Englishmen and Protestants as they were, yet once put in a judicial position the tendency implanted in the Englishman's mind which makes even the most partisan of advocates incline to subordinate his own prejudices to the demands of law, led them to point out that the new Bill proposed to take away (1) the estates of all innocent papists yet unheard, (2) of those transplanted, (3) of the ensignmen, (4) of those claiming the articles of peace, (5) the power given to the King of restoring papists to houses and lands in corporations.[1]
They had applied for an Act to extend the time during which they could carry out the provisions of the Act; instead of which the Bill now under consideration was transmitted.
The time limited for hearing the claims of innocents expired on August 21st, 1663, and the great question for the Irish was would it be extended.
During the seven preceding months 820 cases had been heard.[2] In about 112 of these the verdict had been "nocent," thus leaving 708 cases in which either a decree of innocence was issued, or the plaintiff left to the ordinary law courts.[3]
- ↑ It was said that three of the Commissioners—Churchill, Rainsford and Beverley were for the King, three for the English interest and one—Allan Broderick—for himself. (Cal. St. Paps., 1663—65, p. 231). The document cited above was read on November 30th, 1663, at the Privy Council. Other documents of a similar nature were delivered on December 9th, 1663.
- ↑ List in Appendix to 19th Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Rolls, 1887.
- ↑ Winston Churchill stated that owing to Coventry's absence in London the Commissioners were often evenly divided, and so cases dismissed for want of agreement, the parties, though never so innocent, without any visible remedy. Cal. St. Paps., 1663, p. 48.
