. many cases in our books do over-rule this case in question, for ubi (c) eadem ratio ibi idem jus, at de similibus idem est judicium.' 2. That for want of an express text of law terminis terminantibus,' and of examples and precedents in like cases (as was objected by some), we are driven to determine the question by natural reason: for it was said, 'si cessit lex scripta, id custodiri oportet, quod 'moribus et consuetudine inductum est; et si qua in re hoc defecerit, recurrendum est ad 'rationem.' But that receiveth a threefold answer. First, that there is no such rule in the common or civil law; but the true rule of the civil law is, lex scripta si cesset, id custodiri oportet quod moribus et consuetudine inductum est; et si qua in re hoc defecerit, tunc id quod proximum et consequens ei est; et si id non appareat, tunc jus, quo, urbs Romana utitur, servari oportet. Secondly, if the said imaginative rule be rightly and legally understood, it may stand for truth: for it you intend ratio for the legal and profound reason of such, as by diligent study and long experience and observation are so learned in the laws of this realm, as out of the reason of the same they can rule the case in question, in that sense the | said rule is true: but if it be intended of the reason of the wisest man that professeth not the laws of England, then (I say) the rule is absurd and dangerous; for (a) cuilibet in suâ arte perito est credendum, et quod quisque (e) norit in hoc se exerceat. Et omnes prudentes illa admittere solent, quæ probantur iis, qui in suâ arte bene versati sunt.' Arist. 1. Topicorum, cap. 6. Thirdly, there be multitudes of examples, precedents, judgments, and resolutions in the laws of England, the true and unstrained reason whereof doth decide this question. For example, within the ligeance of the king: which point being put in issue, and found by jury to be true, it was adjudged that he should have reinstitution of his possessions generally without mentioning of advowsons. After which restitution, one of the said advowsons became void, the prior presented, against whom the king brought a quare impedit wherein the king was barred; and all this was contained in the latter petition. And the book saith, that the earl of Arundel, and sir Guy of B. came into the court of Common Pleas, and demanded the opinion of the judges of that court concerning the said case, who resolved, that upon the matter aforesaid the king had no right to seize. In which case amongst many notable points, this one appeareth to be adjudged and resolved, that a man born in Gascoia under the king's lineage, was no alien born, as to lands and possessions within the realm of England, and yet England and Gascoin were, 1. Several and distinct countries. 2. Inherited by several and distinct titles. 3. Governed by several and distinct municipal laws, as it appeareth amongst the records in the Tower, Rot. Vasc. 10. Ed. 1, num. 7. 4. Out of the extent of the great seal of England, and the jurisdiction of the chancery of England. 5. The like objection might be made for default of trial, as hath been made against the plaintiff. And where it was said that Gascoin was no kingdom, and therefore it was not to be matched to the case in hand, it was answered, that this difference was without a diversity, as to the case in question? for if the plea in the case at the bar be good, then without question the prior had been an alien; for it might have been said (as it is in the case at the bar) that he was born extra ligeantiam regis regni sui Angliæ, et infra ligeantiam dominii sui VasThe dukedom of Acquitain, whereof Gascoin coniæ,' and that they were several dominions, was parcel, and the earldom of Poitiers came to and governed by several laws: but then such a Henry 2, by the marriage of Eleanor, daughter conceit was not hatched, that a king having and heir of William duke of Acquitain, and several dominions should have several ligeances earl of Poitiers, which descended to Rich. 1, of his subjects. Secondly, it was answered, Hen. 3, Ed. 1, Ed. 2, Ed. 3, &c. In 27 lib. that Gascoin was sometime a kingdom, * and (f) Ass. pl. 48. in one case there appear two likewise Millan, Burgundy, Bavaria, Bretagne, judgments and one resolution to be given by and others, were, and now are become duke the judges of both benches in this case follow-doms. Castile, Arragon, Portugal, Barcelona, ing. The possessions of the prior of Chelsey in the time of war were seised into the king's hands, for that the prior was an alien born. The prior by petition of right sued to the king; and the effect of his petition was, that before he became prior of Chelsey, he was prior of Andover and whilst he was prior there, his possessions of that priory were likewise seised for the same cause, supposing that he was an alien born; whereupon he sued a former petition, and alledged that he was born in Gascoin (c) Co. Lit. 10. a. 191. a. 232. a. (d) 4 Co. 29. a. 5 Co. 7. a. Caudry's Case. Cawly 31. Co. Lit. 125. a. (e) 11 Co 10. b. 12 Co. 66. 