Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	good_a	read_v	write_v	2,874	5	5.1956	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61601	The proceedings and tryal in the case of the most Reverend Father in God, William, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury and the Right Reverend Fathers in God, William, Lord Bishop of St. Asaph, Francis, Lord Bishop of Ely, John, Lord Bishop of Chichester, Thomas, Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells, Thomas, Lord Bishop of Peterborough, and Jonathan, Lord Bishop of Bristol, in the Court of Kings-Bench at Westminster in Trinity-term in the fourth year of the reign of King James the Second, Annoque Dom. 1688.	Sancroft, William, 1617-1693.; Lloyd, William, 1627-1717.; Turner, Francis, 1638?-1700.; Lake, John, 1624-1689.; Ken, Thomas, 1637-1711.; White, Thomas, 1628-1698.; Trelawny, Jonathan, Sir, 1650-1721.; England and Wales. Court of King's Bench.	1689 (1689)	Wing S564; ESTC R7827	217,926	148

considered the nature of your Majesty's Declaration from Bredah and are humbly of opinion That your Majesty ought not to be pressed any further Because it is not a Promise in it self but only a Gracious Declaration of your Majesty's Intentions to do what in you lay and what a Parliament should advise your Majesty to do and no such Advice was ever given or thought fit to be offered nor could it be otherwise understood because there were Laws of Uniformity then in being which could not be dispenced with but by Act of Parliament Sir Rob. Sawyer This is all that we read this for your Lordship and the Jury see what is here declared by the Parliament That the Act of Uniformity could not be dispensed with without an Act of Parliament Next My Lord we shall shew you what was done in the Year 1672. Read the King's Speech the 5th of February 1672. The Journals of the Lords House were delivered in Clerk reads Die Mercurii 5. Febr. 1672. My Lords and Gentlemen I am glad to see you here this day I would have called you sooner together but that I was willing to ease you and the Country till there were an absolute necessity Since you were last here I have been forced to a most important necessary and expensive War and I make no doubt but you will give me suitable and effectual assistance to go through with it I refer you to my Declaration for the causes and indeed the necessity of this War and shall now only tell you That I might have digested the Indignities to my own Person rather than have brought it to this Extremity if the Interest as well as the Honour of the whole Kingdom had not been at stake and if I had omitted this Conjuncture perhaps I had not again ever met with the like advantage You will find that the last Supply that you gave me did not answer Expectation for the ends you gave it the payment of my Debts therefore I must in the next place recommend them again to your special Care. Some few days before I declared the War I put forth my Declaration for Indulgence to Dissenters and have hitherto found a good effect of it by securing my peace at home when I had war abroad There is one part in it that has been subject to Misconstructions which is that concerning the Papists as if more liberty was granted to them than to other Recusants when 't is plain there is less for the others have publick Places allowed them and I never intended that they should have any but only have the freedom of their Religion in their own Houses without any concourse of others and I could not grant them less than this when I had extended so much more Grace to others most of them having been loyal and in the service of me and the King my Father And in the whole course of this Indulgence I do not intend that it shall any way prejudice the Church but I will support its Rights and It in its full power Having said this I shall take it very ill to receive contradiction in what I have done and I will deal plainly with you I am resolved to stick to my Declaration There is one Jealousie more which is maliciously spread abroad and yet so weak and frivolous that I once thought it not of moment enough to mention but it may have gotten some ground with some well-minded people and that is That the Forces which I have raised in this War were designed to controul Law and Property I wish I had had more Forces the last Sommer the want of them then convinces me I must raise more against this next Spring and I do not doubt but you will consider the charge of them in your Supplies I will conclude with this assurance to you That I will preserve the true Reformed Protestant Religion and the Church as it is now Established in this Kingdom and that no Mans Property or Liberty shall ever be invaded I leave the rest to the Chancellor Mr. S. Pomb Now go to the Journal of the Commons of the 14th of February 1672. The Journal put in Clerk Reads Veneris xiiij die Februarii 1672. Mr. Powle Reports from the Committee appointed to prepare and draw up a Petition and Address to his Majesty The said Petition and Address which he read in his place and afterwards delivered the same in at the Clerks Table and the same being again twice read is as followeth viz. Most Gracious Sovereign We your Majesties most Loyal and Faithful Subjects the Commons Assembled in Parliament do in the first place as in all Duty bound return your Majesty our most humble and hearty Thanks for the many Gracious Promises and Assurances which your Majesty has several times during this Present Parliament given to us That your Majesty would Secure and Maintain unto us the true Reformed Protestant Religion our Liberties and Properties which most gracious Assurances your Majesty out of your great Goodness has been pleased to renew unto us more particularly at the Opening of this present Session of Parliament