. 68  

9 El. Constable's case cite devant fo. 34 a.  Robertus Constable Ar' per Franciseum Jobson mil' locum tenend. Turris London virtute brevis Dom' Regine de Habeas corpus ei inde direct & coram Domina Regina dict' cum causa vizt. quod idem Robertus Constable prefat Francisco Jobson commissus fuit per mandatum private. Consil' Dom. Regine salvo custodiend. Qui committitur Marr. etc. Et postea isto eodem Ter. traditur in Ball. prout patet inter scriuect finum istius Ter.   

Ter. Pas. Anno 20. El. & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 72.  

20 El. browning's Case cite devant, fo. 34 a.  Johannes Browning per Owen Hopton mil' locum tenen' Turris Domine Regine London virtute brevis Habias Corpus ad Subiiciend. ei inde direct, & coram dilecto & fideli Ch'ro Wray mil. captain. Justiciar. Dom. Regine ad placita coram nobis tenend. assignat apud Hospitium suum in Sergeant's Inn Fleetstreet London die lune, vizt. 12. die Maij dust. cum causa vizt. quod pred. johannes browning Comissus fuit eidem locum tenend. per mandatum privati consil' Regine salvo custodiend. etc. Qui come. Mar. etc. & postea isto eodem Ter. traditur in Ball' prout pat. per struect finum istius Ter.   

De Ter. Sanct. Hillar. Anno 40. El. Regine & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 62.  

40. El Harecorts c●se cite devant, fo. 34.  Edwardus Harecort per Hugonem Parlour custod. prisone Domine Regine de Gatehouse infra Civitatem Westminst. in Com. Middl. virtute brevis Domine Regine de Habeas corpus ad Subiiciena. etc. ei inde direct, & coram Domina Regina apud Westminst. dicta cum causa, vizt. quod ante, advent brevis pred. scil. 7. die Octobr. An. Regni dom. Regine nunc. 39 corpus Edwardi Harcort per duos private Consil. dicte Domine regine ei comiss. fuit salvo & securae custodiend. certis de causis ipsos movent, & ei ignotis qui committitur Marr. etc. Et postea isto eodem Ter. traditur in Ball. prout patet per Struct finum istius termini.   

De Vacation Hillar. Anno 43. El.  

Catesbies' case cite antea foe. 34.  Robertus Cattesbie per Johannem Phillips Guardian' de le Fleet virtute brevis Domine Regine de Habeas Corpus ad Subiiciend. etc. ei inde direct & coram Edwardo Fenner uno justiciar. Domine Regine ad placita coram ipsa Regina tenend. assignat apud Winbhester house in Burgo de Southwark in Com. Surr. dict. cum causa, vizt. quod pred. Robertus comissus fuit prisone pred. primo die Marcij Anno 43. El. Warr. diversorum pre nobilium virorum de privato consilio Domine Regine in hec verba. To the Warden of the Fleet or his Deputy; These shall be to will and require you, to receive at the hands of the Keeper of the Compter of Woodstreet, the person of Robert Catesby Esquire, and him to detain and keep safely in that Prison under your charge, until you shall have other direction to the contrary, whereof this shall be your Warrant. Et praefat Robertus Commissus fuit Marr. per prefat Edwardum Fenner, & statim traditur in Ball' prout patet, etc.   

Ter. Hill. Anno 43. Eliz. Regine 12. jac. Regis.  

12. jac Beckwiths case cite dev●nt. fo. 34.  Ricardus Beckwith gen' per Aquilam Wykes custod, person de Gatehouse in Com. Midd. virtute libris Dom. Regis de habe as corpus ad Subiiciend. ei inde direct. & coram Domino Rege dust. cum causa vizt. quod ante advent. libris predict. scilicet 10 die julii. Anno Regni Dom. Jac. Regis dei gracia Anglie Franc. & Hibernie fidei defensor. etc. 11. et Scot 47. predict. Ricardus Beckwith sibi Comissus fuit prisone predict. sub custod. sua virtute cujusdem Warrant sibi fact. et direct. per Georgium divina providentia Cant. Archiepiscopum totius Anglie primate. et. Metropolitan Henric. Com. Northampton Dominum Guardiam. 5. portuum et un. de privato Consil. Regis Tho. Com. Suffolk Dom. Camerar' Regie Family ac sacr' Consil. Dom. Regis Edwardum Domini Wooton gubernator Regie family Johannem Dom. Stanhoppe Vice-Camerar' Regie Family cujus Warrant. tenor. Sequitur in hec verba To. Aquila Wykes Keeper of the Gatehouse in Westminster or his Deputy, whereas it is thought meet that Miles Rayner, and Richard Beckwith, be restrained of the 12 liberties, and committed to the prison of the Gatehouse, These shall be to will and require you to receive the persons of the said Reynard and Beckwith into your charge, and safe keeping in that prison, there to remain until you shall have further order from us in that behalf, for which this shall be your warrant, Dated at Whitehall the 10 of July 1613. Et postea isto eodem termino.   

De Ter. Mich. Anno. 14. Jac. per cont. ejusd. Rot. 14. 7.  

Turris London. 14 jac. Sir Tho. Mounsons' case cite devant. fo. 34.  Thomas Mounson miles per Georgium More locum teneum Turris Dom. Regis London virtute libris Dom. Regis de Habeas Corpus ad subiiciend. etc. ei inde direct. coram Domino Rege apud Westm. dust. cum Causa vizt. quod ante adventum libris predict. predict. Thomas sibi Commissus fuit per warrant. advers. Dominis de privato Consilio Dom. Regis sibi direct. etc. Qui Committitur Marr. etc. Et super hoc traditur in Ball' prout patet per Scruect. fin. istius Terminum.   

De Ter. Mich. 7. H 7. & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 6.  

7. H. 7. Bruggs case cite devunt. 34.  Tho. Brugg junior, nuper de Yanington in Com' Hartford gen ' johanes Rawleus & te Com. & in ure de Lemster in Com. predict' Yeoman, Robert us Sherman nuper de Lemster in Com. predict. Walter Thomas nuper de eadem in Com. predict. Hosier. Tho. Ballard nuper de eadem in eodem Com. Smith Cadwallader ap john Duy nuper de Kerry in Marchia Wallie in Com. Salop adjacen. gen. Reignald ap Breignham, alias Sherman, nuper de Leamster in Com. Herreford Shereman, & Thomas Turner nuper de king sland in Com. Hereford courser, sunt in custod. Marr. ad mandatum Dom. Regis, &c, ac pro aliis certis de causis pro ut patet alibi de record, etc. per record. istius Ter. postea isto Termin. Dominus relaxavit mandatum suum & pro recuss. predict. comperaverint per Attorn. etc. Et quod utlagem versus praefat. Thomam Brugg revocatur isto termino & predict. johannes Rawleus profelon. & murdo predict. traditur in Ball' prout patet alib. &c, ideo hic Marr, de ejus orbus per cur exoneratur. etc.   

Ter. Hillar. 7. H. 7 & per Cont. ejusdem Rot. 18.  

7. H 7. Bartholomewes' case cite devant. 34.  W. Bartholomew, johanes Bartholomew, Willielmus Chace, Henr. Carr, Tho. Rotesley, Tho. Street, Robertns Feldone, & Henr. Banks sunt in custod. Marr, ad cust. mandat. Dom. Regis, &c, per receipt. istius termin, ac predict. Willielmus Chace pro pace Randulpho Josselen inveniend etc. Pasche sequen, pet, postea Termin. sequen, dictus Dominus Rex mandatum suum predict. quo ad Willielmus Chace relaxavit per Regis Attornat. & pro pace & pro fellow. & murdro traditur in Ball.   

De ter. Pas. 7. H. 7. & per Cont. Rot. ejusdem 18.  

7. H. 7. Beomonds' case cite devant. fo. 34.  johannes Beomond de Weddesbury in Com' Staff. Ar' est in custod. Mar' add mandatum Dom. Regis, etc. per record. istius ter' postea scilicet Trin' 7. H. 7. see quen' predict. johannes Beomond de mandato predict. exoneratus existit Ideo Marr' de eo per eandem Cur' exoneratus exist.   

De ter' M. Anno 12. H. 7. Rot. 8.  

