for great
matters. The law of England and all laws hold these degrees of
injury to the person, slander, battery, mayhem, death; and if there
be extraordinary circumstances of despite and contumely, as in case
of libels and bastinadoes and the like, this court taketh them in
hand and punisheth them exemplarily. But for this apprehension of a
disgrace that a fillip to the person should be a mortal wound to the
reputation, it were good that men did hearken unto the saying of
Gonsalvo, the great and famous commander, that was wont to say a
gentleman's honor should be _de_ _tela_ _crassiore_, of a good
strong warp or web, that every little thing should not catch in it;
when as now it seems they are but of cobweb-lawn or such light
stuff, which certainly is weakness, and not true greatness of mind,
but like a sick man's body, that is so tender that it feels
everything. And so much in maintenance and demonstration of the
wisdom and justice of the law of the land.

For the capacity of this court, I take this to be a ground
infallible, that wheresoever an offense is capital, or matter of
felony, though it be not acted, there the combination or practice
tending to the offense is punishable in this court as high
misdemeanor. So practice to imprison, though it took no effect;
waylaying to murder, though it took no effect; and the like; have
been adjudged heinous misdemeanors punishable in this court. Nay,
inceptions and preparations in inferior crimes, that are not
capital, as suborning and preparing of witnesses that were never
deposed, or deposed nothing material, have likewise been censured in
this court, as appeareth by the decree in Garnon's case.

Why, then, the major proposition being such, the minor cannot be
denied, for every appointment of the field is but combination and
plotting of murder. Let them gild it how they list, they shall never
have fairer terms of me in a place of justice. Then the conclusion
followeth, that it is a case fit for the censure of the court. And
of this there be precedents in the very point of challenge. It was
the case of Wharton, plaintiff, against Ellekar and Acklam,
defendants, where Acklam, being a follower of Ellekar's, was
censured for carrying a challenge from Ellekar to Wharton, though
the challenge was not put in writing, but delivered only by word of
message; and there are words in the decree, that such challenges are
to the subversion of government. These things are well