And further we crave leave humbly to represent That we have with all Duty and Expedition taken into our Consideration the several parts of your Majesties last Speech to us and withal the Declaration therein mentioned for Indulgence to Dissenters dated the 15th of March last And we find our selves bound in Duty to inform your Majesty That Penal Statutes in Matters Ecclesiastical cannot be Suspended but by Act of Parliament We therefore the Knights Cittizens and Burgesses of your Majesties House of Commons do most humbly beseech your Majesty That the said Laws may have their free Course until it shall be otherwise provided for by Act of Parliament And that your Majesty would graciously be pleased to give such Directions herein that no Apprehensions or Jealousies may remain in the Hearts of your Majesties good and faithful Subjects Resolved c. That this House doth agree with the Committee in the Petition and Address by them drawn up to be presented to his Majesty Sir Rob. Sawyer Now turn to the 24th of February 1672. in the same Book Clerk Reads Lunae 24th of February 1672. Mr. Secretary Coventry Reports and Presents in Writing from his Majesty his Answer to the humble Petition and Address of this House which was thrice read and the Matter debated and is as followeth viz. CHARLES R. HIS Majesty hath received an Address from you and he hath seriously considered of it and returns you this Answer That he is very much troubled that that Declaration which he put out for ends so necessary for the quiet of his Kingdom and especially in that Conjuncture should have proved the Cause of disquiet in his House of Commons and give occasion to the questioning of his Power in Ecclesiasticks which he finds not done in the Reigns of any of his Ancestors He is sure he never had thoughts of using it otherwise than as it hath been

when I reflect what an inconsiderable number of men began it and how long they carried it on without any opposition I hope every body will be convinced that the Militia which hath hitherto been so much depended upon is not sufficient for such Occasions and that there is nothing but a good force of well disciplined Troops in constant pay that can defend us from such as either at home or abroad are disposed to disturb us And in truth my concern for the peace and quiet of my Subjects as well as for the safety of the Government made me think it necessary to increase the number to the proportion I have done this I owed as well to the honour as to the security of the Nation whose Reputation was so infinitely exposed unto all our Neigbours by having lain open to this late wretched Attempt that it is not to be repaired without keeping such a Body of Men on foot that none may ever have the thoughts again of finding us so miserably unprovided It is for the support of this great Charge which is now more than double to what it was that I ask your assistance in giving me a Supply answerable to the Expence it brings along with it And I cannot doubt but what I have begun so much for the honour and defence of the Government will be continued by you with all the chearfulness and readiness that is requisite for a Work of so great importance Let no man take Exception that there are some Officers in the Army not qualified according to the late Tests for their Imployments The Gentlemen I must tell you are most of them well known to me and having formerly served with me on several Occasions and always approved the Loyalty of their Principles by their Practices I think them fit now to be employed under me and will deal plainly with you that after having had the benefit of their Services in such time of need and danger I will neither expose them to disgrace nor my self to the want of them if there should he another Rebellion to make them necessary to me I am afraid some men may be so wicked to hope and expect that a difference may happen between you and me upon this Occasion but when you consider what advantages have risen to us in a few months by the good understanding we have hitherto had what wonderful effects it has already produced in the change of the whole scene of Affairs abroad so much more to the honour of the Nation and the figure it ought to make in the World and that nothing can hinder a further progress in this way to all our satisfactions but Fears and Jealousies amongst our selves I will not apprehend that such a misfortune can befall us as a Division or but a Coldness between me and you nor that any thing can shake you in your Steadiness and Loyalty to me who by God's blessing will ever make you all returns of kindness and protection with a Resolution to venture even my own Life in the defence of the true Interest of this Kingdom Sir Rob. Sawyer Turn to the Commons Journal the 16th of November 1685. The Journal of the House of Commons put in Clerk reads Die Lune xvi die Novemb. 1685. Most Gracious Sovereign We your Majesty's most Loyal and Faithful Subiects the Commons in Parliament assembled do in the first place as in duty bound return your Majesty our most humble and hearty thanks for your great care and conduct in the suppression of the late Rebellion which threatned the overthrow of this Government both in Church and State and the uttermost extirpation of our Religion by Law established which is most dear unto us and which your Majesty has been pleased to give us repeated assurances you will always defend and support which with all grateful hearts we shall ever acknowledg We further crave leave to acquaint your Majesty That we have with all duty and readiness taken into our consideration your Majesty's gracious Speech to us and as to that part of it relating to the Officers in the Army not qualified for their Imployment according to an Act of Parliament made in the 25th year of the