cannot cure nor prayers profit declares his prayers noe other then Charmes and himselfe a man that can neither cure nor pray and sets prayer among those things he scoffes at aswell as the Titles of him that is only to be prayed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vpon the KINGS Calling this last PARLIAMENT THat which the King lajes downe as his foundation that he called this last Parliament not more by others advice and the necessitie of his affaires then by his owne choice and inclination is to all knowing men so apparently vntrue that a more inauspicious Sentence could hardly have come into his minde That his Majest intention could be apparent to all knowing men must have better Authoritie then this Authors word to be beleived His Majest best knew his own intentions and ought to be credited against the Malicious conjectures of such as seeke matter of slander against him to shelter their owne impieties never King of England shewed greater affection to Parliaments then his Majest and never King found greater ingratitude His frequent coming to Parliaments in his Fathers Raigne His many good offices done the houses and the larg acknowledgments of their obligations to him are vpon the Records of both houses Vpon the death of his Father he instantly called a Parliament seeking to continue the same vnderstanding betweene him and his houses as there had been in the time of his Father He had then entred into a dangerous warr with Spaine vpon the Parliaments Councell was in preparation of a greate fleete stood charged with a greate debt left on him by his Father besides 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 wil 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 I conoclastes 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 Parafites 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 nominiously 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 anoâ—…her 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
for the peace of his people Shall he destroy innocent men and persecute Christians to procure peace Or are these things consistent with honour conscience and may not such things be desired by a wicked people in order to peace And therefore the Libeller vainely presses that nothing is more agreeable to the conscience and honour of a King then to preserve his subjects in peace And is there anything more contrary to the conscience dutie of subjects then to procure a Civill warr by demaunding concessions of their King which in honour and conscience he cannot grannt which being graunted would be noe ground for a lasting peace though it avoyded a present warr The Libeller askes which of the propositions were obtruded on him with the point of the sword till he with the point of the sword thrust from him both propositions and propounders A strange question in this Libeller that hath soe often obtruded the feares and terrours raysed in the King by the Tumults and Iron flaile seizing of the Magazins and not leaving him a sword that had a point to thrust but this Theame is too much soyled by soe often repetition and yet he proceedes to talke of merciles obtrusions which for almost twentie yeares the King had been forcing vpon tender consciences by all sorts of persecutions And these tender consciences he will allow to be preferred before the peace of the Kingdome Truly these are not large and indefinite words but apparent absurdities to the eye of every Common judgment that the pretended conscience of every hipocriticall sectarie must be preferred to the peace of a King dome and the King must be allowed none but lose life and Kingdome or prostitute his conscience The Libellers examination of the Kings booke it seemes was noe other then of his owne writings that huddles vp contradictions and absurdities soe obvious to the first sight His labour to declaime against persecution is not matter of faâ—…t and the impertinencie of it hath been already sufficiently detected The king sayes Many things are required of him nothing offred in requit all And the Libeller demaunds What could satiate the desires of this man who being King of England and Master of almost two millions yearely was still in want And yet the Masters in the new state affirme in their declaration that the constant Revenue of the Crowne exceeded not a hundred thousand pound a yeare And why should not the King expect contributions from his subiects aswell as al his Predecessours still had And why will this man deny him supplies that soe often obtrudes his wants and he will have the King content with Rebells Charitie and allowes them to take al from him when they list as the subjects money this is the supreame honour and Revenue that the king ought to content himselfe with It was for honours sake that they put the King vpon the giving part not that it belonged to him of right for he sayes all lawes are in the hands of the Parliament and King-shipp it selfe He sayes it and yet we must beleive him that England was a Monarchy if the Majestie were not in the king how was it other then a republique and it was for honours sake that they have been subjects these many hundred yeares wherefore would he have the world beleive warrs were made betweene compeâ—…tours for the Crowne of England was it only to be a king in a play but we finde that what Rebells can attaine by power they will assert for right and they which have had soe many denialls and have professed conscientious subjection at last come to say it was for honours sake and of forme not necessitie that they were subjects The Libeller proceedes to shew that Monarchy cannot permit the requisites necessary to societie That the will of one man in Government is contrary to freedome And why not the will of five hundred to the freedome of the rest as much as that one These men thinke that their clamour against the power of one man hes a greate influence vpon the ignorant people which might have had some beleife before they had tryed their new Masters If we looke vpon the most ancient stories of the world we finde the people both in peace and warr commaunded by one man nature teaching the necessitie of one generall in an Army and the Government which God himselfe appointed to his people was by one man and as moyses was at first soe were his successours and the kings after Saul and David and this Libeller can speake nothing of this power of one man but must censure and vilifie Gods owne institution he offers nothing against Monarchy but what hes equall opposition to Parliament and all formes of Government for the peoples good for which he sayes the king hath his rights will assoone become a pretence for Rebellion against any Rulers as kings His denyall that the King is not greater then his Parliament is only opposinge his bare word to all sense and reason for doth the greater petition the lesse and yet the Parliament constantly petition the king He sayes the King can doe noe wrong And have not they then that pretend he had done wrong committed disobedience and wrong The King can doe noe right but in his Courts And if they be his Courts and his deputies and doe all in his name doth it not follow that it is his doing And though the kings sitt not ordinarily in their Courts yet they have often sate in severall Courts and in Parliament the King himselfe gives orders as appeares by the Presidents of all times and wherefore did the Parliament preferre their petition of right to the King and importuned his answeare if he had noe power to doe right but by his Courts But what concernes the administration of Justice by deputies is not peculiar to England but to all other Kingdomes Without his Courts he is noe King And yet they are his Courts and cannot sitt but by his graunt If the King doe wrong in the highest degree he must doe it as a Tyrant not as a King of England But he is still King of England though a Tâ—…rant and if subjects may judge their King the ordinary acts of soveraigntie wil be wrong in the highest degree If he cannot as one greater give oft to the Parliament as the Libeller supposes and that it may be termed the Courtesie of England to aske any thing of the King They would not have importuned the Acts that have passed this Parliament nor have vsed their Iron flaile to obteine them and by his rule subjection is noe more the Courtesie of England then all other Countreyes We never forced him to part with his conscience but it is he that would have forced vs to part with ours and doth he that refuses the demaund of another force his conscience that demaunds Doth the Kings denyall force his subjects consciences because they force themselves to Rebell and enforce him to say what they will have him The
they that wrote against the knowne legall authoritie Prisoners in Gayles hire persons of strong voyces to begg for them att the grate and the Rebells have found this Authors rancour and impudence so sublimated as his falsities and slanders were probable to infect the world though to knowing and honest men they sound the voyce of a Beast and not a man what one libertie of the English Nation is there now left Doe not all men see that their ridiculous howse and state Councell act at the will of their sword Master by whose act those Cyphers are disposed of to signifie what he pleaseth Doe not all men see that the vse of the name libertie signifieth nothing but a sound to fill the peoples eares and deceive their vnderstandinge That Tyranny should be objected to the best King in whose time fewer men suffred death then in any time of like extent throughout all our Kings shewes hellish rage not common impudence In his Raigne of sixteene yeares vntill this abominable Parliament one only Peere of the Kingdome suffered death that not for any provocation or offence against the Kings person but for Crymes of another nature a raritie in the stories of the best Kings and yet so brutish is this man to say that he hath offred at more cunning fetches to vndermine our liberties and put Tyrany into an art then any brittish King before him Wherein should Tirany appeare was there any violence vsed in taking away mens Estates Can they object Covetuousnes or luxury to his late Majest they have not yet pretended it but they would make Tyrany by imagination that Government which stands in their way must be called Tyrany and the want of instances of Tyrany makes them thus giddily stagger from side to side and talke of offring at more