private ends and ambition At first noe man lesse beloved noe man more generally condemned then was the King from the time that it became his Custome to breake Parliaments at home and cyther willfully or weakely betray protestants abroade to the beginninge of those combustions He would prove the people inconstant who doubts it there hath been proofe enough of it in their wretched levitie tossed to and fro by these Rebells Bene facere male audire Regium est will not be denyed by Iconoclastes to be a knowne truth and that it is the common lot of good Princes to be misreported That his late Majest suffered by the privy whispes of ambitious seducers to the credulous vulgar is easily graunted but it was their ingratitude not his merit and the Authors lesse beloved and more generally condemned is a supposition voyde of truth as the Act it selfe was voyde of dutie the causes he would have to be his Custome in breaking Parliaments and betraying Protestants Let vs examine what ground there was for this aversion from the King vpon either of theis There were in the time of King James men that made ill vse of Parliaments and insteede of amending what was amisse strived to make the people beleive things were out of order which they felt not and to create discontents at the Government This caused the breach of some Parliaments in that Kings time his late Majest finding the people possest with great jealosies of his match with spaine greate desires to breake the peace with that nation in order to the recovery of the Palatinate became the instrument of setling a right vnderstandinge betweene the King and his Parliament in the 21. th Yeare of his Raigne Then was the Treatie of the match and peace broken the session of Parliament concluded to the greate joy of the people and with their greate professions of affection to his late Majest for soe happy a worke King James was noe sooner dead and his late Majest by the Councell of the Parliament engaged in a dangerous warr but the seditious contrivers that had pretended such Zeale for the regaininge of the Palatinate cast about how they might ruine his Majest by that vndertaking and in his first Parliament without respect to their owne promises his Majest merit from them in procuringe their desires or the publique necesisities ingratefully withdrew their assistance from him and spread abroade rumours against his Government and when he called a Parliament the private annimosities personall thirst of revenge in some men were entertained in the house of Commons to exclude the consideration of the pressing necessities of his Majest affaires and forreigne agents had their fingers with these leaders in Parliament to divert all supplies from his Majest that both Protestants and all other his allies might be disappointed and which by that meanes was effected It s well knowne with what industrie difficultie his Majest in the middest of his necessities advanct releife to the Protestants and if they were betrayed the Treason must lie on the Parliaments credulitie to those vnderminers that forsooke their King in the prosecution of that worke To betray Protestants theis Traytours know signifies much to the people therefore they make it a reproach to their King against the knowne evidence of the fact and all sense and though they hipocritically pretend affection to the Protestant Religion the world knowes they doe not asmuch as give it a toleration for the Protestants doe not account Iohn of Leidon and the mad men of Munsters Protestants there is noe Religion but theirs now current in England This Author sees the cleerenes of the proofe against their malitious allegations of betraying Protestants and therefore descends a little in his termes and sayes either wilfully or weakely Could he betray them by impotencie of force or Councell that a new found Treason that the minde intends not but it s too much respect to such an absurd Calumnie to give it an answeare He goes on all men inveighed against him all men except Court vassalls opposed him and his Tyranicall proceedings Inveighinge against the King was vnknowne in England before such Monsters as this Author were hatcht by Rebellion and made their words accord with their Actions when their lying and hipocrisie could noe longer serve turne Before this time malecontents muttered their censures of Government and people that beleived them thought it their sin and shame to inveigh against their King Though discontents were nourisht among many few or none were soe impudent to inveigh There is noe Courtier whose observance to his Prince or his flatterie of him can binde him to like vassallage as he is that serves Rebells by false and impudent detractions of Rulers Noe slave soe base as he that wil be hired to murther the fame and honour of others There are some Courtiers among his new Masters whose falshood to their true Master and base observance of the Traytours to him entitles them to the worst of vassallage This Author goes an ill way to prove Tyranicall proceedings when he sayes they were soe opposed It s strange a Tyrant should suffer himselfe to be opposed and how were those Tyranicall proceedings opposed he will say by disputes in Courts of Justice was this Tyrany to admit contestations in ordinary Courts There was never time wherein there were not questions of right betweene King and subject is it Tyrany in a Prince to be a partie in a Proces And doth this Author hold malicious reports and rumours notes of disgrace vpon King or any other Magistrate good Princes lives confute detractours and though the people for a time may be deluded they will come to know a good King in his losse Rebellious humours are an Epidemicall pestilence whose violence cannot continue This full Parliament was at first vnanimous in their dislike and protestation against his evill Government This hath not the least colour of truth and as there was never time wherien somethinge was not to be amended soe in the beginninge of this Parliament there were things of that nature but not such as laid Cryme vpon his Majest Government nor did the Parliament judge soe but all corruptions of Courts Errours of Councell ill successes of Actions are charged by this Author as his Majest ill Government and every judgment of Parliament in a particular case made a protestation against it This Author cannot but know that the most vnamimous protestation that ever the Parliament made was to defend the Kings person honour and Estate and they that made this protestation could not be vnanimous in protesting against his evill Government nor in destroying both him and it They protested to defend the lawes of the land one of which they declared to be that the King could doe noe wrong and that if they should say his late Majest did they should speake against the law the affection of their owne hearts Can this Author finde any roome heere for an vnanimous protestation of the
Treason in Kings to have sold Jewells of the Crowne would have made it some Cryme to have bought Jewells for the Crowne and it is noe Treason now to sell the Crowne Jewells and all by his cut throate crew The Parliament was not ignorant to what intent these summs were raysed their owne actions told all the world they were necessary to be raysed The Kings refusing to settle the military power in trustie hands vpon their petitions and doubting he would possesse himselfe of Hull they were necessitated by the turbulence and danger of the times of their owne authoritie to putt the Kingdome into a posture of defence and to send Sr. Iohn Hotham to take Hull into his possession How many lewde lyes have they sent abroade into the world that the King made warr vpon them and it was the Libellers owne pretence in the beginning of the last Chapter now plainly tells they seized Hull because they suspected the King intended it and because he would not settle the militia as they desired If he had no power over the Militia why did they petition him If the Parliament be his superiour why did they petition at all Doe superiours petition inferiours But what was that turbulence danger of the Kingdome was there any more then what themselves had made by rumours and Tumults and is not the seizing of a fort an Act of warr The King had attempted the same before And was that any cause for them because the King sends to his Castles or forts must they therefore take them from him And he sayes letters of the Lord Digby were intercepted wishing the King to retire to some safe place And therefore these Rebells would provide he should be safe in noe place The King offred to goe in person into Ireland and that he would Arme his guard from his Magazine of Hull The Parliament he sayes foreseeing the kings drift petition him that they might have leave to remove the Magazine of Hull to the Tower of London Soe carefull they were to have the Rebellion in Ireland proceede that they desired his Majest to forbeare his going into Ireland out of consideration of danger to his person when as they intended to destroy him at home and the true cause was that they would deteine theis Armes to make warr against him if he would not submitt to be deposed and to keepe the money given for Ireland to drive on the warr heere The King afterward going to Hull required the Governour to deliver him the Towne whereof the Governour humbly desired to be excused till be could send to the Parliament It seemes the libeller would not have that a denyall The King proclaimed Hotham Traytour before the Towne walls And noe man dobuted but he was soe The King gave order to stopp all passages betweene him and the Parliament And had he not reason to prevent supplies and intelligences to a Traytour Yet sayes the Libeller he demaunded Iustice as vpon a Traytour vsing a strange iniquitie to require Iustice vpon him whome he had debarred from his apparence Traytours must be apprehended before their apparence and it was a strange iniquitie in them that would not apprehend a Traytour as in Justice they ought but a most execrable impietie in such as pretend Justice to cleere a malefactour without hearing both parties as the libeller sayes the Parliament did Sr. Iohn Hotham for he sayes the Parliament noe sooner vnderstood what had passed they declare Sr. Iohn Hotham had done noe more then was his dutie They meant noe doubt his dutie to them as fellow Traytours not to his king and soveraigne That this proves that to be false which is heere affirmed by the King that his greatest Enemies had scarce confidence enough to abett or owne it And such as knew the manner of their proceedings at that time know the truth of what the King affirmes and though the necessitie of their engagement made them owne it yet there were very few or none that esteemed it an act of Justice in them but of Policie for their owne securitie The king sayes it affected him more with sorrow for others then anger for himselfe nor did the affront trouble him soe much as their sin The libeller sayes there is vse of this booke to shew vs what a deluded thing the creature is which is called the vulgar who will believe such vaine glories as these And surely we cannot believe any creature soe deluded as those for whose capacitie the libeller writes that makes the deluded vulgar judges of lawes and kings yet heere spurnes it as a despised creature The strangenes of beleife that he imagines as that the King proclaimed him Traytour without due proces of law If he could have told what the due proces of law was no doubt he would If a theife or murtherer be taken in the Act or escape must there not be a proclamation for his apprehension If Traytours be in Armes against their King is it choler or rashnes to proclaime them Traytours The King had lately been convinced of his illegallitie with the five members He was injuriously denyed Justice against them which produced the second insolence of Hotham The Kings relation declares his anger to be incensed as he had but doth it follow from thence that he was not more sorry for others then angry May not a fathers sorrow for his sons disobedience exceede his anger and may not a King desire the punishment of a Malefactour because he pitties his person greives for the ill consequence of his offence Yet this trifling Libeller would inferr that the king could not be more sorry then angry because his words testifie impatience of delay till Hotham be punished It s a strange operation of sorrow that stirred him soe vehemently to have Hotham punished and not to have him repent But this exception is more strange that a man may not be vehement for the punishment of one for whose offence he is greived and there may be just cause of sorrow for an Act which the repentance of the Actour cannott remedy He knowes well how litle his Majest was likely to worke vpon Hotham at that time obstinate but it was a necessitie vpon his Majest to endeavour that he should be proceeded against injustice There hath not been observed in the King a sorrow for his owne sins nor for such sins of others as cannot be supposed a direct injury to himselfe This man will not have the Kings sorrow for his sins observed nor acknowledged wee have seene his malicious detractions of the Kings sorrow for his consent to the death of the Earle of Strafford and it cannot be expected from such men that they will give Testimony to any truth that deny all evidence of it The Kings labour to have the sinner only punished wil be called revenge And why They pretended justice not revenge that after cut of Sr. John Hothams head May not a King doe justice without revenge The jnjustice in abettinge protecting Sr.
Parliament against the Kings ill Government And yet these were made long after the beginninge of the Parliament but they that have noe conscience of speaking truth have noe shame to be convinced of falshood But when they who sought themselves and not the publique began to doubt that all of them could not by one and the same way attaine to their ambitious purposes then was the King or his name at least as a fit propertie first made vse of his doings made the best of and by degrees justified He is very industrious to finde out causes why soe many would not be Traytours why could he not fall into the consideration of the oaths of Alleagiance supremacie that all members of Parliament take at their entrance why could he not thinke on the protestation themselves contrived to defend the King how did he forget the Commaunds of obedience from God If himselfe and his Masters had not preferred their ambitious ends before their dutie to God or man if they had not thought all oaths and vowes of noe obligation against their ends they would never have attributed other mens desertion of their courses to proceede from ambitious ends Could men that saw these Traytours making such oaths and protestations of loyaltie with a resolution to breake them run without remorse with them Could any that retained any sparke of Religion or morall honestie concurr with such persons in their lewde courses But all could not attaine their ambitious ends by the same way What way by destroying the King wee are sure some have attained their ambitious ends that way And doth this Author thinke that any men had higher ends of ambition then they that now have attained theirs if he doe he hath very few of his minde how ever there was a way to ambitious ends but it was not wide enough for all and who had these ambitious ends they that tooke the way or they that left it They that had obligations of honour and conscience for their wayes are vncharitably charged with ambitious ends and they that brake the bounds of dutie and oaths to attaine their ends are sottishly pretended to seeke the publique How the Kings name and office hath been made a propertie and all dutie and oaths to him a Ceremony by the Traytours is knowne to the world They have not spared any thing Religious or Civill They have made a propertie of the very name of God of fasts of thankesgiving of prayers of preaching They have made a propertie of Justice of Delinquents evill Councellours how often have they made the lords house a propertie calling it the Kings hereditary Councell how often of loyaltie And how frequently in this very libell doth he make a propertie of the name of Parliament All men see there hath been nothing reall with them but their ambition and crueltie Which begate him such a partie as after many wiles and struglings with his inward feares imboldened him at length to set vp his standard against the Parliament After many Messages to the Traytours that possest both houses of Parliament After many offers to relinquish his just rights to take away all jealosies and feares of his power which were then pretended After many Remostrances of the Calamities that attend Civill distractions After the vndutiful rejections of al his motions for peace After the discovery of the vnsatiable ambition and blood thirstie malice of the prevailing partie After the violation of all priviledges of Parliament After the compulsion of the better part of both houses to desert them After the seizing of his Majest forts and Navy and assuminge the Militia After the longest and most provokt patience that ever King reteined his Majest set vp his standard against those Rebells that tooke the name of Parliament But Iconoclastes remember you have heere vpbraided feares to the King when you come to deny he had any What wiles were vsed to seduce the people what jealosies ridiculous feares were blowne vp to disorder them is yet fresh in Memory and he well observes the Kings standard at length set vp for there was just cause to have done it long before and much disadvantage to his Majest by the delay When as before that time all his adherents consistinge most of dissolute swordmen and suburb roysters hardly amounted to the making vp of one ragged Regiment strong enough to assault the vnarmed house of Commons What time doth he meane the setting vp of the standard If his Majest had sooner declared a gainst the Traytours he had not wanted a greater Regiment And if he had intended to assault the house of Commons those he had with him were enough to have done it though those that then sate had been armed otherwise those members would not have been absent when he eame For the qualitie of the Kings adherents as he Phrases it the persons that then waited on him were for the most part of better qualitie then their Rebell Generall whome now they adore It was the art of one of the guides of this Treason at that time to stile such as were about the King Cavileers as a name vnagreeable to the prickeard Puritan whose supersilious demurenes made wry faces at such a name it being the Custome of false Traytours to lay claime to those behaviours that may hide their inward wolvish disposition and defame others to get reputation to themselves and thence suburb Roysters and dissolute swordmen became names for such as followed the King to add terrour to the citizens of London who have found more pride crueltie robbery among their schismaticall pretenders to pietie then any such danger as was threatned them from such as followed the King Though this breaker would destroy the reason and sense of his readers yet its impossible by such incoherent Arguments as he produceth Can he hope any man will beleive him that such as followed the King at that time to the lower house were all that tooke offence at the proceedings in Parliament and that none els were resolved to aslist the King against the inivries offred him That were too vnreasonable considering the Actions both then and succeedinge and because he had not endeavoured to get more strength therefore he could not But if the number of them that had a right vnderstanding of the Kings affaires were very small doth it follow that the contrary was the better because numerous The Author refutes it himselfe in his next words and surely the Argument is more strong against the cause he maintaines that the people that at first followed them have now left them then the motions of the people carryed by rumours against their King in the beginning were of any Tyrany or ill Government in him for a people are easier stirred vp to follow an evill cause then reduced after they have begun and the qualitie number of such persons who have lost their lives and fortunes in maintaning the Kings cause in regard of Estate honour and integritie in Comparison of such
of subsidies but voted that the Bill should not come into the house till their greivances were answeared His Majest sent them there vpon severall Messages to hasten them to present the greivances which nothing wrought on them but without any reason after long expectatiō they denyed to have the bil of subsidies brought into the house It s wel known that no Kingdome had lesse greivances then that of England vnder his late Majest And the people were perswaded into an opinion of greivances not by sence of Suffering but the disputes of Pragmaticall Incendiaries and they would have rested quiet had they not been seduced by such Craftsmen and there is no on thing that this breaker can name for a greivance which his Masters that now Lord it do not encrease The first he broke of at his coming to the Crowne for no other cause then to protect the Duke of Buckingham against them who had accused him besides other hainous Crymes of no lesse then poysoning the deceased King his Father This Author takes himselfe not concerned in speaking Truth for the publike Records of the Kingdome and some late declarations of the pretended Parliament would have held his hand from this false assertion if he had valued Truth at the rate of perusing them for the Duke of Buckingham was not at all accused by the first Parliament of the King nor in any Parliament for poysoning the deceased King He might have found that in the second Parliament of the King Among other Articles against the Duke of Buckingham he was accused for a Transcendent Presumption and of dangerous consequence touching Phisicke applyed to the deceased King but the malice of such as hated the Duke of Duckingham did not extend to an accusation of poysoning the deceased King yet the venome of Treason in this Author makes him madd and say that a fact of presumption and of dangerous consequence was a poysoning If such were the wisedome of a house of Parliament to call poysoning of a King a presumption of dangerous consequence neither King nor people neede be troubled to want their Councell This is the first instance though not the first falshood of Iconoclastes but to the matter of what he sajes in that second Parliament wherein in Duke of Buckingham was accused his Majest by Message to the lower house told them he was well pleased they should proceede against the Duke of Buckingham they did accordingly give vp their Articles to the Lords the Duke of Buckingham made his answeare which was sent down to the Commons who being vnable to reply to it such as then swayed the house contrary to the Councell of a greate number of the most experienced amongst them resolved to hinder al proceedings and necessitate the King to a Dissolution of the Parliament This is no secret the journall bookes of that house sufficiently evince it Still the latter breaking was with more affront and indignitie put vpon the house and her worthyest members then the former This appeares not by his subsequent reason but if this breaker had thought either the dissolving of Parliaments or indignitie and affront to members and offence why does he take on him the defence of those that have Ignominiously excluded the whole house of Lords and so many of the Commons and among them some whome he termes the worthiest persons in the Parliament he speakes of but his reasons and narrations are of the same stuffe And if any man compare the affronts and indiginties offered his Majest by some persons in parliament and his proceedings against them he will judge that their provacations exceeded his passion and their owne sufferings In so much that in the fifth yeare of his Raigne in a Proclamation he seemes offended at the very Rumour of a Parliament divulg'd among the people as if he had taken it for a kinde of slander that men should thinke him that way exorable much lesse inclined What strawes this man pickes vp If the King did seeme offended at a factious Rumour doth it follow that he held it a Scandall to act that which was Rumoured Because a King doth forbid Rumours of his intended Actions doth he not therefore intend them And must his Councells be the subject of common Rumour It is a factious practice to spreade a Rumour of a parliament before the King please to declare it and tends to the precipitation of his Councells by sedition But as his premisses are he seemes so his conclusions are as if and men may aswell beleive him on his bare word as such inferences he appearing inexorable to speake Truth or forbeare slander And forbidds it as a presumption to prescribe him any time for Parliaments that is to say eyther by perswasion or petition or so much as the reporting of such a Rumour for other manner of Prescribing was at that time not suspected His Majest therein forbad no more then the law forbidds and accounts it a presumption to Prescribe him any time for Parliaments But such as have destroyed King and Parliament would have it esteemed strange that they should not prescribe what they lift and the breaker that would have the King Prescribed will allow non to Prescribe his now masters His explanation signifies nothing for doth he thinke that the King ought to be petitioned or perswaded by every on that will or that the spreading of a Rumour is a fit meanes to induce him to call a Parliament He endeavours to defame the King for restrayning popular licence and Sedition and when he seekes to confirme the Tyranny of his Masters he reproaches the people with Levitie and violence And the wayes of Prescribing by him mentioned were vnorderly and by him particularised as Plausible not sound other manner of Prescribing was then not Suspected he intends the force of a scotts Army and though he commend that way of Prescribing and attribute the calling of the Parliament to it and accuse the King for resisting it yet he will charge the King with beginning the warr By which feirce Edict the people forbidden to complaine as well as forced to suffer began from thence foorth to despaire of Parliaments The people have now greater cause to dispaire of Parliaments then ever they had in the time of his late Majest for if these men prevaile they are sure never to have more for they professe to introduce a new form of Government which hath nothing of the Parliament of England however the people by seditious practices or false apprehensions despaired of Parliaments that proves nothing of his Majest inclination or aversenes to Parliaments How an edict can be called feirce where no punishment of the breach of it appeares to be denounced nor any severitie ensuing it cannot be imagined but it s well knowne what Titles this Author wil give to any of his Majest Actions respecting only the reproachfullnes of the Termes nor their proportion or congruitie to what they are applyed and whoever lookes on the time while Parliaments were intermitted the
