comprised within the Articles of Exon or of any other Garison or not within Articles yet did they Petition in that manner although they were as zealous for their King as Sir John Stawel deeming it wisdom in them rather so to do then to run the hazard of not performing their Articles and thereby of the loss of their Liberty and Estate and especially since such acknowledgment or expression and formality of Address was within the intention of those Articles For if a man agreeth to submit to a Composition with these Exceptions certainly he doth agree to submit to all other Rules for such Composition not formerly excepted and this was a constant rule and observed at and before the time of the making of those Articles And therefore in regard Sir John Stawel did refuse to insert such an Acknowledgment or Expression in his Petition he hath in a second particular neglected the performance of his Articles and that premediately since he was preadvised Neither is it satisfactory when Sir John alleageth That he did tell Mr. Ashe he had borne Arms for the late King and by his command unless for the Reasons aforesaid he had in writing affirmed as much And yet this very Paper or pretended Petition which was thus delivered was not presented by himself but put in by a Solicitor And Sir John did refuse to subscribe the same as Mr. Michael Herring hath lately affirmed before a Committee of this present Parliament sitting in the Star-chamber And if it shall be objected That although the several Orders aforesaid did inable that Committee to compound onely with Delinquents it followeth not They should compound with none but such as in terminis acknowledged Delinquency It is easily answered when it is considered That Sir John was not advised to acknowledge in express terms That he was a Delinquent but if he had in his Petition set forth some act done by him amounting to Delinquency it had been sufficient but one of them he was by the constant rules of the Committee to insert in his Petition which Sir Iohn refused Sir Henry Berkley with others came in upon the Articles of Exon as well as Sir Iohn yet Sir Henries Petition was in these words To the Honorable Committe for Compounding with Delinquents The humble Petition of Sir Henry Berkley Knight Sheweth THat your Petitioner as formerly a Commissioner of the Army for His Majesty and since did voluntarily contribute to the Forces raised against the Parliament by means whereof he is become under the notion of a Delinquent That being in the City of Exeter upon the delivery thereof humbly craves the benefit of the Articles of the same And that he may be admitted to a favorable Composition for his offence according to the value of his Estate to the end he may free the same from Sequestration And he shall pray c. Subscribed Hen. Berkley But Sir Iohn having taken on a Resolution not to compound took up all pretences to avoid the same But Mr. Ashe asked him as Sir Iohn objecteth whether he had taken the negative Oath and Covenant to whom Sir Iohn answering no and that his Articles did free him from taking any Oaths Mr. Ashe replyed that before he could be admitted to Composition with them he must take them both It is answered that there then lay on that Committee a command several Ordinances of both Houses the transcripts whereof are inserted that injoined them to tender that Covenant and negative Oath to all persons that came to compound and to secure their persons upon refusal Sab. 1 Nov. 1645. ORdered by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled That the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall shall have power to tender the Solemn League and Covenant to all persons that come out of the Kings quarters to that Committee to compound either upon Mr. Speakers Pass or otherwise and to secure such as shall refuse to take the Covenant until they shall conform thereunto Sab. 5. April 1645. BE it ordained by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled That all and every person of what degree or quality soever that hath lived or shall live within the Kings quarters or been aiding assisting or adhearing unto the forces raised against the Parliament and hath or shall come to inhabite or reside under the power and protection of the Parliament shall swear upon the holy Evangelists in manner following I A. B. do swear from my heart that I will not directly nor indirectly adhere unto or willingly assist the King in the war or in this cause against the Parliament nor any forces raised without the consent of the two Houses in this cause or war And I do likewise swear that my coming and submitting my self under the power and Protection of the Parliament is without any manner of design whatsoever to the prejudice of the proceedings of the two Houses of Parliament and without the direction privity or advice of the King or any of his Councel or Officers other then in what I have now made known so help me God and the contents of this book And be it ordained by the Authority aforesaid that the Commissioners for the keeping of the great Seal of England for the time being shall have power are hereby authorised