"'My lords, I submit whether this be not proper in _mitigation of
your lordships' sentence_; but whether it be or not, I leave myself
to your lordships' justice and mercy; I am sure neither of them will
be wanting, and I entirely submit.' * *
"Then the said earl, as also the managers, were directed to withdraw;
and the House (of Lords) ordered Thomas, Earl of Macclesfield, to be
committed to the custody of the gentleman usher of the black rod; and
then proceeded to the consideration of what _judgment_," (that is,
_sentence_, for he had already been found _guilty_,) "to give upon
the impeachment against the said earl." * *
"The next day, the Commons, with their speaker, being present at the
bar of the House (of Lords), * * the speaker of the House of Commons
said as follows:
"'My Lords, the knights, citizens, and burgesses in Parliament
assembled, in the name of themselves, and of all the commons of Great
Britain, did at this bar impeach Thomas, Earl of Macclesfield, of
high crimes and misdemeanors, and did exhibit articles of impeachment
against him, and have made good their charge. I do, therefore, in the
name of the knights, citizens, and burgesses, in Parliament
assembled, and of all the commons of Great Britain, demand _judgment_
(_sentence_) of your lordships against Thomas, Earl of Macclesfield,
for the said high crimes and misdemeanors.'
"Then the Lord Chief Justice King, Speaker of the House of Lords,
said: 'Mr. Speaker, the Lords are now ready to proceed to judgment in
the case by you mentioned.
"'Thomas, Earl of Macclesfield, the Lords have unanimously found you
guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, charged on you by the
impeachment of the House of Commons, and do now, according to law,
proceed to _judgment_ against you, which I am ordered to pronounce.
Their lordships' _judgment_ is, and this high court doth adjudge,
that you, Thomas, Earl of Macclesfield, be fined in the sum of thirty
thousand pounds unto our sovereign lord the king; and that you shall
be imprisoned in the tower of London, and there kept in safe custody,
until you shall pay the said fine.'"--_6 Hargrave's State Trials_,
762-3-4.
This case shows that the principle of Magna Carta, that a man should be
_sentenced only_ by his peers, was in force, and acted upon as law, in
England, so lately as 1725, (five hundred years after Magna Carta,) so
far as it applied to a _peer of the realm_.
But the same principle, on this point, that applies to a peer of the
realm, applies to every freeman. The only difference between the two is,
that the peers of the realm have had influence enough to preserve their
constitutional rights; while the constitutional rights of the people
have been trampled upon and rendered obsolete by the usurpation and
corruption of the government and the courts.
SECTION V.
_The Oaths of Judges._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account