sufferings of the people were lesse then when Parliaments were frequent they neede not be forbidden to complaine when their peace plentie were a reason strong enough to restraine them however querulous murmurings wrought by seditious contrivers may happē ought to be forbiddē in al just Governments Where vpon such illegall Actions and especially to get vast summs of mony were put in Practice by the King and his new Officers as Monopolies compulsive knighthoods Coate Conduct and Shipmony the seezing not of on Nabaoths Vineyard but of whole inheritances vnder the pretence of forrest or Crowne lands Corruption bribery compounded for with impunities graunted for the future as gave evident proofe that the King never meant nor could it stand with the Reason of his affaires ever to recall Parliaments All the pretences of Tyranny and oppression wherewith the Rebells have sought to maske their disloyaltie are reduced to this on summe to get money That Princes must have supplies from their people for support of the Kingdome cannot be doubted and where the lawes have given the King a richt to demaund money of partioular persons in certanie cases or of the whole people theis are no illegall exactions but due debts The King of England is entitled by law to diverse dues from his subjects and of such things his learned Councell and his Judges have the care that he loose not his rights and they are bound by oath to preserve them if in any cases they faile in their judgment their King cannot be guiltie of illegall exactions in following their Councell and of such nature are the particulars he mentions vnles Coate and Conduct money which had been disbursed by the Counties for the present where souldiers were raysed and was of inconsiderable value and to be repayed and only of practice in case of warr when necessitie requires greater contributions and such Actions as theis the best Governments could never avoyde and those formes of Government which theis Rebells Preferr before Monarchy ordinairly practis but they must supply with exclamations what they want of matter and having broken all bounds of dutie Justice and humanitie they seeke to make the common meanes which necessitie compells Governnours to vse for publique support the height of oppression and Tyranny The vast summs received by all the wayes were farr short of that greate charge which the Kingdome required and of what former Kings had received in the like space but inconsiderable in regard of the present exactions He resembles the legal proceedings in cases of civil right to Nabaoths vineyard so as al suites for recovery of deteined rights is the getting of Nabaoths vineyard but they that by the blood of many Naboaths have gotten their inheritances would have Civill Controversies not bloody murther the sin of Ahab Corruption and bribery compounded for with impunitie for the future is a denomination which cannot be fixt to any Actions of Majest That his Majest hath a power to pardon was never denyed and therefore no act of grace in that kinde can be illegall but this which they call corruption and bribery was no other then the fees which some officers received and were questioned to be above their due had they been convict their mulct was pecuniary and due to the King They vrged long Custome in their defence and in a case of that nature where only errour not corruption or bribery can be admitted it was neerer to justice then favour to forbeare profecution And as the fact was not illegal so had it been it was only theirs by whose Councell it was done and theis men that professe such zeale against corruption and bribery pretend that it was necessary to take away the starr chamber where such Crymes were punisht and from whence comes it that it could not stand with his majest affaires te recall Parliaments when his Majest desired to continue nothing but what was necessary for the Kingdome Having brought by theis irregular courses the peoples interest and his owne to so direct an opposition that he might foresee plainely if nothing but a Parliament could save the people it must necessarily be his vndoing The King had no interest but that which was common to the people with him and nothing that was their interest could be opposite to his The people were very farr from any such apprehensions of being Destroyed or that they might not be saved without the Kings vndoing And wherein could the King foresee his vndoing by Parliament must he necessarily foresee that a Parliament would follow Traytours against him Or must he necessarily foresee that a Parliament would vndertake an illegall and vn just power Must he necessarily foresee that a Parliament would produce a Rebellion when no Action was desired to be continued by him which was not according to law nor any greivance duely proved vnredressed But because in the Parliament which he called a faction destroyed him and hath vndone the Kingdome therefore Iconoclastes would have it plainely to be foreseene Such as know the difference of the last from former Parliaments know likewise that it was not from the condition of the Parliament but the conjuncture of affaires at the time of calling it that produced those wicked effects filling the mindes of many with ambitious thoughts and desire to lay the foundation of their private greatenes in the publique ruines It is impossible that the interest of a King can have an opposition to that of his people which is vainely fancied by him or that any thing by him alledged should worke such opposition And although there have been disputes in Courts and Parliaments touching the profitts and rights of the Crowne yet before this Rebell generation non were so shameles to pretend them causes of the subjects violence and necessarily desturctive to the King or people which had the people imagined would have been the issue of a Parliament they would have had a greater aversion to it then Iconoclastes supposes in his late Mejest And as the preservation of the people is the Kings interest so his preservation is theirs which the people now finde to late and could not foresee that such as made vse of the pretence of their interest minded it least Till eight or nine yeares after proceeding with a high hand in these enormities having the second time levied an injurious warr against his native countrey Scotland and finding all those other shifts of raysing money which bore out his first expedition now to faile him not of his own choice and inclination as any childe may see but vrged by strong necessities and the very pangs of State which his owne violent proceedings had brought him to he calls a Parliament Iconoclastes is very industrious to shew that he can expresse the malice of his heart with his pen and can give false denominations to Actions with greater confidence then true where it may advantag his Masters The gentle hand wherewith his Majest governed during the nine yeares he mentions
though experience hath confirmed that if a greate part of the people of England had not followed them with a more blinde and obstinate beleife then ever Romish laitie did their Pope they could never have been ridden and jaded as now they are And Iconoclastes could never presume the beleife of his extravagant assertions if he thought not his readers of worse then naturall sottishnes to be abused for while they lye groveling vnder the Tyrany of their present oppressours and lament the losse of their happines vnder the Kingly Government this man will perswade them out of their sense and memory While in the judgment of wisemen by laying the foundation of his defence on the avouchment of that which is so manifestly vntrue he hath given a worse foyle to his own cause then when his whole forces were at any time overthrowne Surely there wisemē shewed as little reason in judging an assertion as knowledge in military affaires that made by comparison of this period to the defeat of an army If his Maj have given so greate a foyle to his cause by the first period of his booke whence comes the danger that Iconoclastes would prevent Was this first period vnintelligible without his comment and what is it to the Kings cause whether he called the Parliament of his owne choice or not It s very likely his wife men heere are the same with his wel principled men he mentioned els where their principles or impiety being the same with his their judgment is as corrupt as their conscience and as farr from wisedome as the libeller from modestie and if any had such a judgment they might soone finde their errour which all others descerne and such a judgment were a greater foyle to their wisedome then to his Majest cause They therefore who thinke such greate service done to the Kings affaires in publishing this booke will finde themselves in the end mistaken of sense right minde or but any mediocritie of knowledge and remembrance hath not quite forsaken men They will finde themselves no whit mistaken if sense right minde and mediocritie of knowledge and remenbrance have not quite forsaken men but the libeller will finde himselfe very much mistaken if he expect that his sense shal be so received against apparent truth as to give a greater foyle then the defeate of Arimes and vnderstanding must have left the world where the Author of such a comparison findes credit He comes now to prosecute his Majest discourse in pursucance of that period and first to what his Majest affirmes of Parliaments to have allwayes thought the right way of them most safe to his Crowne and best pleasing to his people he sayes we felt from his Actions what he thought of Parliaments or of pleasing his people The people feele now that which makes them confesse that they had just cause by what they felt from his Majest Actions to be well pleased with them to beleive what he affirmes heere to be his judgment of Parliaments and if any people were pleased with the ill way of Parliaments they have seene their errour by the evill consequents and now thinke the right way of them only most safe for the Crowne them and that nothing but ruine to the Kingdome can be expected from disorderly Parliaments He goes on to that which his Majest adds that the cause of forbearing to Conveene Parliaments was the sparkes which some mens distempers there studied to kindle To this the libeller sayes they were not temperd to his temper for it neither was the law nor Rule by which all other tempers were to be tryed but they were chosen for fittest men in their Counties to quench those distempers which his inordinate doings had inflamed Is the choice in Counties the law and rule whereby tempers are to be tryed And would the libeller have it beleived that all such as are chosen in the Counties are of better temper then the King If choice be the law of temper why doth he justifie those men which have affronted scorn'd and punished such as have been chosen by the Counties If all are so well temperds why are some so ill handled and excluded And if there may be distempers as he must confesse in despight of impudence why was it not a just reason of his Majest forebearance if he found it We know what fires small sparkes kindle in greate Assemblies and we have felt the flame of them like the sudden eruption of burning Mountaines when all was quiet and there were men that studyed to turne the Parliament into confusion having not the temper to quench but to enflame Were these men that were of the two Parliaments in the first yeare of his Majest Raigne The first called within two moneths after he begun the second within twelue chosen to allay those distempers which his inordinate doings had inflamed what were these inordinate doings that could inflame so suddenly We neede not argue this Authors credit from one vntruth but he would obtaine some credit if one entire truth could be found in him If that were his refusing to conveene till those men had been quallified to his will wee may easily conjecture what hope there was of Parliaments had not feare and his insatiate povertie in the middest of his excessive wealth constrained him His Majest might with reason exspect that many who through errour had caused distempers might returne to a right minde seeing his temper and their little reason to desire such Parliaments as make it their whole worke to divide the peoples affections from the King and follow the Councells of such as are malecontents for want of preferment and if men had been quallified to his Majest will Parliaments would have had happier successe and the people pleased with their agreement that now groane vnder the miseries of their division But whence his insatiate povertie in the middest of his excessive wealth should constraine him is not vnderstood wants and wealth are inconsistent This libeller hath greate povertie of sense in the middest of his excessive expressions He goes an ill way to prove that the King was so vninclined to Parliaments and that povertie compelled him if he had wealth certainly that would have kept him from hazarding a course so disliked He shal be rich and poore that some may contemne his povertie others may grudge his wealth The King hoped by his Freedome and their moderation to prevent misvnderstandings To this sayes Iconoclastes wherefore not by their Freedome and his moderation The Champion cannot fuffer a King to passe without signifying to him that there is no difference betweene King and subject The King had resolved to vse Freedome in his concessions and hoped they would vse moderation in their demaunds This man would have him say that they should vse Freedome in their demaunds he would vse moderation in his concessions hath he not made it a proper speech Will his wise and well principled men thinke him a fit Champion to breake
preserve the love and welfare of his subjects To this of his Majest he sayes Who doubts it but the same interest common to all Kings was never yet availeable to make them all seeke that which was indeede best for themselves their posteritie But if it be the interest of Kings to preserve the love and welfare of their subjects in vaine doth Iconoclastes from the transgressions of particular persons defame the sacred office of Kings and endeavour to set vp vsurpers whose interest cannot so much oblidge them to the love welfare of the people He sayes all men are oblidged by their interest to honestie and Iustice but that consideration workes litle in private men It seemes by his writing it workes litle in him that so litle regards honestie and Iustice But his interest is not to regard it for the interest of his profitt and esteeme with his Masters cannot be maintained by honestie and Iustice and that interest is more prevalent with him then the interest of a good conscience or heaven it selfe He might well have descerned that his Majest argued from the Humane or Civill interest which men are apt to judge strongest and the breaker impertinently diverts the sense to talke of mens fayling in the exercise of vertue when their temporall interests are the cause of their miscarriage and therefore his Majest reason was strong that since his interest as well as right carried him to the inclination he mentioned it might be more probable to others But the Image breaker admits no reasons not gives any but magisterially layes downe his position that Kings have lesse consideration of honestie Iustice then other men It were an injury to that high calling to offer an answeare to such a barking detractour against the most approved most ancient and most sacred office for the preservation of Humane societie that will deprave that which God hath sanctified and will make those by whome God dispenseth the blessings of peace vnto men the greatest Enemies to God and goodnes He intended to oblidge both friends Enemies and to exceede their desires did they but pretend to any modest and sober sense To this he sayes mistaking the whole busines of a Parliament which meete not to receive from him obligations but Iustice nor he to expect from them their modestie but their grave advice vttered with Freedome in the publique cause This man mistakes the whole busines of a Parliament that would exclude modestie from the advice and libertie from the advised The freedome that the libeller intends is inconsistent with modestie as-well as Monarchy Trayterous dispositions having an Antipathy to morall vertues How often have Parliaments made petitions to their King for graces were they not oblidged when they were graunted But it cannot be expected that such as despise dutie should willingly acknowledge the right of those to whome it belongs and such as vse no modestie will acknowledge no gratitude or obligation If their advice had been grave their behaviour would have been modest and they whose dutie was only to advise had no pretence to Commaund and dictate nor they that were to receive Justice from their King to snatch what they desired and become judges of their owne demaunds Such as wil not be oblidged by lawes nor oaths cannot by benefites favours and such as have robbed a King of his power grow quickely to that height of impudence to deny he had ever any as this Author that is so Brutish to affirme that Kings cannot oblidge their subjects thence it followes that they owe no thankes to God for a good King as they professe to owe him none for his good Government His talke of modestie in their desires of the common welfare argues him not much to have vnder stood what he had to graunt who misconceived so much the nature of what they had to desire His excepting at the talke of modestie shewes how little he vnderstands other modestie or the right or practice of Parliament Is not humilitie a word of larger signification then modestie and yet this breaker will make modestie contrary to the nature of the Parliaments desires and the Kings graunts when humilitie is the common expression of the Parliaments petitions to the King And he might well have said the King vnderstood not what he had to graunt if he had not expected his subjects desires to have a modest and sober sense Can there be desires of the common-welfare that exclude modest sober sense But the truth is the desires of the late faction in the name of Parliament had neither modest nor sober sense and thence the libeller would inferr it vnnecessary and it was very farr from the nature of what they had to desire to demaund their Kings Crowne And for sober sense the expression was too meane and recoiles with as much dishonour vpon himself fo to be a King where sober sense could possible be so wanting in a Parliament And must it be the Kings dishonour if an Assembly of Parliament want sober sense how does that recoile vpon him can he make them otherwise Iconoclastes lately reprehended his mention of heate in Elections and now it s the Kings dishonour if the Parliament want sober sense was there never experience of a Parliament that wanted sober sense or was any man so savage as to hold sober sense too meane for a greate Councell Wee have seene not only sober sense but al Religion reason law Justice wanting in a Parliament being taken for the prevalent partie and Histories record it to have happened more then once Kings have been vnhappy in such Parliaments but the dishonour and infamy rests vpon such Assemblyes and these Apologists are the Trumpetts of their shame not the covers of their nakednes The odium and offences which some mens rigour or remissenes in Church state had contracted vpon his Government he resolved to have expiated with better lawes and regulations To this he sayes the worst misdemneanours of rigour or remissenes he hath taken vpon himselfe as often as the Clergy or any other of his Ministers felt themselves over-burthened with the peoples hatred He instances in the superstitious rigour of his sundayes Chappell remissenes of his sundayes Theatre that reverend statute for Dominicall liggs Maypoles derived from the Example of his Father Iames which testifies that all superstition and remissenes in Religion issued from his authoritie and the generall misearriages in state imputed cheifely to himselfe That the remissenes and rigour of some men may contract odium and offence in the best Governments was never doubted but that this libeller would take occasion from his Majest intention to expiate them with better lawes to cast them on his Majest shewes that this Rebellion arose not from offences in Government but wicked inclinations of ambition Covetuousnes and that amendments were not desired but confusion It was just honourable that the King should take on him the defence of his lawes against Sectaries
of this mans Religion otherwise we might demaund of him why the King should goe further then his reason and conscience directed him and why the libeller his Mates should hould it lawfull for them to spurne at al lawes both in Church and state vpon pretence of their reason and conscience against them he cannot deny to have done this they should doe well to shew how the King may goe against his reason conscience Is it intayled vpon him with his Fortune as a King to have lesse priviledge then they must he renounce his owne reason and conscience to the advice of a Parliament And must they controll him and the Parliament Surely the King must give an account to God for the Talents he hath lent him But how can the breaker conclude from the Kings forbearance of Acts wherein he is vnsatisfied in his conscience that is to set vp an Arbitrary Government when as nothing is introduced And why must not all Brittaine be chained to the judgment reason and conscience of the King as well as all Israell Gods owne peculiar people and not only all Brittaine but the whole world are Chained to the reason judgment and conscience of their Rulers be they one or many And the seducers would perswade vs that Brittaine could not be happy vnles it were reduced to its ancyent barbaritie and governed by a multitude of Kings Religions God had promised peculiar assistance to Kings and Commaunds the peoples obedience to them the miseries of the Kingdome many be imputed in a greate part to what his Majest observed that he had suffered his owne judgment to be overborne in some things A Tyrant may make this pretence and it were in vaine for any Parliament to have reason judgment or conscience if it thwarted the Kings will It were much more tollerable for a Tyrant to pretend conscience in governing then for a people to pretend conscience in rebelling and this libeller hath reprehended the peoples levitie and violence so sharpely as he cannot if he pretend reason subject the reason judgment and conscience of the Rulers to the controll of the subjects Because Tyrants may pretend conscience therefore by good logicque no King may vse it and because some Kings may not rightly governe therefore he will have the right judgment in the people which he so much despises and which as it hath been the meanes of the Rebells present power so it hath been in all ages the cause of confusion and miserie to states and Kingdomes The reason judgment and conscience of a Parliament is not therefore in vaine because not infallible it is most probable that a King will follow the best Councell but it cannot be presumed that in Parliaments the greater-part will continue subjects if they may be Kings by saying they wil be and it was the wisedome of our Ancestours that would have no lawes made without the will of their King and they never trusted such as they chose further then to present their desires and offer their Councell vnto him and consent to what should be ordeyned by him with advice of the Lords it were in vaine to have a King if he were not impowred to judge of Councells or if lawes might be obtruded vpon him and the people without him The present Calamities testifie how vnhappily and absurdly a Parliament seekes to Commaund whose office is to Councell and pretend Councell vseles vnles they may deprive him whome they advise of the benifit of Councell taking away his power to vse it To what end doe they Councell if there be none to be Councelled but all to be commaunded That thus these promises made vpon experience of hard sufferings and his most mortified retirements being thorowly sifted containe nothing much different from his former practices His Majest expressions being thorowly sifted containe nothing in them but pious and Princely considerations and from libellers owne mouth all men may see that his Majest practices against which they maliciously exclaime were consonant to Religion and Justice and only opposite to Trayterous and schismaticall licence It was the libellers profession to parrallell his Majest faire spoken words as he calls them to his owne farr different Actions and now his words and deedes being sifted by malice it selfe are not much different the libeller is some what ingenuous to discover his owne vanitie and falshood He leaves it to prudent foresight what fruites in likelyhood his Majest restorement would have produced We have seene already the fruites of the inhumane cruelties exercised vpon him and the continuance and encrease of those abominable impieties that attend such Actions where of the libeller makes a large profession who confidently obtrudes lavish lyes for knowne truths petulant insolence for sober sense maximes of villany for sound Arguments which are the bitter fruites of disobedience and Rebellion To that part of the section which he calls the devout of it and modelled into the forme of a private Psalter he objects nothing but his spleene that it is not to be admired more then the Arch-Bishopps late Breviary and other manualls and handmaides of Devotion and these he calls the lip worke of every Prelaticall leiturgist quilted out of Scripture Phrase with as much ease and as litle neede of Christian diligence or judgment as belongs to the compiling of any ordinary saleable peece of English Divinitie that the shopps value The Authors of leiturgies and helpes to devotion have their memory blessed by the benifit which many devout soules have acknowledged to have received from their labours and the crueltie which bloody Rebells exercised on the person of the late Arch-bishopp and their other barbarismes towards the Prelates to please that kennell by whome they acted their Rebellion hath satisfied the world of the nature of Sectaries of whose bloody disposition many by sheepes-clothing were much deceived Quilting of Scripture Phrase was wont to be the prayse of their long winded Lecturers who vsed it more for sound then sense but it seemes their spirit is changed The libeller will hardly gett credit vnles with those for whose sake he doth not professe to write that is his wise and well principled men the Sectaries if he affirme that there is more neede of Christian diligence in the bold and extempore bablinge of their senseles zealots then the compiling of those Leiturgies and Manualls he mentions And such as have observed the presumption of this rabble in their prayers will beleive they hate diligence as much as they want judgment Why English or saleable should dininish the esteeme of Divinitie is not vnderstood but becaused they are common termes he would have his readers vnderstand that they signifie nothing but common matter and he expects that some will thinke English and saleable Divinitie of no regard though they vnderstand no other But he proceedes such a kinde of Psalmastry or other verball devotion without suteable deedes cannot perswade any of Zeale and righteousnes in the person
