5. From the inconformity to the principles
of the Civil or Common Law to have restitution
in specie.
Then he proceeded to answer the presidents
presented by Mr. Serjeant Maynard on behalf
of the Lord Craven, as in the Case of Sir John
Scudamore in Edward the fourths time, That
it was not applicable to the Lord Cravers case,
though he had restitution in specie by Act of
Parliament; for that it had reference onely to
Articles granted in time of Warr, which according
to Jus Gentium was to be observed: And
for the Presidents produced by Mr. Serjeant
Maynard, in the Cases of Mortimer and Mattrevers,
they were to be taken with this difference,
that restitution was made in those Cases, by reason
they were attainted by the Judicative power
of Parliament, and not by the Legislative
power, for that the Judicative power of
Parliament is subordinate to the rules of
Law, and ro an Act of Parlament, and in such
Cases a Petition of Right may lie, but not against
an Act of Parliament; for in that Case
only a Petition of Crace is to be offered, and not
of Right; and besides that, it doth not appear
by the said Records produced on the Lord Cravens
behalf, that any restitution was made against
a Purchaser.
Then he proceeded to shew Presidents on the
behalf of the purchasers, where Abbey Lands
were sold in Henry the eights time, and yet when
Queen Mary endeavored to restore those Lands
again, such was the care of that State at that
time,