to tender administer the said Oath unto any Peer or Wife or Widdow of any Peer so coming to inhabit as aforesaid And it shall be lawful to and for the Committee of the House of Commons for Examinations the Committee for the Militia in London and all Committies of Parliament in the several Counties Cities of the Kingdome to tender and administer the said Oath unto every other person so coming to inhabite a abovesaid if any person not being a member of or assistant unto either of the Houses of the Parliament shall refuse or neglect to take the said Oath so duely tendered unto him or her as abovesaid the said Commissioners and Committees respectively shall and may commit the same person to some prison there to remain without bail or mainprize untill he shall conform thereunto It is true that the Articles of Exon do free all persons comprised therein from all Oaths Covenants and Protestations but it is likewise as true that those Articles were not at the time of Sir Iohn's being at Goldsmiths Hall confirmed by both Houses as in right they then ought indeed the House of Commons had before that time confirmed them viZ. sixth of May 1646. but they were confirmed by both Houses not before the fourth of Nov. 1647 above an year after Sir Iohns being there so as the command of tendering this Oath and Covenant lay still upon that Committee and they were not to compound with any person be he within Articles or without before he had taken them and therefore it was no injustice in that Committee to deny Sir Iohn to treat with him before he was sworn for they were prohibited otherwise to admit him to Composition which Sir Anthony Irbie in his
he catcheth at every twig to recover it However the truth of those Verdicts and Indictments is since confirmed by the Iudgment of the High Court of Iustice upon Sir Iohn Stawels Plea of Not guilty and the Depositions of several Witnesses to that purpose as is certified under the subscriptions of three and twenty of that Court and manifested by the recital of the proceedings of that Court in the Remonstrance Sir Iohn being thus found guilty by three several Indictments of Treason and two Murders and still refusing the mercy of his Articles the Parliament in honour of Iustice and upon consideration of his forfeiture of Articles did on the 14 of March 1648. and two years and a half and more after his first Commitment Order his Trial upon these Indictments at the Upper-Bench bar where his Expressions were more insolent and his disownings of the present Authority greater then at any time before And so far was Sir Iohn Stawel after so long imprisonment from accepting the benefit of his Articles that he did not then mention them in order to his exemption from that Trial but on the contrary distinguishing Mr. Iustice Bacon from Mr. Iustice Roll owned the first as one sitting by the Kings Commission but disowned the latter being appointed by the Parliament under the Great Seal by them approved which Seal he termed a Counterfeit and accused the then Sollicitor-Generall of high treason for prosecuting against him in the name of the Parliament as was by several Witnesses proved before the High Court of Iustice And as Mr. Iohn Ash affirmeth uttered words to this effect viZ. My offence is not Treason for which I am here arraigned but because I would not permit the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall to pick my purse and give my consent to pay a sum of mony for the redemption of my Estate which is unjustly taken from me Which speeches if they had fallen from one formerly innocent had been an offence of an high nature but being spoken by sir Iohn a person guilty and so found by several Grand Iuries and at several times of Treason Murder and other high offences And by one that came into the Parliament-Quarters under the pretence of a Composition and in that conjuncture of time when divers Garrisons held yet out for the late King and some Ships had renegaded the Parliament-service and in one of the highest Iudicatures whither multitudes resorted to observe his deportment became not a Compounder much aggravated his former offences must prove prejudicial to the Parliaments affairs and contrary to the 21 of Exceter Articles and to sir Iohns Engagement and subscription at the Guild Hall and was doubtless a breach of his Articles And although perhaps these insolencies were not Treason within the Cognizance of an inferior or ordinary Judicature yet might the Parliament adjudge them so which they have done For in their Act of sale they have mentioned Treason committed by him which must be his miscarriages since his Articles for his former were pardoned And although it be granted they do not amount unto Treason yet they may be a breach of Articles for it is not Treason only that doth break them inferior offences may prove a breach the breach of good behaviour and certainly his miscarriages are of no less nature is a forfeiture of a pardon and why not of Articles Truely much more for pardon though of grace is grounded upon the compact and agreement of the whole Nation but these Articles are but the agreement of certain