Reign of your Majesty's Royal Brother of blessed memory Intituled An Act for preventing danger that may happen by Popish Recusants We do out of our bounden duty humbly represent unto your Majesty That those Officers cannot by Law be capable of their Imployments and that the Incapacities they bring upon themselves thereby can no ways be taken off but by Act of Parliament Therefore out of the great deference and duty we owe unto your Majesty who has been graciously pleased to take notice of their Services to you we are preparing a Bill to pass both Houses for your Royal Assent to indemnify them from the Penalties they have now incurred and because the continuance of them in their Employments may be taken to be a dispencing with that Law without Act of Parliament the consequence of which is of the greatest concern to the Rights of all your Majesty's Dutiful and Loyal Subjects and to all the Laws made for the security of their Religion We therefore the Knights Citizens and Burgesses of your Majesty's House of Commons do most humbly beseech your Majesty that you would be graciously pleased to give such directions therein that no Apprehensions or Iealousies may remain in the hearts of your Majesty's good and faithful Subjects Mr. Polixfen My Lord We pray that these half dozen lines of the Statute 1 Eliz. may be read A statute-Statute-book was then produced by Mr. Ince L. C. J. No We will have it read out of our own Book which was delivered into Court. Clerk reads This is 1 Eliz. cap. 2. An Act for Uniformity of Religion c. Whereabout is it Mr. Ince 'T is the 15th Paragraph at these words And for the due execution c. Clerk Reads And for due Execution hereof the Queens most Excellent Majesty the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in this present Parliament Assembled do in Gods Name earnestly Require and Charge all the Archbishops Bishops and other Ordinaries that they shall endeavour themselves to the utmost of their knowledge that the due and true Execution hereof may be had throughout their Diocesses and Charges as they will answer before God for such Evils and Plagues wherewith Almighty God may justly punish his people for neglecting this good and wholsome Law. Mr. Serjeant Levinz No●… my Lord if your Lordship pleases the Charge is a Charge for a Libel and there are two things to be Considered First Whether the Bishops did deliver this Paper the King 〈◊〉 tha●… leave upon the Evidence that has been given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say them has been no direct proof of that In the next place Supposing they did deliver this Petition to the King Whether this be a Libel upon the Matter of it the manner of delivering it 〈◊〉 the Persons that did it And with submission my Lord this cannot

giving Reasons for the Disobedience in a Libellous Petition and I am going on to that The Declaration is said in the Petition to be Illegal which is a Charge upon the King That he has done an Illegal Act. They say they cannot in Honor Conscience or Prudence do it which is a Reflection upon the Prudence Justice and Honour of the King in Commanding them to do such a thing And this appearing to have been delivered to the King by my Lords the Bishops Persons to whom certainly we all owe a Deference as our Spiritual Masters to believe what things they say as most likely to be true and therefore it having an Universal Influence upon all the People I shall leave it here to your Lordship and the Jury whether they ought not to Answer for it Mr. Recorder Will your Lordship please to spare me one Word L. Ch. Iust. I hope we shall have done by and by Mr. Recorder If your Lordship don't think fit I can sit down L. Ch. Iust. No no go on Sir Barth Shore you 'll say I have spoiled a good Speech Mr. Recorder I have no good one to make my Lord I have but a very few Words to say L. Ch. Iust. Well go on Sir. Mr. Recorder That which I would urge my Lord is only this I think my Lord we have Proved one Information and that they have made no Answer to it for the Answer they have made is but Argumentative and taken either from the Persons of the Defendants as Peers or from the Form of its being a Petition As Peers it is said they have a Right to Petition to and Advise the King but that is no Excuse at all for if it contains Matter Reproachful or Scandalous it is a Libel in Them as well as in any other Subject and they have no more Right to Libel the King than His Majesties other Subjects have nor will the Priviledge of their Peerage exempt them from being Punished And for the Form of this Paper as being a Petition there is no more Excuse in that neither For every Man has as much Right to Publish a Book or Pamphlet as they had to Present their Petition And as it would be Punishable in that Man to Write a Scandalous Book so it would be Punishable in them to make a Scandalous and a Libellous Petition And the Author of Iulian the Apostate because he was a Clergy Man and a Learned Man too had as much Right to Publish his Book as my Lords the Bishops had to Deliver this Libel to the King. And if the City of London were so severely Punished as to lose their Charter for Petitioning for the Sitting of a Parliament in which there were Reflecting Words but more Soft Mr. Iust. Holloway Pray good Mr. Recorder don't compair the Writing of a Book to the Making of a Petition for it 's the Birth-right of the Subject to Petition Mr. Recorder My Lord it was as Lawful for the City of London to Petition for the Sitting of a Parliament as it was for my Lords the Bishops to give Reasons for their Disobedience to the King's Command And if the Matter of the City of Londons Petition was reckoned to be Libellous in saying that what the King had done in Dissolving the Parliament was an Obstruction of Justice what other