13 Co. 12. Co. Lit. 125. a. 8. Co. 130. a. (ƒ) Moor 796, 801. VOL. II. &c. were sometime earldoms, afterwards dukedoms, and now kingdoms. Bobemia and Po land were sometimes dukedoms, and now kingdoms; and (omitting many other, and coming nearer home) Ireland was before 32 H. 8, a lordship, and now is a kingdom, and yet the king of England was as absolute a prince and sovereign when he was lord of Ireland, as now, when he is styled king of the same [Co. Lit. 7. b.] 10 Ed. 3, 41. an exchange was made between an Englishman and a Gascoin, of lands in England and in Gascoin; ergo the Gascoin was no alien, for then had he not been capable of lands in England. 1 H. 4. 1, the king brought * Vasconia appellata foit tempore Caroli magni regnum de Vasconia, Mo. 800. Vaugh. 300. 2 T riage, and continued in the actual possession of the kings of England by ten descents, viz. from the first of Henry 2, unto the 32nd of Henry 6, which was upon the very point of 300 years, within which duchy there were (as some write) 4 archbishopricks, 24 bishopricks, 15 earldoms, 202 baronies, and above 1000 captainships and bailliwicks: and in all this long time neither book-case nor record can be found wherein any plea was offered to disable any of them that were born there, by foreign birth, but the contrary hereof directly appeareth by the said book-case of (a) 27 lib. Ass. 48. The kings of England had sometimes Normandy under actual ligeance and obedience. The question is then, whether men born in Normandy, after one king had them both, were inheri table to lands in England; and it is evident by our books that they were: for so it appeareth by the declaratory act of 17 Edw. 2, de Prærog. Reg. c. 12. that they were inheritable to, and capable of lands in England: for the purview of that statute is,quod rex habebit ex'caetas de terris Normannorum, &c.' Eige, a writ of right of ward against one Sybil, whose husband was exiled into Gascoin; ergo, Gascoin is no parcel or member of England, for exilium est patriæ privatio, natalis soli mutatio, legum nativarum amissio.' 4 E. 3, 10. b. the king directed his writ out of Chancery under the great seal of England, to the mayor of (g) Burdeaux (a city in Gascoin), then being under the king's obedience, to certify, whether one that was outlawed here in England, was at that time in the king's service under him in obsequio regis: whereby it appeareth, that the king's writ did run into Gascoin, for it is the trial that the common law hath appointed in that case. But as to other cases, it is to be understood, that there be two kinds of writs, brevia mandatoria et remedialiu, et brevia mandatoria et non remedialia. [Vaugh. | 401. 2 Inst. 486. Moor 804.] Brevia mandatoria et rimedialia, as writs of right, of formedon, &c. of debt, trespass, &c. and shortly, all writs real and personal, whereby the party wronged is to recover somewhat, and to be remedied for that wrong was offered unto him, are returnable or determinable in some court of jus-Normans might have lands in England: et tice within England, and to be served and exe-hoc similiter intelligendum est, si aliqua hæcuted by the sheriffs, or other ministers of justice 'reditas descendat alicui nato in partibus transwithin England; and these cannot by any means marinis, &c. [Stamf. Prærog. 38, 39, &c.] extend into any other kingdom, country, or na- Whereby it appeareth, that they were capable tion, though that it be under the king's actual of lands within England by descent. And ligeance and obedience. But the other kind of that this act of 17 Edw. 2, was but a declarawrits, that are mandatory, and not remedial tion of the common law, it appeareth both by are not tied to any place [3 Inst. 179.] but do Bracton, who (as it hath been said) wrote in follow subjection and ligeance, in what country the reign of Henry 3, lib. 3. tract. 