cunninge fetches what doth this signifie Doth this Author thinke that he wil be beleived in his slanders of Tyrany when all is resolved into offers offers at cunning fetches and all is only their malicious inconsequent inferences This Author well knowes this assertion of his is so farr from truth that he cannot name one Act of his Maj wherevnto he or his Masters have excepted that wants Example of his best Predecessours so wide hath he opened his mouth in saying more then any Brittish King before him And his late Majest tooke not such Examples as those men that make Acts of violence and Rebellion Examples but such Actions as were by Councell and in the way of law and Iustice. But this Author having so lately mentioned the old English fortitude how falls he to name the Brittish Kings If he intend the Kings which the Romans found at their comming or which succeeded their departure his comparison is not of any large signification for the Catalogue is very short and the Actions lesse but perhapps he meanes to make Authenticke the story of Geoffry of Monmouth where the Catalogue hath as litle truth as the persons Actions he doth not meane the Saxons to be Brittish Kings If he doe he will finde among them not only offers at fetches but open rapines and homicides which when he thinkes on what he hath written might shame him if he could shame at any thing and if he thought knowing readers would have the patience to pervse so much scurrilous language and impudent vntruth as he hath packt togeather in this booke he would expect just reproach for offering at such a Comparison so impertinent if he intended such Kings only as were properly termed Brittish in regard of discent whose persons and Actions are so inconsiderable and so lewdely false If he intend all others that have Raigned in England whose stories conteine so evident a refutation of his vntruth In the first Parliament of King James there was a debate touching the Kings Title which he desired to have of greate Brittaigne in reguard of his Dominion over the whole Island the lower howse then reputed wise much opposed it and would reteine the name of England vnder which name they said their Ancestours had been famous These men tell vs noe contentions are infallible but the present and they are in love with the name of Brittish Kings of whome they know nothing that the people may forget their English Kings that made them famous Wee reade of some in Scripture that wrought mischeife by a law and this Author that talkes of making Tyrany an art strives to make Rebellion a law and all Government a Tyrany and having vndermined Monarchy with cantinge termes of Libertie seekes to suppresse all Libertie by lawlesse power He doth not wonder though he pretend it at the change in the people for the many odious lyes and slanders his Masters have vsed of the King the many promises they have falsified to the people the cōtinual oppressions they exercise over them justly provoke hatred to such Tyrants vnles the people were condemned to perpetuall stupiditie with their present slavery The Rebells whome this Author reports to be Sainted though they objected misgovernment to their Kings never were so impudent to pretend their lawes slavery but the present Traytours have improved all the impieties of former ages to extreamitie and they call all the Government of England for many hundreds of yeares Norman slavery and will imagine a libertie that perisht by the flood which they now resume Their pretence of lawes is turned into sickely fancies of distempered braines though the leaders are hardened by their confirmed corruptions the people begin to recover their vnderstanding and see the cunning fetches whereby they were vndermined and the Art which Traytours vsed to betray them Which low dejection and debasement of minde in the people he cannot willingly ascribe to the naturall disposition of an Englishman but rather to two other causes And is it a low dejection and debasement of minde to restue a mans selfe from a common cheate or a malicious oppressour Is it not dejection and debasement of spirit to follow detected villaines and common theeves Is it the naturall disposition of an Englishman to betray and kill his King put his necke vnder the yoke of his inferiours Is the English disposition so base as to leave a King and be subject to a Iacke straw And is stupiditie the English disposition that can swallow any deceites and abuses though never so palpaple Doubtles whoever lookes what Government was heeretofor lived vnder what now must needes conclude that such as willingly forsooke the on and submitted to the other expessed as low dejection and debasement of minde as ever the English nation shewed fortitude and the many s◅fferes for refusing their submission to this vsurpation and the few which the Author sayes retaine the old English fortitude shewes that it is not the disposition of an Englishman but the vnnaturall and degenerate inclinations of some that assuminge the English name have sought to dishonour the nation and transferre the infamy of their Actions on the naturall disposition stiling the
a Capital offender he had made no conscience of his death and this libeller vainely supposes conscience of sin to put to death a Capital offender which cannot consist with a conscience so informed neither doth an erroneous conscience in sparing blood as oft thinke it meritorious to kill vndeservedly though it be nothing to the present purpose for he can fasten neither vpon his Majest conscience of sparing a Capitall offender or killing a righteous person But in this whereof he repents That the sin of signing the Bill of straffords execution he would not have matter to trouble the Kings conscience and his reasons are That all men looked vpon him as one of the most impetuous instruments to advance any illegall designe The Earle of strafford was a man that the Seditious disturbers of the state hated and feared and sought vnderhand to rayse the malevolence of others against him If any men have so farr lost reason as to measure the Ministers of Kings by the libells of Traytours they are likely to take the best men for most guiltie and if a King should sacrifice his faithfull Servants because they are not looked vpon with a good eye by the multitude he may not expect to be served by men of fidelitie or merit and we have seene how the peoples lookes have been won and lost That he had rul'd Ireland some part of England in an Arbitrary manner The word Arbitrary in the beginning of the late Parliament was vsed to scare the people and made to signifie greate affrightments to them but that bugbeare is now growne rediculous to children for 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 at 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 refist 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 he had cunningly 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 defends 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 appeated 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 singularitc 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 drest 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 they had a President in the people of the Iewes that cryed Crucifie If we believe this libeller telling vs how
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 King sayes They forbore not rude deportments contemptuous words and Actions to himselfe and his Court. And to this the libeller sayes It was noe wonder having heard what treacherous hostilitie he had designed against the Citie and his whole Kingdome that they forbore to handle him as people in their rage have handled Tyrants heere to fore for lesse offences The supplicating and petitioning people may vse rude deportments contemptuous words and actions To what purpose hath he minced his Tumults into supplicating petitioning people when he defends their highest violence The King design'd Treacherous hostilitie against the Cittie and Kingdome The last thoughts that madd men had before their destraction run most in their fancie in the time of their frensie and these Traytours having lost all reason inculcate still those ridiculous fraudes wherewith at first they seduced the people The designes of Treacherous hostilitie was one of the Ceremonies which its now time to give over Who but an I diot can beleive that the King can have Treacherous designes against his Kingdome whereof shal he be King whome shall he have to execate hostilitie against his owne Kingdome but these dreames of the blowing vp of Thames and tales of winde mills and fiery Dragons are over and it s become the peoples sorrow and shame to looke backe vpon the cheates whereby they were deluded He cannot name any Tyrant ill handled by tumults vpon such pretences as he makes the most wicked Tyrant was not soe guiltie as that people which exercised their rage vpon him yet the libeller determines that the tumults fury is as justifiable as the Parliaments order for he ascribes noe more to the one then the other They were not a short ague but a feiree quotidian feaver And the libeller sayes he may best say it who most felt it He will rather boast of the greatenes of their villany then reprove the impietie of it and therefore he sports himselfe with the injuries of it after his appellations of mildnes and supplicating people and extolls the highest of their violence as a feirce quotidian feaver and he is soe Lunatique that out of his malice to the King he calls them milde out of his insolence confesses them violent and deadly The King would perswade vs that men scared themselves others without cause And al men are now satisfied of the truth of it the fraudes being soe apparent and confessed by this breaker Wise feare and suspition would finde weapons And we have found by experience that Rebells by suggesting vaine feares and suspitions have gotten weapons and armed the people to their owne destruction Vpon the Kings repeating the mischeifes done by the tumults that they first petitioned then protected dictate next and lastly overaw the Parliament They removed obstructions they purged the houses cast out rotten members He sayes if there were a man of Iron such as Talus by our poet spencer is fain'd to be the Page of Iustice who with his Iron flaile could doe all this and expedititiously without those deceitefull formes and Circumstances of law worse then Ceremonies in Religion I say God send it