Construction can be made of my Lords the Bishops saying that the King's Declaration is Illegal And if the Matter of this Petition be of the same Nature with that of the City of London your Lordship can make no other Judgment of it but that it ought to have the same Condemnation Mr. Iust. Powel Mr. Recorder you will as soon bring the Two Poles together as make this Petition to agree with Iohnson's Book they are no more alike than the most different things you can name Mr. Serj. Trinder My Lord I have but one Word L. Ch. Iust. How unreasonable is this now that we must have so many Speeches at this time of Day But we must hear it go on Brother Mr. Serj. Trinder My Lord if your Lordship pleases That which they seem most to insist upon on the other side and which has not been much spoken to on our side is That this Power which His Majesty has Exerted in setting forth His Declaration was Illegal and their Arguments were Hypothetical If it were Illegal they had not Offended and they offered at some Arguments to prove it Illegal But as to that my Lord we need not go much further than a Case that is very well known here which I crave leave to mention only because the Jury perhaps have not heard of it and that was the Case of Sir Edward Hales where after a long Debate it was Resolved That the King had a Power to Dispense with Penal Laws But my Lord if I should go higher into our Books of Law that which they seem to make so strange of might easily be made appear to have been a frequent and constant practice L. Ch. Iust. That is quite out of the Case Brother Mr. Serj. Trinder I beg your Lorships Favour for a Word or two if your Lordship please to Consider the Power the King has as Supreme Ordinary we say he has a Power to Dispense with these Statutes as he is King and to give Ease to his Subjects as Supreme Ordinary of the whole Kingdom and as having Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority throughout the Kingdom There might be abundance of Cases cited for this if there were need the Statute of primo Eliz. doubtless is in Force at this time and a great many of the Statutes that have been made since that time have express Savings of the King's Supremacy so that the King's Power is Unquestionable And if they have come and Questioned this Power in this manner by referring themselves to the Declarations in Parliament they have done that which of late Days has been always look'd upon as an Ill thing as if the King's Authority was under the Suffrages of a Parliament But when they come to make out their Parliament Declarations there was never a one unless it be first in Richard the Seconds time that can properly be called a Parliament Declaration so that that of the several Parliaments is a Matter perfectly mistaken and if they have mistaken it it is in the Nature of false News which is a Crime for which the Law will Punish them More things might be added but I consider your Lordship has had a great deal of Patience already and much time has been spent and therefore I shall conclude begging your Lordships Pardon for what I have said L. Ch. Iust. I do assure you if it had not been a Case of great Concern I would not have heard you so long It is a Case of very great Concern to the King and the Government on the one side and to my Lords the Bishops on the other and I have taken all the Care I can to observe what has been said on both sides 'T

Lord Devonshire that was an express Breach of the Peace tho' it was debated and disputed then so that I take it these Noble Lords cannot be charged with this Information because they do not come in by Legal Process and unless they can shew me any Case where a Peer did ever come in upon such a Commitment and answered to an Information upon that Commitment it must certainly be allowed not to be the Legal Course though if such a Precedent could be shewn that past sub Silentio without debate or solemn determination that would not do nor could bind the rest of the Peers If one man would lose a particular Benefit he has all the whole Body must not lose it and the benefit is not small of Time to make his Defence of Imparling of taking a Copy of the Indictment and preparing himself to plead as his Case will bear and indeed a common person has used to have these priviledges tho in some Cases of late they have taken the other Course and if a Capias went out which We say cannot go against a Lord and the Party were brought in he was to answer immediately Now my Lord I take it That the Priviledges of Peers is in all times the same with the Parliamentary Priviledge in Parliament time which reacheth to Informations as well as other Actions My Lord Cooke is express in this point in the 4. Instit. 25. If that Objection should hold good that every Information being Contra Pacem that should be a Breach of the Peace then as I said before priviledge will hold in no Information which is contrary to that and all our other Books 't is only such a Breach of the Peace as for which security of the Peace may be required But further that this is a Priviledge enjoyed by the Peers Spiritual as well as Temporal I suppose will not be denied for I think they will not question but that the Bishops and Abbots that were Lords of Parliament were Peers and we find in our Books when the Court has been moved for a Capias against an Abbot if he were a Mitred Abbot and sat in the Lords House it was always said that no such Process ought to go and so it is in the case of Bishops but indeed for other Noble Men the difference is this Where it does not appear upon Record that they are Lords of Parliament there the Courts have put them to bring their Writs of priviledge but where it does appear upon Record that they are Peers the Court is to allow and take notice of their priviledge and there needs