persons thereof of the Army with Traitors And although by the third Article of Exon certain enumerated Acts are made a breach of those Articles yet questionless other matters not enumerated may be a breach whereof these of sir John are some and it seems have been so adjudged by the Parliament For in the Debate of all Acts and Resolutions of theirs against sir John they still had a consideration of his Articles and adjudged these his miscarriages a breach of them and therefore declared him not to be admitted to Composition having forfeited the benefit thereof And although the Articles bind not sir John in point of his judgement yet they restrain him from all open and overt expressions thereof to the prejudice of the Commonwealth A man in private thoughts deemeth another man to be a thief perhaps knoweth him to be one This judgement this knowledg the Law taketh no notice of But let him declare such his thoughts judgement or knowledge by saying he is a Thief these open words being prejudicial to the party whereof the words were spoken make him liable to an Action and if he proves it not to repair him in damage Sir John might without damage have kept his judgement to himself but expressing it in such insolent and prejudicial language to the affairs of Parliament he forfeited his Articles Which his deportment being reported to the House of Commons they proceeded at that time no further against him in that Court but having then consideration of the Articles of Exon and to preserve the faith of their Armies from all colour of violation they still reserved their mercy for him if he had but then implored it But sir John continued in his averse resolution out of a confidence of the late Kings restitution to his Power and Authority and a designe thereby to receive his whole Estate gratis with a great reward for his many sufferings in owning and justifying the late Kings Cause beyond any of his party being the only Subject of his that refused to comply with the Parliament when he might and was earnestly invited thereunto which aim of his is apparent For Mr. Iohn Ash doth tell us that he sent unto the late King at Hampton-Court desiring him to take notice of the great sufferings he had undergone for his Majesties Cause and did let him know the hopes he had of his Majesties great favour and reward for him when he should be restored And Mr. Iames Ash testifieth that the Lady Stawell told him that sir Iohn did still flatter his hopes to have the King restored and although there were daily less hopes yet his faith continued strong nay besides the testimony of these two persons of honour and by the testimony of two witnesses each truth ought to be tryed if half an eye did but look into his carriage from his first coming before the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall untill his tryal by the High-Court of Justice it could be nothing but disownings contempts and opprobrious language of the present Government and Authority deriding of Compounders and not the least claim of the benefit of his Articles as long as his hopes of favour and singularity remained For sir Iohn never pleaded nor so much as ever pretended to those Articles untill some time after the late Kings death although in the mean time there were brought and obtained against him divers Actions and Iudgements for acts by him done before those Articles and relating to the wars which
the Parliament had by their Act declared that he was not admitted to compound and that that Court should try him as one not admitted thereunto which Declaration no inferior or subordinate Court or authority whatsoever hath power to examine or question And all Examinations Resolutions and other proceedings of that Court touching those Articles and Plea thereof are void and extrajudicial and Sir Iohn stands guilty by the Judgement of that Court of high Treason and other the offences abovesaid and by Act of Parliament declared not admitted to compound This his Guilt being certified to the Parliament by the high Court of Justice with a cesser of sentence in respect of his Articles the Parliament upon reading of that Certificate 10 Iune 1651. resented the same yet by reason thereof spared his life but passed an Act of the 16 of Iune 1651. a month thereafter whereby they adjudge sir Iohn to have forfeited his Estate for Treason and thereupon vested the actual possession of that Estate in certain Trustees and their heirs in order to the sale thereof which Lands are since sold accordingly and the moneys disposed of for the use of the Commonwealth sir Iohn Stawell being in that Act first named and before others of higher degree Which Act and Iudgement being the Act and Iudgement of all the People of England inclusively and the same judgement being since fully executed and the Estate of sir Iohn in fact sold and disposed of by and according to that Act and the Purchasers thereof by force of their respective bargains in the actual and peaceable possession thereof these consequences will follow and be necessarily deduced 1. That the Reasons and causes of that Iudgement cannot be examined or questioned out of the