done whether by one Talus or by a thousand Religion lawes are lesse then Ceremonies in this Authors account and when Pages follow not nor acknowledge Masters Justice wil be ill waited on such cut-throates are not the Pages of Justice but the furies of hell and theis this libeller prayes to God for what will not such call Justice to satisfie their ambition and crueltie Poets are short in their fancies of what the English Rebells have acted Their Gyants were Pigmyes to theise Monsters and their Hidra too few heads too litle venom for the service of these Enemies of mankinde What a silly propertie does this libeller make Parliament and lawes that subjects them to Tumults and how barbarous are their proceedings that made endeavour to subvert fundamentall lawes a Capitall Cryme and heere he commends the fact calls them deceitefull formes and Circumstances of law Might he not better have said they would make good their villanies by the sword then prevaricate and say and vnsay and pretend Religion and yet pray God to send Tumults and Confusions to breake all lawes in order to their designes The King sayes they subdued the men of conscience in Parliament backed and abetted all seditious schismaticall proposalls against Government Ecclesiasticall and Civill To this he sayes That it was not the Kings grace but this Iron flaile the people that drove the Bishopps out of their Baronies Cathedralls Lords house Coopes surplisses papisticall innovations threw downe high Commission starr chamber gave vs a trienniall Parliament and what we most desired And is not this brave Is it a credit to a Church to be thus reformed Is this the Christian Religion to glory in oppression robery and Rebellion There is noe doubt but many things graunted by his Majest in the late Parliament were Acts of grace in respect of his compliance with importunitie in hope thereby to preserve the people from a Civill warr not in respect of the nature of the things graunted The libeller might have remembred that the King never consented to drive the
The king neede not bring proofes against a groundles accusation that containes not any evidence of fact and a single denyall by al lawes is preferred before such a charge and it is as likely that the Rebells in Ireland should pretend his Seale as those in England his authoritie noe man doubts of the invaliditie of a Rebells pretence This Chapter is not without witnes of his good affection to the Rebells which he collects from thaâ—… the king sayes they were lesse in fault then the Scotts from whome they might alledge to have fetched their imitation making no difference sayes the Libeller beâ—…eene men that rose necessarily to defend themselves which noe Protestant Doctrine ever disallowed against them who threatned warr and those who began a voluntary causâ—…les Rebellion If the Irish made warr not to be restrained from their Religion had they not the same cause the same pretence of defending themselves as the other pretended for refusing the Common prayer booke and expelling Bishopps Where lies the odds Is it Protestant Doctrine that they may defend themselves and Papists may not and that Protestants may Rebell for Religion Papists may not That were very much to the credit of Religion but the Libeller will not acknowledge the protestants nor their Doctrine who maintaine it to be vnlawful for subjects to defend themselves against the supreame power though Tyranically abused and there is noe neede to fly to the Parliaments authoâ—…itie if subjects may take Armes against their king vpon pretence of defending themselves The Libeller well knowes the just indignation the Protestants abroade have expressed for this scandall the king names not the Scotts but thinkes that their blame must needes be greater whose Actions the Irish had to alledge for their imitation by how much protestant principles are more against Rebellion then those of Papists such as inferre good affection to the Irish from such premises will easily make vaine or malitious rumours strong proofes The King sayes he hath the greatest share of dishonour and losse by what is committed The Libeller as before makes this noe Argument because every one that offends God or his neighbour hath the greatest share of losse and dishonour in the end and have they not worldly ends in offending God and if these ends were not sought by them they would not offend God He pretended before that this was a politique contrivance of the King and now he would have it an act without designe Doth he thinke that the malitious reports of him and his Scotchman are of weight to make a man suspected of an act directly tending to his owne vndoing and would the King instigate the Irish Rebellion for his owne ends to have the assistance of the Irish which by such engagement could not assist him Though presumptions are noe convincing proofes yet they are more credible then suspitions or reports It is a strong Argument for the peoples confidence in their King more then in other men because his interest lies cheifely in the common welfare of his subjects and it is hard to beleive that a King will knowingly doe any thing against that interest and to his owne losse and dishonour and whenever any have offended in that kinde the proofe of it hath been more apparent then the authoritie of rumours and Libells but heere the act it selfe cannot have any possibilitie of concurrence to the Kings ends It too notoriously appeares in another section which he Mangles but shall heere have it whole The King sayes t is thought by many wise men that the preposterous rigour and vnreasonable severitie which some men carryed before them in England was not the least incentive that kindled and blew vp into those horrid flames the sparkes of discontent which wanted not predisposed fewell for Rebellion in Ireland The Libeller sayes that these some men are the Parliament And if the Rebells had feed an Advocate he could hardly have dazled better Truly the Libellers too notoriously doth not amount to a dazling of any eyes from descerning his vaine confidence Does any thing heerein excuse a Rebellion that speakes only of what succeded it And if the kings censure of the proceedings of such as managed the busines against the Rebells shew an affection to the Rebells then certainely most Princes that have had warrs in Ireland were very guiltie of that affection that vsed like censures but what the king sayes heere was spoken in Parliament by diverse members who disadvised the preposterous severitie that was propounded and afterward proceeded in and it will rest an indelible blemish of a rash and vnadvised Councell in those men that in the beginning of a Rebellion would put a whole nation into despaire and feare of extirpation That their wonted oppressions as they conceived should rather have made them against the King then the Parliament is easily beleived for it s knowne to all the world they did rise against the king vpon pretence of regaining their nationall liberties from the English oppression as they called it and since the Libeller seeth soe apparent an Argument of their rising against the king its blinde madnes to suspect their rising for the king The Parliament then pretended to act for the king and that the Rebellion was against him not themselves but the man deserts his Arguments and falls to his old common place and will suspect the king because he vsed the Prelaticall Religion and to force it vpon others made Episcopall Ceremoniall and common prayer booke warrs Such men as made warrs and raysed Rebellion to take away the order of Bishopps Ceremonies and booke of Common prayer established by lawes in the Raignes of best Princes with the advice of the most eminent confessours and Martyrs of the age wherein they lived conformable to the Scripture and purest times of the Church declare to the whole world that they have neither shame truth nor Religion and are justly stigmatized for making not only Episcopall Ceremoniall and common prayer booke warrs but Antichristian and Diabolicall Rebellion That the Papists knew these warrs were their warrs may easily be beleived for they must needes apprehend advantage from the Rebellion But it s well knowne that the Papists are more jealous of Episcopacie Ceremonies and booke of common prayer as they stand râ—…formed in the Church of England then of the Directory Extemporall devotions independent or Pres biterall platformes that have noe foundation in the Scripture or the doctrine or practice of the ancient Church but what is this to the preposterous rigour and vncharitable fury that he would justifie Does he meane that the extirpation of the Irish was the sole way to suppresse open Idolatry and is this what we may doe Evangecally to be their Reformers Is blood massacre Evangelicall reformation is kill and reforme the same thinge As that rigour observed by his Majest was altogeather vnpolitique soe if it were intended in order to Religion it was most abominable such Massacres being the designes of irreligious
meaâ—…es 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 not their proportion or 〈◊〉 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 happeÌ„ ought to be forbiddeÌ„ 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 particular 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 saile 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 prosecution 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 〈◊〉 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 hy 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 destructive 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 brands that high hand of slander and deâ—…action 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 commaund 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 be 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 vninclination 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 exercise 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 afâ—…erwards The Parliament in Ireland he might have knowne was not the first that was called in the nine yeares he mentions but falshood are so common that mistakes are not worth the observation and if the King had called that Parliament in Ireland to obtaine â—…ower 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 eaâ—…ily have found a greate number of good lawes made in that Parliaâ—…ent 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 aftersuch 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 those 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