no such Writ Now that the Parliament priviledge and the priviledge of Peers as to their persons is the same appears by the form of the Writ in the Register fol. 287. Fitz Herb. Nat. Brev. 247. The Words of the Writ are these That if such a one be Sued at the Suit of another the Writ commands that a Peer out of Parliament time should have the same priviledge with those summoned by the KING to the Parliament and I know not any difference that can be put between them and it cannot be denied that all Informations whatsoever unless such as are for Breaches of the Peace for which Surety of the Peace may be required are under the Controul of the Parliament priviledge so that upon these grounds I do press that my Lords the Bishops may be discharged If there be any Information against us we are ready to enter our Appearance to answer it according to the course of the Court but if the Information be for no other thing than what is contained in the Warrant of Commitment then their persons ought to be priviledged from Commitment Mr. Pollixfen If your Lordship please to take it all together you will find it a case very well worth your consideration it being the case of all the Peerage of England Mr. Attor Gen. My Lord these Gentlemen have taken a great deal of Liberty and spent much of your time in making long Arguments and after all truly I do not know where to have them nor can understand what they would be at it seems they agree that for Treason Felony and Breach of the Peace a Peer may be Committed Ld. Ch. Iust. That is say they such a Breach of the Peace as for which Surety of the Peace may be required Mr. Attor Gen. Then all the Learning they have been pleased to favour us with is at an end for if here be any thing charged upon the Bishops for which Sureties of the Peace may be required then this is a good Commitment Ld. Ch. Iust. That they must agree upon their own Arguments Mr. Attor Gen. Can then any man in the world say that a Libel does not require Sureties of the Peace for we must now take it as it is here upon this Return How my Lords the Bishops will clear themselves of it is a Question for another time but the Warrant says they were Commited for Contriving Framing and Publishing a Seditious Libel against His Majesty and His Government Is there a greater Misdemeanour Or is there any thing on this side a Capital Crime that is a greater Offence Is there any thing that does so tread upon the Heels of a Capital Offence and comes so near the greatest of Crimes that can be Committed against the Government Not to enlarge at this time upon what the Consequences of such things may be Is there a greater Breach of the Peace than such Seditious Practices No doubt any man may be Committed for it and may be bound to find sureties for his good Behaviour Sir Robert Sawyer I say Sureties of the Peace not of the good Behaviour Mr. Soll. Gen. Pray my Lord would you consider where we are we are going towards France I think or some farther Country they have set us out to Sea and I do not see after this rate when we shall come to Land certainly these Gentlemen are mightily out of the way and would fain have us so too we are here upon a single Question as this Case stands before your Lordship upon the Return here is a Libel a Seditious Libel said to be contrived made and published against the KING and His Government by these Noble Lords the Prisoners this is the Accusation suppose this be true that is to be proved hereafter I hope they are innocent and will prove themselves so but suppose it to be true that they have made a seditious Libel against the King and His Government will any man say that this is not done Vi Armis This is a Libel with a witness nay two or three degrees more may carry it to High Treason and all the Informations that were exhibited by Sir Robert Sawyer when he was Attorney General and he exhibited a great many for Libels constantly these Words were in Vi Armis contra Pacem Bishop of Peterborough Was it so in your own Case Mr. Sollicitor Mr. Soll. Gen. Yes it was so

I agree with them it is not For if we had brought three or four Men that had seen them Write this very Paper and put their Names to it that had been a stronger Evidence than this that we have given but whether we do not give such a sort of Evidence as may induce the Jury to belive that this is their Paper and their Hands to it we submit they say This is such a method as never was taken but I admire that that should be said by Men of their Experience and Knowledge in the Law for is there any thing more usual or any other course taken for the proof of Hands than for a Wittness to say He knows the Hand of the Party very well for he has often seen his Hand-writing or received Lettters from him and if you shew him the thing that you would prove to be his Hand and he says I do believe this to be his Hand for this Reason Because I have had other things of his Writing Certainly in the Experience of any Man that has practised this is an Evidence that is given every day and allowed for Evidence For the Case of Mr. Sidney which your Lordship has heard mentioned it is certainly very opposite to this purpose it is insisted upon and pretended That that was Evidence because it was found in his Study but without all doubt that would not be the reason for may not a Book of another Man 's Writing be found in my Study and he insisted upon it in his own Defence but the Answer was That it should be left as the Question Whether the Jury would believe it upon the Evidence that was given of its being his own Hand-writing And so in this Case though it be not so strong Evidence as if we had brought those that had seen them Write it yet Evidence it is and whether it be sufficient to satisfie the Jury may be a Question but no Question it is good