House it self Whether they passed that their Iudgement for Treasonable acts by him done before his Articles in regard they adjudge his Articles to be either neglected in performance or broken by all or any his refusals or misdemeanors abovesaid or whether they adjudged those misdemeanors either joyntly or severally to be a new Treason and by consequence a forfeiture of his Estate since his Articles Or whether for any and for any other act of his or cause they passed their Iudgement against him It will therefore seem very unreasonable and be of dangerous consequence if the Purchasers mediat or immediat should be now enforced for defence of such their Possessions to search into and produce the reasons and causes thereof especially since the Purchasers are meer strangers thereunto 2. That all the Examinations and other proceedings and very Iudgement of the Court of Articles on the said Iudgement of Parliament although an Act of Parliament erected it after that Iudgement given were extrajudicial against the fundamental Laws of this Commonwealth and of bad example Coram non Iudice When that Court under pretence of a general Act of Relief upon Articles did intermeddle with the Case of sir Iohn Stawel touching his person and Estate his Estate being already adjudged by Act of Parliament to be forfeited and the imprisonment of his person remaining indiscussed in that very House especially after the Parliament had Thursday Febr. 24. 1652. Resolved THat the Cause of Sir John Stawel upon his pretence of Title to Articles be resumed to the consideration and determination of the Parliament and that the Commissioners for giving relief to persons upon Articles do forbear to proceed any further therein untill the Parliament take further order Hen. Scobell Cler. Parl. Which Resolves amounting unto an explanation of that Act of Reviver determined not with the dissolution of the Parliament but doth remain annexed to it as a Codicil taking away the Iurisdiction of that Court in the Case of Sir Iohn 2. These proceedings were coram non Iudice in regard of a Proviso in that Act of Reviver in these words viZ. Provided That such person or persons claiming benefit of Articles as aforesaid have not forfeited the same by breach or non-performance of what is or was on their part to be performed since their Articles were granted Now the Parliament having declared if not adjudged Sir John Stawell not to be admitted to Compound have adjudged or declared that Sir John hath forfeited his Articles either by breach or non-performance either of which Judgment or Declaration the Court of Articles could not draw into question And therefore is Sir John within that Proviso and without the jurisdiction of that Court. It is a fundamental That a Judgment of Parliament should not be reversed or annulled by any subordinate or delegated Court Judicature or Authority whatsoever or otherwise then by the immediate power of Parliament which power cannot be transmitted to any other Judicature The Court of Articles have adjudged That Sir John Stawell from and after Composition made as aforesaid shall have the possession of his Estate freed and discharged from all sequestrations and seisures whatsoever and shall enjoy the same without any claim demand impediment or molestation of the said Trustees or of the Survivors or Survivor of them they or any of their heirs These are the words of that Judgment as it is recited in the Remonstrance pag. 71. Which Judgment in respect of this Estate is no otherwise then an annihilation of that Act of Parliament by this subordinate Court under pretence of a power transmitted unto them by the general words of the Act of Reviver when as a special Act could not give any such power of annihilation The Legislative power by the fundamental laws remaineth solely and undoubtedly in the Parliament and cannot be transferred to any inferior Judicature whatsoever Of which power the Abrogation or Repeal of former Laws is a branch or part But this Judgment of the Court of Articles in respect of the Estate of Sir Iohn doth amount unto a Repeal of that Act of disposing this Estate by a power pretended to be delegated to that Court by the general words of that Act of Reviver It is of bad example for that Court of Articles to take cognisance of the Cause of Sir Iohn Stawel the same being depending before the Supreme Authority of the Nation when as their Predecessors who had the same if not greater power for that very reason forbare to give Sir Iohn any relief in that behalf And when the High Court of Justice for the same cause forbore their sentence and did submit it to the judgment of the House although their Act was particular and the Act of Reviving the Court of Articles in generall words And the example is heighthened after that the Parliament-Votes had prohibited them any further intermedling to resume the cognisance of the Cause and to proceed to judgment and by that judgment in respect of the Estate to intrench upon the priviledge of Parliament in reversing the Judgments of Parliament and repealing the Acts thereof and when the Judges Members of that Committee and the best and fundamental Expositors of Acts of Parliament the Parliament that made them being