prosecution vpon the cleerest evidence that could be produced It is the Method of the false Sectaries to insinuate an opinion of their vertue by rigid censures of others whereby they draw men from observation of their owne lewdenes offensive to sobrietie and thence the libeller calls his Majest guard the spawne and shipwracke of Tavernes Such as were of his Majest guard may no thinke to escape these hipocrites thinke to hide their blood guiltines pride robbery perjury oppression by reproaching their Enemies with Stewes and Tavernes The principall zealotts of this Rebellion were the tags and raggs of the people who were glad to heare voluptuous living and riott objected to the Kings partie that they might compare their beggery and base condition before other mens vices whether true or fayned If the house of Commons declar'd that the comming of those Soudiers Papists and others with the King was to take away some of their members and in case of opposition or denyall to have falne vpon the house in a hostile manner they shewed themselves men of as litle creditt as this Author for the world knowes that they neither had nor pretended proofe of such a purpose their declarations in that kinde are no truer then their professions of loyaltie If the house had denyed their members and opposed was it lesse then Treason He inferrs from the Kings profession if he purposed any violence or oppression against the innocent then let the Enemy persecute my soule treade my life to the ground lay my honour in the dusi that God hath judged and done according to the verdict of his owne mouth The king well knew his Enemy persecuted his soule when he wrote this and that he was in the hands of those that would take away his life but assassination was noe proofe of his guilt nor of Gods judgment of his cause and these words vsed by the prophett and him are not an imprecation for tryall but a deprecation of the offence and it was not to satisfie men but to acknowledge his judgment of the Cryme to God The kings partie are assured that the proceedings against him were odious to God man and this Action touching the members was noe other then necessary Justice and there appeares not any purpose of violence or oppression of the innocent and in vaine doe murderers seeke to shelter themselves from the guilt of their impieties by pretending Gods secret Counsells The sinceritie of his Majest heart is noe lesse manifest because he sell into the hands of wicked men who cannott treade his honour in the dust which outluies their fury and though they murthered him his life is with the Lord and their infamy endles God will bring their wickednes vpon their owne heads in his due time The Kings admirers may see their madnes to mistake this booke But all men see his madnes to traduce the booke and to prophane and prostitute all things sacred to his lewde detractions who sayes it is his doomesday booke not like that of William the Norman his Predecessour Thus making the common appellation of the greate day of the Lord an inducement to vilifie the kingly office which must be a day of wrath to such mockers as aske where is the promise of his comminge which did theis Traytours expect they would not proceede soe presumptuously in their wickednes and compile a booke of it against that day The Admirers of the kings booke are noe white mistaken but they see the breaker very much mistaken in his coufidence that thinkes all men madd because himselfe is soe and they were madd indeede if they received his sense or saw not that only rage art the excellency of the kings Booke not right vnderstanding made him seeke these silly objections and face them with such ostentation Vpon the INSOLENCIE Of the TUMULTS HE must confesse to have heere a neate and well couch'd invective against Tumults which surely ought not to be answeared with a impudent defence of them The misfortunes of Princes are the mirth of Rebells and therefore he sayes Rehoboam the son of Solomon could not have compofed a better It was not only the son of Solomon but his Father David and himselfe too that felt the fury and danger of Rebells and Rehoboams misfortune doth not mittigate the sinfull Revolt of the ten Tribes which the Scripture calls Rebellion and this Author scoffing at his baste to escape their fury shewes how affectionate he is Rebellion That the Tumults at whitchall were not soe dangerous at these at sechem he cannot affirme for those Tumults at whitehall have produced greater impieties and Calamities then those at sechem and those Tumults have since felt the scourge of their violence as those at sechem soone did their revolt being punisht by God who gave them a King in his rage that brought in Idolatry with their Rebellion which after many sore afflictions at last rooted them out of their land and they ceased to be a people He would insinuate that because this is a neate invective therefore the Kings Houshold Rhetorician made it but this hath as litle credit as his exceptions have truth or weight That the matter considerable is whether these were Tumults or noe next if they were whether the King himselfe did not cause them Doubtles he would not have it beleived that there could be any Tumults nor any Rebellion against him for if there could be any he knowes themselves have committed it The knowne lawes allow noe causes of Tumults from provocation for it soe tumults may judge of lawes and law makers as these defended tumults presumed to doe His first cause is the Kings unwillingnes to call the Parliament but theis tumults were after a parliament called His not enduring to be overswayed by them Were this a cause of Tumult or Rebelliō ther would never be cause wanting of such disorders in any kingdome or state when the Councells of kings must be subject to vulgar appeales Tumults must reforme the kings Judgment His often repeated imposture of the Kings tempting the English or scotch Armyes is grossely introduced for a cause of the Tumults when the Tumults preceded these suppositions and we may see what causes this man will have of Tumults that will make subsequent Actions the grounds of them The profering the fower northerne Counties to the scotts was an invention as ridiculous as the Authors commendation of an honest discovery of a thing never acted He formerly spake of Timpanies and Queene Maries cushion which might have caused him to have forborne such a grosse and exploded a forgery That the Parliament or people descerned a malignant partie was no other then the artifice of the conspiratours in Parliament to devise names which the people vnderstood not and suggest terrours to them from things that had not entred into their thoughts and of that nature was this name of malignant-faction brought foorth by the Junto to amuse the people but he might well remember that not
as much as the name of malignant partie was hatch'd when the Tumults begun The Rebellion in Ireland was then broken out which was not till neere six moneths after the insolence of the Tumults began and that Rebellion in all probabilitie tooke example and encouragement from these Tumults The 〈◊〉 conspiracie of Scotland while the King was 〈…〉 of a peece the 〈◊〉 having preceeded the Kings journey thither that conspiracie 〈◊〉 knowes vanis he into ayre could give noe more occasion of Tumults then of this Authors remembrance That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of unknown persons 〈…〉 the Citie was as vnknowne to such as were then 〈◊〉 as the persons to this Author and as such resort is knowne to be noe cause of such Tumults The King being returned from Scotland dismisses that guard which the Parliament thought necessary in the middest of soe many dangers to have about them It s true the conspiratours in Parliament eyther from the guilt of their consciences or advantage to their plots pretended apprehension of danger that they might have a guard which they might make vse of to excoute their designes and affront the members of the house that refused to cuncurr to their plotts and therefore noe guard pleased them but such as were composed cheifely of such persons as made vp the Tumults The King dismissed the guard which the Parliament thought necessary put in another contrary to the priviledge of that high Court and by such a one commaunded as made them noe lesse doubtfull of the guard it selfe It s very likely that they had as litle doubt of danger from any other as from the guard for they sought to create dangers to others feared none to themselves but from their owne guilt It s well knowne there was not the least appearance of danger but from what that faction intended and such desire of a guard was noe lesse vnknowne then ridiculous to all former Parliaments and it was soe farr from being a priviledge to that high Court that the leaders of the faction in the lower house procured a vote to desire it of the king And how could it be contrary to the priviledge of that high Court for him to change the guards that had first placed them The guard which the king appointed was commaunded by the cheife officer of that guard and because he gave commaund to keepe of the Tumults therefore the Rebell faction concluded their busnies could not be done by such a guard nor such a Commaunder Which they therefore sayes he discharge deeming it more safe to fitt free though without a guard in open danger then enclosed with a suspected safetie And in what safetie sate they that were threatned and abused by those Tumults every day The visible cause of a guard was the Tumults but the cause why guards were desired was to act the same for which the Tumults were raysed and the danger pretended was a deceite for they that desired a guard would rather be without one then not have a Commaunder of their owne faction and the houses found noe inconvenience in the want of a guard but in the insolencie of the Tumults which the seditious faction invited would not have them hindred by any guards The people therefore least their worthyest and most faithfull Patriotts who had exposed themselves for the publique and whome they saw now left naked should want aide or he deserted in the middest of these dangers came in multitudes though vnarmd in wittnes their fidelitie and readines in case of any violence offred to the Parliament It hath been aldeady observed that these Tumults preceded the desire of guards and they were soe farr from being acceptable to the Parliament that the house of Lords desired their restraint and invited the lower house to concurre with them to suppresse these Tumults and though the factions partie withstood the motion yet it was thought necessary by a greate part of that house to joyne with the Lords in that desire And how could they wittnes their fidelitie to the Parliament when soe greate a part thought them a greivance And why did they menace and assault the members of both houses Why did they prescribe resolutions to the Parliament and in case their demaunds were not graunted denounce to rout to the opposers Is this fidelitie to the Parliament This Author neede not seeke such bliede excuses for Tumults that justifies open Treason noe doubt those his faithfull Patriots well-vnderstood that their greatest danger was from the law which they had violated and they would be secure by subverting it and engaging multitudes in their owne guilt The king had reason to send into the Citie to for bid such resorts and nothing but sedition could encourage or permit them The supposition of the kings inâ—ying to see the peoples love devolved on mother object shewes that Rebellious inclinations were the desire and strength of the leaders in the lower house the envying may be properly changed into indignation that subjects should breake their dutie and become workers of their owne miserie such Tumultuous licence had not soe much probabilitle to hinder any action of the King towards the Parliament as to ruine the Parliament kingdome The faction feared not any action of his Majest but endeavoured to promote their owne designes against him He is now come to tells vs some reasons why the Parliament petitioned the king for a guard after they were content to sit without one and while be maintanies a power in his imaginary Parliament to murther the king he presents them petitioning the king for a guard and their words which he will not take notice of are worth observing The Knights Citizens and Burgesses of the house of Commons your faithfull and loyall subjects who are ready to lay downe their lives and fortunes and spend the last dropp of their blood to maintaine your Crowne and royall person in greatnes and glory doe oust themselves downe at your Royall feete with such elaborate deceites did they hope to perswade the king to give them a guard to oppresse himselfe Their subsequent actions have been a full Comment vpon theise wicked dissimulations and their false professions convince the present shamelesse challenges of power in theis that thus addresse themselves That blood was drawne in a fray or two at the Court gate and even at their owne gate in Westminster hall Are not these proper motives for a Parliament to call for guards A Constable of a Parish might more reasonably set a guard about his house after the parting of a fray then the Parliament seeke for an armed guard vpon such an occasion If the tumults were soe seditious as to shew their insolencie at the gate of white hall or Westminster hall and any of them were wounded in such disorderly resorts it had been just and necessary to forbid their comming in such numbers and provoking such danger and their continuance is a mainfest signe that these tumults were not the voluntary motion of the people
have perused the Roman story he must acknowledge many causses Tumults in that state It like he holds that Demetrius and his Craftsmen had a cause for their Tumults and surely it was not soe violent as the Tumult he defends And if all Tumults and Rebellions be caused by ill Government we may reasonably conclude that the people needed not Governours that knew soe well how to governe themselves and did never judge a misse of the Actions or Councells of their Governours The libeller at first said he tooke vp the gantlet for libertie and the Commonwealth which he hath now expounded to be for destruction of libertie and Kingdome by Tumults If they prove extreame pernicious that is the Tumults the were never counted so to Monarchy but to Monarchical Tyrany Who doubts but Rebels wil pretend Tyrany oppression Did ever reasonable man before this vnreasonable creature pretend that Tumults were not pernicious to all governments can any maÌ„ conceive that they wil not grow extream if not prevented but left to their owne violence what is become now of his judgment of the peoples excessive and extravagant motions are these none in Tumults Can any Rebellion want a pretence if the extreamitie of it be a proofe of Tyrany in the Rulers There can hardly be supposed an assertion more voyde of truth modestie What publique wickednes was there ever acted to the subversion of Kingdomes but by Tumults How many vsurpations how many murthers of most vertuous Princes have been acted by Tumâ—ults But this libeller glories in those exploites of the rabble and makes the Calamities they have brought he on others the matter of his mirth Extreames he sayes are at most Antipathy If then the King soe extreamely flood in feare of Tumults the inference will endanger him to be the olliert extreame Where doth he finde in his learning that Tumults and Tyrany are at any Antipathy which are but one and same thing for was there ever greater Tyrany exercised then by Tumults And are not the lawes of all states most severe against Tumults And can there be any inference from thence that the Government is Tyrany are not Government and Tumults at most Antipathy It s a certen Rule that all watchfull Governours wil feare Tumults The King had just cause to seare the Galamities ensuing the violence of Tumults and this trisler vainely infers his fancied extreames from a prudent foresight and if there were noe other example of causeles and mischeivous Tumults then those the King complained of they only were sufficient to instruct the world vpon what mistaken rumours they are raysed and vnto what desperate impieties they proceede He never thought any thing more to presage the mischeifes that ensued then those Tumults To this sayes the libeller Those Tumults were but the milde effects of an evill and injurious Raigne Tumults the prodigious and pestilentiall raignes get vp in a milde and gracious Government wherein seditious and trayterous factionists take libertie to defuse their venom among the people and milde tumults and loyall Rebellion are phrases agreable to this mans modestie Those signes were to be read more apparent in his rage and purposed revenge of those clamours of the people That those tumults might overcome the patience of any King the severitie vsed vpon lesse provocations by others is a full evidence but his Majest moderation was constant rage and revenge being only legible in his Enemies That tumults did presage the mischeifes ensuinge al knowing men concurr with his Majest and descerne the libellers servile defence of popular clamours Not any thing portends more Gods displeasure against a nation then when he suffers the clamours of the vulgar to passe all bounds of law and reverence to Authoritie to this he sayes it portends rather his displeasure against a Tyranous King As God sometimes gives an evil King to a people soe whenever he destroyes that King by the contemptible vulgar it is a signe of the encrease of his displeasure and seldome or never was any King good or evill soe destroyed but the peoples sufferings were encreased That those whome he calls a supplicating people and that did noe hurt to law or authoritie but stood for it in the Parliament were a Rebell rabble cannot be doubted since the libeller defends them and he cannot be believed they did noe hurt to law in as much as he defends the subversion of law and the attempts of this supplicating people that were in order to that end This supplicating is one of his abolisht Ceremonies The libeller tells that they ought to have stood for law the world knownes they did the contrary and he is wittnes both of their guilt and his owne falshood That they invaded the honour and freedome of the two houses To this he sayes It is his officious accusation not seconded by the Parliament who had they seene cause were best able to complaine And how were they able when they were threatned if they did complaine and because the Parliament is overawed by Tumults that they cannot complaine therefore their fredome is not invaded But how shamelesly he charges the King with the officious accusation he tells vs in the next words for he sayes if they strucke or menaced any as the King said they were such as had more relation to the Court then to the Common wealth Enemies not Patrons of the people Is not the honour and freedome of the two housce invaded when their members ar strucke and menaced And is it an officious accusation to say soe Can this man pretend the name of Parliament when he will allow the base rabble to abuse them at pleasure And could any man but he tell the King that persons elected were not sent to be Cavelled at by him or entertained with an vndervalue of their temper judgment or affection and heere defend the rascallitie in striking and menacing the members and not only vndervaluing their temper judgment and affection but handling them as cullions Never was libeller more passionately malicious more blindly absurd more wilfully false yet he thinkes he hath a reserve against all opposition for he sayes if their petitioning vnarmed were an invasion of both houses what was his besetting it with armed men Is striking and menacing soe quickly returned to petitioning Is it a way of answeare not to speake to the question Did ever Kings of England come without an armed guard to the Parliament and doe they beset the house when the guard is at the doore And can he say that the Kings comming with his guard to the house is a greater invasion of the honour freedome of the houses then the striking and menacing the members by the Tumults Doubtles he had consulted better to his credit to have said nothing then that which was soe different from the case himselfe had stated and his repetition of petitioning and supplicating people is noe other then the noyse of the Ephesian Rabble that greate is Diana of the Ephesians The
delivered from such madnes and yet this libeller sayes that the king praying to be delivered from the Tumults prayeth to be delivered from the people and blasphemously concludes God save the people from such intercessours And we cannot beleive that God is in his thoughts whose mouth soe often abuseth his name Vpon the Bill for TRIENNIALL PARLIAMENTS and for setling this c. HE sayes the Bill for Trienniall Parliaments was a good Bill and the other for setling this at that time very expedient And this he sayes in the Kings owne words was noe more then what the world was full confirmed he might in Iustice reason honour and conscience graunt them for to that end he affirmes to have done it This man hath a confirmed enmitie against truth cannot make a right recitall The Kings words are that the world might be fully confirmed in my purposes at first to contribute what in Iustice reason honour and conscience I could to the happy succes of this Parliament I willingly past the Bill for Trienniall Parliaments The greatenes of the trust which his Majest put vpon the people by passing that Bill was a strong Argument that he would deny nothing which in Justice reason honour and conscience he might graunt not that the world was confirmed he might graunt that Bill in reason honour and conscience in respect of the matter of it for a greate part of the world was of opinion he might with better reason have denyed it had not his desire to shew his purposes of contributing what he could to the happy successe of the Parliament moved him And they might be confirmed thereby of his purposes to deny nothing which in Justice reason honour and conscience he could contribute to the happy successe of the Parliament It is the Kings manner to make vertues of his necessities and that neither prayse nor thankes are due to him for these beneficiall Acts. It cannot be expected that Rebells will retaine gratitude that have cast of loyaltie but let vs looke on his reasons and the first is that this first Bill graunts much lesse then two former statutes yet in force by Edw. the 3. that a Parliament should be called every yeare or oftner if neede were Either the libeller is vaine in producing this instance or in commending the Bill that gave much lesse then two former lawes in force and he must make the Parliament very inconsiderate that would soe much Importune a law soe farr short of what former lawes had enacted His ancient law booke called the mirror and his late Treatise that Parliaments by our old lawes were to be twice a yeare at London carry as litle Authoritie as cleerenes what those Parliaments were they mention but neither the statutes nor law bookes did ever affirme the right of calling Parliaments in any other then the King or that he might not deferr the calling of them if he saw cause and these statutes were made to declare the subjects dutie to attend the King in his Parliament once a yeare or oftner if neede were and there was noe reason why oftner should have been inserted into the law if any obligation were intended thereby vpon the King And its contrary vnto the writt whereby Parliaments are called that the time of Parliaments should be defined for it is recited to be an Act of Councell to call a Parliament which needed not if it were necessary at a prefixed time The second Bill he sayes was soe necessary that nothing in the power of man more seemed to be the stay of all things from ruine then that Act. We are sure that nothing did more confirme the designes of the Traytours nor hasten that ruine of the Kingdome they have wrought then that Act. All men descerne the fraudulent artifices vsed to gaine that Bill by pretending publique debts which seditious faction had contracted and intended to encrease for the carrying on of their Rebellion and his Majest in graunting that Bill hoped to take of those occasions of it the Reports which they cast out among the people of his vnwillingnes to rayse money for discharge of the Armyes These charges were occasioned by the Kings ill stewardshipp but the world satisfied it was from a trayterous conspiracie of the guides of this Rebellion He alleadges his needeles raysing of two Armies to withstand the Scotts which noe man but a profest Rebell can soe call for should he have raysed noe Army but left all to the mercy of the invader next he had beggerd both himselfe the publique When by this libellers owne confession the King had received noe supplies from the publique for raysing those Armies and these shameles Traytours blush not to talke of the Kings beggering of the people when the greate plentie his Government had enriched them with is soe visible in those vast leavies which the Rebells have since made vpon them The King left vs vpon the score of his needy Enemies If they had not been too much friends to the traytours of England there had been noe score to them for all men know whatever they received from England was by the contrivance of the Trayterous faction in Parliament to accomplish their ends To disengage him greate summs were borrowed Which its well knowne was not to disengage the King but to advance the designes of the Traytours who dealt vnder hand with some of the Scotts to protract the Treatie that the charges might be encreast The errours of his Government had brought the Kingdomes to such extreames as were incapable of recovery without the absolute continuance of this Parliament They never did one act after that Bill but in order to the Kingdomes confusion and all men saw there were noe extreames to be recovered at the time of passing that Bill but the returne of the Scotts and the disbanding the faction in Parliament and the only recovery had been by setting an end to the Parliament which they that made it their propertie could not endure The King past these Acts vnwillingly It cannot be doubted but the King foresaw the danger of both and the libeller might have seene in the first section of this Chapter that his Maj was not without doubt that what he intended for a remedy might prove a disease beyound all remedy and though to avoyde a Civill warr he made some concessions in hope to bring the people to see their owne good which might turne to his and their greater mischeife if by them ill applyed yet his Majest deserves prayse and thankes for such Acts of grace and the necessitie which this libeller soe impudently vrges to take of his Majest just thankes was the danger of a Civill warr which his Majest sought by these Act to prevent and might have entred into with lesse hazard before the passing of these Bills then after The libeller only encreases the infamy of the Rebells ingratitude and his owne impudence by obtruding necessities to take of the Kings grace in passing those Bills and it had not the
