The Englishman's Right: A Dialogue Between a Barrister at Law and a Juryman : Plainly Setting Forth, I. The Antiquity, II. The Excellent Designed Use, III. The Office, & Just Privilege, of Juries, by the Law of England
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
The Englishman's Right: A Dialogue Between a Barrister at Law and a Juryman ...
No preview available - 2018
The Englishman's Right: A Dialogue Between a Barrister at Law, and a Juryman ...
No preview available - 2018
according acquit act of parliament ancient attaint Barr Barrister Cadwine chief justice Coke Coke common law condemn conscience contempt crime criminal dence dict direct duty England Englishman ENGLISHMAN'S RIGHT estates evidence excellent false favour fear find him guilty find the fact fined fully give a verdict giving their verdict Gracechurch-Street happen hath hear heard Henry VII honest honestly illegal imprisoned indictment innocent institution judgment judicature jurors Jurym jurymen justly king lawfully lawyers learned judge liberties lord chief justice Magna Charta matter in issue matter of fact matter of law Mead men's lives murther never oath opinion oppression parliament peace perhaps person posterity prison privileges proper judges proved punished raise sedition reason recited ruin saith scandalize shew speak supposed tence thereby thing thou trials by juries truly truth twelve unlawful assembly Vaughan's Reports Whitechapel William Mead William Pen witnesses words
Page 8 - No freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold, or liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed ; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land.
Page 60 - King, and of his law; to the great disturbance of his peace, to the great terror and disturbance of many of his liege people and subjects, to the ill example of all others in the like case offenders, and against the peace of the said Lord the King, his crown and dignity.
Page 23 - Also in such case where the inquest may give their verdict at large, if they will take upon them the knowledge of the law upon the matter, they may give their verdict generally as it is put in their charge...
Page 59 - Justice, in the cases now reported, are innovations in the trial of men for their lives and liberties; and that he hath used an arbitrary and illegal power, which is of dangerous consequence to the lives and liberties of the people of England, and tends to the introducing of an arbitrary government. 2. That in the place of judicature, the Lord Chief Justice hath undervalued, vilified, and condemned Magna Charta, the great preserver of our lives, freedom, and property.
Page 64 - Chief Justice Vaughan held the ground to be insufficient, and discharged the prisoner.
Page 55 - If the meaning of these words, finding against the direction of the court in matter of law, be, That if the judge having heard the evidence given in court (for he knows no other) shall tell the jury, upon this evidence, The law is for the plaintiff, or for the defendant, and you are under the pain of fine and imprisonment to find accordingly, then the jury ought of duty so to do...
Page 62 - Mayor. Was it not an unlawful assembly? You mean he was speaking to a tumult of people there?
Page 61 - You have heard what the Indictment is. It is for preaching to the People, and drawing a tumultuous Company after them, and Mr. Penn was speaking; if they should not be disturbed, you see they will go on; there are three or four Witnesses that have proved this, that he did preach there; that Mr. Mead did allow of it; after this, you have heard by substantial Witnesses what is said against them: Now we are upon the Matter of Fact, which you are to keep to, and observe, as what hath been fully sworn,...
Page 23 - ... guilty pleaded in trespass, breach of the peace, or felony, though it be matter in law whether the party be a trespasser, a breaker of the peace, or a felon, yet the jury do not find the fact of the case by itself, leaving the law to the court, but find the party guilty or not guilty generally? So, as though they answer not to the question singly, What is law ? yet they determine the law in all matters where issue is joined.