of Commission and Iustice of the Peace for and within the Town of Taunton And also saith That about the eight day of the same Month of Iune the said Sir Iohn Stawell in company with Iohn Syms Esquire sent for and commanded the said Davis to bring this Deponent before them at the house of one Edward Cooper in the said Town who told this Deponent that he was fined eight hundred pounds to the King for his rebellion against the said King and after many opprobrious speeches used saying the Parliament and the said Town were a company of Rebels and Traitors against the late King and deserved to be hanged required the said Fine of 800 l. of this deponent and upon his refusal to pay the said Fine committed this Deponent close prisoner to the Castle of Taunton then in the hands and power of the said Sir Iohn Stawell as Governour of the said Garrison for the late King who after divers weeks imprisonment there and several demands of the said Fine by the said Sir Iohn Stawell and refusal of payment thereof by this Deponent he this Deponent was afterwards by the said command transmitted to the Bridewell of Taunton and there kept in Irons close Prisoner with many others not suffered humane necessaries to the great weakning and impairing of the health of this Deponent untill at last being often threatned by the said Sir Iohn Stawell to be hanged or to be sent to Oxford then in the late Kings power to be tryed for his life through fear of which and terrour and for preservation of his life he was constrained to Morgage and Pawn that land credit they had left him for three hundred pounds or thereabouts which he paid then languishing in prison unto the said Sir Iohn Stawell to redeem himself out of that cruel bondage and inhumane usuage and imprisonment This Deponent further saith that during S. Iohn Stawell's bearing power and government in the said Town he exacted great sums of mony from several persons for the late King his armies use Mustered Soulderies for the late Kings service against the Parliament and billited and enforced on this Deponent and divers of the said Town many Soulderies to free quarter And during his Government there a Souldier of his Regiment the name of whom at present this Deponent remembreth not was then hang'd on the Gibbet or Gallowes set upon the Market place in the said Town and by one Reeves his Major declared that it was the command and pleasure of the Governour that he should be hanged which being done the said Reeves did then further declare openly in the Market place that it was a beginning and president for the rest of the Rebels and Roundheads of the Town to look upon and must look some of them to follow after shortly or words to that effect which was to the great terrour and fear of the free-born of this Nation I Honour Powell of Taunton the relict of my late Husband George Powell Gent. am ready to make attestation of what is under written In the time of the late miseries of this Land it pleased God to make us of this Town partakers in a great measure of the calamities of the times of the which my late husband as is well known had not the least share being exposed to the most inhumane cruelties and outrages of the Enemy when this Town was subdued by them and afterwards made the mark of Sir Iohn Stawels envy and hatred as will more largly appear by what is under written when he usurped that most Tyrannous government over this Town First of all he imposed a Fine of eight hundred pounds on him his house being before rifled and plundred by the Souldery for the refusal to pay the said Fine he was committed by the said Sir Iohn Stawell prisoner to the Castle of Taunton after he had lain there a long time he was removed by his order to the Bridewel where he was kept close prisoner and lay night and day in Irons without the least favour nay denying him that favour which we give to horses namely to have a bundle of clean straw to lye on saying that he would make him an ensample to all Rogues and should look through a grate all dayes of his life and saying at his committing to the Bridewell that he would lay him neck and heels until he paid his Fine which words Mr. Maj. of Taunton which now is can attest being in the presence when they were spoken and threatned at several other times that he would hang him Afterwards having paid a Fine of 300. l. of mony besides what other goods were fetcht from us by his order he was then released of his imprisonment being so weak with lying on the ground and in Irons that he was scarce able to go along the street afterwards being sick for not hearing one of their malignant Priests on their Monthly Fast Sir Iohn caused him to be brought before him and fined him 10 l. and told him if he did not pay it forthwith he would levy a greater fine on him which was forthwith paid unto him with many more of such like cruelties and threats which now would be too tedious to recite One act more of his cruelty I cannot here in silence pass by which is this when he had clapt up my husband close prisoner in the Bridewel putting