But why in Gods name are not the Assembly of Divines at Westminster consulted with in this point Or why doe not our conscientious Brethren read the Annotations of the Assembly who note that Egypt which would not in the greatest extremity of famine On Gen. 47. when all other mens lands were sold yet then that they would not sell the lands of the Priests shall rise up in judgement against the alienators or sellors of lands which have been dedicated to God or his Servants CHAP. VI. That this kind of Alienation is against Prudence Justice the good of the Kingdom in general and of the Tenents to such Lands in special BUt were there not so much said in Gods Book and by learned Orthodox Divines shall neither our owne Lawes nor Prudence nor Justice prevaile in this case to keep us from selling of Church Lands For what Justice is it to sell that which is not our owne And that these lands are 1. Gods I hope it is proved sufficiently by Gods words the verdict of allowed Divines and shall be further proved anon by the Lawes of our Land 2. They are the Bishops who are Gods Assignes and Usufructuaries and these lands are theirs by as good title in Law as any man can hold any land in this Kingdome 3. They are by Patronage the Kings for this is very lately professed in a good Parliament 1 Jacob. 3.3 in these words Whereas all the Lands of the Bishops in England and Dominion of Wales were given by Kings of England the full truth whereof I will not dispute whereby the King is become the lawfull and rightfull Patron of all those Lands therefore it is desired that the King would enact not that they without the King would or could no such power then knowne and what is desired not that the Bishops Lands should be sold but that they may not be leased out by the Bishops for longer terms of time then for 21. yeares or three lives no not to the Crowne And is this Justice so soone forgotten or so soone changed in so short a time that without the consent of God the Proprietary of the King the Patron and of the Bishops the Assignes the lands shall be utterly sold away And yet must we call this Justice I pray God this Justice call not for judgement from heaven And whether it can be just to sell the Bishops Lands I pray examine by that rule and touch-stone of true Moral Justice which our Lord Christ hath expressed in two short Precepts the one Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe The other Mat. 19.9 Mat. 7.12 Whatsoever ye would that men should doe unto you doe you even so unto them for this is the Law and the Prophets Now by the first rule examine your selves whether in this act of selling the Bishops Lands you love the Bishops as your selves And trie this by the other whether you would yeeld your consent as to a thing just that if the Bishops had your power they might and should preserve to themselves their own lands and expose yours to sale If your hearts speake the truth I feare they would denie this to be just in the Bishops against you and if so then be assured that in this act of selling the Bishops lands you doe not that which by the verdict of your owne conscience is just And if you will as Law-makers should look forward and provide for future times stands it with civil Prudence to sell those Lands away which doe and will yeeld so much for maintenance of the King and Kingdome in Tenths First-fruits Subsidies and Taxes which for the most part will bee swallowed up when fallen into Lay-hands 2. Stands it with civil Prudence to robb Tenents of so good penniworths as they now hold from Bishops and Church-men which they must not expect when in Lay-hands whereby they have beene enabled the better to serve the King and Kingdome in time of need 3. Stands it with Prudence and Charitr to cast so many into a state of beggery and danger of theeving who by Bishops and Church-men have been reasonably relieved by under Offices and places in the Church Upon the dissolution of the Religious Houses in the Reign of K. Henry the Eighth Chron. f. 773. Mr Speed saith that a great Rebellion was raised in Lincolnshire and the Rebels expressing the cause thereof to the King they say Wee grieve for the suppression of so many Religious Houses whereby the Pooralty of your Realme is unrelieved and many put off their livings which is a dammage to the Common-wealth Soone after another Rebellion arose in Yorkeshire where 40000. with Horse Armes and Artillery rose for Religion who had upon their sleeves the Name of the Lord the ground of their rising was saith the same Author That the King by his evill Counsellers will destroy the Ministers of the Church f. 775. which makes against the Common good 4. Stands it with a Religious and civil Prudence to robb Learning and Religion of that profit and preferment which encouraged the study and encrease both of Learning and Religion Prov. 14.4 Where no oxen are the crib is cleane And the Land soon after K. Solomon found this true 1 King 13.33 for when Jeroboam had taken away the best maintenance of the Priests what followed but that the Priests were chosen out of the lowest of the people Which I would it were not too true now in our Land and in after times the Church suffered more under Julian then Dioclesian for this tooke away the able men but that Apostate their maintenance I shall close this point with that memorable passage of Sr Edward Coke in Winchesters Case The decay of the Revenues of the Church will draw after it the downe-fall of Gods Service