12. H 7. Yewes' c●se cite devant. fo. 34.  Thomas Yew de villa de Staff. in come Stafford Yeoman, per johannem Shawe & Ricardum Haddon vir' London virtute libris Dom. Regis de habeas corpus, ad Sect. ipsius Regis eis inde direct. coram Rege dust. cum causa quod id in Thomas Yew attachiatus fuit per Ricardum Whittington Sergeant apud Baynords Castle Civitatis predict. & prisona dicti Dom. Regis infra eandem Civitatem salvo custodiend. causa pro suspitione felon apud Coventrie in Com' Warr' per petrat. ad Suggestionem Willielmi King Inholder, Ac in super idem Tho. Yew detinetur in prisona predict. virtute cujusdem alterins querel. versus ipsum ad Sestam Johannis Freeman Sergeant de eo quod inveniat. ei in sufficiaend. Secur. pacis indicta cur. coram Johanne Waiger nuper vic. Ac. ulterius idem Tho. Yew de tent. est indicta prisona pro 23 l. debit. & 2 s. 8 d. dampnis & custag. quos Robertus Corbet Mercer. ex cognicione ipsius defend. versus eum recuperavit. in eadem Cur. coram eodem Johanne Waiger nuper vic. Ac. etiam idem Tho. detinetur in dicta prisona ad mandatum Domini Regis per johannem Shawe Alderman Civitatis London, Qui Comittitur Marr. etc. postea scilicet ter' Sct. Trin. Anno 19 Regis H. 7. predict. johannes Freeman relaxavit secur. pacis versis eundem Tho. Yew dictusque Robertus Corbet cognovit se fore satisfact. de debito & dampnis predict. Ac. jacobus Hubberd Attornat. general. Dom. Regis relaxavit mandatum Dom. Regis Ac. pro suspicion felony predict. traditur in Ball. Simon. Little de London Tailor & johanni Ashe de London Skinner usque Octabis Mich. ubicunque etc. Ad qui diem comperwit & Robertus Throgmorton miles unus custod. pacis predict. come Warr' return' quoth mill. Indictiament. de aliquibus felon' sieve transgress. versus prefat. Tho. Yew coram eo & Sociis ad presens residet. & ulter. virtute brevis Dom. Regis sibi & Sociis suis direct. per Sacrament. 12 probor. & legal hominum de villa de Co. venutriepredict. de gestu & fama predict. Thome diligenter inquisicionem fecerunt, & nihil de eo preter bonum coram eo & Sociis suis est compertum sed de bono gestu, & fama ideo concess. est quod predict. Tho. eat inde sine die.   

Ter. Hillar. Anno 9 H. 7 & per cont. ejusdem Roth. 14.  

9 H. 7 Broch's case cite d●vant. fo. 34.  Humfridus brooch nuper de Canterbrig in Cantabr. Scholar: per Robertum Willoughby Dom' Brook mil. Senescall. Hospitii Dom. Regis ac johannem Digbie mil. Marr' cur' Marr' Hospitii predict' virtute cujusdem brevis Dom. Regis de habeas corpus ad Sectam ipsius Regis ad stand. rect', etc. ad sect. partis utlag. eyes inde direct. coram Rege dust. cum causa vizt. quod idem Humfridus Commissus fuit Gaol. Marr' Hospitij Dom. Regis & hac de causa & non alia idem Humfridus in prisonae pred. detinetur qui committitur Marr', etc. posteo Pas. sequen' Rex relinquit mandatum suum Capital. Iusticiar' per Tho. Lovett mil. osten' & pro utlag. pred. traditur in Ball. prout patet alibi.   

De Ter' Scte. Trinit' anno 39 El. & per cont. Rotli. ejusdem 113.  

39 El. Broome case cite devant. fo. 35.  Laurence Broome per Hugonem Parlour custod, prisone Domine Regine de le Gatehouse virtute brevis Domine Regine de habeas corpus ad subiiciend. etc. ei inde direct. & coram Domina Regina apud Westminst' dust. cum causa vizt. quod predict. Laurence Broome in arcta custod. sua remanset per mandatum duorum de Consilio dicte Domine Regine pro certis causis eos moven' qui committitur Marr' & postea iste eodem termino traditur in Ball. pro ut patet, etc.   

Per Scruect. Fin. Ter' Sct. Trin. anno 39 El. Regine.  

Essex.  Lawrencius Broome de parva Baddow in Com. pred. husband. traditur in B●ll ' add subiiciend, etc. ad mandat. private. Consil. Domine Regine super habe as corpus.  

Vsque octabis Mich.  Versus Rando. Mayall de Hatfield Beverell in Com' pred' gener.  
Versus Henrico Odall de eadem Gent.  
Versus Will. Eekasden de Wesminst' Bricklayer.  
Versus Rica. Morgan de Westminst' Labourer.  
Vterque sub pena 40 l. et princeps sub pena 100 morcarum.  
Pro suspitione proditionis cum Johanne Smith mil.   

De Ter' Sct' Michaelis anno 4 El. & per cont: Rot. ejusdem Rot. 37.  
Tho. Wenden per Hugonem Parlour gen' custod. prisone Domine Regine de ie Gatehouse virtute brevis Domine Regine de Habeas corpus ad Subiiciend. etc. ei inde direct' et coram Domina Regina apud Westm' dust. cum causa vizt. ad 18 die Junii Anno Regini Domine El. nunc Regine Anglie 38 corpus etc. infra nominat. Tho. Wenden extra cur' ejusdem Domine Regine coram ipsa Domina Regina privati Consilii Dom. Regis civitatis tenor sequitur in hec verba scilicet. These are to will & require you to receive into your charge and custody, the person of john Brocket Knight, and him to retain in safe keeping under your charge, until you shall have further order for his enlargement, whose commitment being forsome special matter concerning the service of our Sovereign Lord the King, you may not fail to regard this Warrant accordingly. From the King's Palace at White-Hall the last of March 1605. Eaque fuit causa detentionis pred. Johannis in prisona pred. qui committitur Marr. etc. & postea traditur in Ball' prout patet, etc.   

Ter' Mic-Anno 12. Jac. Regis Rot. 119.  

12. ja. Rayners Case cite devent fo. 35.  Milo Reyner per Aquilam Wykes Custod. prisone de le Gatehouse, virtute brevis Dom, Regis de Habeas corpus ad Subijciend. etc. coram Domino Rege dust. cum causa vizt. quod ante advent brevis pred. scilt. 10. july Anno Dom. 1613. pred. Milo Reyner comissus fuit prisona pred' & huc usque detent. virtute Warr' cujusdem fact, & direct. per Georgium Archiepiscopum Cant. Henr. Com. Northampton, Tho. Com. Saffolke. Willielm. Dom. Knolles, Edwardum dom, Wooton, & Edwardum dom, Stanhope cuius Warranti tenor sequitur in hec verba. To Aquila Wykes, Keeper of the Gatehouse in Westminster, or his Deputy, whereas it is thought meet that Miles Reyner and Richard Beckwith, be restrained of their liberty, and committed to the prison of the Gatehouse. These shall be to will and require you, to receive the persons of Rayner & Beckwith into your charge and keeping, until you shall have further order from us in that behalf, for which this shall be your sufficient warrant, Dated at White-Hall the 10. of July 1613. Et haec est causa detentionis sue in prisona pred. Qui comittitur Marr' &c. Et postea isto eodemter' traditur in Ball' prout patet. etc.   

Ter. Hill 5. H. 7. & per cont' ejusdem, Rot. 18.  

5. H 7. Everards' Case cite devunt, fo. 35.  Ricus Everard imper de Colchester in Com. Essex clericus, & Robertus Wight nuper de Norwico Smith per Robertum Willoughby mil' Dom. de Brook Seneschall' Hospicij Dom. Regis, & johannem Turbervile mil. Marr. Hospicij pred. virtute bre, de Habeas Corpus ad Sectam ipsius Regis pro quibusdam prodicionibus, & felon' unde indicto Com. Essex indictat sunt eis inde Direct. Coram Domine Rege duct cum causa, vizt. quod ijdem Ricardus Everard & Robertus Wight Commiss. fuer' custod. Marr. Marr. pred. per mandat. Dom. Regis Qui committitur Marr. etc.   

Ter. Hill 8. H. 7. et percont. ejusdem, Rot. 13.  

Berckss. 8. H. 7. Cherries case cite devant fo. 43.  Roger Cherry nuper de nova Windsor in Com pred. Yeoman alias dict. Rogerus Stearries nuper de eadem in eodem Com. Yeom. per lohan. Baker Majorem villae Dom. Regis de nova Windsor in Com. pred. virtute brevis Dom. Regis de Habeas Corpus ad Sect. ipsius Regis pro quibusdam felonijs & iransgr. unde in Com. Midd. indictatus est ' sibi inde direct. coram Domino Rege dust. cum causa, vizt. quod idem Roger' commissus fuit Gaol. Dom. Regis infra villa. pred. per mandat. Dom. Regis Qui committitur Marr. etc.   

Ter. Hillar. 9 H. 7 & per Cont. ejusdem Rot. 14.  