is this man to call his Majest going to the house of Commons with an ordinary guard without Pike or Muskett an hostile March after the March of a compleate Army led by his Rebell Masters against that house But he vrges for proofe that his Majest confesses it to be an Act which most men cryed shame vpon which his Majest sayes not at all but that his Enemies loaded it with obloquy indifferent men grew jealous of fearefull and many of his friends resented as a motion rising rather from passion then reason The cryes of his Enemies prove nothing but their owne passion partialitie and the jealosies of men are oftner resolved into their owne mistakes then the truth of Actions The opinion of his Majest friends condemned not the Action as injurious though they might thinke it passionate and if this Author could set aside the malice and corruption of his heart he might justly learne from his Majest cleerenes in stating his owne Actions with observing all the Circumstances of them that make to his disadvantage to forbeare these fayned discourses of every Action he writes of That in one of his answeares to both houses he made profession that he was convinced that it was a plaine breach of the priviledge it was greater satisfaction then ever King gave his houses of Parliament and it must have been an inexcusable disloyaltie in them to presse him after such a profession and make it matter of complaint T is true his Majest denyed any intention to breake their Priviledges in that Act. But no man yet could assigne a reason to exclude the King from any of his Courts or Counsells and why he might not aswell come to the lower house as to the higher and speake to the Commons in their owne aswell as send for them to the higher house or els where as was both law Custome And as no priviledge of Parliament doth extend to Treason but that a Conestable may apprehend any member of that house being accused of that Cryme so why the King should be forbidden to come to the house to cause Traytours to be apprehended none but Traytours will finde a cause but heere he sayes he represents it fraudulently We have found already it hath been fraudulently expressed by the libeller He sayes the King would make some benificall vse of his worst Actions And surely his Actions which were most charged with guilt appeare just and shame his accusers These men meaning his friends knew not the just motives and pregnant grounds with which I thought my selfe furnished To these words of his Majest which he hath interlaced with meaning his friends he sayes his best friends knew not nor ever could know and it would have tended to his justifying to have named them in this place and to shew his owne impertinence the next words he cites of his Majest are that he had discovered as he thought vnlawfull Correspondencies which they had vsed and engagements to imbroyle his Kingdomes What more would he have had in this place But he sayes suppose them reall and knowne what was this to that violation and dishonour puâ—…t vpon the whole house whose doore was forcibly kept open all passages neere it besett with swords pistolls cockt menc'd in the hands of about three hundred swaggerers and Ruffians who but expected nay audibly called for the word of onseâ—…t to begin a slaughter But suppose them reall was it not a matter of more importance to apprehend such conspiratours then to omitt the opening the doore of the house of Commons Is it a dishonour to have Traytours taken from them There neede not any answeare to his pretended tendernes of the house that approves such open violence against them with Pikes and Musketts but reproves swords and Pistolls Doth not he thinke that all men looke vpon him as a common prostitute that vses such aggravations of a cause which himselfe defends though accompanied with outrage and violence A word of onset to begin a slaughter could never be expected by such an inconsiderable number armed only with swords and pistolls a strange preparation for a Massacre but there are men apt to be disordred by any rumours of danger and some are willing to have a pretence for vnwarrantable Actions thence proceede these onsets in the ayre He would willingly perswade the Rebell rowte that whatever the King may doe for the securing of himselfe Kingdome Rebells may doe to destroy him and vsurpe his Kingdome and therefore to that which his Majest sayes of the correspondencies and engagements which the accused members vsed to imbroyl his Kingdomes the Libeller answeares that he remembers not his owne conspiracies with the Irish and. French English and scotch Army to come against the Parliament the least of which attempts by whomesoever he sayes was no lesse then manifest Treason against the Common whealth To imagine a Monarchy and Commonwealth or Republique in the same state can enter into none that vnderstand eyther nor that a King can commit Treason with his subjects or against them Kings have been charged with Tyrany never with Treason till those brutish vndertakers If there had been any law to make such a Treason this libeller would never have added the word manifest for t is a sure Rule with him to add most vehement asseverations where he knowes there is no colour of truth He well knowes how carefull the people of England were that Treason should not be made Arbitrary and therefore they were confined into one positive law and in that law this Author findes not his fantasticall Treason Can any but mad men dreame that when the priviledge of Parliament extends not to Treason that they cannot committ Treason It s Treason by the law to leavy warr against the King and that this libellers Masters have acknowledged and can he finde it consistent in the same Government that there can be Treason in the King to leavy warr against the Parliament and because a King may have confederations and Alliances with Forraigne Princes can subjects have so too These are not the opinions but the Stratagems of Rebels The people of England are bound to assist their King against any without distinction and the law hath provided for their indemnitie though the King miscarry but lawes are chaffe when Rebells Raigne The particulars he mentions if they had been reall on his Majest part as they are only imaginary the Actions of the Rebells have given Testimonie to their Justice and necessitie To demaund Iustice against the five members there needed not so rough assistance But the successe tells vs there needed more for these members were guarded with an Army and a fleete and insteed of being committed on such an accusation which themselves resolved could not be denyed by law they protected them against law If he had resolved meaning the King to beare that repulse with patience wherefore did he provide against it with such an armed and vnusuall force Is a Kings guard any
Bishopps who were immediately appeacht of Treason for that audacious declaring Surely it was worth the considering in reguard of the Justice of the declaration and the Injustice towards those Bishopps and there can hardly be produced a more impudent Act by an assembly of men that would allow tumults to offer violence to their members and charge their members for complaining of the injury with Treason And as they proceeded without shame or truth soe they make it their mirth that they could by such a ridiculous meanes effect soe greate a villanie That declaration which he calls foolish and self vndoing will stand a perpetuall Monument of the vertue and courage of these Bishopps and the infamy of those Cipher Lords that committed them And if the Bishopps were pulled by their Rochetts as he admitts was not this a just cause in feare in his Majest And doth this pulling by the Rochetts amount to nothing but petitioning This libeller sayes the Bishopps deserved another kinde of pulling And noe doubt he would have justified their murther in the streetes as well as the Kings since and that must not have been the blood of Nabaoth He would inferr that the King had noe cause of feare because he came the next day after his going to the house of Commons into the Citie without a guard The King beleived at that time the Citie was not soe totally debaucht but that he might finde some that would guard him against the disloyaltie of others and those humble demeanours which he mentions are well knowne to be most insolent provocations of base people and though at that time the infection was not soe venemous as it grew afterwards yet the king found disloyaltie very apparent Though the King might have feared in reguard of his owne guiltines yet he knew the people soe full of awe and reverence to his person as he dared to committ himselfe single among them If the King had knowne guiltines in himselfe he could not have hoped for that awe and reverence but his going single at such a time and after soe many affronts shewes the audacious scurrilitie of this Author that hath taunted at him soe often for seares and terrours and now sayes he dared goe single among such outragious tumults And if awe and reverence to his person were a commendation to the people as this libeller would have it it must be the brand of infamy vpon him and his Rebellious packe that have troden awe and reverence vnderfoote and wickedly despised and murthered him He would prove that the King had no feares after all the reproachfull scoffing at his feares because he went into Scotland after the Bishopps had been worse handled then in England and after two Armies had entred England against him and this he sayes argues first that he was a stranger to England and full of diffidence To the Scotts only a native King in his confidence though not in his dealing next he sayes which shewes beyound doubting that all his feare of Tumults was but a pretence Wee cannot boubt that this Authors braine is as Giddy as the Tumults for to prove that the King had noe feare of the Tumults he affirmes him diffident to the English confident of the Scotts and labours much to make periods of non sense that he may vse words of Calumnie Might not the King have cause to feare in reguard of their malice though not his personall suffering And doth not his libeller shew his vaine falshood that heere makes the king feareles and soe lately made mirth of the terrours of the Tumults The libeller doubted he should not finde credit