shape of a Masterly brow but gracious aspect in his Majest saying the greatnes of the obligation above their deserts that he had put vpon them by passing the first Bill and the Masterly brow suites not with the following scurrilous conceite that the kings recital of the obligation he had putt vpon them by that Act was as if he had beggd an office to a sort of his desertles groomes and these desertles groomes now Rule the new Republique there being none that had the least desert that would accept such a Trayterous office That the King passed the latter Bill to prevent the encrease of the present disorders not out of consideration of the fittnes of that Bill he neede not spend time to prove and his consent was moved from the reason of the time not the matter and the libeller hath well observed that they had offended him much more after the passing of the former Bill which is not to their creditt but shame It was feare made him passe the Bill least the Parliament and people incensed by his conspiracies should resent his doings if he had added the denyall of this only meanes to secure themselves Either his memory is short or his absurditie vnnaturall that soe lately said the kings feares were pretences and does he thinke that his Majest could feare their resenting more at that time then afterward besides his supposed fantasticall conspiracies were not as much as named or spoken of to Parliament or people at the time of passing that Bill and there cannot be imagined any cause of his Majest passing that Bill but his earnest desire to avoyde a Civil warr and assure his people of his purpose by committing so greate a trust vnto them neither can there be imagined other cause why the passing of that Bill was soe much importun'd by the Rebells but to secure themselves for being conscious of their owne guilt they knew themselves vnsecure vnles they gained a power over King and lawes The libeller cannot excuse neither the ingratitude nor disloyaltie of the Rebel partie in Parliament from the Kings consent to these lawes to present disorders and mischeifes which in themselves had not been fitt for his consent at another time and their insolence in binding him first of all his Predecessours shewes their corruption and guilt that would vse soe much violence disloyaltie to a Prince whose gratious Government had least of all his Predecessours provoked it The King taxes them with vndoing what they found well done The libeller sayes They vndid nothing in the Church but Lord Bishopps Liturgies Ceremonies high Commission judged worthy by all true Protestants to be throwne out of the Church These Protestants which are true only to him will judge the like of all Kings and Rulers of State and all orders of the Church that are not of their Bedlem patterne These false Sectaries talke of Church true Protestants just as they doe of Parliament as long as it consists of their owne limbs it must be obeyed but if it dissent from their Commaunds then they are worse then Ceremonies in Religion Doubtles al true Protestants abhorre this den of Schismatickes that boast of their Rebellious defacing of the Church and hate their societie there having not been yet any true Protestant Church that ever pretended that Lord Bishopps Leiturgies Ceremonies or high Commission were worthy to be throwne out of the Church the greatest part of Protestants retaining the like The vndid nothing in the state but irregular and grinding Courts The Courts they tooke away were judged by al wisemen to have been profitable to the Kingdome and fitt to be continved and the best Governours sometimes graunt that to the peoples irregularities thereby to preserve them from proceeding to their owne ruine which were fitt to deny at another time it s their Zeale to publique safetie not feare and dissimulation as the libeller calls it It was a greater confidence of the people to put into one mans hand a power to Summon and dissolve Parliaments then the King put in the people by the 〈◊〉 of continuance of the Parliament And if the libeller could shew the Act whereby the people put that power in the King he had said some thing But how had they put it into his hands or what confidence was it if they might take it away when they list This man cannot see truth through his owne contradictions while he acknowledges the Kingly power to Summon and dissolve Parliaments forthwith adds that Kings could not dissolve Parliaments till all greivances were redressed and then where was the kings power to dissolve or the peoples confidence This is he sayes not only the assertion of this Parliament a strong proofe but of our ancient lawe bookes that noe man ever read which averr it to be an vnwritten law of Common right soe engraven in the hearts of our Ancestours and by them soe constantly enjoyed and claimed as that it needed not enrolling this is pretty poetry that because a law is no where to be found therefore it was engraven in the hearts of our Aucestours where are those law bookes But how many hundred yeares since was this engraving worne out surely if there had been either such an vnwritten law and soe constantly enjoyed and claimed it would have been often enrolled ere now but the libeller expected applause for his conceite not creditt to his assertion If the Scotts could charge the King with breach of their lawes for breaking vp that Parliament without their consent it were vnreasonable that the wisedome of England should be soe wanting to it selfe as not to provide against the not calling or arbitrary dissolving of Parliaments If they had provided against it where was the confidence he talked of It followes not that because the Scotts charged the King with breaking of the Parliament without their consent that therefore the King offended in it neither was the wisedome of the English nation wanting to it selfe in leaving the calling and dissolving of Parliaments Arbitrary to the King it being a power essentiall to Monarchy and we have seene that the taking away of that power dissolves the Government and drawes confusion and miserie vpon the state and it cannot be avoyded but that from a power erected to affront the soveraigntie there must follow sedition and Civill discord People must depend vpon their Kings grace and goodnes for redresse of their greivances whose power and safetie consists in their welfare not seeke by violence to be their owne Carvers and the people never found soe greate suffering by submission to their Kings as by seeking wayes to oppose them It appeares that if this Bill of not dissolving were an vnparalleld act it was a knowne and Common right That it was an vnparalleld Act he doth not deny that it was a Common right noe where appeares and how can that be an vnparalleld Act that is a Common right He sayes it s not enrolled and how then shall it appeare to be
Common right What needed written Acts when as it was anciently esteemed part of his Corwne oath His Crowne oath is well knowne and may not be tryed by estimation but inspection The libellers estimation hath as litle proofe as authoritie He referrs the lawerlie mooting of this point to a booke called the rights of the Kingdome written it seemes by some Author of as much fidelitie in his quotations as this libeller in his narrations and to other law Tracts being neither his Element nor proper worke since the booke which he hath to answeare pretends to reason not to Authoritie And he holds reason to be the best Arbitratour and the law of law it selfe And it appeares by his writings that reason is neither his Element nor worke heere for had he vse of reason he would not referr vs to bookes that are onely of Authoritie to prove the ignorance and boldnes of the writer neither could reason judge it a law that a king should not dissolve a Parliament till all particular greivances were considered though the setting of it might prove an incurable greivance but his reason would have the Parliament defend the Kingdome with their votes as the Roman Senatours their Capitall with their robes against the Gaules The King must not be at such distance from the people in judging what is better and what worse That the people are not the best judges of what is better and what is worse the libeller himselfe acknowledges saying they are excessive in all their motions and is it not reason that the King then should be at such distance in judging but the libeller seekes to be at greate distance with truth that sayes the Kings owne words condemned him that he had not knowne as well with moderation to vse as with tarnestnes to desire his owne advantages Where as the King spake not of himselfe but others his words were If some men had knowne as well with moderation to vse as with earnestnes to desire advantages of doing good or evill Doth this man thinke reason the law of law or falshood the Master of both law and reason that soe palpably belyes the booke before him The King sayes a continuael Parliament he thought would keepe the Commonwealth in tune To this sayes to Libeller Iudge Commonwealth what proofes he gave that this boasted profession was ever in his thought The king doubtles thought not that every Parliament would keepe the Commonwealth in tune but a Parliament that preferred publique good before private faction The King saith as he relates him some gave out that I repented me of that setling Act. The Libeller sayes his owne Actions gave it out beyound all supposition for be went about soe soone after to abrogate it by the sword Heere the Libeller omitts a materiall word which the King vsed which was soone for the Kings words are that I soone repented It is well knowne that the wicked vse which the Traytours made of that setling Act might give the king just cause to repent him of it but as the king vsed not the sword till many Moneths after the passing of that Bill soe the cause of his Armes were the violent and Trayterous Actions of a faction not the abrogation of that Bill The King calls those Acts which he confesses tended to their good noe more Princely then friendly contributions as if sayes the Libeller to doe his dutie were of Courtesie and the giving backe of our Liberties stood at the mercy of his contribution He would have it beleived that Parents can doe nothing for their childrens good out of favour all is of dutie and noe thankes belongs to them from their children nor any from subjects to their Soveraignes or rulers for the greatest benefitts they receive by good Government and all the vigilance watchfullnes pietie of Princes for the peoples good is not at all thankes worthy theis are the Maximes of Rebells and if Kings will not yeelde vp their power they may be compelled and the quitting of Government for which Kings must give account to God is by theis mens Divinitie the giving backe of liberties being noe other then to give licence to all wickednes and beare the sword in vaine The kings sayes he doubts not but the affections of his people will compensate his sufferings for those Acts of confidence To this sayes the libeller not his confidence but his distrust brought him to his sufferings and he trusted nere the sooner for what he tells of their pietie and Religious strictnes but rather hated them as Puritans whome he allwayes sought to extirpate The libeller himselfe cannot deny but that if the king had not had confidence that those Acts of his would not have beē abused he would not have graunted them for if the had not been so confident it had been much more eligible for him to hav run the peril of a war without graunting them and wee have seene by experience that many as well as the king were deceived in those that profest pietie and Religious strictnes and though the king had just cause to hate the faction of the hipocriticall Puritan yet he thought that there could not soe much impietie lurke in many vnder such profession of pietie and Religious strictnes as hath since exceeded the most blasphemous Atheist and had the king sooner distrusted he had in humane reason prevented much of the Calamitie that hath befallen himselfe and his kingdome That those Acts of the Kings did not argue that he meant peace knowing that what he graunted out of feare he might assoone repeale by force It is noe argument that he would doe it because he might doe it but it is one of the libellers vsuall Arguments to conclude from the possibilitie to the being and there cannot be a greater Argument of a mans desire of peace then to part with his right to prevent a warr and by this rule of the libeller there must never be peace nor end of Rebellion but by the destruction of the king because their guilt is still vnsecure That the Tumults threatned to abuse all acts of grace and turne them into wantonesse This sayes the libeller is abusing of Scripture not becomming such a saint to adulterate sacred words from the grace of God to the acts of his owne grace And is it an abuse of Scripture to say the King did Acts of grace and whence then comes it to be an abuse of Scripture to say the people abused the Kings grace or turned it into wantonesse was it not a sin of wantonesse in the people and may it not be soe exprest without any abuse of Scripture Scripture is abused when it is applyed to a prophane ludicrous sense but the words heere are not transferred from a right signification There are diverse words that signifie both divine and humane Actions there is noe abuse of them in either sense And the libeller having excepted to the vse of an expression of Scripture presently makes bold with Scripture saying that
he hath made of the kings single judgment for the Lords house may not have a negative in his judgment notwithstanding their number But why is it offred the king if he may not reject it and whence hath it been that so many Bils have been rejected in al ages without any complaint When Kings come soe low as to fall vpon Philosophy which before he neither valued nor vnderstood is a signe they are then put to their last trump If the king had not valued nor vnderstood Philosophy he could not have made soe pertinent vse of it and if the Libeller had vnderstood Philosophy or valued truth he would have given better signes of it Could not his Majest discourse of his reason and will but it must be out of the way or above his abilities But why is this a signe that kings are then put to their trump why the vse of Philosophy more then other learning Though kings come low Rebells will come to seeke corners to hide themselves He shewes not how Philosophy breakes the necke of their cause or how he hath made advantage of Philosophy against the king but we finde how his elaborate contradictions have broken the necke of his owne cause through out all his discourses The king sayes he cannot thinke the Majest of the Crowne of England to be bound by any Coronation oath in a blinde and brutish formalitie to consent to whatever its subjects in Parliament shall require And sayes the Libeller What Tyrant could presume to say more And the law it selfe Religion and reason never said lesse It cannot but be yeilded that the oath which bindes him to performance of his trust ought in reason to containe the summe of what his cheife trust and office is But what if it doe not is there an argument to be drawne from what the oath ought to be but is not The oath may containe the generall dutie of Justice right but it neither did nor could comprehend all the wayes of effecting it The libeller sayes that the Kings negative voyce is not contained in that oath But that oath oblidges him to governe by just lawes which comprehends a negative to all vnjust lawes and can it impose an obligation vpon the king of doing Justice and not give him a libertie of judging what is just or vnjust The Libeller sayes that his oath requires only his assent to those lawes which the people have already chosen or shall chuse there is noe such word in that oath and his mention of the Lattine and old English of that oath are of another sense that the libeller was conscious of therefore he sayes All reason admits that the people should not loose vnder a new king what freedome they had before but their freedome consists not in an exemption from soveraigne power It is the custome of Rebels to contradict corrupt al lawes vpō pretence of their private reason allow no reason but what concludes against just authoritie he wel knew there was not that double sense he assignes but we wil make his sens the kings oath if the peoples choise be referred to the time past it implies not that their choise was or ought to be a law though they had a choise in the laws made as stil they have they could not loose what they never had the Parliament which at first mētioned the kings oath acknowledged that as they did not determine the questiō how far foorth the king is oblidged to follow the judgmēt of his parliament so as to conclude that a new law might be mad without his consent so they acknowledge that the contrary may be truly inferred out of al they had said That if the King deny what the Parliament hath chosen he makes himselfe superiour to his whole Kingdome And who doubts but he is doe not they which take the oath of supreamacie acknowledge it The libeller sayes the generall maximes of Policie gainsay it The general maximes of Rebellion doe but Policy cannot It is impossible in Policy that he to whome every soule must be subject should not be superiour to them all Our owne standing lawes gainsay it as hath been cited in Remonstrances that the King hath two superiours the law and his Court of Parliament The merit of those remonstrances are neere the rate of this libell though as yet they never mentioned such standing lawes if there had been such standing lawes the Author would have found them enrolled but that he doth not how absurdly such a pretence is obtruded whē the superiotie of persōs places is in quesstiō to name the superiority of law which holds comparisō with sciences not with persōs that the Parliament should be above the king who is the head of the Parliament without whom a Parliament hath no being is as Monstrous to reasō as law it is impossible that the law cā say that the king hath no superiour but God say that the Parliament is his superiour the king might wel say that this was blinde brutish formalitie and no part of the law his oath or dutie but such brutish formalities Rebells vse to blinde the people The King and Peeres represent only themselves the Commons are the whole Kingdome Which is as apparently false as that the Common Councell of London are the whole kingdome the commons in Parliament have no power from the people to doe any thing without the king Lords Infinite mischiefes may grow while our safetie shall depend vpon the over weening reason of one man And we finde by experience that desperate ruine inevitably followes when our safetie depends vpon the agreement of a multitude It is the nature of sectaries to be wise in their owne conceite and thence come arrogance and contempt of Government it is a principall in their schisme to improve this naturall insolence and contemne all Estates and abilities of men dissenting from them though his Majest were of most eminent natural endowments this libeller cals him a man neither by nature nor nurture wise Which shewes he vnderstood not wisedome in others nor was sensible of his owne folly soe apparent to all his readers That a King should want breeding to make him wise is strange in the libellers owne judgment and that the experience breeding of the King was eminently extraordinary the world well knowes He calls the Kings negative his will the Parliaments demaunds advice May not their demaunds be willfull and his negative advised The nature and nurture of this libeller is disobedience and therefore will have the Kings wisedome to be will the Rebells rashnes wisedome and it is impossible that men who have sucked in such principles should ever be obedient to any Government studying only how they may disaffect subjects to it He sayes the Kings errour was imperious and force was vsed not to dispell errour out of his head but to drive it from of our neckes These Rebells sought to be imperious
peace was that which drew out the English to a needeles and dishonourable voyage against the spaniards at Cades It was that peace the Parliament desired and if the voyage proved successeles his Majest by preventing further danger and preserving peace notwithstanding the miscarriage which must be the dishonour only of the managers sufficiently testifies how wel he deserved of his people for the continuance of their peace and safetie He askes next what that was which lent our shipping to a Treacherous and Antichristian warr against the poore Protestants of Rochell What is this against our peace at home and though there were shipps of ours vsed against Rochel t is sufficiently knowne they were not lent against Rochell and the Dutch shipps which were vsed as ours were not lent to a Treacherous and Antichristian warr He askes what peace was that which fell to robb the french by sea to the imbarring all our marchants in that Kingdome Is not this man madd that will charge the vse of the shipping against Rochell for a Cryme and call it a Treacherous and Antichristian warr and presently charge the King for making warr against the french vpon the ground of vsing his shipps against Rochell and call it a robbing of the french by sea and is it possible to avoyde the losse of Marchants in case of hostilitie He proceedes to cry out on that vnblest expedition to the Isle of Ree doubtfull whether more calamitous in the succes or designe Was not the designe in the favour of Rochell did they not desire it and yet he calls the ill successe of that Action the betraying all the flower of our military youth and best Commaunders to a shamefull surprisall and execution And who betrayed them and to what purpose what advantage could his Majest have by such a losse And was the warr against Rochell Treacherous and Antichristian and the releife too But this Libeller is resolute to defie sence and reason now he hath spoken against the peace we enjoyed whereto doth it amount was there any interruption of our peace at home and was there not cause for these expeditions abroade If there were not the Parliament failed in their Councell to the King in advising the warr with spaine and complaining of the french for the misimployment of the shipps against Rochell If peace were intended vs at home what meant these billetted souldiers in all parts of the Kingdome Doth noth he know the meaning that mentions Cades and the Isle of Ree where they were imployed surely he is soe intent on words as he looses his Memory aswell as his other faculties But he hath found out a designe of German horse to subdue vs in our peacefull houses These German horse have made much noyse yet were never discovered and the King who was advised to make a warr in Germany and other places by the Parliament could not vse German horse but against England But what is all this to the greate measure of peace we enjoyed above other nations Can any man that reades this Libellers willfull impertinency judge other then that he fights blindfold who would extend these forraigne voyages which had not the face of warr at home and continved not beyound the fower first yeares of his Majest Raigne to diminish the measure of our peace soe long enjoyed and that in the middest of soe many miscarriages and conspiracies both at home and abroade For our Religion he sayes where was there a more ignorant prophane and vitious Clergie learned only in the antiquitie of their pride The pride of these Sectaries contemnes all learning antiquitie which condemnes their fanctasticall presumptuous novelezing The learning of the English Clergie is too well knowne to the world to receive any disreput from the Streechinge of night oules and of Kats Noe wise man could see what was left for other nations to admire or envie but to pittie Other nations saw who had enough to cause them to admire our happines not to pittie our condition and of this there is a large Testimony But sayes the libeller wealth and plentie in a land where Iustice Raignes not is no Argument of a florishing state but of neerenes rather to ruine commotion The blessings of God peace and plentie are often turned into wantonnesse and wickednes by the people and are often a signe by the peoples abuse of ensuing ruine or commotion and of this the present condition of England is a greate Testimonie but it was never denyed to be the florishing state of any nation and he will finde litle creditt to his supposition that Justice Raignes not where there is wealth and plentie in a land There were not some miscarriages only of Government which might escape And of that nature are all the particulars gathred by him if they had been true but an viniversall distemper and reducement to arbitrary Government There was a distemper and disaffection to Government in many seditious seducers but an viniversall distemper and reducement to Arbitrary Government could not consist with the oppression of that tranquillitie and securitie of the people which was visible to all men the losse whereof brought on by these Rebells is too late lamemted That his Majeest owned the Actions and protected the persons of men in highest favour with him is noe argument of this vinversall distemper no more then the vulgar cryes against rulers is an Argument of their miscarriage or the peoples moderation who will have persons removed from Government and yet not agree who shall succeede them It was an Argument of greate distemper in a people that cryed out against the Kings evill Councellours that could not judge of their Actions but of noe vinversall distemper in the Government neither could the king with pietie justice leave his Ministers to the malice of conspiratours and barbaritie of Tumults The king sayes whose innocent blood hath he shedd what widdowes or orphans teares can wittnes against him The Libeller thinkes he hath given an answeare by saying the suspected poysonnig of his Father not enquired into and he advanced who was aceused by Parliament to be Author of the fact and many yeares of cruell warr on his people in three Kingdomes It is a wonder to amazement that such whose language hath noe Limits of truth or modestie should not be able to forge a probable Calumnie the Records of the Parliament shew that noe man was accused for the poysoninge of the kings Father nor poysoninge named ct the fact was fully enquired into and all wittnesses examined that had any knowledge of Circumstances touching it and must this be the particular to prove the king guiltie of shedding blood We may see vpon what grounds they will draw blood that offer such pretences for taking the blood of their king Is it possible that a Tyrant in seventeene yeares Raigne could not be proved guiltie of the blood of one man And can a Rebellion be more apparently convinced then by the seeking a cause for it from
the resistance that is made against it and the endeavour to suppresse it Was ever a cause soe barren of excuse that had nothing but it s owne guilt for defence But he hath found out a scotchman not vnacquainted he sayes with the affaires who affirmes that there hath been more Christian blood shed by the Commission approbation and connivance of King Charles and his Father Iames in the latter end of their Raigne then in the ten Roman Persecutions And is not this a doughtie authoritie what could he say more to prove himselfe a false varlett Whoever saw or heard of this shedding of Christian blood is it possible that soe much blood should be shed and noe man know it but this Scotchman Was all the world soe negligent to take notice of it and did the Scotchman and this Author thinke that the blood of the late warr made vp this number they may then expect vengeance vpon themselves and their bloody crew for it either heere or heereafter They value such as suffred in the ten persecutions at the same rate they doe their King and their conscience and if they though persecution odious why doe they exercise a persecution vppon Christians as cruell as these persecuting Emperours He sayes not to speake of those many whippings and other corporall inflictions wherewith his Raigne alsoe before this warr was not vnbloody And is a Raigne bloody by inflicting death vpon robbers and murtherers or whipping and the Pillory vpon Cheates Infamous Libellers and seditious disturbers of Government but of these latter the number was very small not exceeding fower in seventeene yeares and these merited the punishment they had an higher had not exceeded their crymes Is the execution of law a bloody Raigne he findes none that suffred banishment nor any that died in prison but such as were restrained by ordinary Justice He cannot pretend an arbitrary power in any of this that the King infested the true Church is noe other language then what good Princes allwayes received from Sectaries who accuse allwayes for their restraint infesting the true Church but all men now see they are the malignant Compamy that infest the true Church the seducers of simple soules But he hath a proofe of blood above exception where no blood was drawne and that is the six members whome all men judged to have escaped no lesse then Capitall danger Doubtles they had merited Capitall punishment in the judgment of all knowing men That a just King may be offended for the escape of malefactours is easily beleived but that saying the birds are flowne argues much trouble is a secret to all men and a proverbe as often applyed in jest as earnest The libeller sayes that if some vulter in the mountaines could have spake he could not have vttered fitter words at the losse of his prey The excesses in blood and crueltie of theis Rebells cannot be expressed to the full by the savage nature of any Creature The grinning of doggs howling of wolves and hissing of Serpents are not more hideous to nature then the petulence of vile persons against kings are abominable to Religion and pietie Because Nero was vnwilling to sett his hand to the execution of a Common Malefactour and wishing he had not knowne letters he would prove the King prosecuting Traytours to have noe greate aversation to blood but it strongly proves a bloody conspiracie when the contrivers are held innocent and the King made the offender for seeking just punishment and the Triumphs of such as protected those persons and their impudent braving the King at his very doores argued their haste to the shedding of that blood which since hath covered the Land Touching the cause of the warr the King sayes It was not my withdrawing from whitehall for noe account in reason could be given of those Tumults where an orderly guard was graunted The libeller sayes that if it be a most certaine truth that the Parliament could never obtaine any guard fit to be confided in then some account of these pretended Tumults may in reason be given But if they be not only pretended but apparently Tumults there can be noe account given of them at least the libeller vndertakes it not and that they could not obtaine a guard fit to be confided in is false for they had a guard and Commaunder of their owne nomination though not the Earle of Essex The King askes whome did he protect against the Iustice of Parliament The Libeller sayes he endeavoured to rescue Strafford that was from their injustice if he had done soe But sayes the Libeller he endeavoured it though with the destruction of them and the Cittie commaunding admittance of new souldiers into the Tower And is it a necessary consequent that the admittance of new souldiers into the Tower were to the destruction of Parliament and Citie But did not such as like blood hounds wolves hunted the Earle of Strafford that they might not loose their prey and the sweetenes of their revenge in drinking his blood stirr vp the Tumults to the destruction of King Parliament and Kingdome What can be disputed with such a King in whose mouth opinion the Parliament it selfe was never but a faction and their Iustice noe Iustice but the Dictates and overswaying insolence of Tumults and rabbles The Parliament was never a faction in the Kings mouth but it is in every mans mouth that the Parliament hath been overswayed by a faction and a faction have called themselves the Parliament And how can the Libeller define a Parliament but he must acknowledge that those whome the King calls a faction were noe Parliament and that their Actions were noe Justice but the Dictates and overswaying insolence of Tumults and rabbles himselfe prooves it by the commendation he gives the Tumults for effecting these Acts which he now calls the Justice of the Parliament noe wise man could thinke such a rabble fit to Judge of Delinquents or that such men who fled from their fury were thereby culpable of the Crymes objected and the fairest Tryall would sooner have condemned to death these Tumultuous accusers then the parties accused But who can talke with such a man as this breaker that reputes Monarchy Tyrany order in the Church an imposed Religion and lawes worse then Ceremonies in Religion He compares the avoyding of his madd Iudicature to Catilnies flight and excepting to the Roman Senate and Cesars injecting scrupulous demurrs against the Decres of the senate vpon Lentulus and Cethegus But did either of them object that the power of Tumults overswayed the senate or that the senate wanted freedome and had oppressed the members of its If Catiline had set vp a senate as Caesar did afterward and these Rebells have in England oppressed the legal Government the exceptions had been very just but exceptions against particular senatours for private animosities cannot derogate from the judgment of the whole being free That such reasons were vrged for Strafford was never heard