9 H. 7. Burtons' Case cite devant, fo. 44. Surr. ss.  Christopherus Burton nuper de Rochester in Com' Cancij Hackneyman per Robertum Willoughby Dom. Brooke mil' Seneschall' Hospitij Dom. Rogis, & johannem Digbie mil' Marr. cur. Mar. Hospitij pred. per mandatum Dom. Regis. Et hac est causa & non alia. Qui committitur Marr. etc.   

Ter. Pas Anno 19 H. 7. & per Cont. ejusdem. Rot. 23.  

9 H. 7. Vrmswicks Case cite devant, fo. 44.  Georgius Vrmeswicke de London Mereer, per Oliverum Wood locum tenen prisonae Dom. Regis de le Fleet virtute brevis Dom. Regis de conservand. diem, etc. eiinde direct. coram rege dust. cum causa vizt. quod idem Georgius 13. Maij Anno 19 Regis commissus fuit prisonae del Fleet per mandatum ipsius Dom. Regis salvocustodiend. Sub pena 40. l, qui committitur Marr. etc.   

Ter. Trin. Anno 8. H. 8 per cont. ejusdem, Rot. 23.  

8. H. 8. Page's case cite devant, fo. 45.  Edwardus Page nuper de London Gent. per Georgium Com. Salopiae Seneschal. Hospitij Dom. Regis, & Henericum Shamburne, Marr. cur. Mar. Hospitij pred. virtute brevis Dom. Regis de Habeas corpus ad Sect. ipsius Regis ad conservand, diem. etc. eye inde direct. & coram Rege dust. cum causa, vizt. quod idem Edwardus Captus & detentus in prisona Regis Marr. pred. per mandatum Dom. Regis ihidem salvo Custodiend. etc. Qui committitur Marr. Hospitij Dom. Regic.   

Ter. Mich. Anno 8. Jac. Et per cont. ejusdem Rot. 99  

8 jac. Caesar's case cite devant fo. 46.  Tho. Caesar per Tho. Vavisour mil' Marr. Hospitij Dom. Regis & Marr. Marr. ejusdem Hospitij Dom. Regis, virtute brevis Domini Regis de Habeas corpus ad subijciend. etc. ci inde direct, & coram Rege apud Westminst. dust. cum causa, vizt. quod ante adventum brevis pred. scil. 18. Julij Anno Regni dicti Dom. Regis nunc Angliae, etc. 7. Tho. Caesar in brevi pred. nominat. Captus fuit apud White-Hall in Com' Middl. per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis ac per eundem Regem ad tunc & ibidem Commiss. fuit prison. Marr. ibidem salvo Custodiend. quousque etc. Et ea fuit causa captionis & detentionis ejusdem Tho. Caesar Qui comittitur prisonae Marr. pred.   

Ter. Sancti Mich. 8. Jac Regis.  
Nisi pred. Seneschal & Marr. Hospitii Dom. Regis sufficienter return' bre. de Habeas Corpus Tho. Caesar die Mercur. per quinden. Sanct. Martini defendens exonerabitur.   

Ter Hill. 12. Jac. Rot. 153.  

Marr' Hospitii Regis 12. jac Emersons case cite devant. fo. 46.  jacobus Demaistres, Edwardus Emerson, Georgius Brookeshall & W. Steephens per Tho. Vavisour mil' Marr. Marr. Hospitij Regis virtute bre. Dom. Regis de Habeas corpus ad subijciend. etc. ei inde direct. coram domino Rege apud Wostminst. dust. cum causa, vizt. quod ante adventum brevis pred. scilt. 22. januar. Anno Regis jacobi Angliae, etc. 12. & Scot 48. pred. jacobus Demaistres, Edwardus Emerson, Gregorius Brookeshall, & W. Steephens in brovi. huic Schedul' annex, nominat, Commiss. fuer' Gaol' Marr. Hospitij Dom. Regis pro causis ipsum Regem & servic' suum tangen. & concernen. Et hac est causa Captionis pred. jacobi, Edwardi, Georgij & Willielmi, & postea immediate remittitur prafat. Marr. Hospitij pred.   

Ter. Hill. 12. Jac. Regis.  

Prison de le Fleet Sir Samuel Saltonstalls case cite devant fo. 49.  Samuel Saltonstall miles per Johannem Wilkinson Ar. guard. de le Fleet virtute brevis Dom. Regis de Habeas Corpus ad subijciend. etc. ei inde direct. & coram Domino Rege apud Westminst. dust. cum causa vizt. quod pred, Samuel commiss. fuit prisonae pred. 11. Martij 1608. per Warrant. a Dominis de privato consilio Dom. Regis & quod detentus suit etiam idem Samuel in prisona pred virtute cujusdem ordinis in cur. Canc' Dom. Regis fact. cujus ordinis tenor patet per Rot. Record. istius Termini ad quem diem pred. Samuel remittitur prisonae pred. Et secundus dies prox. ter' datus est guardian. prisonae pred. ad emendand. return. suum sufficien. super pred. bre. de Habeas Corpus, Et quod tunc intulerit hic in cur. corpus pred. Samuel Saltonstall mil'. Ad quam quidem diem prefat. Guardian. prisonae pred. super pred. bre. de Habeas Corpus return. quod pred. Samuel commissus fuit prisonae pred. 11. die Martii 1608 per Warrant. a Dom. de privat' Concil. dicti Dom. Regis apud Whitehal tunc Seden. & quod postea 11. die Febr. 1610. commiss. fuit extra cur. Canc. Dom. Regis apud Westminst. pro contemptu suo eidem cur. illat. Et quod detent. fuit etiam idem Samuel in prisona pred. per mandat. Dom. Cancellar' Anglia super quo pred. Samuel' iterum remittitur prisonae pred. & ulterius dies dat' est prefat. Guardian. ad emendend. return. suum super Habeas corpus ver. deftom prout stare voluit usque diem jovis prox' men's. Pasch. Et tunc ad Habend. Corpus, etc. Ad quam diem prefat. guardian. intulit corpus hic in cur. & retorn' super Habeas corpus quod pred. Samuel' Commiss. fuit prisonae pred. 11. die Martii 1608. virtute cujusdem Warranti a Dominis de privato Concil' Dom. Regis tunc seden. apud White-Hall, Et quod etiam idem Sam. Commiss. fuit. prisonae 11. Febr. Anno Regis Jac. 8. per cur. Canc. Dom. Regis apud Westminst. tunc existen. pro quadam contempt. per eundem Samuel eidem cur. illat. & perpetrat. proinde salvo custodiend. qui remittitur prisonae pred.   

Ter. Tr. Anno 13. Jac. & per cont. ejusdem Rot. 17.  

13 ja. Sir Samuel Saltonstals case cite devant, fo. 49.  Samuel Saltonstall miles per johannem Wilkinson Guardian. prisonae de le Fleet virtute brevis Dom. Regis de Habeas Corpus ad Subiiciend. et recipiend. etc. eiinde direct. & coram Domino Rege apud Westminst. dust. cum causa vizt. quod pred. Samuel. Saltonstall commissus fuit prisonae pred. 12. die Martii Anno Regis jacob. Angliae, etc. sexto virtute cujusdam Warrant. a dominis de private. Consilio Dom Regis tunc seden. apud White-Hall commissus fuit etiamidem Samuel Saltonstall miles prisonae pred. 12. die Febr. Anno 1610. & Anno Reg. jac. Angliae, etc. 8. per considerate. cur. Cancell' dicti Dom. Regis apud Westminst. pro contempt. eidem cur. ad tunc per pred. Samuel illat, ibidem proinde Salvo custodiend. Et haec sunt causae captionis & detentionis pred. Sam Saltonstall mil. in prisona pred. cujus tamen corpus ad diem & locum infra content. parat. habeo prout mihi precipitur.   
Finis d' les Presidents.    

Sir Edward Cook's Argument.  
jovis 3. Apr. 4. Caroli Regis.  