Evidence in Law. Mr. Sol. Gen. It is a wonderful thing they say That such Evidence should be offered but truly my Lord it is a much stranger thing to hear Mr. Serj. Pemberton say It was never done before and then to make that Remark to your Lordship upon the Case of Sidney which I 'le put to your Lordship and the Court as a Case and let him contradict me if he can and then we shall see how far it goes Sidney was Indicted for High Treason and the Treason insisted upon was A Writing supposed to be his it being found in his Study the Question was Whether it was his Hand-writing or no there was no positive Evidence that is was his Hand-writing there was no Evidence produced that proved it to be his Hand-writing for there was no one that Swore That they they saw him Write it there was nothing proved but the similitude of Hands Ay but says Mr. Serj. Pemberton It was found in his Study will Mr. Serj. Pemberton be content that all the Libels that are found in his Study shall for that reason be adjudged to be Libels to be his Hand-writing and he to be a Libeller for them I think he will make a severe Declamation against that and he would have very good reason for it Certainly that which was Evidence in one Man's Case will be Evidence in another God forbid there should be any such distinction in Law and therefore I conclude that this is good Evidence Mr. Serj. Pemberton The Court went upon this That it was found in his Study and compared with Letters and Bills of Exchange produced in Court which were Sworn to be of his Hand-writing Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord I was by all the time for I was ordered to attend him in the Tower and therefore I can tell what passed as well as any Body My Lord they proved no more as to that Libel but only by Comparison of Hands they had no other proof in that Case but by comparing the Hand-writing and that was insisted upon to be a mighty fallible thing That which they would have for us to compare Paper with Paper it is true would make the proof somewhat stronger if we could in such a Case as this be able to produce such Evidence but I appeal to your Lordship and shall leave it to the Jury to consider which is better Evidence these Men that have been produced that have been Conversant with these Lords and acquainted with their Hand-writing and who as your Lordship sees are not willing Men to give Evidence they avoid it as much as they can and they Swear it all to be the Hand-writing of the Archbishop of Canterbury as they believe which is as far as any Man can Swear One says the whole Body of the Paper is my Lord of Canterbury's Hand and he knows it very well so that we are not upon a single Name but a whole Paper that contains many Lines and this is as much as can be proved by any one that did not see the thing Written Then my Lord for the rest of the Company the Evidence is not so strong against every one of them as it is against my Lord Archbishop but is strong enough certainly to Convict them of what we accuse them of and pray my Lord what was the Objection in Sidney's Case but what has been mentioned here That any Man's Hand might be Counterfeited I remember in that Case there was one Mr. Wharton a young Gentleman then in the Court that undertook to the Court That he would Counterfeit that Hand presently and he that was to Swear the Comparison should not know which was the one and which was the other which certainly was a stronger Case than this And I see some of the Learned Gentlemen that are now standing at the Bar who pressed this matter very hard against Mr. Sidney and Mr. Sidney lost his Life upon that Comparison of Hands though Mr. Wharton did Testifie how easie a matter it was to have a Man's Hand Counterfeited and we all know was a Man of Value and Quality so there is a President for Mr. Serj. Pemberton that never heard of this Law before They say the proving of similitude of Hands is no Evidence unless you prove the actual Writing what a condition then will England be in when Witnesses are Dead Is it not the most common practice that can be to produce Witnesses to prove such Men are Dead whose Names are set as Witnesses to Deeds and they Swear They believe it to be the Hand-Writing of those Witnesses Can there be any greater Evidence of such a Case unless it be the confession of the Party himself My Lord we are now only upon reading this Paper We have been heard and they have been heard now we pray the Paper may be Read. Mr. Recorder We pray it may be Read. Mr. Serj. Levinz If your Lordship please Mr. Sol. Gen. We are not to be replied upon Mr. Serjeant L. C. I. You have spoke Brother Levinz and you have

place where it was done Mr. Sollicitor General Here is a great deal of Prevarication in this matter and I would observe to your Lordship how they do use the Court ill in it pray my Lord What is it we are upon we are proving that these seven Lords the Bishops signed this Paper and I think we have proved it sufficiently out of their own Mouths But say they it was not signed in the County of Middlesex but in the County of Surrey All this is but Imagination and they would have the Court to imagine it too For how do they prove it They would have your Lordship and the Jury believe That it was signed elsewhere because my Lord Archbishop has not been out of his House in some Months before it is all but Inference and Argument and Imagination But still Gentlemen do you answer what I objected to you Does it not lie in their Power to shew where it was signed Here are six more besides the Archbishop where was it signed by them Here are six of the Bishops that it does not appear where they signed it but they confess at White-Hall in Middlesex that they did set their Hands Mr. Serjeant Levinz Ay they did so and what then Mr. Solicitor