naked people the ragged Regiment a formidable Army But if these doe not prove the King to have done the first act for it seemes he doubted it would not yet at Hull he is sure and if the King had fortified all or any of the Townes of his Kingdome is that the act of warr Is not the law evident that he may doe it and hath it not been the approved practice of all ages And if he beseidged Hull who began the warr they that surprized it or he that would recover it And yet the Libeller gravely concludes from this fardle that the King is truly charged with beginning the warr though the particulars themselves evince the contrary He sayes that at the Isle of weight he charged it vpon himselfe at the publique Treatie What he did at that Treatie is well knowne to be in order to the procuring of peace and though they that treated with him would have an Act to acquitt them for their securitie yet that could not alter the fact and the King tooke nothing on himselfe by consenting to passe an act if the Treatie tooke effect which act by law to whose interpretation only it was subject could not be expounded to charge the king with the beginning of that warr but so mainfest is the vntruth of their pretence that they would aide their cause by inferences from an Act of their owne importunitie and violence for their owne securitie He sayes the securing of Hull was noe surprisal but a timely prevention But was it not allwayes in the Kings power and Custodie before and what they did to Hull they did to his other Castles and is it noe surprizall to dispossesse those that are in possession He sayes it were folly beyound ridiculous to count our selves a free nation if the King against the Parliament might appropriate to himselfe the strength of a whole nation as his proper goods And is it lesse ridiculous to count themselves a free nation if the Parliament may appropriate to themselves all the strength of the kingdome as their owne proper goods against al the people are they more a free nation because they have many Masters Our nation justly accounted it selfe a free nation and yet a king had all the strength of the kingdome appropriated to him as his owne proper goods and they have seene how their libertie was preserved by that constitution how it hath been lost by vsurpation of this right in the name of Parliament The Parliament had never the life and death of lawes in their power and the people never thought it for their Securitie that they should and the Libeller may with as good reason call succeeding acts preventions aswell as this taking of Hull a Securing Are not the taking of Townes Acts of hostilitie vnder what name soever had not the taking of Hull been an Act of hostilitie in an Enemy And is it lesse in a Rebell The question is now of an act of hostilitie not the right of it and that the taking af a Towne is not an act of hostilitie wil be incredible to the meanest capacitie and noe lesse that the Parliament have a power of hostilitie against the king He sayes the law of the land is at best but the reason of Parliament And the reason of Parliament is noe reason if it differ from the opinion of Sectaries witnes his censure of voting the kings concessions a ground for peace it were as dissonant from law as reason that a kingly Government should be subject to the reason of a Major part in Parliament The King sayes they knew his cheifest Armes left him were those only which the ancient Christians were wont to vse against their persecutors prayers and teares At this the Libeller makes an exclamation O Sacred reverence of God respect and shame of men whither were ye fled when these hipocrisies were vttered Was the Kingdome at all that cost of blood to remove prayers and teares Shakespeare could not have framed a fitter exclamation for Rich. 3. Doubtles reverence of God respect and shame of men are fled from this man that makes this vaine prophane outcry Doth it follow that because the King got strength therefore he was possest of it when they rebelled against him doth not he reproach him that all his adherents hardly amounted to the making vp of one ragged Regiment strong enough to assault the vnarmed house of Commons And can he thinke there is a God that cryes out sacred reverence of God vpon occasion of these words of his Majest was ever king more destitute of aide and might more truly vse that expression then he Those thousands of Cavileers whose number he soe often despised and now advances are a conviction of his contempt of God and men and his prophanes is more abominable then any oaths curses and carouses he supposes And the numbers mustred on He worth Moore were a sufficient proofe of the Kings want of Armes to make a warr as they were then the matter of the Rebells scorne were not the Libeller as vaine as wicked he would not have mentioned the sale of the Crowne Iewells to buy Armes for a ground of his exclamation when nothing could shame him more were he capable of it for may not a man justly say that the cheifest Armes left a King were prayers teares when all his visible meanes to procure Armes were the Jewells of his Crowne those guns which were bought with the Jewells he calls deadly instruments of warr but the instruments of Rebells are harmeles and vnkilling Men of corrupt consciences thinke they may prophane the name of God at their pleasure by making their lewde constructions of words and Actions And although this libeller jeere at the Kings weakenes in the beginning of this warr which was visible to all the world the strength he found was vnexpected by his Enemies and that all men judged prayers and teares his cheifest Armes yet because strength came to him the Libeller calls Ammunition Regiments and Brigades prayers and teares his ordinary Armes being slander vntruth and prophanes In his next words he sayes they who fought for the Commonwealth have by the helpe of better prayers vanquished It seemes he holds not their prayers their cheifest Armes who trusted more in other Armes then their prayers and might thence have reasonably concluded that their succes was not given to their prayers but permitted for the sins scourge of the nation The King reckons not the want of the Militia in reference to his owne protection as his peoples Not consideringe sayes the Libeller how ill for seventeene yeares he had protected them and the miseries are like a forked Arrow it cannot be drawne out without incision of more flesh He hath told vs that those miseries of seventeene yeares were peace and plentie which those merciles Phisitians will cure by an endles warr letting out the blood and tearing the flesh of the afflicted people and wee now descerne what Phisike they intended
permitt that he should suffer soe much vpon a pretence of conscience It was the just judgment of God that he who was soe cruell and remorseles to other mens consciences should have a conscience soe cruell to himselfe And were not they that were soe cruell to his conscience condemned by their owne being heerein the instruments of hell to afflict the consciences of others but these miscreants can sport themselves with their owne sins and others sufferings Hath he made asmuch as a pretence of the Kings crueltie to any mans innocencie The Libeller recites that the King said he thought fit to deny some things in honour Policie though he could approve them which is not at al said by the King but that some things which a King might approve yet in honour Policie might be denyed at some time to some men And who doubts it can there be a want of such considerations in a King Good Princes thought it their happines to be allwayes graunting How could that be if it be true which he sayes they had nothing to graunt But good subjects never demaunded that which should make their King vnable to graunt any more He remembers himselfe now that good things were to be graunted for the things sake indifferent things for the peoples sake and he hath made it his continued Theame that the King could graunt nothing in favour but all was necessary in Justice and it is apparent that the kings large concessions invited these ingratefull Rebells to make those shameles demaunds which themselves knew noe king in honour Policie and Justice could graunt Vndoubtedly his Coronation oath bindes him to a generall and implicite consent to whatever the Parliament desired And then vndoubtedly the king must be in worse condition then any subject for noe man but he is bound to such a blinde obedience and it is a strange blindenes in this man to offer such a thing to be beleived which himselfe holds incredible for he sayes the Kings oath cannot binde him against necessary reformation And can it then binde him to make wicked lawes which must be reformed Is the Parliament infallible may they not make ill lawes What is the reason that the Libeller and his Sectaries would not give obedience to Acts of Parliament vpon pretence of conscience ought the king to consent to such lawes as the subjects ought not to obey The King ought not to vie wisedome with the Parliament and why then doe the Libeller and his Sectaries vie wisedome with all former Parliaments Any of the Parliament may as farr excell him in the guift of wisedome as he them in place and dignitie But it s very vnlike and neere to impossible especially if we looke to the experience of all times and it is often found that a King is wiser then all his Councell And though the libeller say sure it was not he meaning the King as wise men as any of his Councell or Parliament thought it was he never good subjects contended with their King for that comparison The king sayes that that were as if Sampson should have consented to put out his eyes that the Philistins might with more safetie mocke and abuse him And this sayes the Libeller out of an vnwise or pretended feare of scorne for yeilding to his Parliament he gives cause of suspition that he made a scorne of his Regall oath Could any man suspect that his Regall oath bound him to such a dispicable slavery that a king should be in greater bondage to his Parliament then any vassall to a Lord a king might justly scorne such an oath that would make him scorned by all when he had taken it but the Libeller had noe better answeare and therefore retreates to his Common refuge of insignificant repetition The King sayes to exclude him-from all power of denyall seemes an arrogance The Libeller adds in the Parliament he meanes and askes what in him then to deny against the Parliament It is no arrogance to deny in him that is asked but arrogance in him that askes to receive noe denyall The king sayes its least of all becomminge those that make their addresses in a humble and loyall way of petitioning who by that confesse their inferioritie which oblidgeth them to rest if not satisfied yet quieted with such an answeare as the will and reason of the superiour thinkes fitt to give To this the Libeller sayes petitioning in better English is noe more then requesting or requiring And is it not good English to call our prayers pititions and is it better English to say wee require when we pray and is requesting and requiring the same in good English Is the petitioning of his new Masters requesting or requiring Men require not favours only but their due and that not only from superiours but equalls and inferiours It s the first time that such requiring of favours was heard of and a sorry inference that because men require of equalls they may of superiours and that there is noe difference betweene superioritie of Government and superioritie in fortune or Title It was called petitio consulatus when the noblest Romans went about and begged that dignitie of the meanest plebeians naming them man by man But might not those to whome they went deny their petition Could they require their election as due and was their begging requiring He would willingly make badd English out of good Lattyn though good Lattin may be noe good manners from a subject to his king and it is absurd in Government for any to pray that ought to commaund the Libeller seemes distracted that would have petitioning requiring and prove it by the signification it hath of begging They petitioned not because all of them were inferiour but because he was superiour to any of them But why then doe they petition in their politique Capacitie as a Parliament He tells vs at last it was for fashions sake more then dutie But why then did they professe it to be their dutie He tells vs the Misteries of their Religion their professions and promises are Ceremonies their submissions for fashion this is the doctrine of cut throates By plaine law cited before the Parliament is his superiour And why had he not brought in petitio principy as well as petitio consulatus vsing it soe often and that in good English is begging the question Doubtles he thinkes that some beleive it is plaine law because he saith soe but such as reade his booke finde he vnderstands not law nor reason and will not speake the truth he vnderstands It were a mad law that would subject reason to supcrioritie of place And doth not himselfe say it that the Parliament is superiour and therefore the kings reason must be subject to it and is not he mad or senseles He returnes againe to his invective against Monarchy and one mans will and soe its only the kings Cryme that he was a Monarch and if the King be not bound in a blinde obedience to all that the
Reformers and there were never any but those Sectaries soe shamelesse to deny the Authoritie of antiquitie or charge it in this particular with an aberration from Scripture and many learned men living vnder Presbitery acknowledge the dignitie of Bishopps above Presbiters in the times of the Apostles The Libeller likes any limitations in the Covenant dangerous to the king soe much of the Covenant as concernes the casting out of Bishopps but he will sweare and forsweare comformitie to the Church of Scotland or any other That this Covevant had former practice vnles in the french League cannot be shewne The Libeller would have the Israelites entring a new into a Covenant with Asa their King to be a new Covenant when it was only a renewing of their promise of obedience to God noe Articles of their owne devising and as that was with the King soe he hath found one without a King for the Jewes after the captivitee tooke solemne oath to walke in the Commaundements of God without consent demaunded of that King who was then their Master and they had the Authoritie of that King But did they take an oath to vse violence against that King if he consented not to them or was the Covenent to walke in Gods Commaundements a new Covenant This is like their pulpitt proofes That Protestant Churches have made Leagues or Covenant against their King Or imposed their confessions with Civill penalties vpon refusers without their Prince is a notorious slander for the protestation it was confined to established law the Covenant to destroy law and what was established by it the protestation to defend the Doctrine the Covenant to destroy the Government which is comprehended in the Doctrine and this the Libeller holds needes noe reconcitement There is noe doubt but the Examples of Asa and Esra were approved by Scripture but they are farr from the Examples of the present Covenant and if the Libeller approve the taking of the Covenant how doth he satisfie himselfe in the breach of it he hath found out away for he may aswell breake that as his oath to his King and obligation to former lawes which he sayes are Conditionall and that condition to be expounded by every man at his pleasure He proceedes to shew the strength of the Covenant and yet he will keepe it one way and his brethren of another name and sect another way If he Covenant oblidge to contrary courses it cannot be a Rule of Reformation and as it clashes with former oaths to God and the king rightly vnderstood soe the clashing of these that devised it shewes that the spiritt of peace was not desired by the contrivers of that Covenant That the Kings booke is replenished with Popish Arguments must be spoken in a Corner not publiquely with any modestie for the Protestants throughout the world know the contrary and will disavow this Covenanting power to be a part of their Religion The salvoes cautions and reservations vsed in taking the Covenant were the arts of the deceitefull composers and it s well knowne it was an artifice vsed to perswade men to take it that they might vse the libertie of their owne sense and the Libeller willing to say some thing in detraction of the King vpon every occasion as if it were a sin to vse truth and ingenuitie transposes words of the Kings which were vsed in reproofe to additions of his owne as if the King approved these shuffling cautions who he well knowes detested both the Covenant and them and shewed the inniquitie of these deceites and we have seene that these Cautions have made Covenanter and anticovenanter Presbiterian and independent Rebell The Libeller likes well the povertie of the Ministers of the gospell And although the primitive povertie of Churchmen was very glorious yet the Christian Laitie were never soe sordid to thinke a liberall patrimony vnfit for them and Religion hath litle power where the Clergie are trencher chaplaines to gluttons feasts These men that judge povertie a curse to themselves hold it Christs legacie to the Ministers If there were any legacie povertie was to all Christians aswell as Clergie but we see that notwithstanding these professions their Levites now hold more pluralities without remorse then ever were knowne and shame not to contradict their former declamations but it is the calamitie of the Church that greedy doggs devoure her patrimony and barking detractours traduce her Clergie Vpon the many JEALOSIES c. TO wipe of Iealosies and scandalls the best way had been by cleere actions or till Actions could be cleered by evident reasons Cleere Actions nor evident reasons will stopp the mouth of malicious slanderers nor abate the industrie of conspiratours in raising jealosies But these which his Majest complained of were tempered only to vulgar capacitie and were long since hist at by all knowing men who saw apparently they were not the opinions of the devisers but artifices of deceite and the progresse of this Rebellion hath cleered al mistakes and taken away al credit from these fopperies It is very late for the Libeller to call to his aide the petitions and addresses composed by the faction in Parliament when himselfe accuses them for want of wisedome and integritie and whoever reades these addresses will easily finde not only cause to suspect the truth of what they say but plaine proofe of falshood and hipocrisie That the whole Parliament conspired against the King he never said and the author well knowes that it was a potent faction only to whome the King imputes this injurie though their being elected to that place is no exemption from a possibilitie of errour Cryme and we have seene it beyound doubt that this faction conspired to blow vp the peoples affections towards him and batter downe their loyaltie by the Engnies of fowle aspersions and have acted what the powder plot intended The King offers not to purge himselfe by any other Arguments then such whose proofe is visible to all the world and the silliest people see how they were cheated by factious Artists The Kings Arguments are not only demonstrable to the best but obvious to common vnderstandings and it cannot be expected that such as are resolute in wicked courses will aske forgivenes or have it The world knowes the King when he wrote this expected the Rebells crueltie but feared it not and there was not cause to vse insinuations which were not to be divulged till his death Tyrants and vsurpers are forced to flatter but it s a wicked slander to charge him with flatterie that is feareles of crueltie This Libeller prophanely descants on Scripture as he doth apparently vpon the Kings misfortunes for vpon the Kings saying that he could willingly be the Ionah for restoring his peoples tranquillitie if he did not foresee that by the divided interests of their and his Enemies as by contrary windes the storme of their miseries would rather be encreased then allayed The Libeller sayes these mindes were never heard of in the
in an apparent inequallitie and subjection both in the state Civill Ecclesiasticall And this broode of Sectaries have heeretofore complained that the doctrines were traduced as opposite to Monarchy And neither Libertie nor equallitie is sought for to the people but to betray them to the power of these deceivers who are growne to that impudence to pretend doctrines of confusion and Rebellion to be the true Religion The Church as ancient prophesies foretold should dissolve all their power Dominion Few sects professing Christ have appeared more Turkish then these present of England they fancie an earthly Kingdome for the Church as Mahomett his Paradise and then that themselves are the true Church and shall have Dominion ever all and avow their intention to destroy all Kings and whoever submitt not to them But certenly Kings vnderstood not any such prophesies nor feared such pretenders who make prophesies to agree with their owne wicked Actions and ambitions desires His first instance is in Pharaohs oppressing of the Israelites And doth he beleive that Pharaoh knew their doctrines or prophesies the man might have learnt more from the Text that being strangers they might over power him and thence grew his persecution not from the libellers imaginary doctrine He makes a strange leape that passes by all stories els and would prove his position by his owne authoritie and expects that his libell against the King shall make good his position that Kings ever feared and hated the true Church a strong way of disputing to prove that kings hated and feared the true Church because the King did soe and to prove the King did soe because kings did soe this is a stout Champion There neede no answeare to his bawling of the kings suspition of men most Religioâ—s for time hath tryed that they were Rebellious and wicked Traytours vnder the Masque of Religion He could not vse violence as Pharaoh did and therefore chuses a more misticall way of Antichristian fraude and like Balak to hire against a nation of Prophetts other esteemed Prophetts and to meare out the Church by a false Ecclasiasticall Policie The Summe is to supresse Sectaries and prevent Traytours is this Ecclesiasticall Policie but where is this Misterie of Kings hating the true Church is there noe true Church of God where there is Government And what proportion hath this supposition of his to the kings proceedings Did he erect Bishopps or was there any Religion established or publiquely profest which he opposed but only false and hipocriticall factionists which outwardly professing the established Religion sought for gaine and pride secretly to draw disciples after them to the disturbance subversion of the Church There needes not any thing be said to his rayling his corruption being apparent by objecting it to the calling of Bishopps and hates it for the remedy against schisme which the Church had by them The King bestowed livings according to the law and the Policie was not his but the ancient constitution of the Church and this Monster that reproaches the retaining any thing in Leiturgie or Government practised by the ancient Church is not ashamed to charge the king with breach of Canons and the ancient practice of the Church in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and the peoples right in Elections was never pretended in England and justly and anciently forbidden in the Church neither doe any Canons in force support that pretence That influence which the king sayes is necessarie for the Prince to have vpon Churchmen noe man that beleives the Scripture will thinke vnfitt but how can the Libeller make good that the many Emperours and Kings that imbraced the Christian Religion hated and feared it for soe they must by his grounds And how can he conclude from Pagans hatred to Religion that it was only from their kings when as the stories are soe plentifull in setting downe the madd rage of the multitude the truth is seditious innovatours know that their hopes and strength lie to seduce the silly people and that it is the interest of governours to prevent their lewde endeavours and thence proceede their declamations against Rulers and their proclamations of Libertie and that which they cal the Bishopps Tyrany is only their office to take away schisme and schisme is the way to Rebellion The Libellers judgment touching callings founded on Scripture reformation or graces of the Bishopps and others is of the same authoritie as the determinations of Traytours touching loyaltie and heretickes touching sound doctrine and his end never agrees with his beginning but in rayling and incongruitie for but now he made it the Kings Policie to hire the Bishopps now it is the Bishopps Policie to worke that perswasion in the King of noe Bishopp noe King the man well knowes that noe Bishopp noe king was the perswasion of King James who found it true by his owne experience without the helpe of Bishopps and vet soe sottish doth this Libeller presume his readers that makes the dependence which Bishopps have only of the king the cause of such perswasions yet in their owne subtill sense they were of another minde how theÌ„ could their dependence be a cause of their perswasion or was their sense subtill and grossely mistaken Thus those blattering devills that in the beginning of the Parliament charged the Bishopps to be Antimonarchicall thereby to conceale their malice against the king now make it their Cryme to favour Monarchy He hath found a very strong proofe as he would have it out of the Historie of the Councell of Trent that Bishopps are most potent when Princes are weakest that argues not their dependence vpon Princes nor that aversion to Bishopps is not aversion to Princes it was spoken of Bishopps depending on the Pope not on Princes and such Clergy men as have their dependence on Pope or people wil never wish that the king should be potent to master their dependencie From this the King sett himselfe to the removall of those men whose doctrine he feared would be the vndoing of Monarchy And needed he the Councells of Bishopps to provide for his safetie against such men And is that the evill interest of Tyrany and Episcopacie to prevent the designes of Traytours Who were Traytours if they were not that would vndoe Monarchy The doctrine and designes of the schismatickes are heereby apparent to be against Monarchy and yet the prevention of such conspiracies is the Tyrany and the corrupt Councells of Bishopps which the hipocrites cry out on Noe temporall law could touch the innocencie of their lives And had they innocency that plotted the vndoing of Monarchy vnder which they lived and could not the law touch it Their disobedience to lawes was a Cryme inconsistent with innocence and must necessarily be punished by the lawes they disobey and that which he calls persecution of their consciences and laying scandalls before them was only the requiring of their obedience to Acts of Parliament whose authoritie he soe frequently cryes vp and the