1. REsolved upon the question, that no Freeman ought to be detained or kept in prison, or other wise restrained by the command of the King, or the Privy Counsel, or any other, unless some cause of the commitment deteyner or restraint be expressed, for which by Law he ought to be committed, detained or restrained.  
2. That the Writ of Habeas Corpus may not be denied, but aught to be granted to every man that is committed or detained in prison, or otherwise restrained, though it be by the command of the King, the Privy Counsel or any other, he praying the same.  
That if a Freeman be committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by the Command of the King, the Privy Counsel, or any other, no cause of such commitment, deteyner or restraint being expressed, for which by Law he ought to be committed, detained or restrained, and the same be returned upon a Habeas Corpus granted for the said party, than he ought to be delivered or bailed. All these without one negative, that these Acts of Parliament, and these Judicial precedents in affirmance thereof (recited by my Colleagues) are but declarations of the fundamental laws of this Kingdom I shall prove by manifest and legal reasons which are the grounds and mothers of all laws,  

The first general reason.  
1. The first general reason is drawn are ipsa, from imprisonment, ex visceribus causae, be it those or other imprisonments, which is divided into three parts.  
1. First, no man can be imprisoned at the will and pleasure of any but he that is bond, and a villain, for that imprisonment at will is tails luy haut, & base, are propria quarto modo to villains.  
2. But if Freemen of England might be imprisoned at the will and pleasure of the King by his commandment, than were they in worse case than bondmen & villains for the lord of a villain cannot command another to imprison his villain without cause, as of disobedience, or refusing to serve, as it is agreed in our Books.  
3. Imprisonment is accounted in law a civil death, perdit domum, familiam, vicinos, patriam, his house, is family, his wife, his children his neighbours, his Country, and to live among wretched wicked men.  

39 H. 6. fo. 50. & 41. Ed. 3. 9  If a man be threatened to be killed, he may avoid a feoffment of lands, gift of goods, etc. So it is, if he be threatened to be imprisoned, he shall do the like, for that is a civil death.   

The second general reason.  

Bracton 105. fo. 15.  The second general reason is a Minore ad majus; paena corporalis est majus qualibet pecuniaria, but the King himself cannot impose a fine upon any man, but it must be done juditially by his Judges, per Iusticiar' in Cur' non per Regem in Camera, 
2. R. 3. 11.  and so it hath been resolved by all the Judges of England.   

The third general reason.  
The third general reason is drawn from the number and diversity of remedies, which the law giveth against imprisonment, vizt. brevia de Homine replegiande de odio & Atia de habeas corpus & bre. de manucaptiene.  
The two former of these are antiquated, but the writ de odio & Atia is revived, for that was given by the Sat. of Magna Car' cap. 26. and therefore though it were repealed by the Stat. of 28. Ed. 3 ca 9 yet it is revived by the Stat. of 43. Ed. 3. cap. 1. by which it is provided, that all Statutes made against Magna Charta are void, now the law would never have given so many remedies, if the Freemen of England might have been imprisoned at Free will and pleasure.   

The fourth general reason.  
The fourth general reason is drawn from the extent & universality of the pretended power to imprison, for it should not extend only to the Commons of the Realm and their posterity but to the Nobility and their Honourable Progenies, to the Bishops and Clergy of the Realm and their Successors; to all persons of what condition, or sex, or age so ever: to all Judges, Officers, etc. whose attendance are necessary without exception of any person.   

The fifth general reason.  
The fifth general reason is drawn from the indefiniteness of time, the pretended power being limited to no time, it may be perpetual during life.   

The sixth general reason.  
The sixth general reason is drawn a dedecore from the loss and dishonour of the English nation, in two respects. 1. For their valour and power so famous through the whole world. 2. For their industry; for who will endeavour to employ himself in any profession, either of War, liberal Science, or Merchandise, if he be but tenant at will of his liberty, and no tenant at will, will support or improve any thing, because he hath no certain estate; and thus it should be both dedecus and damnum to the English nation, and it should be no honour to the King to be King of a slaves.   

The seventh general reason.  
The seventh general reason is drawn ab utili et inutili, for that appeareth by the Stat. of 36 Ed. 3. that the execution of the Statute of Magna Charta 5. Ed. 3. 25. Ed. 3. & 28. Ed. 3: are adjudged in Parliament to be for the common profit of the King, and of his people, and therefore the pretended power being against the profit of the King, and of his people, can be no part of his prerogative.   

The eighth general reason.  
The eighth general reason is drawn a tuto, for it is safe for the King to express the Cause of the Commitment, and dangerous for him to omit it, for if any be committed without expressing of the Cause, though he escape, albeit the truth be, it were for treason or felony, yet the escape is neither felony nor treason; but if the cause be expressed to be for suspicion of treason or felony, then if he escape, albeit he be innocent, it is treaon or felony.   

The last general reason.  
The last general reason is drawn from authorities.  
16. H. 6. Means de fait 182. by the whole Court, the King in his presence cannot command one to be arrested, but an action of false imprisonment lies against him that arresteth.  
22. H. 7. 4. Newton. 1 H. 7. 4. The opinion of Markham chief Justice to Ed. 4. And the reason because the party hath no remedy. Fortescue cap. 8. Proprio ●re nullus regum usus est, etc. to commit any man.  
4. El. Plo. Com. 236. The Common Law hath so admeasured the King's Prerogative, as he cannot prejudice any man in his inheritance, and the greatest inheritance a man hath, is the liberty of his person, for all others are accessary to it. Cicere. Major haeredidas venit unicuique nostrum a legibus quam a parentibus, 25. Ed. 1. cap. 2. All judgements given against Magna Charta are void.    

Upon conference with the Lords, these objections were made by the King's Attorney.  

The first objection.  
1 That the resolutions of the House of Commons were incompatible with a Monarch that must govern by rule of State.  

Rns.  Whereunto it was answered, Quod nihil tam propr' est imperii quam legibus vivere. And again, Attribuat Rex legi quod lex attribuat ei vizt. dominationem & imperium quia sine lege non potest esse Rex. It can be no prejudice to the King by reason of matter of State: for if it be for suspicion of treason, misprision of treason, or felony, it may be by general words expressed, vizt. pro suspitione proditionis, etc. If it be for any contempt, or any other thing, the particular cause must be showed.   

The second objection.  
2 To blind those that are committed, one cause must be pretended, and another intended, especially when it toucheth matter of State.  

Rns.  Whereunto it was answered, that all dissimulation, especially in a cause of Justice, was to be avoided, and soundness of truth to take place. And therefore David that was both a King and a Prophet, prayed unto Almighty God against dissimulation, in these words, Lord send me a sound heart in thy Statutes, that I be not ashamed: where found in the original signifieth upright without dissimulation, and shame follows dissimulation when the truth is known.   

The third objection.  
3 If a Rebel be attainted in Ireland, and his children for safety, and matter of State be kept in the Tower, what shall be returned upon the habeat corpus?  

Rns.  Whereunto it was answered, that their imprisonment might be justified, if they could not find good sureties for their good behaviour. 2. It was charity to find them meat, drink, and cloth, that by the Attainder of their Father had nothing.   

The fourth objection.  
4 Though his Majesty expresseth no cause, yet it must be intended there was a just cause.  

Rns.  

Bracton  
Fleta   Answer De non apparentibus & non existentibus eadem ratio.   

The fifth objection.  

25. Ed. 3. cap. 13 Stat. 4. H. 7. 6.  5 The King in stead of gold or silver, may make money currant of any base mettle. 2. He may make wars at his pleasure. 3. He may pardon whom he will. 4. He may make Denizens as many as he will, and these were said to be greater prerogatives than these in question.  

Rns.  Answer to the first. It was denied that the King might make money Currant of base money, but it ought to be of gold or silver. 2. It was answered admitting that the King might do it, his loss and charge was more than of his Subjects, both in the Case of money, and in the Case of war; the pardon was private, out of grace, and no man had danger or loss by it; and so the making of Denizens the King was only the loser, vizt. where he had double Customs to have single. 3. It was a non sequitur, the King may do these things, ergo he may imprison at will.    

Your Lordships are now advised by those that cannot be daunted for fear, nor misled by affected reward, or hope of preferment, that is of the dead.  

1 By ancient and many Acts of Parliament in the point besides Magna Charta, which hath been 30 times confirmed, and commanded to be put in execution, whereto the Kings of England have 30 times given their royal assent.  
2 Judicial Precedents of grave and reverend Judges in terminis terminantibus, that long since are departed this world.  
3 And lastly, per vividas rationes, manifest and apparent reasons.   
We of the House of Commons have, upon great Study and serious consideration, made a great manifesto unanimously nullo contradicente, concerning this great liberty of the Subject, and have vindicated and recovered the body of this fundamental liberty, both of your Lordships, and of ourselves, from shadows, which sometimes of the day are long, sometimes short, and sometimes long again, And therefore no Judges are to be led by them: your Lordships are involved in the same danger, and therefore ex congruo & condigno, We desired a conference, to the end your Lordships may make the like declaration, as we have done, Commune periculum requireth common auxilium, and thereupon take such further course as may secure both your Lordships, and us, and all your and our posterities in enjoying our ancient undoubted and fundamental liberties.    
FINIS.   