General Ay and ay too if they did so the Presumption and Common Intendment upon such Evidence is That is was done in the Place where it was owned and the rather for that Reason that I said before That it lies in their Knowledge and therefore it is incumbent upon them to prove That it was not in the County of Middlesex So that this Objection I take rather to be an Invention of the Counsel than the Truth of the Fact because they that can make this out do not And as to what they say of my Lord Archbishop That he has not been out of Doors for so long who can prove such a thing Certainly my Lord was able to come for any thing that appears he has been here twice and he was able to come to the Council-Board But when all is done my Lord Archbishop is certainly able to put this matter out of doubt for he may easily prove it if the Fact be so and that will satisfie the Court and every Body That it was signed by him at Lambeth if he designs to deal sincerely with your Lordship and the Court and the Jury but certainly it is not to be proved by a Circumstance such a one as this is but he ought to give your Lordship and the Jury Satisfaction about this Fact He ought to say 'T is true I did sign it but it was at Lambeth-House that indeed would be a down-right Stroke to us But to go upon a Supposition That because my Lord Archbishop was not out of his House for so long together therefore they are all not Guilty is a very hard and foreign Inference My Lord there 's another Matter that they insist upon and that is about the Publication that is as plain as any thing can be that here is a full Proof of a Publication for if the Paper be Libellous where-ever that Paper is that is a Publishing where-ever the Paper travels how far soever it goes it is a Publication of it by these Persons that signed it I believe no body thinks that this should fly into the King's hand but some body brought it to him and certainly my Lord if your Opinion should be that this Paper is Libellous then where ever it is it is a Publishing which is our offence where-ever it is found it is a Publ●…tion for there is the mistake of these Gentlemen they fancy that unless there was a Publick Delivery of this Paper abroad nothing can be a Publication but I rely upon it they setting their Names to it made it their Paper and where-ever it was afterwards found that did follow the Paper where-ever it went and was a Publication of it it was in their Power being their own Contrivance it was made and formed by themselves and no body will believe when it was their own Hands that they put to it that any body else could have any power over it for ought appears no body else was at work about it and when there were so many Learned Prelates that had signed such a Paper no one can believe they would let it go out of their Hands but by their Consent and Direction Is not this a Proof of the Publishing Do they give your Lordships any Evidence that they had stifled this Paper If they had so done they had said something but will any body believe that this thing was done in vain Can any body assign a Reason why so solemn a thing as this should be done to no end and purpose Why a Paper should be framed that rails at the Kings two Declarations Why a Paper that gives Reasons why they could not read it in their Churches and signed with such Solemnity by all these Noble Lords we submit this to you in point of Law and the Law is plain in it that if this Paper be Libellous and it is found in the County of Middlesex there is a Publication of that Libel I shall mention to your Lordship that Case of Williams which is reported in the Second Part of Roll's Reports Mr. Finch made use of it in the Case of Sidney it was the great Case relied upon and that guided and governed that Case as I apprehend from the Verdict and Judgment that was given in it This Case was 15 Iacobi It seems Williams was a Barrister of the Inner-Temple and it seems being an high Catholick for Opinion and Judgment he was expelled the House and he being so expelled being a sort of a Vertuoso w●…ote a Book called Baalam's Ass and therein he makes use of the Prophecy of the Prophet Daniel and he makes Application of it according to his own particular fancy He writes there That this World was near at an end and he said Those ill days were come that that Prophecy had spoken of and because of the Impurity of Prince and Priest and People and other things that happened those were the worst of days and therefore the last and that certainly we had the worst Prince that ever was in the World when he wrote this Book what does he do He was a little more close than my Lords the Bishops and pins it up or seals it up and it was brought to the King and what is this more than the Case before your Lordship They indeed say I do this by way of Advice to the King so said he I do this by way of Advice to the King for God forbid that any of this should happen to the King and so what he does was by way of Advice and he prayed God to avert it from him here was as good a Prayer as there is in this Paper and there was a good design he made use of the Prophet Daniel and applied his words Well what was done upon it This was