to his many contradictions touching the tumults therefore turnes about to another theame of the Kings relation to the scotts and is so voyde of sense as having affirmed within ten lines before that the king was confident of the awe and reverence of the people of England to his person heere sayes he was full of diffidence But he sayes he tooke occasion from the Tumults of absence from the Parliament to turne his disorderly bickerings to an orderly invadinge That the King might be absent without shewing a reason why from his Parliament noe man of knowledge or common reason ever doubted and he might as well goe to Yorke as into Scotland But he must be persecuted by disorderly Tumults if he stay and followed with a formed Army if he depart and they that sought Colours and disgiuses for the Tumults grow soe impudent to rayse an Army for the King to fight against him The King sayes he would not have weakened himselfe by soe many former and after Acts if he had meditated warr as some suspected when he left white hall The libeller sayes his former Acts did not weaken him it might come into his minde after passing these Acts. That which strengthened the Rebells must weaken him and was the Act for continuance of the Parliament without which they could not have sate nor acted nor deluded the people nor part of their strength nor the Kings weakenes But he that objects cunning fetches and evill Councellours to the king now allowes him nothing but improvidence and feare The King doubted not but all had gone well if the Parliament had sate still free as it was in its first election and sayes the libeller his not doubting was all good mens greatest doubt And theis are the good men that could not endure a free Parliament and the libellers Parliament that must governe is a new modell not a free Parliament as it was at first elected that stood not with their Rebellious disignes and his good men doubted that all would not soe well with them if that sate still free therefore the Iron flaile must thrust the Bishopps out of the Lords house and purge the lower house and yet it is still Tyrany and obstinacie in the King by this mans judgment not to accept all the Dictates of this ridiculous packe and he hath a narrow conscience and not fitt for the publique that follows not the cry of this kennell To the Kings resolution to heare reason and consent as farr as he could comprehend The libeller askes what if his reason comprehend nothing but his owne advantages was this a reason to be trusted with the common good of three nations Yes truly and it is noe Paradox that if the King comprehend his owne advantages it is sufficient for the common good of the three nations for whatever is their common good is his advantage and whatever is his advantage is their Common good but all his Patriotts for whome the libeller is soe Zealous have advantages of their owne that are opposite to the Common good of the three nations The King sayes as swine are to gardens soe are Tumults to Parliaments To this sayes the libeller The Parliament could best have told vs had they found it so And doubtles such of the Parliament as found it not may be accounted among the number of these swine or the herdsmē of
them But he sayes one greate hogge may doe as much mischiefe in a garden as many litle swine And it seemes that the like evill spirit as entred into the heard of swine hath possest this libeller and driven him on head long in his Rebellious impudence The King sayes he was some times prone to thinke that had he called this last Paâ—liament to any other place in England the sad consequences might have been prevented To shew that the place could have made noe change the libeller instances in his Majest first Parliament at oxford which was dissolved What doth that prove to contradict what his Majest sayes that if he had called the Parliament at another place these sad consequences might have been prevented Does the libeller thinke that because there was misvnderstanding betweene the King and some of his Parliaments that they would therefore have run to the same extreamities that the faction in this last did or that these factionists could have brought this mischeife vpon the kingdome by like Tumults in another place He goes on to say that the King called his last Parliament at Oxford a Mungrell Parliament consisting all of his friends Noe doubt there were in that Parliament many loyally affected to his Majest but it cannot be denyed for time hath tryed it that there were many among them that were spyes and disturbers corrupted by the Rebell faction at Westminster and their owne base inclinations who sought to disorder all Councells and consultations The libeller would comprehend the whole people of England within the Tumults interprett the Kings prayer against the tumults to be a prayer against his people Is it not God that stilleth the raging of the sea madnes of the people And is not a prayer for the people to pray they may be 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 fully 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 is 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
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 i◅ 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 Crowne 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 earnestnes 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 the 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 he 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 he 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
libeller most reasonles and vnconscionable is the vtmost that any Tyrant ever pretended over his vassalls Tyrants were never esteemed by their pretences but by their Actions it shewes that these men knew not what Tyrany was who make a just right of all Governours the vse of reason Tyrany and that which never king was thought fitt to be denyed though Tyrants abused it Tyrany is in the abuse of power not in the rule of Government In all wise nations the Legislative power and the judiciall execution of that power have been distinct But never devided being allwayes subordinate one to the other the judiciall execution depending on the Legislative He makes an assumption If then the king be only sett vp to execute the law he ought noe more to make or forbidd the making of any law then other inferiour Iudges But if the king be set vp to make law by the advice of his Councell the Parliament can they make lawes without him but this Libeller that would be thought soe strong at Arguments talkes himselfe into contradictions and allowes the king neither the one power nor the other for he affirmes the king cannot judge and make lawes he must not and what will he conclude sure that his owne nation is not wise nor himselfe honest or rationall He cannot reject a law offred him by the Commons no more then make a law which they reject And hath it sense that because a man cannot doe an Act without the advice of another therefore he must doe what that other advises The man dictates and would be beleived though the Commons never did nor could offer a law to the king for he wel knowes it must passe the Lords before it come to the king but he was loath to mention the Lords least it should cry downe the noyse 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 figne 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 abilitie 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 obliged 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
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 to breake this oath If Sectaries say the calling is vnlawful against the judgment of the vniversall Church must the king beleive this thinke himselfe absolved of his oath The King never doubted that his oath could not binde him to sin but he was assured that it was a sin to breake his oath when it was no sin to keepe it and while his conscience was not informed of any vnlawfulnes in the matter of his oath his sin must be the more hainous to act against his oath aswell as his knowledge The Libeller talkes of lawes of God and truth of the Gospell But his schismaticall fancies must over rule lawes and oath though the German Emperours or other Kings had noe cause to leavy warrs vpon Protestant subjects vnder colour of a blinde and literall observance to an oath it had been a wickednes in their subjects to make a warr on them to compell them to breake that oath It is not to be imagined if what shal be established come in question but that the Parliament should oversway the King and not the King the Parliament Neither can it be imagined that he which is to be overswayed by the Parliament is a King By all law and reason that which the Parliament will not is no◅ more established in this Kingdome neither is the king bound to vphold it as a thing established Certainly lawes are very vainely said to be made by the King if he have no voyce in the making of them and if they may be vnestablished without him and it was a wickednes aswell as weakenes to binde him to vphold lawes and to governe his people justly that had not soe much as voyce in the making of their lawes that was bound to governe by wicked lawes if the Parliament would have them such Imaginary powers cannot consist with Religion law nor reason in the Government of England The King sayes had he gratified he thinkes their Antiepisconall faction with his consent and sacrifised the Church Government and Revenues to the fury of their Covetuousnes they would then have found noe colourable necessitie of raysing an Army The Libeller to this sayes It was the fury of his owne hatred to the professours of the true Religion which incited him to persecute them with the sword of warr when whipps pillories exiles and imprisonments were not thought sufficient It s certen such a generation of Traytours as have persecuted the King with a warr justly merited to be whipt out of all Kingdomes and while this Libeller frequently sports at the Kings necessities he is not ashamed presently to call the warr voluntary on his part If the Kings fury incited him to a warr he would not soe often have sought peace nor been denyed peace without the sacrifice of the Church But the Libeller sayes to colour this warr the K̄ing cannot finde wherewith all but that stale pretence of Charles the fifth and other Popish Kings that the Protestants had only an intent to lay hands on the Church Revenues The King neede not a