The substance of the objections made by M. Attorney General, before a Committee of both Houses, to the Argument that was made by the House of Commons, at the first conference with the Lords, out of Precedents of Record, and resolutions of the ludges in former times, touching the liberty of the person of every Freeman, and the answers and replies then presently made by the House of Commons to those objections.  
M. Attorneyes objections.  
AFter the first conference which was desired by the Lords, and had by a Committee of both Houses in the painted Chamber, touching the reasons, laws, acts of Parliament, and Precedents concerning the liberty of the person of every Freeman, M. Attorney General being heard before a Committee of both Houses, as it was assented by the House of Commons that he might be, before they went up to the conference, after some preamble made, wherein he declared the answering of all reasons of Law, and Acts of Parliament, came only to the Precedents used in the Arguments before delivered, and so endeavoured to weaken the strength of them that had been brought on the behalf of the Subject, to show that some were directly contrary to the Law comprehended in the resolutions of the House of Commons touching the bailing of prisoners returned upon the Writ of Habeas Corpus to be committed by the special command of the King, or of the Counsel, without any cause showed for which they ought by Law to be committed. And the course that was taken (which it pleased the Committee of both Houses to allow of) was that M. Attorney should make his objections to every particular Precedent, and that the Gent. appointed and trusted by the House of Commons by several replies should satisfy the Lords touching the several objections made by him against or upon every particular, as the order of the Precedents should lead them. He began with the first 12 Precedents that were used by the House of Commons, at the conference desired by them, to prove that prisoners returned to stand so committed were delivered by bail by the Court of King's Bench.  

Objection all Bildestons Case cite devant. fo. 35. & 55.  The first was, that of Bildestons' Case in 18 Ed. 3. Rot. 33. To this he objected, 1. That in thereturne of him into the Court it did not appear that this Bildeston was committed by the King's Command. And secondly, that in the Record it did appear also that he had been committed for suspicion of counterfeiting of the great Seal, and so by consequence was bailable in the Law, in regard there appeared a cause why he was committed, in which case it was granted by him (as indeed it is plain and agreed of all hands) that the prisoner is bailable, though committed by the Command of the King. And he said that this part of Record by which it appeared he had been committed for this suspicion of treason was not observed to the Lords in their Argument before used. And he shown also to the Lords, that there were three several kinds of Records, by which the full truth of every award or bayling upon a habeat corpus is known. First, by the remembrance roll wherein the award is given. Secondly, the file of the Writ, and the return. Thirdly, The Scruet Roll or Scruet Finn', wherein the Bail is entered, and that only the remembrance roll of this case was to be found, and that if the other two of it were extant, he doubted not but that it would appear also, that upon the return itself the cause of the commitment had been expressed, and so he concluded that this proved not for the resolution of the House of Commons touching the matter of Bail, where a prisoner was committed by the King's command without cause showed.  

Rns all dit obj.  To these objections the reply was first, that it was plain, that Bildeston was committed by the King's express command, for so are the very words of the Writ to the Constable of the Tower, quod cum teneri & custodiri facias, etc. than which nothing can more fully express a commitment by the King's command. Secondly, how ever it be true, that in the latter part of the Record it do appear, that Bildeston had been committed for a suspicion of treason, Yet if the time of the proceeding expressed in the Record were observed, it would be plain, that the objection was of no force: for this one ground both of this one case, and all the rest, is infallible, and never to be doubted of in the Law, 
Regula.  That the Justices of every Court adjudge of the force and strength of a return out of the body of itself only, and according as therein appears to them. Now in Easter Term 18 Ed. 3. he was returned and brought before them only as committed by the Writ, wherein No cause is expressed, and the Lieutenant of the Constable of the Tower that brought him into the Court, said, that he had no other warrant to detain him nisi bre. predict. wherein there was no mention of any Cause, And the Court thereupon adjudged, that bre. predict. or that special command was not sufficient cause to detain him in prison, and thereupon he is by judgement of the Court in Easter Term let to mainprize, but that part of the Record, wherein it appears, that he had indeed been committed for suspicion of treason, is of Trinity Term following, when the King, after letting him to mainprize, because no man, prosecuted him. And at that time it appears, but not before, he had been in for suspicion of treason, so that he was returned to be committed by the King's special command only, without any cause showed in Easter Term, and then by judgement of the Court let to mainprize, which to this purpose is but the same with bail, though otherwise it differ. And in the Term following, upon another occasion, the Court knew that he was committed for suspicion of treason, which hath no relation at all to the letting him to mainprize, nor to the judgement of the Court then given, when they did not, nor could not possibly know any cause for which the King had committed him, and it was said in the behalf of the House of Commons, that they had not indeed in their Argument expressly used the latter part of the Record of Bildestons' Case, because it being only of Trinity term following, it could not concern the reasons of an award given by the court in Easter term next before, yet notwithstanding that they had most faithfully at the time of their Argument delivered unto the Lords (as indeed they had) a perfect Copy at large of the whole record of this Case, as they had also done of all other Precedents whatsoever cited by them, insomuch as intruth there was not one precedent of Record of either side, the Copy whereof they had not delivered in likewise, nor did Master Attorney mention any one besides those that were so delivered in by them. And as touching the three kinds of Records, the remembrance roll, the return and the file of the Writ, and the Scruet, it was answered by the Gent. employed by the house of Commons, that it was true the Scruet and return of this case of Bildestons was not to be found, but that did not lessen the weight of the precedent, because always in the award or Judgement drawn up in the remembrance roll, the cause whatsoever it be, when any, is showed, appears clearly by the constant Entrees of the Court of King's Bench; So as if any cause had appeared unto the Court it must have appeared plainly in that part of the Roll which belongs to Easter term wherein the Judgement was given, but the return of the commitment by the King's command without cause shown, and the Judgement of the Court, that the prisoner was to be let to mainprize appear therein only. And so, notwithstanding any objection made by Master Attorney, the Cause was maintained to be clear proof among many others touching that resolution of the House of Commons.  

Objections Horse de Parker's case 22. H 8 cite ante, foe 35 et. 55.  To the second of those 12. which is Parker's Case in 22. H. 8 rot. 37. his Objections were two, first, that this is true that he was returned that he was committed per mandatum Dom. Regis, but that it appeared that this command was certified to the Sheriffs of London by one Robert Peck, and that in regard the command came no otherwise, the return was held insufficient, and therefore he was bailed. Secondly, that it appears also in the record, that he was committed pro suspitione feloniae ac per mandatum Dom Regis; So that in regard the expression of the cause of his commitment suspicion of felony precedes the command of the King, therefore it must be intended, that the Court took the cause why the King committed him to be of less moment than felony, and therefore bailed him; For he objected that even the house of Commons themselves in some Arguments used by them touching the interpretation of the Statute of Westminst. 1. cap. 15. about this point had affirmed, that in enumeration of particulars those of greatest nature were first mentioned, and that it was supposed that such as followed were of less nature or moment.  

Rns all dit objection.  But the reply was to the first objection, that the addition of certifying of the King's command by Robert Peck altered not the case, first, because the Sheriffs in their returns took notice of the command, as what they were assured of, and then however it came to them, it was of equal force as if it had been mentioned without reference to Peck. Secondly, that as divers Patents pass the great Seal by Writ of privy Seal, and are subscribed per bre. de privato Sigillo, so divers per ipsum Regem & are so subscribed, and oftentimes in the Rolls of former times to the words per ipsum Regem are added Nuntians A. B. So that the Kings Command general, and the Kings command related and certified by such a man, is to this purpose of like nature. Thirdly, in the late great Case of Habeas Corpus, where the return of the commitment was per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis mihi significat. per Dominos de privato consilio, and the Court of the King's Bench did agree that it was the same, and of the like force, as if mihi significat. etc. had not followed, and that these words were void, according whereunto here also per mandat. Dom. Regis nunciat. per Robertum Peck had been wholly omitted and void likewise; in truth in that late Case this case of Parker was cited both at the Bar, and at the Bench, and at the Bench it was interpreted by the Judges no otherwise then if it had been only per mandatum Dom. Regis in this place of it. But the objection there was made of another kind, as was delivered in the first Argument made out of Precedents in behalf of the house of Commons. Then for the second objection touching the course of enumeration of the causes in the return, it was said, that however in some acts of Parliament, and elsewhere in the solemn expression used in the Law, things of greater nature precede, and the less follow, Yet in this case the contrary was most plain, for in the return there appears, that there were three causes of detaining the prisoner, surety of the peace, suspicion of felony, and the King's command, and surety of the peace is first mentioned, which is plainly less than felony, therefore it is as plain, that (if any force of Argument be here to be taken from this enumeration) the contrary to that which Master Attorney inferred is to be concluded, that is, that as felony is a greater cause than Surety of the Peace, so the matter whereupon the King's command was grounded, was greater than the felony. But in truth this kind of Argument holds neither way here. And whatsoever the cause were why the King committed him, it was impossible for the Court to know it, And might also have been of very high moment in matter of State, and yet of fare less nature than felony, all which shows that this Precedent hath its full force also, according as it was first used in Argument by the house of Commons.  