him in the common prison where Felons and other Rogues were kept he would not suffer me nor yet admit my children to go unto my husband And although Sir Iohn Stawell by his Remonstrance page 15. seems to excuse Mr. Powells imprisonment and detainer because he found him committed and his offence of such a nature as that he could not be delivered without due course of Law Mr. Powell upon his Oath discovereth the cause of his detainer to be for his affection to the Parliament and not payment of the 800 l. imposed on him for his proportion of that Fine Mr. Iasper Chapline who was then Maj. of that Town and a person of about 70 years of age will next relate Sir Iohn's usuage of him and the cause thereof His certificate followeth viz. Some particulats of Sir Iohn Stawell's Remonstrance answered by me Jasper Chaplin the 28 of Nov. 1653. When my Lord of Stanford first entred into the Town of Taunton I being then Major was commanded with others to seize the Castle into our hands for the good and safety of the County which was done acordingly And some of the honourable Deputie Leiutenants of this County authorised me to receive of divers Delinquents great sums of money which I ceived and paid according to order but when the Kings army entred this Town I was wounded in the Knee and sent to prison into the Castle being an old man and paid a hundred pound Fine for which I have a receipt under Sir Iohn Stawells hand Whilst I was there in prison divers of those of whom I received great sums of money became suitors to
dissolved did deliver their opinions against such jurisdiction The Examinations Judgment and Proceedings of that Court being coram non Judice and against Fundamentals are meerly void in Law especially when that Judgment is grounded upon no proofs the proofs taken by the High Court of Justice being taken extrajudicially as abovesaid and are therefore in a Legal construction Nullities Which gives a full and short Answer to that large recital thereof in the Remonstrance And although the Certificates Orders and Awards of that Court of Articles are binding and conclusive to all Courts of Justice Committees c. any Law Order or Ordinance to the contrary notwithstanding yet hath not that Court such sole and supreme power or jurisdiction as to controll the Acts or Resolutions of the Parliament the source of their power and especially when their Act beginneth with Courts of Justice which are of an inferior jurisdiction Nor can it now neither ought it to be supposed that the aforesaid Acts Orders Resolutions Iudgments and Proceedings of that Parliament were or were given in breach or violation of any of the Articles of Exon especially they still having a consideration thereof in the violation of which Articles the faith of the Army and honour and justice of the Nation is so highly concerned But it shall and ought to be presumed that Sir Iohn by some or all of the misdemeanors and neglects aforesaid or by other acts of his best known to that Parliament had in the judgment thereof forfeited and lost the benefit of his Articles Sir John by way of objection Remonstrance p. 74. reciteth a Clause in that Act of Sale in these words viZ. Nevertheless upon trust and confidence that the said William Skinner and others the persons abovenamed or any five or more of them shall have hold and enjoy all and every the premises and every of them subject unto such trusts and uses as by this Act or in and by authority of Parliament shall be hereafter further directed and appointed and shall dispose of the same accordingly And from thence would infer 1. That this power of limiting the trusts of those Lands was reserved by the Parliament in relation to the Articles of War by them confirmed that in regard they had ratified divers of them and eminently bound themselves in Faith Honour and Justice to make good and could not take notice of such as had right or claim to the same they thereof provided according to this reserved power that the Trustees should dispose of Lands accordingly In answer whereof it must be premised 1. That the Articles of Exon were confirmed by both Houses the fourth of Novemb. 1647. And this Act passed the sixth of July 1651. almost four years after 2. That the words of that clause refer to trusts and uses onely which should for the future be directed and appointed by that Act or authority of Parliament It will then follow that the trusts if any of the Articles of Exon cannot be the trusts mentioned in that Act being precedent to it not subsequent That the Act for sale passed for no causes mentioned in those Articles but for others and for ought appeaes for offences of a later perpetration That it was well known to that Parliament that Sir Iohn did claim the benefit of those Article for the Parliament had at several times before and at the time of the passing of this Act his very Articles in consideration and deemed them forfeited by him The second thing that Sir Iohn doth infer is that the reviving after that of the Court of Articles was a Declaration of the uses and trusts of that Act of Sale seeing to that persons grieved contrary to those Articles