colour for making a warr whereto necessitie enforced him It is apparent that the sectaries in England intended to devoure these Revenues and have effected it and they professe to seeke it by the sword because they could not have it otherwise But the Libeller sayes it was never in the thoughts of the Parliament till exhausted by warr their necessitie seized on that for the Commonwealth which the Luxury of the Prelates had abused to Common mischeife They neede not have been exhausted if reason Justice or Religion could have contented them They will make a warr and robb and steale from other men to maintaine it Did not their pretended necessitie come from their warr to take away Episcopacy and is not the necessitie of their owne making to get these Revenues What if goods dedicated to Gods service were abused to luxury were there none els in the Kingdome soe abused Must they make choise of the Patrimony of the Church for a sacrifice to their Covetuousnes that they may spare their private That the King consented to the vnlording of Bishopps at Canterbury the cheife seate of their pride for God would have it soe And can he tax the King for his allusions vpon the fate of Hotham and obserring the course of Gods judgments and himselfe make such an observation from the Kings passing the Bill at Canterbury May it not be an aggravation of the offence in passing the Bill there rather then a punishment vpon those that were wronged by it but Canterbury had not relation to their peace in Parliament but in Church and therefore his scene is mislayed The King sayes his consent to that Bill of putting Bishopps out of the house of Peeres was from his firme perswasion of their contentednes to suffer a present diminution of their rights The Libeller from hence argues the pure mockery of a Royall assent to delude for the present May not sober times revoke what distempered madnes had necessitated and ◅ad not the King just cause to thinke that after times would see the obliquitie of that Bill The Libellers consequence is that we may hence perceive
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 tell◅ 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 believe 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 Parliament requires we must all be slaves a proper inference and vpon this he concludes that petitioning was but forme because he doth not like the Kingly Government It cannot be soe absurd to binde the King to a blinde obedience as to confine the Parliaments reason to the will of one man Much more absurd to bind the King and leave subjects vnconfined That the King did notbing but what was opposite to his professed interest cannot be supposed but in his concessions to the late Parliament and we finde by sad experience that nothing is more ruinous to the Kingdome then a power in the Parliament over the King and they have been soe farr from a power to confine the exorbitancie of Kings that those illegall conventions which acted the Tragedies of some Kings were but the stales to vsurpers and moulded to their will That the King called them young statesmen he imputes to arrogance Doubtles the King might have said much more then what he did that most part of these propounders were young statesmen Is there a man in England that doubts it if he regard either age or experience how they have governed themselves and the Kingdome all men see who from soe greate tranquilitie have turned it into a lamentable combustion and despised the Kingdomes interest both at home and abroade that Phaetons miscarriage was never soe answeared by the practice of any rash and precipitate medlers in affaires of state as these vsurpers and as they drove furiously with Iehu soe they practized his hipocrisie that loved the Kingdome better then the commaunds of God and departed not from the sins of Jeroboam though he pretended Zeale for the Lord and that omen of confusion from such fury and madnes his Majest prayed God to divert but the Libeller is pleased with his owne prognostickes and makes augury a warrant for any villany though the wickednes of his Masters may give just occasion to thinke their vengeance sleepes not He comes now to dictate law and tumbling of his repetitions that the Parliament sit not as subjects but superiours called not by him but by the law And doth not this man know the Parliament sayes all this is false and that they are his subjects and called by his writ Surely this Libeller takes pleasure in outfacing all truth otherwise he would not vse such absurd and palpable falsities and that after himselfe had said the king was trusted with the summoning and dissolving of Parliaments Vnreasonable desires might be vnexpected by the king and denyed Wee may see that Iehues fury and Phaetons rashnes were not ill remembred to these men that held the enforcing of old lawes repairing of injuries moderate desires of reformation soe contemptible that nothing but the rooting vp of the foundation of Government could be a remedie for the kingdome whose greate prosperitie was their greatest greivance and all those good lawes which he commends were vseles and to noe purpose That they which came to the Parliament had no authoritie to redresse greivances but to desire the redresse was acknowledged a truth by the late Parliamēt befor their insolēce was confirmed by the kings concessions That their Fathers made as vast alterations to free themselves from ancient Popery is much mistaken for whoever lookes into the reformation of Religion in England shall finde that it moved from the head and that the Parliament conformed themselves vnto the Counsells taken by the king and made not the alterations the Libeller supposes Alterations were made where corruptions had entred into doctrine or practice but it was very farr from esteeming the primitive Church a time of superstition and plucking vp by the rootes what ever was planted in the first ages of the Church Sectaries are not to be judges of what varies from Scripture their opinions arising from disobedience must needes be full of errour and schisme and his Majest had good reason to preferre the doctrine and practice of the primitive Church before any moderne opinion of reformation and as all the pregnant and solid reasons of the Chnrches beyound the seas wrought lesse with the faction in Parliament then the Tumults and rabbles soe farr lesse with this Libeller that defends a schisme from them all vnder the divided Conventicles of Independancy and a crew of ignorant and irreligious Hobgoblins that eate the fat of robbery and oppression And he heere pretends the example of all the reformed Churches against Episcopacie and afterwards confesses the Lutherans who are the greater part of a contrary practice The falshood giddines of their oracles are more ridiculous thē ever were the superstitious pilgramages of blinde votaries he that thus reprehends the kings oppositiō to the change of Church Government while he strives for innovation exclaimes against it as a Cryme for he sayes they would vindicate the Government of the Church innovated corrupted he should have shewed from what time it was corrupted The king sayes such as were looked vpon before as factious in the state Schismatieall in the Church demaunded not only tollerations for themselves in their vanitie noveltie and confusion but alsoe an extirpatiou of that Government
whose rights they had a minde to invade And the Libeller askes was this man ever likely to be advised who setts himselfe against his chosen Councellours and censures the Government of other protestant Churches as bad as any Papist Certainly such Councellours were very vnfitt to advise that were soe ill qualified such as the lawe judges offenders are incapable to judge of law that such were these demaunders is evident to al men that know the lawes and Government of England There are noe Protestant Churches that thinke their Government censured if others differ from it in any particular but they will hold it a Schismaticall insolence in any to endeavour to alter a Government well setled vpon pretence to introduce another against the will of the king It imports not any contempt of the kingdome if such as they chose be found either defective or false and to engage the kingdome in all the impieties that men act which are chosen by them is as absurd as vainely pretended by the Libeller who will make a faction prevalent by Tumults and sedition to be the kingdome and the king should have had his kingdome in greate contempt if he had taken such a faction for the kingdome He drawes an Argument from the penaltie of being a Christian vnder the heathens and a Protestant vnder Papists And surely had they sought to introduce their Religion with the destruction of the Civill state such a fact would have merited the name of treason but their course was contrary to these Sectaries who sought only to enjoy the libertie of their conscience not to enforce others That our saviour comming to reforme his Church was accused of an intent to invade Caesars right as good a right as ever the Prelate Bishopps had the one being gotten by force the other by spirituall vsurpation Helpes not the Sectaries for our saviour was innocent of that false accusation declaring his kingdome not to be of this world acknowledged Caesars right bidding the people to give vnto Cesar the things that were Cesars but this mans prophanes would have the accusation true and lawfull to invade Cesars right from the false accusation of our saviours and blasphemously avowes invading of the Bishopps rights because one better then cesars for to what other purpose doth he compare the rights of Cesar and the Bishopps vnlesse to justifie their dealinge with the Bishopps And accuse our saviour for intending the lyke to Caesar The right of the Prelate Bishopps was gotten by spirituall vsurpation Could any Jew Turke or Pagan speake more reproach fully against Christiaintie that the calling of those men who were soe eminent for suffering and Martidome and gathering the Christian Church throughout the world was a spirituall vsurpation The objection or to his Majest repeating the arguments from law antiquitie Ancestours prosperitie and the like was very improper from him whose repititions of Tyrany slavery single voyce consent of the kingdome and such like have blotted soe greate a part of his booke and he that would binde the king to follow the Example of other Churches will exclude