35. H. 8. Bincks case cite ante 36. & 56 objections horse de ceo.  To the third of these, which is Bincks Case in 35. H. 8. Rot. 35. the Objection was, that there was cause expressed, pro suspitione feloniae, and though pro alijs causis illos moventibus were added in the return, yet because in the course of enumeration the general name of alia coming after particulars includes things of less nature than the particular doth, therefore in the Case suspicion of felony being the first, the other causes generally mentioned must be intended of less nature for which the prisoner was bay leable for the greater which was suspicion of felony.  

Rns all dit objection.  Hereunto it was replied that the Argument of enumeration on in these cases is of no moment, and is next before shown, and that although it were of any moment, yet the aliae causae, though less than felony, might be of very great consequence in matter of State, which is pretended usually upon general returns of command without cause showed. And it is most plain that the Court could not possibly know the reasons why the prisoner here was committed, and yet they bay led him without looking further after any unknown thing under that title of matter of State, which might as well have been in this Case, as in any other whatsoever.  

2. & 3. P. & M. overton's case, Et 4. et. 5. P. & M. Newports case cite ante, fo. 36. et 37. Et les objections la rnde le Record de ceux, vide ante fo. 37. et. 38.  To the fourth of these, which is overton's Case en Pas. 2. & 3. P. et Mar. rot. 58. and to the fifth, which is Newports Case, Pas. 4. & 5. P. & Mar. rot. 45. only these observations were said over again by Master Attorney, which were moved in the Argument made out of the Precedents in the behalf of the house of Commons at the first conference, and in the same Argument were fully and clearly satisfied, as they were now again in like manner.  

9 El. Lawrences' case, et eodem Anno Constables case cite devant fo. 38. et 56.  To the sixth, which is Lawrences' Case, in 9 El. rot. 35. and to the seventh, which is Constable's Case, Pas. 9 El. Rot. 68 the same objections were likewise said over again by Master Attorney that are moved and clearly and fully answered in the Argument made at the last Conference out of Precedents in the behalf of the house of Commons. The force of the Objection being only that it appeared in the margin of the Roll, that the word Pardon was written, but it is plain that the word there hath no reference at all to the reason why they are bailed, nor could have reference to the cause, why they were committed, is utterly unknown, and was not showed.  

20. El. browning's case cite devant fo. 38. et 56.  To the eighth, which is browning's Case, in Pas. 20. El. Rot. 72. it was said by Master Attomey, that he was bailed by a Letter from the Lords of the Counsel directed to the Judges of the Court, but being asked for that Letter, or any testimony of it, he could produce none at all, but said he thought the testimony of it was burnt amongst many other things of the Counsel table at the burning of the Banqueting house.  

40. El. Harecourts' case cite devant, fo 39  To the ninth, being Harecourts' Case. Pas. 40. El' Rot. 620. the selfsame objection was made by him, but no warrant was showed to maintain his objection.  

43. El. cite devant, fo. 39 Catesbies' case. Object. a ceo.  To the tenth, which is Catesbies' Case in vacation Hill. 43. El. he said that it was by direction of a Privy Seal from the Queen, and to that purpose he shown the Privy Seal of 43. El. which is at Charge among the transcript of the Records concerning bails taken in Cases when the King or the Lords of the Counsel assented.  

Rns a ceo.  But it was replied, that the Privy Scale was made only for some particular Gentleman mentioned in it and none other, as indeed appears in it. And then he said, that it was likely that Catesby here had a privy Seal in this behalf, because those other had so, which was all the force of his objection.  

12. jac. Backwiths' case cite devant. fo. 39 & 58. Objection a ceo.  To the 11 which is Beckwiths' Case, in Hill. 12. jac. Rot. 183. He said the Lords of the Counsel sent a letter to the Court of King's Bench to bail him, and indeed he produced a letter, which could not by any means be found when the Arguments were made at the first conference. And this Letter, and a Copy of an obscure report made by a young Student, that was brought to another purpose (as is hereafter showed) were the only things written of any kind that M. Attorney produced, besides the particular showed by the House of Commons at the first conference.  

Rns all objections.  To this it was replied, that the letter was of no moment, being only a direction to the chief Justice, and no matter of record, nor any way concernign the rest of the Judges. And besides, the prisoner was bailable by the Law, or not bailable; if bailable by the Law, than was he to be bailed without any such Letter; if not bailable by the Law, then plainly the Judges could not have bailed him upon the Letter without breach of their oaths, which is, that they are to do Justice according to the Law, without having respect to any command whatsoever; so that the Letter in this Case, or the like in any other case, is for point of Law to no purpose, nor hath any weight at all by way of objection, against what the record and judgement of the Court shows us.  

14 ja. Sir Tho. Mounsons' case devant. fo. 40. & 58.  The twelfth and last of these which is Sir Tho. Mounsons' Case, in 14. Jac. Rot. 147. the same objection only was said over by him, which was moved and clearly answered in the Argument at the first conference, and that one ground which is infallible, that the judgement upon a return is to be made only out of what appears in the body of the return itself, was again insisted upon in this case, as it was also in most of the rest. And indeed that alone (which is more clear Law) fully satisfies almost all kind of objections that have been made to any of these Precedents, which thus righty understood, are many ample testimonies of the judgement of the Court of King's Bench touching this great point, in the several ages & reigns of the several Princes under which they fall.  
After his objections to these twelve, and the replies and satisfaction given to these objections, he came next to those wherein the assent of the King or privy Counsel appears to have been upon the enlargement, but he made not to any of these any other kind of objection whatsoever, than such as are moved and clearly answered (as they were now again) in the Argument made at the first conference. And for as much as it concerns Letters of Assent or direction, the same was here said again by way of reply to him, as is before said touching the Letter in Beckworths' Case, hoc supra.  
After these were disputed, he came to urge the eight Precedents which seemed to make for the other side, against the resolution of the house of Commons, which eight were used, and copies of them also given unto the Lords at the first conference.  
Of these eight, the first four were urged by him, as being of one kind, the difference of them being only said the same, only in the names of prisons, and of persons, they were but the self same.  

Vide touts ceux cite devant fo. 43 44. & 62. 63 objections horse de eux.  The force of these four being objected thus, that Richard Everard for the purpose in the first of them, which is 5. H. 7. Rot. 18. Roger Cherry in the second of them, which is 8. H. 7. Rot. 12. Christopher Burton in the third, which is 9 H. 7. Rot. 14. and George Vrmsewick in the fourth of them, which is 19 ●. 7. Rot. 13. were returned into the King's Bench by several Writs of Habeas corpus, to have been committed, and detained in the prisons whence they came, per mandatum Dom. Regis, and that upon the return they were committed to the Marshalsea of the King's Bench, and that howsoever it had been objected against those Precedents, that this kind of commitment was by the course of that Court always done before the bailing of the prisoner, yet that it did not appear that they were bailed.  

Rns all objections horse des dits precedents.  The reply to these objections was, that the constant course of the Court of King's Bench was, whosoever came in upon a hab. corp.. or otherwise upon any Writ into that Court, cannot be bailed, until he be first committed to the Mar. of that Court, & that thence it was that all those 4 were committed to the Marshal, as appears by the entry, Marr'. etc. which is the usual entry in such a case, and that the Clerks of that Court acknowledge this course & entry to be most constantiso that all the inference that can be made out of these 4 is, but that 4 prisoners being brought from four several prisons by hab. corp.. into the King's Bench, and returned to stand committed per mandatum Dom. Regis, were so fare from being to be remanded by the Law, that in all these four cases, they were first taken from their several prisons wherein they had been detained by such a general command, which could not have been, if they had not been adjudged in every of the Cases to have been bailable by the Court, and that this Commitment of them to the Marshal of the King's Bench was the first step towards the bailing of them, as in all other cases; but that it appears not, that either they ever demanded to be bailed, or that they were able to find sufficient Bail. And if they did not the one, or could not do the other, it may follow indeed that they were not bailed; but the commitment to the King's Bench being the first step to bayling, and by constant course it is, shown most plainly, that they were bailable by the Law, which is the only thing in question: so that although the four Precedents were ranked among them that may seem to make against the resolution of the House of Commons, which was done, both because they have this small colour in them for the other side, to any man that is not acquainted with the nature and reasons of the Entries and courses of the Court of King's Bench, and also because all or some of them had been used in the late great case in the King's Bench, as Precedents that made against this liberty claimed by the Subject, yet in truth all sour of them do fully prove their resolution, that is, they plainly show that the Court of King's Bench in every of them resolved, that the prisoners so committed were bailable, otherwise they had been remanded, and not committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench. And this was the answer to the objection made by M. Attorney upon these four Precedents, being all of them in the time of H. 7.  

