12.1. An act of councell touching this matter, in manner as followeth.

An act of councell touching this matter, in manner as followeth.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 _MEmorandum that on the fiue and twentith day of August,Additions to Polychron. , in the 11 yeare of the reigne of king Ri|chard the second, at the castell of Notingham aforesaid, Robert Trisilian lord chiefe iustice of England, Robert Bel|knap lord chiefe iustice of the cõmon plees, Iohn Holt, Roger Fulthorpe, & William Borough, knights and associats of the said Robert Belknap, and Iohn Lockton one of the kings sergeants at the law, being personalie required in presence of the lords and other witnesses vnder written by our said souereigne lord the king, in that faith and allegiance in which to him they were bounden, that they should trulie answer to certeine questions vnderwritten, and vpon the same by their discretions, to saie the law.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 1 First, it was asked of them,Questions to law demãded of the iustices. whether the new statute, ordinance, and commission made in the last parlement held at West|minster, be hurtfull to the kings preroga|tiue. Wherevnto all of one mind answe|red, that they were hurtfull, and speciallie bicause they be against the kings will.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 2 Item, it was inquired of them, how they ought to be punished, that procured the said statute, ordinance, and commission to be made. Wherevnto with one assent they answered, that they deserued death, except the king of his grace would pardon them.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 3 Item, it was inquired, how they ought to be punished, which moued the king to consent to the making of the said statute, ordinance, and commission. Wherevnto they answered, that vnlesse the king would giue them his pardon, they ought to lose their liues.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 4 Item, it was inquired of them what punishment they deserued, that compelled the king to the making of that statute, or|dinance and commission. Wherevnto they gaue answer, that they ought to suffer as traitors.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 5 Item, it was demanded of them how they ought to be punished that interrup|ted the king so, that he might not exercise those things that apperteined to his re|galitie and prerogatiue. Wherevnto an|swer was made, that they ought to be pu|nished EEBO page image 457 as traitors.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 6 Item, it was inquired of them, whe|ther that after the affaires of the realme, and the cause of the calling togither of the states of the parlement, were once by the kings commandement declared and ope|ned, and other articles on the kings be|halfe limited, vpon which the lords and commons of the realme ought to intreat and proceed; if the lords neuertheles would proceed vpon other articles, and not med|dle with those articles which the king had limited, till time the king had answered the articles proponed by them, notwith|standing the king inioined them to the contrarie: whether in this case the king might rule the parlement, and cause them to proceed vpon the articles by him limi|ted, before they proceeded any further? To which question it was answered, that the king should haue in this part the rule, for order of all such articles to be prosecuted, vntill the end of the parlement. And if any presumed to go contrarie to this rule, he was to be punished as a traitor.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 7 Item, it was asked, whether the king when soeuer it pleased him might not dis|solue the parlement, and command the lords and commons to depart from thence or not? Wherevnto it was answered that he might.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 8 Item, it was inquired, that for somuch as it was in the king to remooue such iu|stices and officers as offend, and to punish them for their offenses; whether the lords commons might, without the kings will, impeach the same officers and iustices, vp|on their offenses in parlement or not? To this answer was made, that they might not, and he that attempted contrarie, was to suffer as a traitor.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 9 Item, it was inquired, how he is to be punished, that mooued in the parlement, that the statute wherin Edward, the sonne of king Edward, great grandfather to the king that now is, was indicted in parle|ment, might be sent for; by inspection of which statute, the said new statute or ordi|nance and commission were conceiued, and deuised in the parlement?

Compare 1577 edition: 1 To which question, with one accord, as in all the residue they answered, that as well he that so summoned, as the other, which by force of the same motion, brought the said statute into the parlement house, be as publike offendors and traitors to be punished.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 10 Item, it was inquired of them, whe|ther the iudgement giuen in the parle|ment against Michaell de la Poole earle of Suffolke, were erronious and reuocable, or not?

Compare 1577 edition: 1 To which question likewise with one as|sent they said, that if the same iudgement were now to be giuen, the iustices and ser|geant aforesaid would not giue the same: bicause it seemed to them, that the said iudgement is reuocable and erronious in euerie part.

Compare 1577 edition: 1 In witnesse of the premisses, the iusti|ces & sergeant aforesaid to these presents haue set their seals, these being witnesses; Alexander archbishop of Yorke, Robert archbishop of Dubline, Iohn bishop of Durham, Thomas bishop of Chester, Iohn bishop of Bangor, Robert duke of Ireland, Michaell erle of Suffolke, Iohn Ripon clearke, and Iohn Blake.