and Religion which God in mercy avert CHAP. VII That it is against the Lawes of this Kingdome of England which the two Houses of Parliament and Kingdome by their severall Declarations Protestations and Covenants are bound to maintaine BUt if neither Gods Word nor the Verdict of best Divines nor Justice nor Prudence can be heard yet I pray heare what our Lawes say in this case and yet before I urge these to which I am as much a stranger as to the Profession let me remember you with that which I have heard to be a Maxime in our Law That no Statute Law or Custome which are against Gods Law or Principles of Nature can be of any validity but are all null which if granted it will save me the paines to cite our Lawes as having before proved that it is against Gods Law to sell away the lands of Bishops Yet let me adde that one Statute saith 1 Edw. 3. c. 2. That the King by evil Counsellors caused the Temporalties of Bishops to be seized into his hands for a time to the great dammage of the said Bishops which from henceforth shall not be done and this Statute is not repealed and therefore
is in its full force at this day as all other Statutes unrepealed are I might add another Statute 17 Edw. 2. that when the Templars theeving bloudy decried Souldiers had their Lands taken from them yet were not those lands then divided among Parliament men nor sold for the Common-wealth although the Kingdome at that time was in distresse and want enough I beleeve more then now no the then Parliament surely conceived they might doe neither of these they therefore translated those lands and settled them on the Priorie of St John of Jerusalem and in the same Statute it is inserted that the Parliament then did not alienate the Lands of those Templars 1. Because they were given to God though possessed by men 2. Because they held it a sinne to rob the Donors of their gift 3. Because they held it would prove mortal to the Alienators and these causes were then held sufficient to keep a Parliament from selling or alienating Church Lands And it is in the same Statute provided that if in after times the said Hospitalers or their successors shall be put out of any of those lands they shall have power to recover the same according to the Law of the Realm I have likewise read that in the 25 Edw. 1. it is declared In the Review of the Covenant Printed 1644. That Lay-men have no authority to dispose of the Lands or Goods of the Church for they are only committed to the Priests to be disposed of I confesse I finde it not in the printed Statutes but this I find and read there That none high nor low by any occasion 3 Edw. 1. c. 1. shall course in any Parke nor fish in any Pond of a Prelate or other Religious person without the leave or will of the Lord or of his Bayliffe In those times sure the Parliaments found not that they had power to sell away the Bishops Lands and I conceive that the Parliament deemed not then that they had any such power by reason of the great Charter granted by this Kings father which Charter Sr Edward Coke calls the Bulwarke of the Subjects Tenures in England and therefore upon this give me leave a little longer to insist as being a maine part and foundation of our Lawes One Statute enacts 42 Edw. 3. c. 1. That if any Statute be made contrary to the great Charter it shall be void which Statute is still in force and now heare what this Charter speakes concerning the Lands of the Church and of Bishops and then say truely whether it be not against the Law of England to sell these Lands In this Charter confirmed two and thirty times by our best Parliaments it is expresly said Wee have granted to God and by this our Charter have confirmed for us and our heires for ever that the Church of England shall be free and shall have all her whole Rights 2 part Institut in Procemio and Liberties inviolable The great Charter saith Sr Edward Coke is no new Law but it is declaratory of the principal fundamental Lawes of England 25. Edw. 1. And he saith The Nobles and great Officers were to be sworn to the observation of it and by a Parliament it was judged to be taken as the Common Law of England and well may considering the four causes or ends of that Charter as is exprest in the entrance viz. 1. The honour of God 2. The health of the Kings soul 3. The advancement of the Church 4. The amendment of the Kingdome And now heare this Law speake which is almost the same which was granted by K. John in the nineteenth yeare of his Reign with the interpretation of the Oracle of our Law Paris p. 255. Sir Edward Coke on the Charter and first as all best Grants have it begins with God and saith Concessimus Deo where the Interpreter saith What is given to the Church as Bishops lands were is given to God and what hath this Law granted to God Why that the Church shall be free where the Interpreter tells you that by the Church is meant all Ecclesiastical persons their possessions and goods And these shall be free saith he from all exactions and oppressions and to sell away their lands is it neither oppression nor exaction If not heare the Charter and Interpreter goe on Wee have granted to God that the Church shall have all her Rights entire i.e. saith the Interpreter That all Ecclesiastical persons shall enjoy all their Rights wholly without diminution or substraction whatsoever Whereby saith hee all their Rights are confirmed as they had them before or as at the first grant and then they had them not to be