2. c. 1. f. or nation soever the subject is, as the king's 116. and by Britton who wrote in 5 Edw. writ to command any of his subjects, residing 1, c. 18. that all such lands as any Norman in any foreign country, to return into any of had either by descent or purchase, escheated to the king's own dominions, sub fide ct lige- the king for their treason, in revolting from antia quibus nobis tenemini.' And so are their natural liege lord and sovereign. And the aforesaid mandatory writs cited out of the therefore Stamford Prærog. cap. 12. fol. 39. Register of protection for safety of body and expounding the said statute of 17 Edw. 2, goods, and requiring, that if any injury be cap. 12. concludeth, that by that chapter it offered, that the same be redressed according to should appear (as if he had said, it is apparent the laws and customs of that place. Vide le without question) that all men born in NorReg. fol. 26. Stamford, Prærog, cap. 12. fol.39, | maudy, Gascoin, Guienne, Anjou, and Britain, saith, that men born in Gascoin are inheritable (whilst they were under actual obedience) were to lands in England. This doth also appear by inheritable within this realm as well as Englishdivers acts of parliament: for by the whole men. And the reason thereof was, for that parliament, 39 E. 3, cap. 16. it is agreed, that they were under one ligeance due to one sothe Gascoins are of the ligeance and subjection vereign. And so much (omitting many other of the king. Vide 42 Ed. 3, cap. 2. et 28 II. authorities) for Normandy: [Kel. 292. pl. 19. 6. cap. 5. &c. 4 Inst. 286. Co. Lit. 11. b. Seld. Mare Clau. lib. 2. cap. 19. Guernsey and Jersey.] saving I cannot let pass the isles of Guernsey and Jersey, parts and parcels of the dukedom of Normandy, yet remaining under the actual ligeance and obedience of the king. I think no man will doubt, but those that are born in Guernsey and Jersey (though those isles are no parcel of the realm of England, but several dominious enjoyed by several titles, governed by several laws) are inheritable and capable of any lands within the realm of England, 1 Edw. 3, fol. 7. [Co. Lit. 11. b.] Commission to determine the title of lands within the said isles, 6 Guienne was another part of Aquitain, and came by the same title: and those of Guienne were by act of parliament in 13 Hen. 4, [nu. 22. Cotton's Abr. 480.] not imprinted, er rot. parliament. codem anno, adjudged and declared to be no aliens, but able to possess and purchase, &c. lands within this realm, And so doth Stamford take the law. Prærog. c. 12. f. 39. And thus much of the dukedom of Aquitain, which (together with the earldom of Poitiers) came to Hen. 2, (as hath been said) by mar (g) Vaugh. 299. 9 Co. 31. b. 2 Roll. 583. Co. Lit. 74. a. Br. Trial. 126. (a) Dav. 19. a. Moor 796, 801. said office was utterly void; for that the Isle of Man, Normandy, Gascoin, &c. were out of the power of the Chancery, and governed by several laws; and yet none will doubt, but those that are born within that isle, are capable and inheritable of lands within the realm according to the laws of the isles; [4. Inst. Maud the empress, the only daughter and heir of Henry 1, took to her second husband Jeffrey Plantagenet, earl of Anjou, Tourain, and Mayne, who had issue Heu. 2, to whom the said earldom by just title descended, who, and the kings that succeeded him, styled themselves by the name of Comes Andegav', &c. until Edw. 3, became king of all France; and such as were born within that earldom, so long as it was under the actual obedience of the king of England, were no aliens, but natural-born subjects, and never any offer made, that we can find, to disable them for foreign birth. [Co. Lit. 7. a.] Wales was sometime a kingdom, as it appeareth by 19 H. 6, fol. 6, and by the act of parliament of 2 H. 5, c. 6, but whilst it was a kingdom, the same was holden, and within the fee, of the king of England; and this appeareth by our books, Fleta, lib. 1. cap. 16. 1. E. 3, 59. 13 E. 3, tit. Jurisdict. 10 II. 4, 6 Plow. 14.8 E. 3, Com. 368. [3 Keb. 402. 4 Inst. 239, 240, &c.Plow. 126. b. 129. Vaugh. 281.] And in this respect, in divers ancient charters, kings of old time styled themselves in several manners, as king Edgar, Britannia Bagikus; Etheldredus, totius Albion' Dei providentia imperator;' Edredus Magn' Britann' monarcha;' which among many other of like nature I have seen. But by the statute of 12 E. 1, Wales was united and incorporated into England, and made parcel of England in possession; and therefore it is ruled in 7 H. 4. f. 13. a, that no protection doth lie quia moratur in Wallin,' because Wales is within the realm of England. [Co. Lit. 130. b. Fitz, protect. 23. Br. protect. 33. 3 Keb. 405. Vaugh. 