7 H. 8. Page's cas● cite devant. fo. 43. & 63.  To the fifth of these being Ed Pages Case in 7. H. 8. Rot. 23. M. Attorney objected thus, he said, that Edward Page was committed to the Marshalsea of the Household per mandatum Dom. Regis ibid. salvo custodiend. etc. Qui committitur Marr. Hospitii Dom. Regis, etc. by which it appears as he said, that the Court remanded him to the prison of the Marshalsea of the household, and he said, whereas it had been objected at the first conference, that here was some mistaking in the Entry, he said he conceived indeed there was a mistaking, but the mistaking was, that the Clerk had entered committitur for remittitur, and that it should have been Qui remittitur Hospitii Dom. Regis, for when ever they remand a prisoner remittitur and not committitur should be entered, and that mistaking being so rectified and understood, he conceived it was a direct Precedent against the resolution of the House of Commons.  

Rns all dit objection.  To this it was answered by the Gent. of the House of Commons, that there was no doubt indeed but that a mistaking was by the entry of the Clerk, but that the mistaking was quite of another nature. The addition of these words Hospitii Dom. Regis was the mistaking, and the entry should have been qui committitur Marr. etc. only, that is, that he is committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, and so indeed the force of the Precedent should be just the same with the first four, but the ignorance of the Clerk that entered it, knowing not how to distinguish between the Marshal of the Household, and the Marshal of the King's Bench, was the cause of the Addition of these words, and to confirm fully this kind of interpretation of that Precedent, and of the mistaking in it, 'twas observed by the Gent. of the House of Commons, that there is in the Margin of the Roll an infallible Character that justifies so much, for by the course of that Court whensoever a prisoner is committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, and not remanded, the word Marr '. etc. is written in the Margin short, by Marr' &c. turned up, and that is never written, but when the meaning and sense of the Entry is, that the prisoner is committed to the prison of the same Court, now in this Case in the Margin Marr '. is likewise written, which most plainly shows the truth of the Case was, that this Page was committed to the Marshal of the King's Bench, and not remanded, which if he had been, neither could the Entry have been committitur, nor should the Margin of the roll have had Marr ' written in it. And thus they answered Master Attorneys Objection touching this Precedent, and concluded that now besides the first four of the eight, they had another, and so five, more to prove that a prisoner committed per mandatum Dom. Regis generally was bailed by the Judgement of the Court. However it appears not in these particulars that they were bailed, which perhaps they were not, either because they prayed it not, or because they could not find sufficient Bail.  

8. jac. Caesar's case cite devant fo. 46. & 64. Objections horse de ceo.  To the sixth of these eight Precedents, being the Case of Tho. Caesar in 8. jac. Rot. 99 Master Attorney objected it thus, That Caesar being committed per mandatum Dom. Regis to the Marshalsea of the Household was returned upon Habeas Corpus to be so committed, and therefore detained in Prison, and that the entry is qui remittitur prisonae pred. by which it appears clearly, that he was remanded to the same prison from whence he came.  

Rns all dits' objections.  To which the Gentlemen of the house of Commons gave this answer, they said that the usual entry of a remittitur, when it is to show that the Court by way of Judgement or award upon a resolution or debate remand the prisoner, is quousque secundum legem deliberatus fuerit, but when they advise, or give day to the Keeper of the prison to amend his return, or the like, than the entry is only remittitur generally, or remittitur prisonae pred. But it was indeed affirmed by Master Keeling, a Clerk of experience in that Court, that the entry of Remittitur generally, or Remittitur prisonae pred. was indifferently used for the same that Remittitur quousque etc. yet it was expressly showed by the Gent. of the house of Commons that there was sometimes a difference, and that so it might, well be in this case, for in the last of these eight precedents, which is Saltonstals Case, they observed that Remittitur prisonae pred. is often used, only for a remanding during the time that the Court gave leave for the Warden of the Fleet to amend the return, which shows plainly, though sometimes Remittitur generally, and Remittitur quousque may mean but the same, yet sometimes also it doth not mean the same. And that in this Case of Caesar it meant only but so much as it doth twice in that of Saltonstalls Case, which was proved also by a rule of the Court, which was cited out of the Rule Book of the Court of King's Bench, by which rule the Court expressly ordered, that unless the Steward and Marshal of the household did sufficiently return the Writ of Habeas Corpus for Caesar, that he should be discharged, the words of the Rule are Nisi pred. Seneschall' & Marr' Hospitii Dom. Regis sufficienter returnabit bre. de Habeas Corpus Thomae Caesar die Mercur. prox' post festum Sanct. Martin. defendens exonerabitur. And this was the opinion of the Court, which shows that the Court was so fare from remaunding him upon the return, that they resolved, that unless some better return was made, the prisoner should be discharged of his first imprisonment, though it appear to them out of the body of the return upon which they are to judge, that he was committed per mandatum Dom. Regis only. And the Rule not only shows the opinion of the Court then to be agreeable with the resolution of the house of Commons, but also proves that Remittitur generally, and Remittitur prisonae predict. doth not always imply a remanding upon Judgement or debate. And this answer was given to this of Caesar's Case, and that is the sixth of this number.  

12. jac. Demestrius and others case cite devant, fo. 46. & 64. Objections horse de ceo.  The seventh, is the Case of James Demestrius, it was 12. jac. Rot. 153. Master Attorney objected, that this Demestrius and divers others being Brewers, were committed per Consilium Dom. Regis to the Marshalsea of the household, and that upon the commitment being so generally returned they were remanded, and that the entry was immediate remittitur praefat. Marr' hospitij praed. where observes that immediate shows that the Judges of that time were so resolved of this question, that they remaunded them presently, as men that well knew what the Law was herein.  

Rns all dit objections.  Hereunto the Gent. of the House of Commons gave this answer; First, that the remittitur in this Case is but as the other in Caesar's, and so proves nothing against them. Secondly, that immediate being added to it shows plainly, that it was done without debate, or any Argument or consideration had of it, which makes the Authority of the Precedent to be of no force in point of Law. For Judgements and awards given upon deliberation and debate only are proofs and Arguments of weight, and not any sudden act of the Court without debate or deliberation. And the entry of immediate being proposed to Master Keeling, it was confirmed by him, that by the Entry it appeared by their course, that the remaunding of him was the selfsame day he was brought, which as it was said by the Gent. of the house of Commons might be upon the rising of the Court, or upon advisement, or the like; and this answer was given to this Precedent of the Brewers.  

12. jac. Saltonstalls case cite devant, fo. 49. & 65 Objections horse de ceo.  To the last of these eight which Master Attorney objected is Saltonstalls Case 12. Jac. he was committed per mandatum à Dom. de privato Consilio, and being returned by the Warden of the Fleet to be so, Remittitur prisonae pred. and in 13. jac. in the same Case there is remittitur generally in the Roll, and these two make but one Case, and are one Precedent.  

Rns all dits' objections.  To this the Gent. of the house of Commons answered, that it is true the Rolls have such entries of remittitur in them generally, But that proves nothing upon the reason before used by them in Caesar's Case. But also Saltonstall was committed for another cause, besides per mandatum Dom. Regis, for a contempt against an Order in the Chancery, and that was in the return also. And besides the Court, as it appears in the Record, gave several days to the Warden of the Fleet to amend his return, which they would not have done, if they had conceived it sufficient, for that which is sufficient needs not amendment.  
To this Master Attorney replied, that they gave him day to amend his return, in respect of that part of it which concerns the Order in Chancery, and not in respect of that which was per mandatum Dom. Regis. But the Gent. of the House of Commons answered, that that appeared not any where, nor indeed is it likely at all, nor can be reasonably so understood, because if the other return per mandatum Dom. Regis had been sufficient by itself, then doubtless they would have remanded him upon that alone, for than they needed not at all to have stood upon the other part of the return in this Case. So that out of the Record itself it appears fully, that the Court conceived the return to be insufficient. So the Gent. of the house of Commons concluded, that they had a great number of Precedents, besides divers Acts of Parliament, and reasons of Common law, agreeable to their resolution, and that there was not one Precedent at all that made against them, but indeed, that almost all that were brought as well against them as for them, if rightly understood, made fully for the maintenance of their conclusion, and that there was not one Example or Precedent of a Remittitur in any kind upon the point before that of Caesar's Case, which is before cleared with the rest, and is but of late time, and of no moment against the resolution of the House of Commons.  
And thus, for so much as concerned the precedents of Record, the first day of the Conference desired by the Lords ended.  
The next day they desired another Conference with the House of Commons, at which it pleased the Committee of both Houses to hear Master Attorney again make what Objections he could against other parts of the Argument formerly delivered from the House of Commons, he objected against the Acts of Parliament, and against the reasons of the Law, and his objections to those parts were answered, as it appears by the Answers by order given into the House of Commons by the Gent. that made them. He objected also upon the second day against the second kind of Precedents, which are resolutions of Judges in former times, and not of Record, and brought also some other testimonies of the opinions of Judges in former times touching this point.  