sold It goes on and that the Church or Church-men have and hold all their liberties Which liberties saith he grants them the liberty of the Law of England the Privilege of Parliaments and all Grants by Charter or Prescription and shall none of these keep the Bishops Lands from sale Moreover these Grants are not alone for that or any set time but for ever Heare the Charter This we have granted to the Church i.e. Church-men for our selves and our heires for ever Which saith the Interpreter is added to take away all scruple that this Charter or Grant should live and take effect for ever And which is not unworthy your observation 12 Hen. 3. p. 23. in our printed Statutes there is an heavy Curse denounced against all those who shall breake this great Charter And now if you grant which I think you will not denie that this Charter is a part of our Law then I hope it will follow that by our Law the Lands of the Church or of Bishops may not be sold or alienated You have seene what the Charter hath granted the Bishops as Church-men Chap. 19. now consider what the same Charter grants them as free-borne Subjects of the Kingdome Nullus liber homo saith it capiatur vel imprisonetur vel disseisiatur de libero Tenemento suo vel libertatibus vel liberis consuetudinibus suis nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terrae Where the Interpreter expounds 1. Who is a free-man 2. What disseising is 3. What is the Law of the Land To the first he saith That every free-born Subject is meant here to be a free-man To the second to be disseised saith he is to be put out of his seisin or dispossessed of his free-hold that is lands or livelihood To the third by the Law of the Land saith he that is either by the Common Law or the Statute Law or the Custome of England And for further explanation adds by the Law of the Land is understood by processe of Law by indictment or presentment of good and lawful men And all this saith he is no new Law or grant but it is onely declaratory of the Law of England And this saith he should admonish Parliaments that in stead of this pretious trial by the Law of
the Land they bring not in absolute and partial trials by discretion CHAP. VIII That it is against the Prudence and Justice of the King and against his lawful Oath AS the selling Bishops Lands is against our Lawes which the two Houses and Kingdome by their severall Declarations Protestations and Covenants have solemnly bound themselves to maintain so it is against the Kings Prudence against his Justice and against his lawfull and just Oath It is against the Kings Prudence to devest and rob himself of those Immunities 25 Hen. 8.20 26 Hen. 8.3 and 1 Eliz. 4. 14 Ed. 3.4 5 Rights Profits and Revenues which the Law of this Land hath settled in the Crown as Collation of Bishopricks First-fruits and Tenths It is against the Kings Justice to take or make that away from his Heires and Successours which by our Lawes are justly and rightly granted unto them and these Rights the two Kingdomes of England and Scotland have sworn to maintain It is against his Justice to doe or suffer it to be done in respect of the Bishops to whom the King as the fountaine of Justice is bound to see Justice done as to his Subjects in general 2. Institut 1. but then considering from Sr Edward Coke that by our old Law-books the Church is ever under age and in the custody or guardian-ship of the King who is bound to maintaine and defend the Rights and Inheritances of the Church and that it cannot be agreeable to Right and Justice that Pupils under age through the negligence or default of the Guardians should suffer losse or disinheritance I pray well weigh whether it wil not amount even to a crying sinne in the King to doe or suffer such an injustice to be done to his Pupil the Church destitute of all help on earth save onely what she may justly expect from the King Solomon the wisest King on earth from the Spirit of God hath spoken it Enter not into the fields of the Fatherlesse for their Redeemer is mighty and he shal plead their cause with thee Prov. 23.10 11 And when you wel consider and weigh what an Oath the King hath taken at his Coronation you cannot I beleeve acquit the King of a flat perjury if hee shall assent to the selling away of the Bishops Lands But what I shal urge in this point is not so much to inform the King who I am verily perswaded by the illumination of Gods Spirit his frequent reading the holy Scriptures and by the Principles received from his most religious and learned Father of ever blessed memory is so fully satisfied and resolved that neither height nor depth nor any creature shall be able to separate or deterr him from the just defence of the Church as to let the world see that it was not as some ignorantly and uncharitably may term it pertinacity in the King not to assent to the destruction of the Church established but the dictate of a good conscience rightly informed And that it may well be so be pleased to hear and consider what how to whom where when the King swears For being to be Crowned King of England in the convention or presence of his Nobles Clergy and People in the Church the Bishop askes the King Sir will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirm the Lawes Customes and Franchises granted to the Clergy according to the Lawes of God The King answers I grant and promise to keep them Then the Bishop speakes to the King Our Lord and King we beseech you to grant and