414.] And where it is recited in the act of 27 H. 8, that Wales was ever But leave we Normandy and Anjou, and parcel of the realm of England, it is true in this speak we of the little, but yet ancient and ab-sense, viz. that before 12 E. 1, it was parcel in solute kingdom of the Isle of Man, as it appeareth by divers ancient and authentic records; as taking one for many. [4 Inst. 283, 281. Co. Lit. 11 b. Kelw. 202. pl. 19. 2 And. 155, 156.] Artold king of Man sued to Hen. 3, to come into England to confer with him, and to perform certain things which were due to Hen. 3, thereupon Hen. 3, 21 Decemb. ann. regni sui 34, at Winchester, by his letters patent gave licence to Artold king of Man as followeth : • Rex omnibus salutem. Sciatis, quod licentiam dedimus, &c. Artoldo regi 'de Man veniendo ad nos in Angl' ad loquend' nobisc' et ad faciend' nobis quod facere debet; et ideo vobis mandamus, quod ei regi in veniendo ad nos in Angl', vel ibi morando, ' vel inde redeundo, nullum faciat' aut fieri per'mittatis damnum, injur', molestiam, aut gravamen, vel etiam hominib' suis quos secum ducet ; et si aliquid eis forisfact' fuerit, id eis 'sine dilat' faciat emendari. In cujus, &c. 'duratur' usque ad fest' S. Mich.' Wherein two things are to be observed; 1. That seeing that Artold king of Man sued for a licence in this case to the king, it proveth him an absolute king, for that a monarch or an absolute prince cannot come into England without licence of the king; but any subject being in league, may come into this realm without licence. 2. That the king in his licence doth style him by the name of a king. It was resolved in 11 H. 8. that where an office was found after the decease of Thomas earl of Derby, and that be died seised, &c. of the Isle of Man, that the | tenure, and since it is parcel of the body of the realm. And whosoever is born within the fee of the king of England, though it be in another kingdom, is a natural-born subject, and capable and inheritable of lands in England, as it appeareth in Plow. Com. 126. And therefore those that were born in Wales before 12 E. 1, whilst it was only holden of England, were capable and inheritable of lands in England. Now come we to France and the members thereof, as Callice, Guynes, Tournay, &c. which descended to Edw. 3 as son and heir to Isabel, daughter and heir to Philip le Beau, king of France. Certain it is, whilst Henry 6 had both England, and the heart and greatest part of France under his actual ligeance and obedience, for he was crowned king of France in Paris, that they that then were born in those parts of France that were under actual ligeance and obedience, were no aliens, but capable of, and inheritable to lands in England. And that is proved by the writs in the Register, fol. 26, cited before. But the inrollment of letters patent of denization in the Exchequer int' originalia, ann. 11 HI. 6, with the lord treasurer's remembrancer, was strongly urged and objected; for, it was said, thereby it appeareth, that H. 6, in anno 11 of his reign, did make denizen one Reynel born in France. Whereunto it was answered, that it is proved by the said letters patent, that he was born in France, before Henry 6 had the actual possession of the crown of France, so as he was Antenatus; and this appeareth by the said letters patent, whereby the king granteth, that magister Johannes Reynel serviens noster, &c. infra regnum nostrum Franc' oriundus pro termino vitæ suæ sit ligeus noster, et eodem modo teneatur sicut verus et fidelis noster infra regnum Angl' oriundus, ac quod ipse terras infra regnum nos'trum Angl' seu alia dominia nostra perquirere possit et valeat.' Now if that Reynel had been born since Henry 6 had the quict possession of France (the king being crowned king of France about one year before) of necessity he must be an infant of very tender age, and then the king would never have called him his scrvant, nor made the patent (as thereby may be collected) for his service, nor have called him by the name of magister Johannes Reynel: but without question he was Antenatus, born before the king had the actual and real possession of that crown. 