surprize him having disposed their forces in such places as must have effected it if he had not speedily prevented it by that onset What he intimates touching Oxford Bristow and scarborrow naming noe particulars he can expect no answeare whoever lookes over the memoriall of passages touching Treaties will finde that the Kings offers were soe large as nothing but desire of peace could have moved him to it and nothing but guiltines and ambition could be the cause of their refusall That the faction in Parliament would have compelled him to part with his honour as a King the Libeller denyes not but askes what honour he had but the peoples guift yet he seekes to defend the Actions of theis villaines as defending themselves and resorts to his common principles that Kings are but the servants of the people who may dispose of their Kings and their honour as they thinke best And by his doctrine the King and people must be the prey of every powerfull Traytour It neede not be repeated that the peoples welfare consists in supporting the rights of their King and that it is their miserie to deprive themselves of him and turne into confusion and slavery to vsurpers And it is Monstrous that a kings highest Court sitting by his regall authoritie should bandie themselves against their soveraigne and like vipers eate out the bowells of their parent fighting against that power which gives them being and by an vnnaturall malice of the members to the head cast the whole body into and incureable consumption This insolence and presumption of the pretended Parliament hath brought the loose rabble and lawles Army to despise the representation which they soe much magnifie and doe that vnto them which they did vnto their king It cannot be doubted that subjects cannot with dutie treate on equal termes with their king and the practice of all times makes it manifest that none but Traytours attempted it and it was a sufficient proofe of the kings desire of peace that he sought a Treatie where a submission was due to him The Kings instructions were to bribe their Commissioners with promise of securitie rewards and places How he proves such instructions he tells vs not but we are sure that the demaunds of their Commissioners were securitie rewards and places for they would have all in their power There were but three heads of the Treatie Ireland Episcopacie and the Militia the first was forestalled by a peace that the King might pretend hu word against the Parliaments Arguments And if there had not been a peace made it was a most detestable Rebellion and blood thirstie crueltie to continue an intestine warr against the King and his people of England vnles a few Tribunes might have the management of that warr in Ireland and exclude the King from any interest in that kingdome and yet this must be a defensive warr on the Rebells part The King bids the Queene be confident he will never quit Episcopacy which informes vs by what patronage it stood And how could that informe you even as well as the Kings telling her that Religion was the sole difference betweene them informes you that the Queene directed him in matters of Religion The sword he resolves sayes the Libeller to clutch as fast as if God with his owne hand had put it into his And there is noe doubt but he had and it was a Rebellious wickednes in that faction which sought to wrest it from him in despite of Gods ordinance and their owne sworne subjection In all these the King had reason honour and conscience on his side and his pretence that the Queene was Regent in all these is farr from credible when causes to the contrary are soe obvious to every vnderstanding The Libeller himselfe professes their intentions to take away the Kings right and would suggest to the world that it was only the Queenes Councell that he would preserve his Crowne Wise men could judge the composure likely to be more miserable then happy But these wise men were taught by their guilt never to thinke themselves secure and to preferre their power before their conscience and the Kingdomes peace The English were called Rebells during the Treatie And why not till the Treatie had made an abolition of their offence for did they forbeare any of their reproachfull termes or Rebellious actions against the king and his partie during the Treatie The Irish were called good and Catholique subjects And that some of them might be though the Libeller cannot produce the instance of it The Parliament was called a Parliament for fashions sake and in the Counsell bookes enrolled noe Parliament That it was no Parliament all knowing men agree and the enrolling of their opinions that held it noe Parliament was noe injury to the Treatie and the Kings appellation of them a Parliament because they would not be treated with otherwise gives them noe right nor shutts vp him from that opinion of their condition which was true and reall Christians treate with the Turke by those appellations he will be called by though they doe not acknowledge them belonging to him It was a divellish fraude that the King in his owne esteeme had been absolved from performance as having treated with Rebells and noe Parliament and they insteede of an expected happines brought vnder the hatchett Who now doth not fee that force and guilt were the continuers of this horrid Rebellion and blood and that these Traytours perferred their private securitie before publique peace But whence is this collection of a divellish fraude by a divellish interpreter If the King thought not the appellation due to them which he gave them doth it follow that he must esteeme himselfe absolved of performance of his promises therefore These are dreames from divellish infusions not reasonable suppositions the titles of treating parties having noe influence vpon the performance of the things promised and they of the other side might have said they were absolved from performance because they treated with the Kings Commissioners vnder other Titles then they had or were knowne by but they would perswade the people that they cannot be safe vnlesse the master Rebells rule May not that bratt superstition be justly laid to their charge that impose for the Scepter of Christs Kingdome a yesterdayes invention of congregationall consistories and make it Religion and truth of God to roote out Prelates of the Church of God For the meritt of the Treaties and where the blame lay of their breach the world hath long since full satisfaction and that the Rebells came but vnwillingly to Treaties and with reserves allwayes to breake it of never mittigating the rigour of any proposition in the least degree and though the Libeller and others spitt Sulphur and cast foorth their cloudes of lying and slander yet the evidence of the facts dissolve and consume their venome and confidence and the meanest capacitie descernes the falshood and crueltie of their proceedings both in warr and Treaties Vpon the
falsification will not sticke to slander thoughts and offer conjectures for convertions such as were most zealous in his Majest cause had a sobrietie vnblemishable by a Traytours malice and were not only free from druken distemper but brutish insolence and brazen impudence which the Rebells rather affect then repent of And is there not a just cause that the consciences of many should grow suspitious and corrected by the pretentions of the misnamed Parliament now proved false and vnintended What 's become of their making a glorious King lawes of the land priviledges of Parliament Doth not every man see they are all in the dirt among the Libellers Ceremonies But they never pretended to establish his Throne without our Libertie and Religion nor Religion without the word of God nor to judge of lawes by their being established but to establish them by their being Good and necessary They never pretended that his throne was inconsistent with libertie or Religion nor to judge of lawes otherwise then by being established But who must be the Dictatours the Parliament which is crumbled into a close Committee and state Counsell or any rabble that shall say this or that law is not good and therefore to be repealed though established he ought to have concluded that they never pretended priviledge of Parliament further then the subterranean junto or the Tumults should judge necessary To pray and not to governe is for a Monke not a King But is prayer inconsistent with Government Those men will accuse the King for being a Christian and have as litle love to prayer as obedience a monke will better governe then such a man pray who is constant to malice falshood and this man that sayes to governe by Parliament justifies his Rebellion to take away Kinglie Government His legislative Parliament and oppressed lawes cannot be admitted where other answeare is wanting but the Libeller hath long since thrust the force of them out of doores by his many prevarications confining them all in the Cabinet of his owne braine which must determine whether they be good and necessary He is constant to Iohn of Leidens principles that must take away other mens goods for doubt of ill vsing them and because the King sayes he feared the temptation of an absolute Conquest therefore it was pious and friendly in the Parliament to resist him Their pietie and friendshipp were much alike and the Libellers Riligion might come in for a share It s very probable that this warr had never been if the Act for continuance of the Parliament had not been consented to by the King and that Act might stopp the mouth of any reasonable man from saying there was such a power in the two houses as the Libeller dreames of that desired that Act from the King and it was never heard in our story that ever Parliaments made warr against Kings as Tyrants or otherwise for how could they make awarr that neither could nor ever did pretēd to sit longer then their King pleased the immodestie ingratitude of the present Rebells have farr exceeded the worst Examples He is obstinate to his principles and feares to attribute any thing to the Kings concessions or denyall and had he graunted lesse in all probabilitie himselfe and the Kingdome had suffred lesse It cannot be doubted but the Libeller will invert whatever the King sayes and it is a greate adventure that he sayes the sins of their lives not seldome fought against them and wee have greate cause to beleive their prosperitie did noe lesse that continue hardned in soe execrable a cause The King sayes he desires not any man should be further subject to him then all of vs should be subject to God And this Mountebanke holds this a sacriledge worse then Bishopps lands for he sayes he desires asmuch subjection as is due to God and so desires noe lesse then to be a god And is subjection to Princes in the Lord subjection to them as God And doth the King desire otherwise that would have them noe otherwise obey him then that they might obey God renouncing all obedience that consists not with obeying God but sale worke must be slight and the Libeller would not exceede his hire The Rebells desiring the Kings acquittall of them for the blood of the warr confirmes their guilt not their innocence Though God impute not to any man the blood shedd in a just cause in respect of the ground and reason of doing it yet there may be temptations vnto naturall infirmitie in acting a just cause and the King was not without a sense of such danger therefore the Libeller wretchedly beggs an argument of his guilt from his prayer not to have blood imputed to him Vpon the REFORMATION Of the Times NOveltie and perturbation are justly condemned not only by Christians but morall men and it is a noveltie taken vp only by Sectaries that would confine all Religion to their owne frensy and reject the vniversall consent of all times and places and not only boasting of the truth of their owne delusions but obtruding them vpon the world threatning fire and sword to gainsayers and yet they will pretend the example of our Saviours publishing his gospell and pretend like reason for their fanaticke conceites as for his divine revelations and miraculous Testimonies and because reformation may be necessary therefore they conclude it must be as often as these that are carried about with every winde of doctrine shall thinke fitt they would reduce Christianitie to a cloud without water tossed to fro with the breath of private opinion The first reformers in the time of Pope Adrian pretended not a reformation of the vniversall Church and a rejection of whatever was received by the primitive as those men now neither did they presume to enforce others to their perswasion and though noveltie and perturbation were objected to them yet they still deprecated that guilt and it is a most vnchristian and prophane disposition to desregard lawes established and Religion setled vpon presumption of private opinions and these of men neither learned discreete nor honest There is greate difference betweene a clamour and an vndeniable truth and we may not thinke that popular compliance dissolution of all order and Government in the Church schisme vndecencies confusions sacrilegious invasions contempt of the Clergy and their Leiturgie and diminution of Princes are lesse odious because Papists objected them or that any pretended reformation introduced by these detestable practices can be acted or approved by Christians All men are wittnes that the present Sectaries are guiltie of all these The former reformers did not give occasion for such aspersions that desired only the libertie of their owne consciences from the practice and beleife of errours newly enjoyned and anciently rejected in the Church or els followed the orderly reformations which Princes and states authorised in their owne Dominiōs but these new reformers obtrude their dictates vpon all the world and will dispose of all Kingdomes with
lift vp his hand against the Lords anointed the Libeller is his owne judge and must be his tormenter that makes an impious defence of those that lifted vp their hand against the Lords anointed in their owne cause and were by his owne confession but private men and he would have their exorbitance and disobedience to law vnblameable Was David a more private man then they All supreame Counsells in other formes of Government that have not at Monarch claime this priviledge of exemptioÌ„ from their subjects Judicature but those gracelesse Rebells hold nothinge sacred the place of Gods vicegerent they wil have to be an enormous priviledge and blow away Religion justice like Chaffe with the blast of their fancie though they pretend the strength of it Aboâ—â—â—…iat of Kings He hath done with Scripture he descends now to saint Ambrose excommunicatinge Theodosius he will allow the Bishopp to be a saint for this fact though his calling were Prelaticall and vnlawfull in his judgment But what is spirituall excommunication to the puttinge of a King to death This fact of saint Ambrose is noe Rule Though Christian Bishopps refused to give the holy misteries to Princes in cases of fins they did not presume to make a Civill seperation betweene them and their people and will the Libeller allow the Bishopps to be more publique persons then Christ and his Apostles and to doe what they would not He that makes such out cryes against Popery heere takes vp the most scandalous doctrine that any of them maintaine and which the most sober disclaime and takes vp those Arguments which the Jesuites vse for the Clergies and Popes power over Princes yet the man would be accounted a zealous Protestant The examples of excommunication by the brittish Bishopps saint Germaine Oudeceus the clergy of Morcant might be al true but nothing to the purpose nor are their excommunications Rules for Christian practice neither can there be any inference of deposing or murderinge Kings from such Actions But for the greater Credit he sayes the facts of theis Brittish Bishopps were before we had Communion with the Church of Rome And may not he looke on himselfe and his crew with horrour for vilyfying and reproaching the calling of Bishopps as Papell and Antichristian and yet confesse it to be before we had any Communion with the Church of Rome What power of deposinge Kings and consequently of putting them to death was assumed and practised by the Canon law he sayes he omitts as a thing generally knowne Why would he not tell by whome it was practised would that discredit the Authoritie What power the Popes practised in deposinge Kings is generally knowne and detested by all good men being Actions contrary to all lawes but of their owne making But did the people of England expect that all the promises of Reformation made by the late Parliament would end only in approvinge the Tyrany and vsurpation of the Pope over Kings and justifying of the powder plot and are all the complaints of the Protestant Divines against the practice of the Popes become impertinent Clamours But such a defence is suteable to the cause Whole Councells have decreed that a Counsell is above the Pope though by them not denyed the vicar of Christ and wee may be ashamed in our cleerer light not to descerne further that a Parliament is above a King It were a shame to vs if we should not descerne the difference betweene the independent power of Kings and the vsurped power of the Pope and this breaker wants shame that pretends cleerer light and opposition to Rome and yet begg Examples from it Such as preferred the authoritie of Counsells above the Pope had their warrant from the ancient Counsells which knew not the vicarshipp of the Pope different from his brethren And had these Counsells thought him Christs vicar and infallible as the Romanists now maintaine their conclusion of the Counsells superioritie could not consist with their premisses being much alike this Authors ordinary Arguments But what resemblance has a Counsell of the whole Church to the Parliament or Counsell of a particular kingdome By the lawes of some kingdomes there are noe Parliaments at all and in Counsells they are not subjects but brethren to 〈◊〉 the Pope as they anciently stiled themselves and they anciently convened and departed without any leave from him but in the English Parliament they are all subjects to the king and their places were by his institution and the kings calling any convention for advice doth not alter the qualitie of subjection He comes now to humane lawes and by them he will prove a divine truth The judgment given against Orestes either at Athens whose king he was not or in any other Countrey where he was but a Titular proves nothing though he story were Authenticke and the proceedings legall but popular furies though occasioned by their Governours Crymes are not Examples of imitation Solons lawes belonged not to kingly Government neither were the kings of Sparta Monarchs nor Licurgus a King indeede though he had a Title the constitution of that State being a Republique and their King noe other then a Consul of Rome or a Duke of venice The Decree in Rome is farr wide from the matter and what the Senate did against Nero was in vindication of their ancient power not acknowledging the Justice of his soveraigntie Though Theodosius decreed the law to be above the Emperour yet he decreed not any person to have power over the Emperour The law was above him in reguard it was his Rule but could not make any person or societie above him The law is the directive power to Kings but subject them not to any and it is a senseles deduction from the superioritie of the Rule to imagine an inferioritie of the Rulers to the people or a communitie in power by the Rule That Bracton or Cleta say the King is inferiour to the Court of Parliament is a manifest vntruth and Bracton sayes expressely the King hath not a superiour on earth to punish him and that only God is the avenger of his Actions soe farr were theis men from affirminge that he stands as liable to receive Iustice as the meanest of his subjects But this man thinkes that some of his Readers will beleive that the name of an Author is sufficient Authoritie though the speake contrary to what he alleadges It is said in an ancient booke the King ought to be subject to the law by his oath Though the King be bound to performe the law by his oath is there any to judge him when all are his subjects and derive their power from him or is he subject to any person And who can judge another that is not subject to him Because Kings bound themselves to doe Justice therefore did they give other men power over them That the king permitted questions of his right to ordinary Iudicature is an vse of Counsell not subjection all Courts being his Counsells
for decision of controversies but it s a sorry inference that Counsellours in his affaires should have power over his person As the Parliaments right is circumscribed by lawes in regarde of the subject soe it cannot be imagined absolute over the King By what the Libeller hath said he might well conclude that kings are oblidged to doe justice but that the people or particular persons may judge their king by any law divine or humane he hath not offred a colour soe barren is he in an Argument which he calls over copious Who should better vnderstand their owne lawes and when they are transgresed then they who are governed by them and whose consent at first made them Certenly he might very wel have answeared himselfe that they which governed by such lawes and whose consent at first made them better vnderstand them and when they are transgressed then they that are governed and it is a course very agreable to these mens confusion that the suiter should teach the judge The Libeller askes who have more right to take knowledge of things done within a free nation then they within themselves And surely they will not be free long from destroying one another where that 's the libertie for there wil be as many Transgressours and as many lawes as there are opinions He goes about to answeare the taking the oath of Alleagiance and supreamacy And to this his answeare is very ready that these oaths were to his person invested with his Authoritie and his Authoritie was by the people given him conditionally vnder law and oath And if his Authoritie had been conditionall their oaths could not be absolute as they are This guift and condition they imagine were engraven in Seths Pillars and they have been long enquiringe for a Cabballisticke Rabbyn to finde out the Characters How the kings hereditary succession is become a conditionall guift must have better evidence then Aphorismes of confusion never law contained either the guift or condition nor was there ever such impudence before theis Traytours that avowed because they swore faith to their kings person invested with his Authoritie they might take away his Authoritie and not breake their oath And it were a prophane oath aswell as vaine that should be voyde at the will of the taker The kings oath added nothing to his right being only an obligation of his conscience noe condition annexed to his right and if he never tooke the oath his subjects obedience is noe whit diminished and a king by inheritance needes not admittance the death of his predecessour puts him in possession this is the knowne law of England The Couquerour tooke on oath at his Crowninge and other times that made noe condition to his Government There is not only reason but absolute necessitie for the avoyding of confusion ruine of mankinde that the subject be bound to the king though the kinge faile in his dutie for the destruction of Government is more sinfull and inconvenient to humane societie then any evill that can come by a kings misgovernment He proceedes to answeare objections touchinge the Covenant wherein we shall not much insist but to detect the shifts of Malefactours to elude the evidence of truth They were accused by the King and his partie to pretend libertie and reformation but to have noe other end then to make themselves greate and to destroy his person and Authoritie for which reason sayes the Libeller they added the third Article to preserve the Kings person and Authoritie in defence of Religion priviledge of Parliament and liberties of the Kingdome And to shew with what ingenuitie he dealt in seeking to avoyde that just accusation the Libeller tells vs that they added that cause for a shew only and they intended not to preserve the Kings person further then it might consist with their opinions touchinge Reformation extirpatinge of Prelacy preservinge liberties of Parliament and Kingdome and in this very clause they called the world to be wittnes with their consciences of their loyaltie and yet made the preservation of their Kings person and Authoritie arbitrary by their owne opinions and while this Libeller would have their Rebellion a defensive warr he forbeares not to tell the world that they resolved the Kings destruction to attaine their ends The sixth Article gives asmuch preservation and defence to all that enter into the league as to him And it seemes more for they have dealt with none of them as with him and he sayes if the Covenant were made absolute without respect to these superiour things it was an vnlawfull vow and not to be kept It is agreed that vnlawfull vowes are not to be made nor kept but it is an vnlawfull vow to destroy the Kinge in order to his supposed ends yet they feare not to vow the destruction of any that oppose them though the honour and innocence of the persons were without the reach of lawes and they will exempt neither callings nor integritie from their lawles Injustice and that appeared by his glosse vpon the fourth Article of the Covenant to bring persons offending to tryall and condigne punishment all that should be found guiltie of such Crymes and delinquencies whereof the King by his letters and proofes afterward was found guiltie in what they thought him at the taking of the Covenant to be over ruled only by evill Counsellours And had not he avowed all that ever his letters conteyned in his former declarations and hath the Libeller forgotten that the imputation of Crymes to evill Counsellours was but a Ceremony and are not his foregoinge words that their ends reformation and extirpatinge Prelacy were to be preferred before the preservation of the Kings person and authoritie This last age hath produced a generation that pretend they doe God service when they scorne all his lawes and Religion and hold forth their execrable villanies to the world as gratefull and well pleasinge sacrifices to God and make ostentations of their perjuries and Blaspheamies as services to him The nullities and vsurpation of those Monster judges that made themselves cut-throates of the King needed not the Kings exceptions to avoyde their illegallitie being soe apparent what the King did or said to of them wil remaine to his honour and the Libellers infamy that glories in the misfortunes of Princes sayinge it was learnt from his graund-mother It s a sad fate to haue his Enemies both accusers parties and Iudges The Libeller sayes what malefactour might not pleade the like if his Crymes have made all men his Enemies But there were hardly ever such malefactours vnles they who tooke vpon them to judge the Kinge He that is an Enemy before judgment cannot be a judge of the Cryme and he that is an Enemy to a Malefactour vncondemned is not fit to condemne him and such as are Enemies to Government and are common destroyers cannot be judges That they of the powder plot might have pleaded the same when their judges knew not their persons nor their
