FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39  
40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   >>   >|  
f the interest of the Commons of Great Britain in the religious observation of the rule, _that the Law of Parliament, and the Law of Parliament only, should prevail in the trial of their impeachments_. In the year 1715 (1 Geo. I.) the Commons thought proper to impeach of high treason the lords who had entered into the rebellion of that period. This was about six years after the decision in the case of Sacheverell. On the trial of one of these lords, (the Lord Wintoun,[13]) after verdict, the prisoner moved in arrest of judgment, and excepted against the impeachment for error, on account of the treason therein laid "not being described with sufficient certainty,--the day on which the treason was committed not having been alleged." His counsel was heard to this point. They contended, "that the forfeitures in cases of treason are very great, and therefore they humbly conceived that the accusation ought to contain all the certainty it is capable of, that the prisoner may not by _general allegations_ be rendered incapable to defend himself in a case which may prove fatal to him: that they would not trouble their Lordships with citing authorities; for they believed there is not one gentleman of the long robe but will agree that an indictment for any capital offence to be erroneous, if the offence be not alleged to be committed on a certain day: that this impeachment set forth only that in or about the months of September, October, or November, 1715, the offence charged in the impeachment had been committed." The counsel argued, "that a proceeding by impeachment is a proceeding at the Common Law, for _Lex Parliamentaria_ is a part of Common Law, and they submitted whether there is not the same certainty required in one method of proceeding at Common Law as in another." The matter was argued elaborately and learnedly, not only on the general principles of the proceedings below, but on the inconvenience and possible hardships attending this uncertainty. They quoted Sacheverell's case, in whose impeachment "the precise days were laid when the Doctor preached each of these two sermons; and that by a like reason a certain day ought to be laid in the impeachment when this treason was committed; and that the authority of Dr. Sacheverell's case seemed so much stronger than the case in question as the crime of treason is higher than that of a misdemeanor." Here the Managers for the Commons brought the point a second time to an is
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39  
40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

impeachment

 

treason

 

committed

 

Common

 

Sacheverell

 

proceeding

 
offence
 

certainty

 
Commons
 
alleged

argued

 
prisoner
 
Parliament
 

counsel

 
general
 

indictment

 
October
 

September

 
capital
 

Parliamentaria


November

 
erroneous
 

months

 

charged

 

submitted

 

principles

 

authority

 

reason

 

sermons

 

stronger


Managers

 

brought

 

misdemeanor

 
question
 
higher
 

preached

 

Doctor

 

learnedly

 

proceedings

 

elaborately


matter

 

required

 
method
 

inconvenience

 
precise
 
quoted
 

hardships

 
attending
 
uncertainty
 

period