this Court was constituted to do them right any Law Order or Ordinance to the contrary notwithstanding But Sir Iohn hath mistaken the Act the words are not that the Court of Articles should releive the party within Articles any Law to the contrary but that the Certificate of that Court should be binding to all inferiour Courts of Justice any Law to the contrary notwithstanding Again by the Act of Sale the trusts of that Act are declared the land sold and setled according to that Declaration and therefore the Patliament cannot by vertue of that reservation declare any contrary or other trusts nor did by their Act of reviver make use of their former power having already executed the same in overthrow of those sales executed by vertue of that Act of sale especially when as hath been shewn Sir Iohn is a party excepted out of that Act. After which Act of Sale and not before Sir Iohn doth pretend to Petition the Parliament for admission to composition which Petition as he alledgeth by his Remonstrance page 39 he delivered unto Mr. Garland but whether Mr. Garland did or thought fit to present it to the Parliament in regard of Sir Iohns former actions is not declared and perhaps the Parliament refused it and justly for Gods vice-gerents do often Act like God himself who when after a long forbearance on his part and an obstinate continuance in evil on mans part he resolveth to punish he doth execute the same accordingly notwithstanding the Prayers and supplications of the sinner to whom he then turneth a deaf year This might the Parliament do Sir Iohns slightning of their mercy and the necessity of their Justice urging them to it Sir Iohn saith Remonstrance pag. 40. that at the time of the passing of the Act of the 29. of Septemb. 1652. for reviveing the Court of Articles provisors were tendered he conceiveth by the Purchasers the one of the 28 of Septemb. 1652. in these words viZ. Provided that this Act or any thing therein contained shall not extend nor cinstrained to ixtend to prejudice alter or make void any Resolutions Votes or Judgments given in the Parliament touching any of the Articles aforesaid or any persons claiming thereby The other of the day following in these words viZ. Provided alwayes and be it further enacted and declared That no real or personal Estate which hath been setled conveyed or assured to any person or persons by vertue of any Act Ordinance or Order of this present Parliament shall be made null vacated or otherwise determined or disposed of by the Commissioners named in this Act or by their Authority but if they shall see cause of restitution by vertue of Articles subject unto their CogniZance they make a word not in specie against the particular person or persons upon whom such Estate or Estates shall be setled conveyed or assured but invalue to be satisfied by such other Lands or Revenew as the Parliament shall direct any thing in this Act or the former which is hereby revived to the contrary notwithstanding The first of these he saith after the second reading the last after the first reading did pass in the Negative which proviso tending to the limitation of that benefit which the House was most honourably pleased to grant and
before sufficiently confuted his opinion that sir Iohn ought to compound as his expression was upon his Examination and his desire to have had sir Iohn admitted to composition as he ought by his Articles is granted for sir Iohn ought by his Articles to have been admitted to a Composition but sir Iohn would not compound in such manner as that Committee could compound with him and therefore he was justly denyed such an admission thereunto but according to their Rules he was admitted and might have compounded As concerning sir Anthonies relation touching the sale of a Manor of sir Iohn Stawels it was but a relation of another unsworn and therefore no evidence but Mr. Ash himself hath fully answered it and therefore needs no other at this time only sir Anthony hath confessed that the whole Committee without a Negative did resolve to report that carriage of sir Iohn to the House wherein sir Anthony now sweareth he then saw no incivility if he did not where was sir Anthonies Justice when himself voted that Report The same answer respectively may be given to sir David Watkins's Certificate mentioned in the Remonstrance page 61. and his Examinations before this Committee of Parliament both agreeing but in this only that sir David doth now affirm that he doth account 28 daies to the month when he saith that sir Iohn Stawell came and presented his Petition to the Committee within four moneths from the eight of April which likewise cannot agree with his Warrant of the fourth of August often mentioned he being one of the Committee that granted it and at that time it seemeth he accounted the Kalender moneths The Remonstrance page 62. doth surmise that the 15. of August 1653. the cause of Sir Iohn whereof the Court of Articles took the Cognizance upon them came regularly to be heard but how reagular or rather how extrajudicial hath been already declared when the Parliament had resumed it to themselves but