the fame Offence, yet it is not the fame Suit; for an Impeachment is at the Suit of the People, and they have an Intereft in it; but an Indictment is the Suit of the King: For one and the fame Offence may intitle several Perfons to feveral Suits; as, if a Murder be committed, the King may indict at his Suit; or the Heir, or the Wife of the Party murder'd, may bring an Appeal, and the King cannot release that Appeal, nor his Indictment prevent the Proceedings in the Appeal, because the Appeal is the Suit of the Party, and he hath an Interest in it. 'Tis, as we conceive, an abfolute Denial of Juftice, in regard (as 'tis said before) the fame Suit can be tried no-where elfe: The House of Peers, as to Impeachments, proceed by virtue of their judicial Power, and not by their legislative; and as to that A&t, as a Court of Record, and can deny Suitors (efpecially the Commons of England) that bring legal Complaints before them, no more than the Juftices of Wefiminfter-Hall, or other Courts, can deny any Suit or criminal Caufe that is regularly commenced before them. nega Our Law faith, in the Perfon of the King, Nulli bimus Juftitiam, We will deny Juftice to no fingle PerJon; yet here, as we apprehend, Juftice is denied to the whole Body of the People. And this may be interpreted an exercifing of an arbitrary Power, and will, we fear, have Influence upon the Conftitution of the English Government, and be an Encouragement to all inferior Courts to exercife the fame arbitrary Power, by denying the Prefentments of Grand Juries, &c. for which at this time the Chief Justice ftands impeached in the House of Peers. This Proceeding may mifreprefent the House of Peers to the King and People, especially at this time, and the more in the particular Case of Edward Fitzharris, who is publickly known to be concerned in vile and horrid Treasons againft his Majefty, and a great Confpirator in the Popish Plot to murder the King, and deftroy and fubvert the Proteftant Religion. Kent, Bedford, Paget, Herbert, Salisbury, Clare, D 2 Sunderland, Die Veneris 22° Maii, 1685. Upon Confideration of the Cafes of the Earl of Powis, Lord Arundell of Warder, the Lord Bellafis, and the Earl of Danby, contained in their Petitions, After fome Debate the Queftion was put, whether the Order of the 19th of March, 1678.9, fhall be reverfed and annulled, as to the Continuance of Impeachments, in ftatu quo, from Parliament to Parliament ? It was refolved in the Affirmative. According to the Right of Peers to enter their Diffent and Proteftation against any Vote, propounded and refolved upon any Queftion in Parliament, we do enter our Diffent and Proteftation to the aforefaid Vote or Refolution, for thefe Reasons, among many others: ft, Because it doth, as we conceive, extrajudicially, and without a particular Caufe before us, endeavour an Alteration in a judicial Rule and Order of the House in the highest Point of their Power and Judicature. zdly, Because it shakes and lays afide an Order made and renewed upon long Confideration, Debate, Report of Committees, Precedents, and former Refolutions, without permitting the fame to be read, tho' called for by many of the Peers, and againft weighty Reasons, as we conceive, appearing for the fame, and contrary to the Practice of former Times. 3dly, Because it is inherent in every Court of Judicature to affert and preserve the former Rules of Proceedings before them; which therefore must be fteady and certain, efpecially in this High Court, that the Subject, and all Perfons concerned, may know how to apply themselves for Juftice; The very Chancery, King'sBench, &c. have their fettled Rules and ftanding Orders, from which there is no Variation. Anglesey, Clare, Stamford. Die Luna 25° Maii, 1685, Elizabeth Harvey having brought a Petition on Saturday turday laft against a Decree in Chancery in Favour of Sir Thomas Harvey, and Confideration had concerning the fame, Contents 47 The Question was put, that this Houfe will not proceed upon the Petition of Mrs. Harvey until the doth perfonally appear, having the Protection of this House, or give fufficient Security to perform such Order as this Houfe thall make? Diffentient It was refolved in the Affirmative. I do diffent to this Vote, being a heavy and unprecedented Obstruction to Judicature and Appeals. Anglesey. Upon Report from the Committee of the whole Houfe, on the Bill for reverfing the Attainder of the Lord Viscount Stafford. The Queftion was put, whether this Bill, with the Amendments, fhall be engroffed? It was refolved in the Affirmative. Diffentient' ift, Because the Affertion in the Bill, of its being now manifeft that the Viscount