antiquitie and the primitive Church and authorise the schisme of innovating Sectaries because Papists have vsed Arguments against them The king sayes had he two houses sued out their livery from the wardship of Tumults he could sooner have beleived them But sayes the Libeller it concerned them first to sue out their livery from his encroaching Prerogative The law allowes noe livery from Royall Prerogative but judges them Rebells that seeke it The Character sett on them that hunt after faction with their hounds the Tumults the Libeller hath justified by his defence It s noe shame for a King to be a pupill to the Bishopps whose calling it is to give him spirituall Councell but it were madnes to be a laquay to such mē who take vpon them to judge of the callings in the Church of God which have noe calling to it much more to a rabble whome the Libeller himselfe holds extravagant That nimrod was the first that hunted after faction could never be told by the Bishopps much lesse that he was the first that founded Monarchy The Bishopps could have named a more ancient foundation in Adam and Noah They finde the hunters after faction by Tumults of a latter dale Corah and his Company that Rebelled against Moses and Sheba that spake to the Tumults what part have we in David or portion in the sonne of Jesse and they finde them in the cursed Jewes that hunted by the Tumults against our Saviour In Demetrious and his Craftsmen against the Apostles and in Alexander the Copper Smith against St. Paul and that 's the game which Rebells in all times hollowed to and the Mungrell sort never faile them and these that hunt with such hounds preserve beasts of prey to devoure the quiett profitable Certainly Parliaments made lawes before Kings were in being which must have better authoritie then his reason to prove We finde kings making lawes before ever we reade of Parliaments in Commonwealths we finde their law makers were single men as Licurgus Solon and diverse others The kings holding his Crowne by law doth not imply another law maker then the king who first made that law wherevnto the whole people were subject but he that soe lately blamed repetitions vnseasonably falls into his old rode of disputing against Monarchy which he pretends to decline It hath been anciently interpreted the presaging signe of a future Tyrant to dreame of copulation with his Mother Heere is a conceite pluckt in by head and shoulders Whereof was it a signe in Junious Brutus that was directed by the oracle to kisse his Mother his succeeding act was the expulsion of the kings and change of the Government was that lesse then Tyrany or not soe presaged by the oracle as wel as a dreame Parliaments can be noe Mothers to kings that are created by kings The king is by the law of England Father of the Countrey the life and soule of the law but the Libeller will finde out a step Mother an Athalia to destroy the seede Royall and sett her meestuous broode vpon the throne for these dreames were the delusions of some prime Rebells and could not allude vnto just Title but conceites are growne low when such dreames must be fetcht in for reasons And from his dreames it is not strange he should fancie allusions which himselfe sayes are ordinary of the King to the sun of force to swell vp Caligula to thinke himselfe a God And because these Rebells can not be Gods they will be Devills The King sayes these propositions are not the joint and free desires of both houses next that the choise of many members was carried by faction He sayes Charles the fifth against the Protestants in Germany laid the fault vpon some few And what is that to the faction in England If they be not the joint desires of both houses as it was not ought the King to
the originall of Kings to be servants of the publique And yet the people were subjects to them and how farr Kings mistake the nature of their office that thinke they are Masters of the people And yet God gave nations to serve them Though their power is for publique good yet they have a peculiar proprietie in that power and Estate as private men in their private fortunes its more for the peoples good to be subject though to an evill King then to fall to confusion And if rulers may not retaine their power because factious multitudes say that they are but intrusted for the peoples good that it is for the peoples good that they yeilde vp the sword they bare it in vaine Such a wooden sword have the Rebells provided for all Rulers but themselves for when they get power by their swords of steele or mines of powder the people may not thinke that they shall finde such Lords of straw as they pretend governours of the people ought to be We are taught by Scripture that the people are commaunded to hearken and obey not teach commaund and though his supposition that Government is in the people and that they ordained Kings be vaine and false by the examples of Scripture and of most Authenticke histories yet were it admitted that a King came in by the peoples consent they are not after such submission Judges of their owne obedience or their Kings power It were vaine to follow the Libeller in his exceptions to the words of favour and gratification as sounding pride and Lordly vsurpation as if kings only had nothing in their power to oblidge men with all these are the spleenetique vapours of Rebellious distemper For the Kings concessions to the Scotts either touching Episcopacie or the Militia wee shall heare his answeare in due time howsoever the king was not bound to the same Actions where Circumstances varied nor after a fuller vnderstanding of the nature and consequence of the things graunted and as his Majest professed a cleerer information after these Actions had passed him soe he evidently saw that they were more against his subjects good then his owne and that insteede of preventing an Arbitrary power it would have introduced an arbitrary licence and confusion into the Kingdome and such men as preferre the bondage of popular confusion or the licentious insolence of many Lords are eyther inchanted with a witch craft of Rebellion or stupidly benummed with a senseles Lethargy With what Zeale the Libeller reproves the abuse of Scripture when he exclaimes as if it offended his conscience we may perceive by the allusion he makes saying Ireland was as Ephraim the strength of his head meaning the Kings Scotland as Iudah was his law giver but over England as over Edom he meant to cast his shooe Hath this man reverence to Scripture or the Author of it He comes againe to accuse the King for persecuting the consciences of Religious men a knowne vntruth yet soe much beloved by the Libeller as he seemes impatient to misse the repetition of it and with this he joynes his reproving the Kings profession of being an Enemy of those that forced the conscience because he had made a warr and lost all rather then not vphold the Bishopps It is an Argument that he esteemed his conscience that lost all for it But the Libeller sayes they were persecuting Bishopps The King vpholding Bishopps vpholds not persecution or abuse and th e Libellers confounding the office ill exercise of it makes knowne his want of Argument The falshood of their Calumnies against the Bishopps is sufficiently manifested to the world that after soe many vehement outcryes they have not proved on such act of persecution done by any one of them not the presons but the office lawe were the persecution in this mans judgment The King obtruded new Ceremonies vpon vs vpon the Scotts a new Liturgie There were noe new Ceremonies obtruded by him in England and this horrid Rebellion to take away the Ceremonies and Government legally established and continually practised vnder the name of innovations detects both the fraude and outrage of their proceedings The new leiturgie offred the Scots by advice of their Bishopps and Clergie was an act befitting the care of a King and noe man will beleive that it was an offence te their consciences who made noe conscience of blood and Rebellion vpon pretence of their conscience which the world sees was an hipocriticall straining at a straw and swallowing a Camell and these tender conscience men have written their tendernes of conscience with the blood of their brethren which will remaine a memoriall of their dissembled sanctitie What hinderance of the search of truth he meanes is not vnderstood vnles he would have the dreames of mad sectaries confirmed by authoritie He would have the penalties of lawes thought persecution of the conscience and sectaries the Judges and sayes if himselfe meaning the King and his learned Churchmen were the obstinate part should Reformation suffer them to sit Lording like the greate whore And are sectaries Libells convictions of Kings and learned Churchmen and the clamours of malefactours a sentence against the Judge Such is the Government that must now rule the world and Reformation must be an Idoll in the hands of a seditious sectarie whereto the people must fall downe and such vnstable multitudes carried about with every winde of doctrine are likely to be those many waters on which the greate whore sits which hath for corruption and crueltie a greate resemblance vnto those false prophetts that now seduce the people These Clergimen were not to bedriven like sheepe but driven out like wolves But they are theeves and wolves that enter into the sheepefold by violence and stealth and the ambition and greedines of these wolves will finde occasion to sucke the blood and devoure the flesh of the sheepe The king sayes that he beleives the Presbiterie though proved to be the only institution of Iesus Christ were not by the sword to be set vp without his conjent which is contrary saith the Libeller both to the doctrine and knowne practice of all Protestant Churches if his sword threaten those who of their owne accord imbrace it But then it cannot be sett vp by the sword vnles his sword threaten those that imbrace it And this jugler denies what the king sayes and yet in effect professes it and while he enrages the Tumults to sett vp their Presbiterie with the sword produces Arguments only for defence The reformed Churches professe to follow the ancients in suffering not associate themselves to bloody Sectaries in Rebelling And his next words impert that private men may not contend with Magistrates nor vse force against them Though Christ and his Apostles being to Civill affaires but private men contended not with Magistrates yet when Magistrates themselves and especially Parliament come to know Religion they ought to defend it against any King or Tyrant What is defence to