preserve to us and to the Churches committed to our charge all Canonical Privileges and due Lawes and Justice and that you would protect and defend us as every good King ought to be a Protector and Defender of the Bishops and Churches under his Government The King answers with a willing and devout heart I promise and grant that I will preserve and maintaine to you and the Churches committed to your charge all Canonical Privileges and due Law and Justice and that I wil be your Protector and Defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in his Kingdome by right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under his government Then the King at the Communion Table makes a solemn Oath in the sight of all the people laying his hand upon the holy Book and saith The things that I have before promised I shall perform and keep So help me God and the contents of this Booke Now I beseech you all good Christians judge whether this be not an Oath able with feare and reverence to bind the King to the performance For 1. it is taken by the King Gods Anointed 2. In Gods House the holy Church 3. At Gods holy Table 4. Upon Gods holy Book 5. Tendered by Gods Ministers the Bishops 6. In the presence sight and hearing of Gods people 7. To defend Gods servants the Bishops and the Church 8. With the imprecation of Gods curses and forfeiture of Gods blessings in case of not performance so that if ever Oath could truely be called the Oath of God this is it And yet if I mistake not there is somewhat more that adds strength to the Obligation of this Oath and that is That it is upon a contract betwixt the King and the Bishops for so the Oath is tendered to the King by and for the Bishops and from such a Contract and Oath if just and lawfull as this is who can absolve but he alone who is concerned and to and for whom the Oath and Contract is made which are onely God and the Bishops I have cast mine eye upon a Treatise touching the Kings Oath published by Order and written by Mr Geree Preacher of Gods Word at Saint Albans wherein hee goes about to perswade that the King without impeachment of his Oath at his Coronation may assent to the abolishing of Episcopacy I cannot without a great digression answer his Arguments which might easily be done from his own words and grounds but in stead thereof I shall set down his own words whence I hope it will appeare clearly that the King cannot saving that his Oath assent to the selling away the Church Lands His words are these The intention of that Oath is not against Legal wayes of change but against invasion of the Rights of the Clergy So that if selling the Lands of the Church be such an invasion then he professeth that the King by his Oath is bound from it and whether it be so or no in his sense and judgement heare himselfe speake in the same Treatise where he expresly saith To abolish Prelacy and to seize the lands of Prelates to any private or civil interest undoubtedly could neither want staine nor guilt So that by the plaine expresse verdict of this Preacher of Gods Word the King is proclaimed before hand to be a man of a stained and guilty conscience if he assent to the selling Church-Lands according
Order be rich and proud shal the Function be rooted out for the offence of the person or was this ever held agreeable to Religion Law Justice or right Reason There was a Judas a Traytor who carried the bag among the twelve Apostles of Christ did Christ therefore take away the Apostleship Some Angels rebelled against God did God therefore destroy all the Angels as Rebels James and John would sit one at the right the other at the left hand of their Lord Christ must all the Apostles therefore be despised as proud and usurpers And to take away the Bishops Lands and give them a portion is it not to take away their meat and make them feed all on pottage Or to deale with them as some Idolaters or Eli's sons did who took the flesh or best part of the Sacrifices to themselves and sacrificed the bones or worst to God Or comes not this too neer our English Proverb to steal a goose and stick in place of it the feathers And when it is said they shall have a sitting maintenance for that is all can be challenged from the Scripture remember what Christ replied to those that murmured at the lord of the vineyards bounty to some of the labourers more then others Is thine eye evil because I am good Mat. 20.15 Or repinest thou at that which I have given to those labourers being it is lawful for me to doe with mine what I wil which holds right both in the several Kings giving the Lands and Gods accepting and allowing them to his Ministers But if we be to be pittanced by a competency as it is called who I pray shall be the Steward or Distributor Shall he that robs the true man of his purse give back what he thinks competent And shall this be held just If we understand and beleeve the Prophet it is God that is robbed and who shall judge but God Or what competency is fitting to be allowed to him Is it one or two hundred pounds per Annum If the best Interpreters even of our modern Divines may be heard they will tell you from Gal. 6. and 1 Cor. 16. that this maintenance must be honorable and hath this been performed when for two three foure yeares you have taken all from them and yet not so much as charging them with any offence against Law or your own Ordinances And is this Justice or an honorable maintenance Or would your Honors be content with the like Argum. 