Resolution de touts les judges, 34. El. Objections horse de ceo per l' Attorney.  First, for that Resolution of all the Judges of England in 34. El. mentioned and read in the Arguments read at the first Conference, he said, That it was directly against the resolution of the House of Commons, and observed the words of it in one place to be, that persons so committed by the King, or by the Counsel, may not be delivered by any of the Courts etc. And in another, that if the cause were expressed, either in general or in speciality, it was sufficient, and he said that the expressing of a Cause in generalty, was to show the King and the Counsels command, and to this purpose he read the whole words of that resolution of the Judges. Then he objected also, that in a report of one Roswels Case in the King's Bench in 13 Jac. he found that the opinion of the Judges of that Court (Sir Edward Cook being then chief Justice and one of them) was that a prisoner being committed per mandatum Dom. Regis, or privati Consilii, without cause shown, and so returned, could not be bailed, because it might be matter of State, or Arc anum nuperii, for which he stood committed. And this also he added, an opinion he found in a Journal in the House of Commons of 18. jac. wherein Sir Edward Cook speaking to a bill preferred for the explanation of Magna Charta touching imprisonment, said in the same House, that one so committed could not be enlarged by the Law, because it might be matter of State for which he was committed, and amongst these objections, as his objections of the other nature, also he spoke of the confidence that was showed in the behalf of the House of Commons: and he said, it was not confidence on either part could add any thing to the determination of the question; but if he would, that he had as much reason of Confidence for the other side against the resolution of the House of Commons, grounding himself upon the force of his objections, which as he conceived had so weakened the Arguments of the House of Commons.  

Rns all dits' objections.  To this a reply was made, and first it was said to the Lords on the behalf of the House of Commons, that notwithstanding any thing yet objected, they were upon clear reason still confident of the truth of their first resolution, grounded upon so just examination, and deliberation taken by them. And it was observed to the Lords also, that their confidence herein was of another nature, and of greater weight, than any confidence that could be expressed by M. Attorney, or whomsoever else being of his Majesty's Counsel learned.  
To which purpose the Lords were desired to take into their present memories the difference between the present qualities of the Gent. that spoke in the behalf of the House of Commons, & of the King's learned Counsel in their speaking there howsoever accidently they were both men of the same profession: For the King's Counsel spoke as Counsel perpetually retained by Fee, and if they made glosses or advantageous interpretations whatsoever for their own part, they did but what belonged unto them; but the Gent. that spoke in behalf of the House of Commons, came there, bound on the one side by the trust reposed in them by their Country that sent them, and on the other side by an oath taken by every of them before he sit in the House, to maintain and defend the rights and prerogatives of the Crown, for even in the point of Confidence alone those of them that speak as retained Counsel by perpetual Fee, and those that by their place being admitted to speak, are bound to utter nothing but truth, both by such a trust and such an oath, were no way to be so compared or counterpoised, as if the one were of no more weight than the other.  

Resolution the 34. El. explain & expound.  For that of the resolution of all the Judges in England in 34. El. It was showed that plainly it agreed with the resolution of the House of Commons, for although indeed it might have been expressed with more perspicuity, yet the words of it as they are, sufficiently show that to them. To that purpose, besides the words of the whole frame of this resolution of the Judges, as it is in the Copy transcribed out of the Lord chief Justice anderson's Book, written with his own hand, which book was here offered to be showed in the behalf of the House of Commons, it was observed, that the words of the first part of it show plainly, that all the Judges of England then resolved, that the prisoners spoken of in that first part of their resolution, were only prisoners committed with cause shown; for they only say they might not be delivered by any of the Courts without due trial, by law and judgement of the acquittal they must be delivered; but it is clear that no trial or acquittal can be had, where there is not some cause laid to their charge, for which they ought to stand committed. Therefore in that part of the resolution such prisoners are only meant as are committed with cause shown, as which also the Judges expressly in that resolution expressly thought necessary, as appears in the second part of their resolution, wherein they have these words, If upon the return of their Habeas Corpus, the cause of their commitment be certified to the Judges, as it ought to be, etc. By which words they show plainly, that every return of a commitment is insufficient, that hath not a cause showed of it. And to that which M. Attorney said, as if the Cause were sufficiently expressed in generality, if the King's command or the Counsels were expressed in it, as if that were meant in the resolution for a sufficient general cause, It was answered, that it was never heard of in Law, that the power or person that committed the prisoner was understood, for the causa captionis or causa detentionis, but only the reason why that power or person committed the prisoner, as also in common speech if any man ask why or for what cause a man stands committed, the answer is not, that such a one committed him, but his offence or some other cause is understood in the question, and is to be showed in the Answer, but to say that such a one committed the prisoner, is an answer only to the question, who committed him? and not why or for what cause he stands so committed.  
That for that of the Copy of the report in 13 jac. shown forth by M. Attorney, it was answered by the Gent. of the House of Commons, that the report itself which had been before seen, and perused among many other things at a Committee made by the House, was of sleight or no authority, for that it was taken by one who was at that time a young Student, and as a reporter in the King's Bench, and there was not any other report to be found to agree with it. Secondly, although the reports of young Students, when they take the words of Judges as they fall from their mouths at the Bench, and in the same person and form as they have spoken, may be of good credit, yet in this Case there was not one word so reported, but in truth there being three cases of a time in the King's Bench, one Rosewells Case, Allens, and one Saltonstalls case, every of which had something of like nature in it, the Student having been present in the Court, made up the frame of one report or case out of all three in his own words, and so put it into his Book: so that there is not a word in the report, but it is framed according to the Students fancy, as it is written, and nothing is expressed in it, as it came from the mouth of the Judges, otherwise then as his fancy directed him.  
Thirdly, there are in the report plain falsehoods of matter of fact, which are to be attributed either to the Judges, or to the reporter. It is most likely by all reason that they proceeded from the reporters faults, and howsoever, these matters of falsehood show sufficiently that the credit of the rest is of light value. It it said in the report that Harecourt being committed by the Counsel, was bailed in 40. El. upon a Privy Seal or a Letter, whereas in truth there is no such thing. And it is said here, that kind of Letters are filled in the Crown Office, whereas in truth there was any such kind of Letters filled there in any case whatsoever, that resolution of the Judges in 34. El. is mis-cited there, and made in 36. El. And it is said there, that by that resolution a Prisoner returned to be committed by the Command of the King might not at all be delivered by the Court, whereas no such thing is comprehended in that resolution.  
But that which is of most moment is, that howsoever the truth of the report were, yet the opinion of the Judges being sudden, and without any debate had of the Case, is of light moment, for in difficult points especially the most grave and learned men living may on the sudden let fall (and that without any disparagement to them) such opinions as they may will, and aught to change upon further inquiry, examination, and full debate had before them, and mature deliberation taken by them. Now plainly in that of 13. Jac. there is not so much as a pretence of any debate at the Bar or Bench. All that is reported to have been, is reported as spoken of the sudden. And can any man take such a sudden opinion to be of value against such debates and mature deliberations since had of the point? And indeed this great point, and all circumstances belonging to it, hath within this half year been so fully examined and searched into, that it may well be affirmed, that the most learned man whosoever that hath now considered of it, hath within that time, or might have learned more reason of satisfaction in it then ever before he met with. Therefore the sudden opinion of the Judges to the contrary is of no value here, which also is to be said by that opinion obliviously delivered in the Commons house in 18. jac. as Master Attorney objected out of the Journal of the House. But besides, neither was the truth of that report of that opinion of the Journal any way acknowledged, for it was said on the behalf of the house of Commons, that their Journals were for matters of Orders and resolutions of the House of such Authority, as that they were as their Records. But for any particular man's opinion noted in any of them, it was so fare from being of any authority there with them, that in truth no particular opinion is at all to be entered in them, and that their Clerk offends whenever bee doth to the contrary. And to conclude, no such opinion whatsoever can be sufficient to weaken the clear Law comprehended in these resolutions of the House of Commons grounded upon so many Acts of Parliament, so much reason of the Common law, and so many Precedents of Record, and the resolution of all the Judges of England, and against which not one Law written or unwritten, not one Precedent, not one reason hath been brought that make any thing to the contrary.  
And thus to this purpose ended the next day of the Conference desired by the Lords, and had by a Committee of both Houses.   
FINIS.