6 circumjacent, imperator et dominus, gratias ago ipsi Deo omnipotenti regi meo, qui ineum imperium sic ampliavit et exaltavit super rcg( num patrum meorum, &c. Mihi concessi, propitia divinitas, cum Anglorum imperiot ' oinnia regna insularum oceani, &c. cum susi 'ferocissimis regibus usque Norvegiam, maximamque partem Hibern', cum suâ nobilissima 'civitate de Dublinà, Anglorum regno subjugare, quapropter et ego Christi gloriam et lau'dem in regno meo exaltare, et ejus servitium 5 amplificare devotus disposui, &c.' Yet for that it was wholly conquered in the reign of Henry 2, the honour of the conquest of Ireland is attributed to him; [Co. Lit. 7. a.] and his style was, 6 rex Ang', dominus Hibern', dux Normann', dux Aquitan', et comes Andegav',' king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy, duke of Aquitain, Calais is a part of the kingdom of France, and earl of Anjou. That Ireland is a doand never was parcel of the kingdom of Eng- minion separate and divided from England, land, and the kings of England enjoyed Calais it is evident from our books, 20 H. 6, 8. sır in and from the reign of king Edw. 3rd, until John Pilkington's case. 32 H. 6, 25. 20 Eliza the loss thereof in queen Mary's time, by the Dyer 360. Plow. Com. 360. [12 Co. 111. 4 same title that they had to France. [Kelw. Inst. 351. 1 And. 263. 2 And. 116. Dav. 37. a. 202. pl. 19. 2. And. 116. Br. trial, 58, 133 Br. Jenk. Cent. 164. Br. parliam. 98.] And 2 R. erro. 101. Br. cinque ports 10. Vaugh. 401, 4 3, 12 a. Hibernia habet parliamentum, et faInst. 282.] And it is evident by our books, ciunt leges, et nostra statuta non ligant eos, that those, that were born in Calais, were ca- quia non mittunt milites ad parliamentum' pable and inheritable to lands in England, 42 (which is to be understood, unless they be esE. 3. c. 10. Vide 21 H. 7, 33. b. 19 H. 6, 2 E. pecially named) sed personæ eorum sunt sub4, 1. a. b. 39 H. 6, 39. a. 21 E 4, 18. a 28 H.jecti regis, sicut inhabitantes in Calesia, Gas6, 3. b. By all which it is manifest, that Ca-coniâ, et Guyan Wherein it is to be oblais being parcel of France was under the actual obedience and commandment of the king; and by consequent those that were born there were natural born subjects, and no aliens. Calais, from the reign of Edw. 3, until the 5th year of queen Mary, remained under the actual obedience of the king of England. Guines also, another part of France, was under the like obedience to Henry 6, as appeareth by 31 H. 6, fol. 4. And Tournay was under the obedience of Henry 8, as it appeareth by 5 El. Dyer, fol. 224, for there it is resolved, that a bastard born at Tournay, whilst it was under the obedience of Henry 8, was a natural subject, as an issue horn within this realm by aliens. [Fitz Protect. 13. Guynes. Tournay. Dy. 224, pl. 29 Vaugh. 232. Co Lit. 8. a. If then those that were born at Tournay, Calais, &c. whilst they were under the obedience of the king, were natural subjects, and no aliens, it followeth, that when the kingdom of France (whereof those were parcels) was under the king's obedience, that those that were then born there, were natural subjects, and no aliens. Next followeth Ireland, which originally came to the kings of England by conquest; but who was the first conqueror thereof, hath been a question. [12 Co. 108, 109, &c. 4 Inst. 349, 350, &c. Dav. 60. Præf. 4. Rep. 32, 33.] I bave seen a Charter made by king Edgar in these words: Ego Edgarus Anglorum Bariaws, omniumque insularum oceani, quæ Britanniam 6 | 6 served, that the Irishman (as to his subjection) (a) Co. Lit. 141. b. 2 Vent. 4. (c) Fitz. Protect. 24. Br. Protect. 34. And in anno 33 reg. El. it was resolved by all the judges of England in the case of (e) Orurke an Irishman, who had committed high treason in Ireland, that he by the statute of 23 H. 8, c. 33. might be indicted, arraigned, and tried for the same in England, according to the purview of that statute; the words of which statute be, that all treasons, &c. committed by any (f) 'person out of the realm of England shall be from henceforth enquired of, &c.' and they all resolved (as afterward they did also in sir John Perrot's case) that Ireland was out of the realm of England, and that treasons committed there were to be tried within England by that statute. In the statute of 4 H. 7, cap. 24. of (g) fines, provision is made for them that be out of this land, and it is holden in Plow. Com. in Stowel's case 375, that he that is in Ireland is out of this land, and consequently within that proviso. Might not then the like plea be devised as well against any person born in Ireland, as (this is against Calvin that is a Postnatus) in Scotland? for the Irishman is born extra ligeantiam regis regni sui Angl', &c.' which be verba operativa in the plea: but all men know, that they are natural born subjects, and capable of and inheritable to laws in England. years of the said grant, concerning the laws in 26 E. 3,) ruleth it, that so many as were born in that part