17 I have heard that which I would rather truly call a Project then an Argument that the Bishops in England antiently had the First-fruite and Tenths of all the Spiritual livings in every Diocese which were the proper maintenance of those Bishops and that therefore these might be restored to the Bishops in lieu of the Lands which by the Ordinance should be taken from them Resp To which I must desire you to know that this Project or Device is grounded upon a double mistake for 1. the maintenance of Bishops ever since they were in England was by lands such as were given them by their Royal Benefactors and others 2. The Bishops in England held or had not those First-fruits and Tenths but the Bishop of Rome who under the false pretended Title of Universal Bishop Mat. Paris in H. 3. p. 849. usurped and took the same in England as he did almost in most parts of Christendome besides witnesse that Grant of the Pope who De potestate sibi à Deo concessâ Pol. Virg. Hist Angl. lib. 20. gave those Tenths for three years to K. Henry the Third And the like of Pope Vrban who gave the Tenths in this Kingdome to K. Richard the Second to aid him against Charles the French King and those that upheld Clement the Seventh against him after which they were paid to the Pope again until they were restored to the Crown by K. Henry the Eighth 2 K. H. 8. c. 3. for that the King as in that Statute he was stiled the Head of the Church or rightly is the Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor in all causes and over all persons Ecclesiastical Now then if it might be just to grant the Bishops these First-fruits and Tenths in lieu of their Lands yet what Justice can it be to rob as we say Peter to pay Paul to take that which is the Kings just right from him thereby to satisfie for that which is unjustly taken from God and the Church So that as this Project failes in the ground so in the superstructure too it tends to a double Injustice the one against the King and the other against the Church and yet if this could be done without Injustice to either I know not how to clear the act from impiety or Sacrilege when God by his Prophet as I before urged the Text saith Thou shalt not exchange that which is holy to the Lord Ezek. 48. Lev. 27.13 Except as it is excepted for the Levite and Priest it may clearly appear that the exchange be for the better which this cannot be Again if by an Act these Lands on these conditions be now taken from the Church then by another Act of Resumption or Restitution those First-fruits and Tenths may be taken away from the Church again and restored as of right belonging to the Crown and wherein then shall there be a maintenance for Bishops in the Church Argum 18 It hath been urged thereby to root out Episcopacy that the King gives those Bishopricks and so their Lands and by these means he holds the Bishops at his beck to say or do what he will Resp 'T is true that this was urged in Parliament for taking away the Bishops Votes there which being done why yet to take away their lands for these have no Vote in Parliament Or why not to take away as well the lands of all those who hold by Office Tenure or Honor from the King Yea or from all those who make conscience to keep Faith and Loyalty Or why not rather on the other side may ye not enact that all Bishops who shall hereafter act or assist against the Parliament shall lose their estates which is as much as in Justice can be done For will you forbid all Wine Knives Swords and the like for these have and may againe doe mischief and so have Parliaments too But God forbid all these should be taken away upon these grounds I confesse I have heard that Mr Knox in Scotland counselled after this manner Pull down the Crows nests said he for such homely or slovenly Similes they mostly use as best becoming them and sitting the palats of their Auditors for else the black Birds will build againe but of this counsel ere he died he repented though too late for when the steed was stollen he advised the Clergy by word and pen to gain-stand this black Sacrilegious act of taking away the patrimony and possessions of the Church Argum. 19 But we have bound our selves by an
is incompatible with the state of the Church in the New that is understood to be continued and commanded to the practice of the Christian Church Now that an Hierarchy or Superiority and Subordination of the Priests was instituted in the Old Testament I think is denied by none that understands the Government of that Church and that this kind of Government is repealed in the New Testament appears not for the words of Christ forbid onely an Heathenish Tyranny and not a Christianly Superiority or an over-lording and not an orderly ruling Luke 22.25 26 1 Pet. 5.3 2. When in that place our Saviour explicitely forbids such Dominion or Lordship as the Kings and Gentiles exercised not ones mentioning alluding to or touching that Government instituted and practised in the Old Testament me thinkes it stands to reason that this kind of Government by Superior and Inferior is rather confirmed then weakened by our Saviours prohibition for had be intended the abolition of such a Government is it not probable being now as it were upon the theme that be would in some glance at least have strook at that Superiority and Subordination among the Jewes Especially when you consider what before was spoken that the Apostles and their Successors did and were to order the Discipline