Stafford died innocent, and that the Teftimony on which he was convicted was falfe, which are the fole Grounds and Reasons given to fupport the Bill, are destitute of all Proof, Warrant, or Teftimony of Witness, or Matter of Record before us. 2dly, That the Record of the King's-Bench read at the Committee concerning the Conviction, laft Term, of one of the Witneffes for Perjury in collateral Points of Proof of no Affinity to the Lord Stafford's Trial, and given feveral Years before, 'tis conceived, can be no Ground to invalidate the Testimony upon which the faid Viscount was convicted, which could never legally be by one Witness, and was, in fact, by the Judgment of his Peers, on the Evidence of at leaft three. 3dly, It's conceived, the faid Judgment in the King'sBench, and the whole Proceedings, were unprecedented, illegal and unwarrantable, highly derogatory to the Honour, Judicature and Authority of this Court, who D 3 have have Power to queftion and punish Perjuries of Witneffes before them, and ought not to he impofed upon by the Judgments of inferior Courts, or their Attainders of a Peer, invalidated by Implication; and the Popish Plot fo condemn'd, purfued and punished by his Majefty and four Parliaments, after publick folemn Devotion through the whole Kingdom, by Authority of Church and State, to be eluded to the Arraignments and Scandal of the Government, and only to be reftoring of the Family of one Popish Lord; and all this being without any Matter judicially appearing before us to induce the fame, and the Records of that Trial not suffered to be read for Information of the Truth before the paffing of the Bill. Lastly, For many other weighty Reafons offered and given by divers Peers in the two Days Debate of this Bill, both in the Committees and the House. Anglefey. Die Jovis 4° Junii, 1685. Hodie 32 vice letta eft Billa, An Act for reverfing the Attainder of William late Viscount Stafford. The Question being put, whether this Bill fhall pafs? It was refolved in the Affirmative. Diffentient' I Anglefey protest against this Bill's paffing, for the fame Reasons enter'd the Day before. I protest against this Bill, because the Preamble was not amended, and no Defect in Point of Law alledged as a Reason for the Reverfal of the Attainder. Die Mercurii 6. Martii, 1688. Clare. Hodie 3a vice leta eft Billa, An Act for the better Regulation of Trials. The Queftion was put, whether this Bill shall pass? Leave was given to any Lords to enter their Diffents; and accordingly thefe Lords following enter'd their Diffents in the Reasons following: ift, Because nothing ever was or may be put into an Act of Parliament, that can reflect fo much upon the Honour of the Peerage as this will. 2dly, Because this fets the Honour of the Peers and the Commons upon an equal Foot 3dly, 3dly, Because fuch Perfons as may have Caufes to be heard at the Bar of this Houfe will not be fo confident of the Juftice of the Peers, and confequently be jealous of the Right that may be expected upon Impeachments. 4thly, Becaufe this ftrikes at the Root of all the Privileges of the Peers, most of which they claim by refon of the great Regard that the Law has to the Honour and Integrity of the Peers above that of the Cominons ; the Statute de Scandalis Magnatum being enacted for that Reason only. 5thly, Because it will be, in fome fort, a Mark of Reproach upon every Peer who fhall be challenged, unless there be very great and apparent Caufe for it. 6thly, Because this will tend to maintain Feuds and Animofities amongst the Peers. 7thly, Becaufe, at this time, it is unreafonable, confidering the late Difputes and Divifions that have been in this Houle. 8thly, Because the Honour of every Man, much more of a Peer, is, or ought to be more valuable than his Life. Stamford, Delawar, North and Grey, Winchester, King fon, Lucas, Manchefer, Lindsey, G. C. H. London, Norfolk and Craven, Morley and Marshall, Northampton, Mounteagle, Berkeley, S. Delamar, Die Jovis 219 Martii, 1688. The Houfe, having been in Confideration of the Bill for abrogating the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and establishing others in their Place. A Claufe for repealing fo much of the Teft-Act as concerns the receiving the Sacrament was read. And the Question being put, whether to agree to the faid Claufe? It was refolved in the Negative. Leave was given by the Houfe to fuch Lords as will, to enter their Diffents, and accordingly thefe Lords following do enter their Diffents, for the Reasons following: ft, Because a hearty Union amongst Protestants is a greater Security to the Church and State than any Test that can be invented. D 4 2ly, |