that Parliament being disolved Sir Iohn Stawel took advantage thereof and by his importunity obtained from that Court of Articles a further though most extrajudicial proceeding therein even to judgment The Trustees of Drury house and Purchasers cannot be blam'd if to preserve the honour and credit of Acts of Parliament they did Petition the then Committe for Petitions in such manner as the Remonstrance sets forth to prevent such irregularities especially when that Court was deliberating and advising upon their judgement the Order of which Committee thereon was as is Remonstrated that Colonel Rous should report it to the Parliament with this sence of the Committee that the Purchasers ought to enjoy their Purchases and Sir Iohn have satisfaction if found within and ought to have the benefit of Articles which report made accordingly and the then Parliament reading the said several Votes of Parliament of the 24 of February 1652. touching the said confirmation of the sales and resuming the cause did resolve to take the consideration thereof on Fryday following After the resumption whereof and during its debate by the Parliament that Court of Articles took the boldness to give that Iudgement for Sir Iohn Stawell at large set forth in the Remonstrance pag. 65. thereby breaking through Resolves Judgments and Acts of Parliament to the contrary and therefore Sir Iohn could not probably conceive that any other besides himself would rest on or that the then Parliament would suffer their proceedings or the Judgements or Resolutions of their Predecessors to be questioned and annulled by an inferiour jurisdiction and therefore it was justly done by the Trustees and Purchasers to endeavour to render those illegal proceedings succesless and for the Parliament in vindication of their supream power to resume the debate touching the Trustees representation and Purchasers Petition the sooner to declare their resentment of those proceedings which they did on the 29 of August 1653. and upon that debate referred back to the same Committee to consider of an expedient for the Petitioners reliefe upon which reference that Committee of Petitions upon consideration had of that Judgement of the Court of Articles and the several Acts constituting that Court and of all the pleadings and proceedings passed in that case thought fit to report that the Purchasors ought to enjoy the same Estate which report the then Parliament was pleased to confirm and Teusd the 15 of Septemb. 1653. Resolved That this House do agree with this Report of the Committee that the Purchasers of Sir Iohn Stawel's Estate shall quietly possess and enjoy the same according to their several contracts made with the Trustees Henry Scobel Clerk of the Parliament And passed an Act accordingly in these words Thursd the 13. of Octob. 1653 An Act for confirmation of the sale of the Lands and Estate of Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath Be it enacted and deccared by Authority of Parliament that all sales made of any Estate Lands Tenements Hereditaments Goods or Chattels of Sir John Stawell Knight of the Bath by vertue or appointment of any Act or Acts of Parliament are hereby confirmed and established and accordingly all Purchasers and Buyers of the same shall and may have hold and quietly enjoy the same to them their Heirs and Assigns according to the Rules Conditions and Limitations prescribed in the said Acts any Law or Judgment to the contrary notwithstanding Hen. Scobell Clerk of the Parliament Notwithstanding which reference resolution and Act of this second Parliament in confirmation of the Act and proceedings of the former Parliament and sale of the Estate accordingly Sir Iohn resteth not but now pretendeth that the Committee for Petitions pursuâ—d not the intent of that Order of Reference and draweth that pretence from these two Premises The one because Sir Iohn had the extrajudicial Judgment of the Court of Articles for part of his Estate therefore this Committee did not pursue the intent of that Order Whereas not to insist upon the consequence the judgment and proceedings of the Court of Articles against the Purchasers being the very cause of their Complaint and against which they desired relief from a superior Court the Parliament thought fit upon a due consideration to establish the enjoyment of the Lands and by consequence did lay aside that Judgment that would have disturbed it Sir John again saith that in regard the Committee did think fit to confirm the Purchasers estates therefore they did not pursue the intent of that Order touching the Purchasers relief As if it were not the best and most sit relief to confirm their Estates notwithstanding this Judgment that would otherwise have taken them away Neither in the judgment of the Parliament it self had that Committee not pursued their intent of Reference for both by a Resolve and an Act they setled the Estate accordingly He saith the Purchasers bargains and contracts could not be absolute and direct in regard the said Clause of Limitation had debarred the Trustees themselves from whom the Purchasers claim in case of Articles