and Government of the Christian Church by the pattern of the Jewish and whether the like kind of Hierarchy was or is likely to be incompatible for the Christian Church which was instituted for the Jewish Church we may judge by the first and after continued practice of the Christian Church from the Apostles and succeeding times And here I shall cite whom you may as well credit as you are willing to heare Mr Calvin Instit 4.4 who confesseth in the Primitive Christian times they chose one called a Bishop who was as Consul in Rome and the Consuls in Rome were above the Senators in place and power And Mr Beza and Mr Moulin come neerer to us and truth who confesse that either in or very neer after the Apostles times Bishops ruled in the Christian Church where they deny not Bishops to have been in the Apostles times onely they will not lest they should offend or lose by the truth say what they did generally read and I am perswaded did beleeve that Bishops were in the Apostles times yet in the other they are plain and peremptory saying Bishops were soon after the Apostles and could they have proved it they would as readily and as plainly have said the Bishops were not in the Apostles times but soon after but by an artificial blinding or hood-winking the truth they chose rather to expresse it as they doe Whereas Bucer Professor of Divinity in Cambridge in K. Edward the Sixth's time speaks as plainly as truly saying From the first Ordination and perpetual Institution of Christian Churches by the Apostles it seemed good to the Holy Ghost to have in them Bishops and in the Book of Consecration of Bishops made and set forth in the fifth and sixth of K. Edward the Sixth and confirmed by Parliament 8 Eliz. 1. it is thus said It is evident to all men reading the Scriptures and ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there have been these Orders of Ministers in the Church of Christ viz. Bishops Presbyters and Deacons And if it were as evident that the Apostles either instituted or commended a Presbyterian Government and not Episcopal may it not be as a wonder and astonishment that so soon as ever the Apostles were deceased or the most of them the whole Christian Church dispersed through the whole world would suddenly conspire and convene to change that Government instituted or commended by the Apostles into Episcopacy And that Episcopacie and not Presbyterie was the Government generally I may say universally used in the Christian Churches from the times of the Apostles besides the authorities above mentioned I appeale to all the best Histories Moreover it cannot be denied but that this Government came into this Kingdom with the first planting of the Gospel here which was almost 1500. years agoe and hath been ever since established by our best Lawes but hath been confessed by the best learned of the Assembly not to be repugnant to Gods Word and by the most learned and strict Presbyterians Calvin Beza Monlin acknowledged to be either in or soon after the Apostles times and by the full consent of the best Historians proved to be instituted if not by Christ yet by his holy Apostles and by and from them spread over all the Christian world and yet to the end this holy Government may be abolished this detestable sin of Sacrilege must be committed The end and the means we see meet but then well weigh and consider that if it be damnation to him that doth ill to a good end as the Apostle testifieth then what damnation shall attend them who to such an end as the abolishing so holy or divine a Government as Episcopacy shall wilfully commit so detestable a sin as Sacrilege But the second end perchance is better which is as professed to pay necessary debts a good end I confesse I would it were practised by all yea or in this case But would not the Excise and Compositions have discharged that debt had the money been rightly imployed as it was pretended I pray remember that Charles Martell of France under pretence of pay for the Holy War seised on the Church Revenues and though he promised restitution yet was proclaimed by the best Historians to be a notorious and a damnable Sacrilegist But how ever the ends meet perchance there is some great cause that moved or provoked the two Houses to this selling yes and the cause is expressed for this late War was promoted by the Archbishops and Bishops and in favour of them or their adherents and dependents I confesse it seems strange to me that their Lands should be sold for what was done in favour of them who know not by whom this favour is done neither are their favourers once impeached for the favourable act for suppose one doe an evill act in favour of or for Mr Speakers sake who never desired nor acknowledged the favour shall Mr Speakers lands be sold away for this And yet more strange it is that their lands should be sold because the War was in favour of their adherents and dependents But it is said that the Bishops promoted this War and yet not said who nor when nor how but may not that more truly be said which I would not add were it not visible and apparently known to all that some one at the least of the Bishops have stood with and by the two Houses in this War For hath there been wanting one who hath sought and received dangerous wounds as it is reported and proclaimed and that in the War for the two Houses against the King For which he hath not only by suit obtained a pardon for his former disservice so called but bath