Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 06.pdf/464

 The Court of Star Chamber.

429

quantitation delicti. . . My Lords, this I integris causis ... To speak my sentence remember always, that every punishment shortly; as I shall not say anything to here must be ad reformationem, non ad encourage hot-spirited men, so I shall still ruinam; therefore, I shall not agree to dis bear and remember that excellent and just charge him of his Recordership, nor of his saying. . . that we are to judge secundam place of Justice of the Peace in that city. probata, not probabilia." He was therefore For binding him to the good behavior, I for a fine of 500 marks as proposed by Sir humbly crave pardon to dissent from that; Robert Heath. he is a grave bencher and a learned man, Sir Henry Vane thought the defendant had and a gentleman well governed hitherto, done " that which befitteth not his wisdom however his indiscreet zeal transported him and experience." He said, " I have learned into this error ... I shall agree to his long since that ignorance doth not excuse submission and confession of his faults. . . an offense, either in church or common but, my Lords, for his fine to the King, wealth. . . But he is a learned man, a £i,ooo is too much, and 500 marks is too Recorder, a bencher, and a parliament man. little. I shall therefore go between both, I have known him give grave and wise and 'set £500 and imprisonment according counsel in that place. All these aggravate to the course of the court." his offense and make it wilfulness in him. Secretary Windebanke expressed himself But for his conformity and yet doing a no further than to say that he agreed with thing contrary to his profession of con the sentence proposed by Lord Cottington. formity, I ground my sentence the heavier He shall pay (I think fit) Secretary Cook said that he should upon him. endeavor to keep a good rule, which was £ 1,000, he shall make acknowledgment of not to make faults where they were not, nor his offense in the Cathedral Church and to make them greater than in themselves before the Bishop, prebendaries and canons, but not be put out of his Recordership." they were. He inclined to Judge Richard son's view of the case, that Sherfield had Sir Thomas Edmonds agreed with Lord been carried away by his zeal, " yet I say Heath for a fine of 500 marks and acknowl that private men are not to make batteries edgment. against glass windows in churches at their The Bishop of London thought there were pleasure upon pretense of reformation, circumstances of aggravation in Sherfield's notwithstanding, I conceive, the danger of offense. He had not gone to the Bishop example to encourage others to break down as he should have done, but had chosen his such windows will not be so great as the own way of getting rid of the window; he occasion of triumph to ill-affected persons was twenty years offended at it and so had would be if this court should too severely plenty of time to determine upon a better punish an error in pulling down that which method; his office and authority made his the church disalloweth." Cook thought offense the more scandalous; his age should Sherfield's public acknowledgment to the have given him better wisdom; he had gone Bishop of his error in not first obtaining privately to the church when if his purpose permission to remove the window, would be had been honest and worthy he might have a sufficient penalty, and acquitted him, for proclaimed it freely; his office of Justice of Peace made the offense greater; his act his part, of any fine or other punishment. Sir Thomas Jarmin said that the offense had encouraged others to commit " like was in doing a thing which, if it had been insolences in the same church"; his pre done " with answerable circumstances, had tended tenderness of conscience should have been no fault in him, sed bonum est ex induced him to go to the Bishop, — '* if it