of Scotland, that was under the ligeance of the king, were no aliens, but inheritable to lands in England; yet was that part of Scotland in another kingdom governed by several laws, &c. And if they were natural subjects in that case, when the king of England had but part of Scotland, what reason should there be, why those that are born there, when the king hath all Scotland, should not be natural subjects, and no aliens? So likewise (m) Berwick is no part of England, nor governed by the laws of England, and yet they that have been born there, since they were under the obedience of one king, are natural born subjects, and no aliens, as it appeareth in 15 R. 2, cap. 7, &c. Vide (n) 19 H. 6, 35. b. and 39 II. 6, 59. a. And yet in all these cases and examples, if this new devised plea had been sufficient, they should have been all aliens against so many judgments, resolutions, authorities, and judicial precedents in all successions of ages. There were sometimes in England, whilst the heptarchy lasted, seven several crowned kings of seven several and distinct kingdoms, but in the end the West Saxons got the monarchy, and all the other kings melted, as it were, the crowns to make one imperial diadem, for the king of the West Saxons over all. Now when the whole was under the actual and real ligeance and obe dience of one king, were any, that were born in any of those several and distinct kingdoms, aliens one to another? Certainly they, being born under the obedience of one king and sovereign, were all natural born subjects, and capable of and inheritable unto any lands in any of the said kingdoms. Lastly, to conclude this part with (h) Scotland itself. In ancient time part of (i) Scotland (besides Berwick) was within the power and ligeance of the king of England, as appeareth by our books (k) 42 E. 3, 2. b. the lord Beaumont's case, 11 E. 3, c. 2, &c. and by precedents hereafter mentioned; and that part (though it were under the king of England's ligeance and obedience) yet was it governed by the laws of Scotland. Ex rotulis Scotia, anno 11 Ed. 3, amongst the records in the Tower of London. Rex, &c. Constituimus Rich. Talebot justici- In the holy history reported by St. Luke, er arium nostrum ville Berwici super Twedam, dictamine Spiritus Sancti, cap. 21 et 22 Act. ac omnium aliarum terrarum nostrarum in Apostolorum, it is certain, that St. Paul was a 'partibus Scot', ad faciend' omnia et singula Jew, born in Tarsus, a famous city of Cilicia; quæ ad officium justiciarii pertinent, secundum for it appeareth in the said 21st chap. v. 39, by legem et consuetudinem regni Scot'.' And his own words, ego homo sum quidem Judæus after anno 26 E. 3, ex eodem rot. Rex Hen-a Tarso Cilicia, non ignotre civitatis munirico de Percey, Ricardo de Nevil, &c. Volumus et vobis et alteri vestrum tenore præsen'tium committimus et mandamus, quod homi'nes nostri de Scot' ad pacem et obedientiam ⚫ nostram existentes, legibus, libertatibus, et li⚫beris consuetudinibus, quibus ipsi et anteces'sores sui tempore celebris memoriæ Alexandrivere; vociferantibus autem eis et projicientiquondam regis Scot' rationabiliter usi fuerunt, uti et gaudere deberent, prout in quibusdam indenturis, &c. plenius dicitur contineri.' And there is a writ in the Register 295. a. Dedimus potestatem recipiendi ad fidem et pacem ⚫ nostram homines de Galloway.' Now the case in (1) 42 Ed. 3, 2, b. (which was within 16 Inst. 11, 18, 24. Co. Lit. 261. b. 1. And. 262, 268. 2 Vent. 4. Cart.190. Cawly 93. (f) 35 H. 8. c. 2. (g) Cawly 93. Co. Lit. 261. b. 3 Inst. 11. (h) 3 Inst. 18. Plowd. 368. b. (i) Heylin's Cosmog. lib. 4. p. 305, 306. (k) Fitz. Brief 551. (1) Fitz. Brief 551. Ant. 23. a. ceps.' And in c. xxii. v. 3, ego sum vir Judæus natus Tarso Cilicia, &c. and then made that excellent sermon there recorded; which when the Jews heard, the text saith, v. 22, levaverunt vocem suam, dicentes, tolle de terra hujusmodi, non enim fas est eum vi bus vestimenta sua, et pulverum jactantibus in aerem.' Claudius Lysias the popular tribune, to please this turbulent and profane multitude (though it were utterly against justice and common reason) the text saith, jussit tribunus, 1. induci eum in castra, 2. flagellis cædi, and 3. torqueri eum (quid ita ?) ut sciret 'propter quam causam sic acclamarent;' and when they had bound Paul with cords, ready to execute the tribune's unjust commandment, the blessed apostle (to avoid unlawful and sharp punishment) took hold of the law of a heathen emperor, and said to the centurion (m) 1 Sid. 381, S82. 2 Burro. 858. |