deepe engagements to his Allies abroade the supplies the then Parliament gave him were two Subsidies he then desired an addition only of fortie thousand pound which was refused him If any man shall say now that the King called not that Parliament of his owne inclination because he was discontented to be so dealt with by them knowing men will hardly beleive him such men as are justly displeased with factions in Parliament might truly affect them when they are rightly disposed and this Sentence which Iconoclastes holds so inauspicious imports not that which his false Augurie Prognosticates for though his Majest received provocations and causes of dislike from severall Parliaments it followes not that he could have no intention to call one when there was a probabilitie of removing the causes of former disorders which his Majest expresses in his ensuing discourse The inclination of a Prince is best knowne by those next about him or by the current of his Actions These neerest this King were Courtiers and Prelates and it was their Continuall exercise to dispute and preach against them For the Actions of others Iconoclastes would thinke them a weake proofe of his intentions though the persons were very neere him and though there were preaching and disputes against the proceedings of some Parliaments it s no proofe of the Kings intentions nor theirs that vsed them against the right vse of Parliaments and the proceedings of some Parliaments might give just occasion to men to say the King they hoped would have no more neede of them and it is a very greate happinesse of any state not to neede them the necessitie of them proceeding from want and danger and there was a time when people held Parliaments a burthen to hem and those in Parliament claimed it that they were not bound to attend the Parliament above fortie dayes and our owne stories tells vs of an indoctum Parliamentum and insanum Parliamentum And doth Iconoclastes thinke that all such as were out of love with such Parlaments had no affection to any This was he sajes but the Coppy which his Parasites had industriously taken from his owne words and Actions who never called a Parliament but to supply his necessities Such as have observed the inclinations of persons neere his Majest finde non greater Parasites then such as proved Traytours to him and Parasites are not wanting to other powers as wel as Kings for we finde by this Author what men will do to please their Masters eyther by offitiousnes to their persons or the performance of villanie against others This Author spends his mouth in vaine following his common place of Parasites and Courtiers when the Actions he mentions are so farr from reflecting vpon his Majest as they leave the blemish vpon the Relatour That his Majest had necessities when he called a Parliament is knowne to all the causes of them but that he was ready all wayes to heare and redresse the just greivances of his people could never yet be contradicted by the experience in any Parliament al though the Author say having Supplied these he suddenly and nominiousty dissolved it without redressing any one greivance of the people But if the Parliaments never presented to him on greivance to be redressed which he denyed where lies the ignominie It seemes the Author takes not the petition of right to be of that nature for that was graunted by the King and that concession of his was then judged as greate an Act to the redresse of greivances as ever King of England graunted his people His Majest summoned three Parliaments before the short Parliament at the beginning of these troubles and in non of these were there any greivances presented by the Parliament to the King to be redressed but that petition of right vnles a Remonstrance against the Duke of Buckingham be reckned in that number and if the people had just greivances to be redressed they had just cause of complaint against those Conventions and of late repentance for their credulitie that depended so much on them that so little regarded their Sufferings If we looke vpon the length of time wherein these Parliaments sate wee shal finde sessions concluded diverse good lawes made in the like space of time in the Raignes of former Kings and whoever lookes to the journalls of the houses in these Parliaments of his late Majest or whoever was present in them must confesse that those that governed in the lower house minded nothing lesse then the redresse of greivances or making of lawes which were formally talked of to entertaine time while private annimosities and personall revenges were made the sole busines of importance in the space of fower moneths no one greivance was prepared to be presented to his Majest and Iconoclastes heapes vp vntruths without respect to the apparence of their detection for this first Parliament was so far from being suddenly dissolved after the King was supplyed that the greate Plague not permitting them to sit longer at west minster his Majest adiourned them to Oxford and in another Parliament after the supply given him there was a second meeting which might have had a longer continuance if it had insisted on the redresse of greivances but whence takes he the occasion to say Ignominiously dissolved Where was the Ignominie Had not his Majest a legall right to do it And if the houses would not agree in the redresse of greivances and supply of the necessities of the Kingdome their continuance would prove ignominious not their dissolving Sometimes chusing rather to misse of his subsidies or to rayse them by illegall courses then that the people should not still misse of their hopes to be releived by Parliaments Iconoclastes in his Preface talked of laying parallel actions to words and heere he vses words of actions that never were for among those Parliaments of his late Majest where can he finde a number to make vp his Sometimes vsing a language as if the King had called as many Parliaments as he had raigned yeares And where can he finde that the King chose to misse his subsidies that the people should not be releived by Parliaments Two of the Parliaments are already mentioned In the third where he had non he was so farr from chusing to misse of his subsidies if he might have had them that his reiterated Messages to the then house of Commons to prepare their greivances that he might apply just remedies to them sufficiently prove that nothing was wanting of his part to have received the subsidies and releived the people It s well knowne that his Majest had at that time a warr with Spaine and France and that nothing but inevitable necessitie on his part could have made him decline the obtaining of subsidies from that Parliament And after the house of Commons had declared that they would supply him in such a way and in so ample a measure as should make him safe at home and feared abroade they agreed vpon the number
brands that high hand of slander and detraction which this breaker stretches out against him and it will fill posteritie with amazement at the folly of the present age that should take such things for enormities as fines for knighthood Coate conduct and shipmony whereof some of them were scarce felt or observed and the rest easily borne And submit themselves to contributions excises loanes and taxes to which those which he calls enormities hold no proportion But not contented with the false appellations of his Majest Civill Actions he proceedes to defy and reproach his Actions for preservation and defence of his Kingdome and calls it an injurious warr to resist an invading Enemy That the Scotts were entred neere a hundred mile into the Kingdome at the time he mentions he cannot be ignorant and to call the warr injurious on his Majest part cannot come from any that thinkes any thing injurious that Rebells commit or any thing just that Governours command When any Actions are rehearsed of his Majest against the Scotts the Traytours call them vnjust and amplifie their slander with the Circumstance of his native Countrey When the Scotts offer obedience to the King or he concurr with them they decry such Actions in respect they are of his native Countrey thus shifting saying and gainsaying to deceive the people If there any yet remaine that will trust such common Cheates His collection that necessitie and not choice brought the King to call a Parliament followes not from any of his premisses His Majest doth not exclude the necessitie of his affaires from moving him to call the Parliament When he sayes that he called the Parliament not more by necessitie then his owne choice doth he exclude necessitie or affirme his owne choice only without consideration of Circumstances Parliaments ought not to be called but vpon greate occasions and their too often Convention is a burthen not an ease to the people and such was the judgment of the late Parliament at the beginning It is not new that necessities have caused Kings to call Parliaments which yet was never made an Argument to prove their owne vninclinaâ—ion to call a Parliament His descant vpon strong necessities and pangs of state layes open the Treason of these conspiratours that plotted how their Country might pine and languish that so vnnaturall Emperickes might excercise their bloody practice and a mercilesse Tyrany could only be exspected from such as sought their power by their Countreyes sufferings And if his Majest proceedings had been violent they had not produced that necessitie First in Ireland which only was to give him four subsidies and so to expire then in England where his first demaund was but twelue subsidies to maintaine a Scotch warr condemned and abominated by the whole Kingdome promising their greivances should be considered afterwards The Parliament in Ireland he might have knowne was not the first that was called in the nine yeares he mentions but fals hood are so common that mistakes are not worth the observation and if the King had called that Parliament in Ireland to obtaine fower subsidies where had been the fault May not a King call a Parliament to be supplyed But if Iconoclastes had patience to know truth or speake it he might easily have found a greate number of good lawes made in that Parliament to worke a conformitie of that nation to England and he vnseasonably produced this instance of the Parliament of Ireland which so mainely contradicts his assertion for the necessities alone he supposes could not worke the calling of that Parliament where Parliaments had been so frequent before In England where he sayes his Majest first demaund was but twelue subsidies he hath lost his expectation and his Ironicall but hath lost its mirth for he cannot thinke that the people now apprehend twelue subsidies so greate a demaund by the King when they see a farr greater proportion given the Scotch for invading the Kingdome and after such an execrable warr and barbarous prodigalitie their greivance is increast and all that is effected or pretended to be done for them is the Destruction of King and Church and dividing the Estates of both among the Master Rebells vpon whose Arbitrary and vnlimited power they must now depend That these twelue subsidies were demaunded to maintaine Scotch warr hath no colour of truth it being not at al propounded And as it had been a sottish and perverse disposition to have condemned the warr against the Scotts when they were in preparation to invade England so it is as shamelesly said by Iconoclastes that it was condemned and abominated by the whole people Himselfe if a wicked obduration had not made him love lying must have conffessed that the late Earle of Essex though afterward in Rebellion against the King with greate demonstrations of Zeale and affection to his Majest went a Commaunder in that expedition And if we respect the qualitie or number of noble worthy persons that engaged themselves in that first warr our stories have rarely remembred an Army that went into Scotland of greater number of eminent persons so as Iconoclastes hath just cause to condemne and abominate himselfe for the Lewdenes and evidence of this vntruth and if the then Parliament had not been abused by some representing his Majest desires the designes of such as meant to make advantage of the breach of that Parliament had been disappointed and the Calamities ensuing had been prevented And as there were no greivances then in the Kingdome but might admit longer delay of redresse then the publique necessities of supply so his Majest might justly demaund subsidies in the first place with promise to redresse their greivances afterwards And Iconoclastes too late observes the order of that demaund of his late Majest to be amisse when the late Parliament graunted so many subsidies for the Scotts without expectation of any such promise Which when the Parliament who judged that warr it selfe on of their maine greivances made no haste to graunt not enduring the delay of his impatient will or els fearing the conditions of their graunt he breakes of the whole session and dismisses them and their greivances with scorne and frustration That the Parliament judged that warr any of their greivances that never mentioned it in their debates or resolutions is fit for the affirmation of this Author only But if the Parliament had judged that warr one of their maine greivances the rest whereof so greate noyse hath been made will hardly be thought weightie This warr was then newly begun the King had received no supply from the people for the charge past and could this be a maine greivance Wee see at what rate this man makes greivance and to what ordinary accidents he applies his exorbitant expressions The then Parliament would not have been slow in his Majest supply if some false Ministers had not interposed and some seditious persons had not plotted to impose a necessitie vpon his Majest to dissolue the Parliament They had not
presented him any greivances and therefore there could be no such dismission with scorne and frustration and he Phrases it There were evident tokens of greife and discontent in his late Majest that he was necessitated to that act but there was reioycing and insolence amongst the turbulent Sectaries for it Much lesse therefore did he call this last Parliament by his owne choice and inclination but having first tryed in vaine all vndue wayes to procure mony his Army of their owne accord being beaten in the north the Lords petitioning and the generall voyce of the people all most hissing him and his ill acted Regalitie of the Stage compelled at length both by his want and by his feares vpon meere extreamitie he summoned this last Parliament This man acts the part of a Lord of misrule to stirre the passions of the people with taunts and abuses and for his over acted petulant scurrilitie fitt to be whipped of the stage If he had ever given proofe of his owne courage hee would not thus barbarously reproach his late Majest with feares who was so well knowne to have hazarded his person in so many perills and these Phrases are the froth of a base insultation not the censure of a just Ennemy But why for feare should the King summon a Parliament if he fore saw as the libeller sayes it would be his vndoing Could he have greater feares then that He hath not instanced one vndue way of his late Majest to get money for the warr against Scotland therefore his repetitions import his impertinence as well as his malice but gaine no credit by their frequency The peoples hissing which the Traytours desired had been as inconsiderable and vndutifull as his assertions are false but as it no way contradicts what his Majest sayes if the allaying of popular discontents rectifying mistakes were one end of calling the Parliament so the petitioning of the Lords instructs all reasonable men to thinke that feares and wants were not the sole cause of summoning that Parliament and that his Majest choice was not excluded And as the beating of his Majest Army had not so disabled him but that they were in number and courage superiour to their Enemies so if his Majest choice had not guided him he might with lesse hazard in common appearance have tryed the successe of a battell at that time then he did at diverse tymes afterwards That which he sayes of the Armyes being beaten of their owne accord is little to their honour if it were true but infamous to this Author being false if there were any so perfidious to betray their own and their nations honour vnto strangers they could not be many for its a knowne truth that the most eminent persons in that service and the greatest number of common souldiers served his Majest afterward in his warrs not only against the English Rebells but the Scotts And how is it possible that be should willingly incline to Parliaments who never was perceived to call them but for the greedy hopes of a whole nationall bribe his subsidies and never loved never fulfilled never promoted the true ends of Parliaments the redresse of greivances but still putt them of and prolonged them whether gratifyed or not gratifyed and was indeede the Author of all those greivances It hath been already shewed how his Majest was perceived to call Parliaments out of his owne choice and inclination and it was not only in his Majest time but in the time of Queene Elisabeth that Parliaments were said to be only called to give subsidies there never wanting male contents and slanderers of the Actions of Princes and the case may be such that subsidies may be the cheife motive to call Parliaments considering the sufficiency of the lawes in force and the small number of greivances complained of Malitious detraction is accompanied with absurditie and Iconoclastes becoming a Champion of Rebellion reckons Tributes and supplies of the soveraigne by subjects which is their duty among the number of scandalous sins and that which was practised by our saviour and commaunded by his Apostles he calls nationall bribes This braine sicke and prophane Libelling can be acceptable to none but such as are delighted with the vnhappy distempers of Bedlam He hath not so much passion to have greivances redrest as love to the word because as he thinkes it imports matter displeasing to the people who yet are now satisfied that those which abused them by the frequent vse of the word greivances never intended the remedy but by multiplying complaints sought to leade them into discontents against the Government whereby they might become Captive to ambitious vsurpers That which he sayeth is the true end of Parliaments to reforme greivances justly condemnes those he now calls a Parliament who he well knowes sitt to no other end but to encrease greivances and in eight yeares time never redressed one Though Kings take notice of greivances in Parliament and take order to redresse them yet that cannot be called the true end of calling Parliaments for there are often occasions of calling Parliaments in respect of publique safetie against Enemies and conspiratours addition alteration of lawes publique supplyes the redresse of greivances is accidentall to the Parliament and the pretence of greivances hath proved the greatest greivance that ever the people suffered and his scurrilous objection of greedy hope to his late Majest on whome malice it selfe hath not yet layd such a Cryme encreaseth the Libellers infamy not the weight of his charge To say therefore that he called this Parliament of his owne choice and inclination argues how little truth wee can expect from the sequell of this booke which ventures in the very first period to affront more then one nation with an vntruth so remarkeable If the venturing vpon an vntruth in the first period be an argument to expect little in the sequell of the booke what may we expect of this Author whose whole booke is a confutation of his first period not to descant on the Kings misfortunes That in seeking to disprove this first period adventured on so many palpable vntruths and stickes not to pervert the very period it selfe and affront not only more then one nation but all indifferent men For if his Majest had been necessitared either through the disorder of persons to dissolve Parliaments or for beare them he might yet call a Parliament by his owne choice considering that not the condition of Parliament but the malevolence of some persons were cause both of the dissolution forbearance The often Parliaments in Ireland the precedent Parliaments in England to that which he mentions maintaine the truth of that first period against the many remarkcable falsities of this Image breaker And presumes a more implicit faith in the people of England then the Pope ever commaunded from the Romish laitie or els a naturall sottishnes fitt to be abused and ridden Kings may expect credit to their words from their people Rebells cannot
all men see that in all places of Government much is left Arbitrary to the Governour and it was evident to the world that the Earle of strafford did nothing in an Arbitrary manner without President of his Predecessours and the Judges in Courts of equitie might be aswell made Cryminall for proceeding in an Arbitrary manner as he That he had endeavoured to subvert fundamentall lawes was a supposition not a fact and if the Image breaker looke over the Articles where with he was charged at his Tryall he will finde nothing of such a Cryme To subvert Parliaments and incense the King against them was not as much as vrged against him as his Tryall that Article being declined by his accusers in regard of knowne falshood and that the Earle of strafford advised the King to call the former Parliament That he had endeavoured to make histolitie betweene England and scotland was a legend devised for vulgar temper not rationall consideration for both Kingdomes being vnder one King they must be Rebells in either Kingdome that make warr against one another without him and what dreamer can fancy that any Minister of state that were affected to the Kings designes as this libeller supposes the Earle of strafford to be would stirr vp hostilitie betweene the nations They have not yet adventured to charge the Earle of strafford with stirring vp the scotch hostilitie and if he endeavoured to resist them is that to make hostolitie be tweene the nations It hath been the practice of these Rebells to stile men incendiaries and malignants that opposed their Rebellion and such evill Counsellours that advised any course to prevent their attemps and the following confusion but though this vaine delusion were cast abroade among the people it was never offred as a charge against the Earle That he had councelled the King to call over that Irish Army of Papists which be had ounningly raysed to reduce England as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation is vnseasonably remembred by the libeller after those Rebells whome he serves have severall times drawne in forraigne Armies into England reduced the nation to serve an vsurped power set vp an Arbitrary Government subverted the fundamentall lawes and destroyed both King and Parliament It may astonish Knowing men to reade this Author objecting Capitall offences to the Earle of strafford and numbring vp for instance the same Actions himselfe desends soe as it cannot be an humane errour but hellish-fury that hurles him into such mad contradictions and its worth the observing that to this particular he adds as appeared by good Testimony then present at the consultation well Knowing that the Testimony was not only single but subject to most just and apparent exception in regard of knowne enmitie and former prevarication in severall examinations vpon oath and it no way helpes a false Testimonie that he knew the truth or that he was present at a fact whereof he makes an vntrue relation and if the Earle of strafford had councelled the King to make vse of the Jrish Army in either Kingdome in case of Rebellion how comes that to be an offence though that was not the truth that he spake of England nor the Army raysed against England and is it a commendable cunning to rayse an Army against a Rebellion His reference to 28 Articles directs vs how to know that he trusts on number more then weight and those Articles remaine a Testimonie to posteritie of the ridiculous pretences which effected such mischeife He sayth the Commons by farr the greater number-cast him and yet is so absurdly impudent to charge the King with singularitie of conscience and alledge presently a part of the lower-house of the same opinion The Lords he sayth after they had been satisfied in a full discourse by the Kings solicitour and the opinions of many Iudges delivered in their house agreed likewise to the sentence of Treason Those Lords that condemned the Earle of strafford might be satisfied by terrour of the Tumults and their owne corrupt passions never by law nor reason It s well knowne that the Lords and Commons were assaulted and threatned by the vnruly rabble of the Citie and Suburbs if they condemned him not they had not freedome in their coming or going to the house or sitting there There was no one judge that gave his opinion for the sentence against him and the Sollicitours discourse was very strong against the present Rebells wholy impertinent to the case of the Earle of strafford and shewed his owne deceite and the sottishnes of them that relyed on what they vnderstood not Diverse lords for sooke the house having not libertie to be present soe farr were the lords from being satisfied That which he calls a sentence of Treason was an act of power it being a Bill to take away his life but an exception of all men els from being proceeded against for the same matters in ordinary Justice and this very Action soe scandalous in it selfe and soe greivous to many that consented to it must be dreft out with a shamelesse commendation to accuse the King for his repentance of a fact which soe much afflicted him That the people vniversally cryed for justice is noe wonder if we consider former examples and the had a President in the people of the Iewes that cryed Crucifie If we beleive this libeller telling vs how light and violent they are in their motions or if we looke vpon the acts of a powerfull faction then prevayling with them that could easily make them cry what was put in their mouth we may easily judge the injustice of their cry and their ignorance of the cause and a sober author would have hated to borrow an Argument of Justice from popular outcryes which are the most evident proofe of injustice and oppression of innocence He sayes none were his friends but Courtiers and Clergimen the worst at that time and most corrupted sort of men Court ladies not the best of women His fer friends and many Enemies render the proceedings against him more then suspected and men may easily beleive that in such a condition furie was the accuser and malice and cowardise the judge The confining his friends to Court and Church is the effect of the libellers engagement of schisme and Rebellion who holds such loyaltie and affection to the King and conscientious reverence to the Church for the markes of greate offenders If multitude of Ennemies be a Testimony of guilt the best men will become the worst of sinners But having noe friends as he sayes it adds much to the right of his cause that soe many who were neither Courtiers nor Clergymen nor any way obliged by him or the Court should in discharge of their conscienc declare their dissent to that bloody law though they were thereby objected to popular fury His impertinent rayling at Courtiers and Clergymen argues his malice not Cryme in them His mention of Court ladies was for want of matter and their activitie