that these Gentlemen have spent all this time to no purpose Lord Ch. Iust. Yes Mr. Attorney I 'le tell you what they offer which it will lie upon you to give an Answer to They would have you shew how this has disturbed the Government or diminished the Kings Authority Mr. Att. Gen. Whether a Libel be true or not as to the matter of Fact was it ever yet in any Court of Justice permitted to be made a question whether it be a Libel or not Or whether the Party be punishable for it And therefore I wonder to hear these Gentlemen to say that because it is not a false one therefore 't is not a Libel Suppose a Man should speak scandalous Matter of any Noble Lord here or of any of my Lords the Bishops and a Scandalum Magnatum be brought for it though that which is spoken has been true yet it has been the Opinion of the Courts of Law that the Party cannot justifie it by reason it tends to the disturbing of the Peace to publish any thing that is matter of Scandal The only thing that is to be lookt into is whether there be any thing in this Paper that is Reflecting and Scandalous and not whether it be true or no for if any Man shall Extra-Iudicially and out of a Legal Course and way reflect upon any of the great Officers of the Kingdom nay if it be but upon any Inferior Magistrate he is to be punished and is not to make his Complaint against them unless he do it in a proper way A Man may Petition a Judge but if any Man in that Petition shall come and tell the Judge Sir you have given an Illegal Judgment against me and I cannot in Honour Prudence or Conscience obey it I do not doubt nor will any Man but that he that should so say would be laid by the Heels though the Judgment perhaps might be illegal If a Man shall come to Petition the King as we all know the Council Doors are thronged with Petitioners every day and Access to the King by Petition is open to every body the most Inferior Person is allowed to Petition the King but because he may do so may he therefore suggest what he pleases in his Petition shall he come and tell the King to his Face what he does is Illegal I only speak this because they say in this Case his Majesty gave them leave to come to him to deliver their Petition but the King did not understand the Nature of their Petition I suppose when he said he gave them leave to come to him My Lord for this Matter we have Authority enough in our Books particularly there is the Case of Wrenham in my Lord Hobart the Lord Chancellor had made a Decree against him and he Petitioned the King that the Cause might be re-heard and in that Petition he Complains of Injustice done him by my Lord Chancellor and he put into his Petition many reflecting things this my Lord was punished as a Libel in the Star Chamber and in that Book it was said that though it be lawful for the Subject to Petition the King against any Proceedings by the Judges yet it must not be done with Reflections nor with Words that turn to the Accusation or Scandal of any of the Kings Magistrates or Officers and the Justice of the Decree is not to be questioned in the Case for there Wrenham in his Defence would have opened the particulars wherein he thought the Decree was unjust but that the Court would not meddle with nor would allow him to justifie for such Illegality in the Decree so in this Case you are not to draw in question the truth or falsehood of the Matter complained against for you must take the way the Law has prescribed and prosecute your Right in a Legal Course and not by Scandal and Libelling My Lord there is a great deal of difference between not doing a thing that is Commanded if one be of Opinion that it is unlawful and coming to the King with a Petition highly reflecting upon the Government and with Scandalous Expressions telling him Sir you Act illegally you require of us that which is against Prudence Honour or Conscience as my Lords the Bishops are pleased to do in this Petition of theirs I appeal to any Lord here that if any Man should give him such Language either by Word of Mouth or Petition whether he would bear it without seeking satisfaction and reparation by the Law My Lord there is no greater proof of the Influence of this Matter than the Croud of this day and the Ha●…angue that hath been made is it not apparent that the taking this Liberty to Canvas and dispute the Kings Power and Authority and to Censure ●…s Actions possess the People with strange Opinions and raises Discontents and Jealousies as if the free Course of Law were restrained and Arbitrary Will and Pleasure set up instead of it My Lord there is one thing that appears upon the Face of the Information which shews this not to be the right Course and if my Lords the Bishops had given themselves the opportunity of reading the Declaration seriously they would have found in the end of the Declaration that the Ring was resolved to call a Parliament in November might not my Lords the Bishops have acquiesced under their passive Obedience till the Parliament met But nothing would serve them but this and this must be done out of Parliament for which there is no President can be shewn and this must be done in such a manner as your Lordship sees the Consequence of by your Trouble of this Day There is one thing I forgot to speak to they tell us that it is laid Malicious and Seditious and there is no Malice or Sedition found we know very well that that follows the Fact those things arise by Construction of Law out of the Fact. If the thing be illegal the Law says it is Seditious a Man shall not come and say he meant no harm in it That was the Case of Williams in his treasonable Book says he I only intended to warn the King of the Danger approaching and concludes his Book with God save the King but no Man will say that a good Preface at the beginning or a good Prayer at the end should excuse Treason of Sedition in the Body of a Book if I meet another Man in the Street and kill him though I never saw him in my Life the Indictment is that it was ex Malitia Praecogitata as it often happens that a Person kills one he never had acquaintance with before and in favorem vitae if the Nature of the Fact be so the Jury are permitted to find according to the Nature of the Case but in strictness of Law there is Malice implyed But my Lord I think these Matters are so Common and that is a Point that has been so often setled that the form of the Indictment and Information must