murder to take away his life whome the king had pardoned and we finde that though Jacob curst the rage of his two sons yet he put them not to death for the murder of the Sichemites A law must be founded in vnrighteousnes if the people doe not punish their Rulers as the Rulers them And such a law is contrary to those Rules of righteousnes God hath prescribed and is the destruction of mankinde not any law at tall and this man feares not to charge God with vnrighteousnes that forbidds evill speakinge of their Rulers though wicked and vnjust and scoffes at his ordinance calling anointinge a Charme Can any man of Common reason imagine that a people wil be obedient vnto any whome they have power to punish or that subjection can consist with such a condition The anointinge of Abiathar to be a Priest did not exempt him from the power of the King And can any reasonable man thinke that any but the King could have vsed that power vpon Abiathar or that because the King who was anointed to that office over the Priest was subject to the like from his people or any private man as this Atheist will have it David as a private man and in his owne cause feared to lift vp his hand against the Lords anointed but this Cannot forbidd the law nor disarme Iustice from havinge legall power against any King This sheweth that divine law forbadd all men to take the Armes of justice without or against the King who is referred to Gods justice and justice hath noe Armes but his power What David feared he judged all others had cause to feare who can touch the Lords anointed and be innocent If David were a private man being anointed King who was a publique man But what David feared these wretches despise and Count this forbearance of David a ceremony which he might have forborne If David feared in his owne cause to 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 a Monarch claime this priviledge of exemptiō from their subjects Judicature b◅t 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 above that 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 sins 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 outcryes 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 sor 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 vilysying 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 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 the 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
diseng age 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 vnâ—…illingly 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 Acts 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 obtâ—…ding 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 Traytorous office That the King passed the latter Bill to prevent the oncroase 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 â—…ller 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 â—…neenfed by his conspiracies should resent his doings if he had added the deâ—…all 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 difloyalite 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 They 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 sitt 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 Act 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 Ancestours where are those law bookes But how many hundred yeares since was this engraving worne
take it for the advice of Parliament and forbeare to shew the fraude because Charles the fifth said the like vpon another occasion The Court was wont to tamper with Elections and he sayes noe faction was then more potent And yet he affirmes they prevayled not where then was their potencie Because the king sayes he cannot swallow such Camells of sacriledge and Injustice as others doe The Libeller sayes he is the Pharisee vp and downe is not as other men are Is it Pharisaisme to professe with the Prophett David the dislike of them that follow superstitious vainties Because the Pharisee swallowed Camells be such men Pharisees that professe they will not because the Sectaries pretended conscience of Ceremonies like the Pharisees washing the outside while they devoure the Estates of other men without remorse are they not Pharisees and are they only that professe they cannot swallow such Camells Pharifees this is a new found Pharisee The three Realmes all most perished for want of Parliaments Wee have seene how neere perishing they are by a Parliament which hath committed more Injustice since it began then all our stories have remembred for five hundred yeares before The Libeller hath found out a new kinde of sacriledge for he endures not to have Church robbing called sa◅riledge and that is to bereave a Christi in conscience of libertie for the narroumes of his owne conscience And by what Engine is this sacriledge committed doth he that abstaines for conscience sake bereave another mans conscienc of libertie He thinkes to take away superfluous wealth from the Clergie is not sacriledge for that serves as an excuse for their theft in taking from others what they pretend ill vsed wee may see the love these Sectaries have vnto the goods of the Church that extenuate their impietie by pretending that such men most oppose that wickednes whose righteousnes in other matters hath been least observed And these are noe Pharisees that traduce the opposers of their sacriledge for want of righteousnes in other matters this is their new righteousnes that allowes none holy but their owne gang and nothing vnholy that they practise and therefore they will not see the Kings vertues least they be driven to confesse their owne wicked Actions against him Vpon the REBELLION IN IRELAND IT Could not possibly be soe secrett from whence it sprung as the contriver supposed And if he knew the contrivers perhaps he might know whether they supposed it would be secrett for they that pretended to be the principall contrivers avowed it openly It cannot be imaginable that the Irish guided by soe many subtill and Italian heads should soe farr have lost the vse of reason and Common sense as not supported by other strength then their owne to begin a warr soe desperate against England and Scotland And truly it may seeme that they who thought themselves wiser then Italian heads had lost reason Common sense who letting lose or rather cutting asunder the Reynes of Government which held in that kingdome to a people naturally disaffected to those vnto whome they were subject invited them to that Rebellion first in a popular fury cutting of the Ld. Lieutenant to gratifie them then leaving the Kingdome without a successour and preparing the way to a Civill warr in England stirring vp jealosies against the King and weakning his Authoritie and composing Apologies for Rebellion which would serve the Irishe pretences aswell as the diferences in England their designes and those Italian heads saw as much advantage from our broyles as want of aide from other nations who were busied to the vtmost in their owne most necessary concernements And therefore the libeller vainely inferrs authoritie for assistance promised from England vnles it were from the faction in the houses there being noe visible strength then in any other there neede not nor could be any private assurance vnto the Irish Rebells from any other but that faction and it is most apparent that they neglected all meanes to remedie that mischeife busying themselves wholy in laying the ground worke of the Rebellion in England which they held their most necessary concernement this was ground enough for Italian heads to stirr vp that Rebellion The libeller proceedes vpon his suppositions as if they were graunted truths he would insinnate an equivocation in what the King sayes That the sea of blood is enough to drowne any man ineternall both infamy and miserie whome God shall finde the malitious Author or instigatour of that effusion Because he sayes the Rebells themselves wil not confesse that any blood was shed by them maliciously bu◅ for the Catholique cause or Common libertie Therein they differ not from the Libeller and his English Rebells for they wil not confesse any of the blood they shed to be maliciously but for Religion and Common libertie and thence the Libeller learnes his skill to cast suspitions vpon the plainest expressions of others he well descerned that the King vsed the word malicious for aggravation not restriction his observation was captious when he read in the following Period that the King affirmes nothing could be more abhorred of him being soe full of sin against God disloyaltie to himselfe and destructive to his subjects and calls God to wittnes that as he could with truth wash his hands in innocencie as to any guilt in that Rebellion soe he might wash them in his te◅res as to the sadd apprehension he had to see it spredd so far make such waste And the Libeller himselfe after soe impertinent and malitious an insinuation confesses he denies it both heere and elswhere But he sayes there is in it no such wide disagreemēt from the scope of his former Counsells we are sure there could not be agreement with the scope of his former Counsells It was agreeable to the Counsells of Rebells to defame the King with this aspersion it is not strange that vntruths may be affirmed in three Kingdomes in reguard of the contrivers that soe industriously spred them But let vs heare his reasons or reports It s most certaine that the King was ever friendly to the Irish Papists And its certaine that what he sayes is salfe but what 's that to their Rebellion against himselfe or destroying his Kingdome But his certaintie is that the King in his third yeare against the plaine advice of Parliament like a kinde of Pope sold them many indulgences for money And was he a kinde of Pope to take their penalties of them which the law enacted for their recusancy was that Pope like That the King might not receive the penalties which the law gave him or take compositions where the whole could not be had was never against the advice of Parliament but this is a very long stride from his third yeare to the beginning of the Rebellion but how does he hang this togeather The advancing the Popish partie he sayes but instances in noe particular nor for negotiating vnderhand by Priests