but the instigation of the factious partie in Parliament That it was reasonable and just for the Parliament to make choise of their owne guards and Commaunder will only appeare to such as had trayterous plotts against the King and the choice that they made of the Earle of Essex shewes by their after imployment and his ensuing Actions that the King had just reason for the refusall and though this Author thinke that he hath said somewhat by naming him the Kings owne Chamberlaine yet all men see that these obligations which the King had put vpon that Earle could not with hold him from being a leader to the mad multitude against King and Kingdome It is the right of inferious Courts to make choice of their owne guards which is vtterly false but can he tell that ever an inferiour Court vndertooke to be guarded by a Militia or that ever they had other guards then from Constables and inferiour officers whome they might require to keepe the peace and doe their dutie and noe Court could ever make choice of any guard either for number or Commaunder He sayes that why the King refused the guard desired the next day made mainfest for then be came to blocke vp or assault the house of Commons It soone appeared wherefore they desired a guard to protect Traytours destroy the King That the King came to blocke vp or assault the libelles hath already confessed to be false for he did it not when it was in his power if he had refused a guard for that reason he would have performed it it s impertinently alleadged for the cause of those tumults when he hath shewed that those tumults were begun long before for he lately to vs of the blood drawne at the gate of white hall and Westminster hall which himselfe knowes was in the tumults He proceedes to say that he had begun to fortifie his Court and entertained armed men How absurdly doth he produce any acts of his Majest which were occasioned by the tumults to be causes of the tumults fortifying his Court and entertaining armed men there was good cause for and what could it signifie that the King fortified his owne house But an apprehension of danger And how could it offend any vnles such as were disaffected to his safetie He sayes these men soe entertained standing at his Pallace gate reviled and with drawne swords wonnded many of the people as they passed by in a peaceable manner whereof some died His owne relation makes it more then probable that such as were wounded gave the occasion of the hurt they had for they were not drawne to the Palace gate and might have quietly passed by though any of his Maj Servants stood at the gate the truth is they dayly provoked his Maj with insolent menacinge words Actions enforced such as guarded the Court to repel them with force if they were reviled they gave the provocation by their seditious carriage these armed men are now come to drawne swords there being no armes found by this Author but swords wherewith the persons vsually walked which were necessarily drawne against that rowt The passing by a multitude though neither to St. Georges feast nor to a tilting of it selfe was no Tumult The expression of their loyaltie and stedfastnes to the Parliament whose lives they doubted to be in danger was noe Tumult but wherefore should such a multitude resort that had nothing to see vnles they were tumults If a multitude of people either at St. Georges feast or a tilting should threaten the King or with violence presse into his Court and reproach and assualt such as they found there this would be a tumult somewhat more but this was not al these tumults acted they assaulted the members of both houses neere their doores they threatned them that consented not to what they would have they prescribed to the King and both houses what they should doe doth this triviall discourser make no difference betweene such Actions that are the most pernitious disorders in states the comming of a multitude to see a tilting If the purpose of such multitudes had been preservation of the lives or safeties of any members in Parliament it was very vnsuteable to their pretence to enquire into the proceedings of the houses assualt menace the members The loyaltie which he sayes they bare to the Parliament was il exprest by breaking the priviledges wronging the members their loyaltie was due to their King in the first place they owed nothing to the Parliament but as their Kings Court Councel but the Author thinkes fit they should breake their sworne loyaltie to their King to maintaine a faction agianst him If it grew to be so the cause was in the King his retinue who by hostile preparations and actuall assailing the people gave just cause to defend themselves can himselfe believe this dreame of his when he reades it over that the kings preparations against the tumults after a long continved insolence against him should more excuse them for encreasing their violence them justifie their first attempts Neede they come to white hall or Westminster to defend themselves but their disorderly absurd pretences are fit Apologies for a tumultuous rowt These petitioning people needed not have been so formidable to any but to such whose consciences misgave them how il they had deserved of the people and doe non forbid such petitioning people but those whose consciences misgave them how il they had deserved of the people why then were the kentish petitioners and other soe roughly handled comming vnarmed more peaceably then these Tumults And doe the libellers Masters permitt such petitioning people at present vnles it be some of their owne suborning And are the people which he soe lately described to to be exorbitant and excessive in their motions become such exact judges of al mens meritt and determine of punishment without respect to their Rulers If the libeller would have shewen what these Tumults wanted to make them Cryminall and wherefore other Tumults were condemned he would have found meanes to have come to himselfe have sayd that Tumults were necessary Preparations to Rebellion That the King was soe Emphaticall and elaborate on this Theame will redound lesse perhapps them he was aware to the commend ation of his Government for in good Governments they happen seldomest and rise not without couse It is more then perhapps that this libellers commendation of the Tumults will condemne his defence If Tumults never happen without cause we must accuse the best Governments of giving that cause we are sure Davids Government wanted them not but Absolon and Sheba shall condemne the man after Gods owne heart Did this libeller thinke any truth in scripture or was he at all acquainted with it that will have a just cause for all Tumuls when we reade soe many against Moyses by the children of Israell And it he had pleased to
giddy wicked Rebellion in the people By what law was the king bound to attend these Lords or what authoritie had they to prepare matter for the Parliament more then any others of the Kingdome Is it not a knowne Treason to endeavour to depose the King and did not the late Parliament professe to abhorre the thought of it And how comes it to passe that these Lords have a power to threaten the King with deposing him What Rebells can be convicted by any law if this Action be not Treason The libeller getts nothing by this example but an evidence against his Masters for these Lords and their assistants had their pardon for that Rebellion And wherein did this Rebellion of these Lords differ from that of Jach straw and other Traytours mentioned by Mr. Sollicitour against the Earle of Strafford His folly in seeking to draw an Argument from the Actions of Rebells to prove a Cryme in the King is ridiculous to any reasonable man and it s not imaginable that the king should be bound to attend any meeting of his Peeres and Councellours which did tend towards a Parliament for by that Rule he must attend in as many places as there are factions noe sober time ever pretended that the king was bound to attend the Parliament which was to be called and dissolved by him and our Ancestours would be esteemed as voyde of reason as loyaltie if their Parliaments were governed by a Tumultuous rabble and the king were oblidged to doe what they would have though the whole kingdome were bleeding to death of those wounds which their impious and inconsiderate violence and fury had inflicted The king sayes the shame was to see the barbarous Rudenes of those Tumulte to demaund any thing And this the libeller beleives was the truest cause of his deserting the Parliament And was it not a just cause for him to desert the Parliament or faction in it when either they could not or would not restrayne that barbarous rudenes The worst and strangest of that any thing they demaunded was but the vnlording of Bishopps and expelling them the house and the reducing of Church discipline to a conformitie with other Protestant Churches And this the libeller would have noe Barbarisme What did the Parliament there if the Tumults may demaund the alteration of the Government of Church or state Can it be presumed that a rowte of Mechannicks could determine what was conformitie to other Protestant Churches The libeller at first remembred Mr. Solicitours discourse against the Earle of Strafford there he might have found that it was Treason to goe about assemble a multitude to alter the Government of Church or state And to seeke the vnlording of Bishopps by force in that manner they did was Treason by the law and we have seene that this desperate rabble whose demaunds the libeller sayes were but the vnlording of Bishopps and the like thinke the murther of the king and destruction of his family noe other then a but. They were demaunded by the Parliament which is vntrue but they were demaunded by a factton who suborned these Tumults to overaw and drive away the greatest part of the members of both houses The King in a most tempestuous season forsooke the helme and steerage of the Common wealth He withdrew himselfe from that storme which the Traytours had raysed against him and admitted not any steerage when all was whirled by tempestuous Tumults The libeller would willingly mince the causes of his Majest departure and therefore he catches hold of the mention of shame to exclude feare from the barbarous rudenes of the Tumults to demaund any thing he would conclude there were only demaunds noe barbarous rudenes and would make the last word to exclude all that went before To be importuned the removing of evill Councellours and other greivances was to him an intollerable oppression To offer violence to him for his protection of faithful Councellours the support of Government in Church and state was intollerable and though the libeller doe commend the violence of the Tumults yet heere he calls it only importunitie and the Kings denyall of the impetuous demaunds of a rabble to change the Government in Church and state denyall and delay of Justice If violence be lawful as he oftē affirmes why doth he mince his defence and soe often fly to these termes of importunitie and petitioning The advice of his Parliament was esteemed a bondage because the the King sayes of them whose agreeing votes were not by any law conclusive to his judgment for sayes the libeller the law ordaines a Parliament to advise him in his greate affaires but if it ordaine also that the single judgment of a King shall outballance all the wisedome of his Parliament it ordaines that which frustrates the end of its owne ordaining There is no doubt but in a Monarchy the dependence of the people is vpon the King the greatenes of whose interest in the prosperitie of the Kingdome is more likely to oblidge him to their preservation then any number of private men can be encleined to and as the law ordained a Parliament to advise him soe it forbidds them to commaund or prescribe him though the Major part of Parliament involve the whole It s against all reason to include the King who is allwayes furnisht by law with his other Councells may see good reason to preferr the Counsell of the smaller number and that law which ordained the Parliament to be called and dissolved by the King had destroyed what it ordained if the King had been bound to consent to all advices given him by the Parliament Such a restraint vpon the King not only makes voyde and vseles those select Councells which by law are continually to advise him but destroyes the Government of Monarchy which the law cannot intend and gives the Parliament the absolute soveraigntie which the people would not live vnder being contrary to their desires and dispositions the trust reposed in such as they elected The Kings judgment may dissent he sayes to the destruction of himselfe and Kingdome And soe doubtles may the judgment of a major part in Parliament and we have found by long experience that Parliaments have produced Acts to the preiudice of the state and corruption of Religion but this libeller holds all meanes frustraneous that beget not Rebellion and as in his affection he preferrs the judgment of the Parliament before the Kings soe any Company or committee of Lords that conspire against him as appeares by his late remembred instance against Rich the 2 And what power he would have in the Parliament over the King he would place in the Tumults his admired Iron flaile over the Parliament and prayes vnto God to send them that they may purge the Parliament and prescribe lawes both to the King and them and therefore he judges that it is vnlawlike that a remedy soe slender should be the vtmost meanes of publique safetie And we are sure that
at his Tryall or other proceedings against him the cases being contrary for Lentulus and the rest were accused for conspiring against the state Strafford was accused by those that conspired against the state and sought to take him away for a cleerer passage to their designe The King vouchsafes to the Reformation which both Kingdomes intended noe better name then innovation and ruine both to Church and state and the expelling of Bishopps out of the Church ruine to the Church and out of the house of Peeres ruine to the state And he askes how happy the nation could be in such a governour who counted that their ruine which they thought their deliverance It cannot be doubted but the abolition of the order and Government of Church and state is an innovation performed by force against the King execrable Rebellion and the King never doubted to say that such disorderly innovations were the ruine of Church and state and the innovations and ruines mentioned by the King to be agitated by some men are not restrained to the cause of the Bishopps though that alone and the manner of proceeding in regard of the injustice violence and the dangerous consequences that attend it threatned ruine to Church and state It is strange that a people may mistake their ruine for their deliverance that a wise Prince by denying them their wil may keepe them from perishing which their owne errours would cast them into but such as knew how small a part of the people how contemptible affected those innovations and how they were cherisht by the leaders of Rebellion to strengthen their partie and how others were drawne in by hopes and feares to comply with a potent faction for their profit or safetie and how greate a partie both for number qualitie detested these innovations may well conclude that neither the nation thought it their deliverance nor the Kings refusall other then a just care and providence for their good It is not likely that the house of Peeres gave hardly their consent to the Bills against the Bishops that soe easily gave it to attach them of high Treason But it is apparent they hardly gave their consent to those Bills for they had often rejected them and therefore his presumption is of noe weight against plaine proofe If their rights and priviledges were thought so vndoubted in that house then was that protestation noe Treason and the house will become liable to a just construction either of injustice for soe consenting or of vsurpation to expect that their voting or not voting should obstruct the Commons The priviledges of the Bishopps had they not been vndoubted they needed not an Act of Parliament nor soe many Acts of violence to take them away neither can the Commons pretend to greater right for their sitting in the one house then the Bishopps in the other and the Libeller hath rightly concluded that their protestation was noe Treason but that their accusation by the house of Commons was a false and vngrounded Clamour and their commitment by the Lords house an odious injustice but it could be noe vsurpation to expect that their voting or not voting was conclusive to the Commons To what end did the Commons offer their accusation to the Lords if their voting or not voting were not considerable It is Justice when they concurre vsurpation when they dissent But Lords house Commons house are vsurpers when they obstruct the Dictates and overswaying insolence of rabbles and Tumults The Commons were not to desist for five repulses of the Lords noe not for fiftie from what in the name of the Kingdome they had demaunded soe long as those Lords were none of our Lords and what if they had been your Lords were they then to desist if so it was more then they would doe to their King but our or not our makes noe difference to resolute Traytours The Lords were soe farr their Lords as they were not to persist by the power wherewith they were intrusted for the kingdome in their demaund after the Lords refusall for to what end hath the law ordained a Lords house and the Commons soe long practised their addresses to them if they may doe what they please without them Doth the vse of the name of the kingdome add any right to them that have not the power of the kingdome and demaund things to the destruction of the kingdome The king allowes not such a faction the name of a Parliament which hath nothing of either house but some members that assume the name without the priviledges and authoritie that constituted it Though the Bill against roote and branch passed not till many of the Lords with some few of the Commons either enticed away by the king or overawed by the sense of their owne malignitie deserted the Parliament that was noe warrant for them who remained being farr the greater number to lay aside the Bill He well knowes they that remained of the Lords house were an inconsiderable number and such as deserted the Commons house wanted not many of the number of them that remained and of them that remained many were overawed by force and diverse plainely dissented to that Bill The injustice of them that remained was intolerable that refused all reparation or securitie to such as were injured by the Tumults and it was a most perfidious Act in them to enforce their members to desert the house that they might exercise their Arbitrary power over the kingdome the injury was so apparent the pretēce of malignancie so ridiculous against the deserting members that noe sober man can imagnie enticement or overawing to be the cause of their withdrawing and these remaining members ought to have forborne by their dutie to the kingdome the passing of such a Bil in the absence of soe many members but they that will forbeare noe degree of treason cannot probably abstaine from breakes of priviledge and lesse injuries He sayes this degrading of the Bishopps was orthodoxall in the Church ancient and reformed What will not this man say Wee neede not wonder at his other impudencies that will affirme the taking away the order of Bishopps orthodoxall in the ancient Church which never wanted them The King sayes he was bound besides his judgment by a most strict and vndispensable oath to preserve that order and the rights of the Church And sayes the Libeller If the letter of that oath be not interpreted by equitie reformation or better knowledge then was the King bound to graunt the Clergie all priviledges graunted to them by Edward the Confessour and so bring in Popery Equitie must be admitted in all interpretations of oaths and soe must better knowledges but the knowledge of other men is noe exposition to him that takes an oath if his owne knowledge be not convinced The King hath sworne to preserve the priviledges of the Church to be a protectour of the Bishopps and by what equitie reformation or better knowledge would this libeller induce
the King must not name without reverence and their seditious tongues more Zealous against schisme then Simony or pluralities might in likelyhood have done mischeife betweene theis Brethren but it was prevented and in despight of the Parliament and these old warriours and Zealous Ministers the new modell seize the King their Captive and this is the law Religion Reformation Libertie and Parliament which the king withstood and the man after all his law determines that irregular motions may be necessary on earth sometimes aswell as in heaven Greate worthyes by disobeying law oft times have saved the Commonwealth and the law afterward approved that vnblameable exorbitancie But wherefore hath he all this time made breach of lawes soe hainous it had been ingenuous in him to have distinguished betweene the blameable and vnblameable exorbitancy then he would not have found Coate Conduct-money and the rest of his particulars rise soe high as the vnblameable exorbitancies he now magnifies But though Divine lawes could not regulate the mans motions as they doe Celestiall bodyes yet the obstinacy in his evil courses makes him goe retrograde and fight for law and against law for Parliament and against Parliament and trust and Elections in Parliament are become scarecrowes to fright Children not Conquerours Though the Presbiterian be supplanted he shall finde a better portion then vncircumcised Prelates It s like the Jewish brethren seeke to bring into bondage such as receive not their Antichristian Markes and professe the beleife of revived heresies eating the sacrifices of the dead The story could not certifie the King that there was division of tongues or hands in the builders of Ierusalem but it told him that they which built had the Kings Commission and God may in mercy to the nation remove theis bloody brethren that will destroy Jerusalem rather then quit their Tyrany over it We may very well see the judgment of God vpon the nation in this bloody warr and though it begun with the house of God we may expect that such men will not escape that have been the firebrands of this dissention and wrought soe greate misery vpon the nation and though the Moabites Ammonites and Edomites gloried in the Jewes Captivitie as theis Rebells in the Conquest and Captivitie of their King and Sanballat and Tobiah and these other Enemies of the Church despised the weakenes of the Jewes in rebuilding the wall of Jerusalem and in scorne said that a fox going on it would overthrow it speaking with the same insolencie as the Libeller now vses yet they may be assured that God will remember his Church and the Enemies thereof as he did Edom in the day of Jerusalem The Libeller is a good witnes against himselfe saying to counterfeite the hand of God is the boldest of all forgeries and he who without warrant but his owne fantastique surmise takes vpon him perpetually to vnfold the secret and vnsearchable misterie of high providence it likely for the most part to mistake and slander them and approaches to the madnes of those reprobate thoughts that would wrest the sword of Iustice out of Gods owne hand and apply it more justly in his conceite and himselfe makes the application that vsurpes the hand of God in the successes and victories of Rebells to the approbation of their impietie and avow the wresting of the sword of Justice out of the hand of Gods vicegerent to imploy it more justly in their owne conceite and dares stander the misteries of high providence by binding them to their owne fantastique surmises What could he have spoken more appositely to his owne condemnation All men that behold the dealings of the Army with that mocke Parliament doe judge a very greate proportion in that retalliation of the injuries they had offred the King they that would lay hands on the Militia are brought vnder the Dominion of those forces which themselves had raysed for that vsurpation and heere againe the Libeller would finde somewhat to succour his feeble conceites of the beginning of the warr from the Kings confession which sayes noe man is soe blinde as not to fee herein the hand of divine Iustice they that by Tumults first occasioned the raysing of Armes must now be Chastened with their owne Army for new Tumults And what now is the Libellers extraction from hence that because Tumults were the first occasion of raysing Armes by consequence he himselfe raysed them first against these Tumults It s a cripled cause that stands on such crutches Though Tumults might be the first occasion yet this was not the whole occasion for these Tumults were seconded by seizing the forts and Navy raysing an Army by those that raysed the Tumults and their guilt in raysing Tumults sought protection from a formed Army and this Method of divine Justice sober men observe with reverence while irrationall and obstinate Traytours attribute nothing but their owne successes to the hād of God in favour which is in wrath to themselves and others These were new Tumults for which the Citie was chastened and cannot be referred to another farr fetcht cause soe many yeares before But the Cittie that raysed Tumults for the Parliament many yeares before is now punisht for Tumults for that same pretended Parliament by that Army raysed out of them and is it not evident heere that the first inventers of mischeife are scourged with the whipps themselves had prepared for others The fact of Manlius defending the Capitoll against the Gaules and afterward throwne headlong from the Capitoll for sedition might restraine the Libellers wicked application of their murdering the King at the gate of whitehall to the merit of his actions done there but the Cittie suffred by an Action which they had done for them who now punish them for it and they that did a wickednes with applause are punisht for it by those that applauded it the Actions of Manlius were opposite one to another heere the same It was a mercy they had a victorious Army soe neere to fly to But it was a judgment that Tumults which they had vsed to drive away the King should drive away them and the Libellers Logickes serves him to as litle purpose as his historie He would have that the latter were reall Tumults the first but pretended and why will he beleive the Parliament for the first and not for the latter And why doth he call them those few of both houses that withdrew from the first tumults and those many from the latter when it is most apparent that they which withdrew at first were three times the number of them that forsoake at last It is not the place but the end and cause that makes a Parliament And then all they that say they have a good cause and a good end are a Parliament and what neede is there then of a writ or Elections And Tumults are as good as Parliaments and the end and the cause make them Tumults and noe Tumults Parliament and noe Parliament and