In the 30th of Charles II., during the trial of Lord Cornwallis,[18] on the suggestion of a question in law to the Judges, Lord Danby demanded of the Lord High Steward, the Earl of Nottingham, "whether it would be proper here [in open court] to ask the question of your Grace, or to propose it to the Judges?" The Lord High Steward answered,--"If your Lordships doubt of anything whereon a question in law ariseth, the latter opinion, and the _better_ for the prisoner, is, _that it must be stated in the presence of the prisoner, that he may know whether the question be truly put_. It hath _sometimes_ been practised otherwise, and the Peers have sent for the Judges, and have asked their opinion in private, and have come back, and have given their verdict according to that opinion; and there is scarcely a precedent of its being otherwise done. There is a later authority in print that doth settle the point so as I tell you, and I do conceive _it ought to be followed_; and it being safer for the prisoner, my humble opinion to your Lordship is, that he ought to be present at _the stating of the question_. Call the _prisoner_." The prisoner, who had withdrawn, again appearing, he said,--"My Lord Cornwallis, my Lords the Peers, since they have withdrawn, have conceived a doubt in some matter [of law arising upon the matter] of fact in your case; and they have that tender regard of a prisoner at the bar, _that they will not suffer a case to be put up in his absence_, lest it should chance to prejudice him by being _wrong stated_." Accordingly the question was both put and the Judges' answer given publicly and in his presence. Very soon after the trial of Lord Cornwallis, the impeachment against Lord Stafford was brought to a hearing,--that is, in the 32d of Charles II. In that case the lord at the bar having stated a point of law, "touching the necessity of two witnesses to an overt act in case of treason," the Lord High Steward told Lord Stafford, that "all the Judges that assist them, _and are here in your Lordship's presence and hearing_, should deliver their opinions whether it be doubtful and disputable or not." Accordingly the Judges delivered their opinion, and each argued it (though they were all agreed) _seriatim_ and _in open court_. Another abstract point of law was also proposed from the bar, on the same trial, concerning the legal sentence in high treason; and in the same manner the Judges on reference delivered their opinion _in open court_; and no objection, was taken to it as anything new or irregular.[19] In the 1st of James II. came on a remarkable trial of a peer,--the trial of Lord Delamere. On that occasion a question of law was stated. There also, in conformity to the precedents and principles given on the trial of Lord Cornwallis, and the precedent in the impeachment of Lord Stafford, the then Lord High Steward took care that the opinion of the Judges should be given in open court.