Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	act_n	henry_n	king_n	2,829	5	3.8707	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88235	Lieu. Col. John Lilburn's plea in law, against an Act of Parliament of the 30 of January, 1651. entituled, An act for the execution of a judgment given in Parliament against Lieu. Col. John Lilburn. Contrived and penned, on purpose for him, by a true and faithful lover of the fundamental laws and liberties of the free people of England, ... all which compels and forceth the penman to be very studious of his own good and preservation, ... and therefore, for his own good and benefit, the honest readers information, and for Mr Lilburns the prisoners advantage, he presents these ensuing lines to thy view, and his, as the form of a plea; that the penman hereof, as a true well-wisher of his, and the people of England, would have him to ingross into parchment, and to have ready by him to make use of (in case his own braines cannot contrive a better) when he is called up to answer for his life before the judges of the upper-bench, or any other bar of justice whatsoever; and the said form of a plea for him thus followeth verbatim.	Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657.	1653 (1653)	Wing L2160; Thomason E703_12*; ESTC R202744	14,820	16

his Army in many of their remarkable Declarations have fully declared against the late 11 members their Accomplices Yea and forced the late Parl. to raze out of their Books and Records many wicked and unrighteous things as they judged them to be after the Parl. had solemnly past them as Votes Orders Iudgments and Acts yea and endeavoured very earnestly to hang divers of those as Traytors that had executed them as particularly Alderman Adams Langham and Bunch with the Lord Major Sr Iohn Gayer c. But the greatest grievances and mischiefs in the world are by the foresaid mischievous and unjust banishing Act established ratified and confirmed for by it a man is condemned to lose his liberty and estate and all the comforts of this life and that without any the least crime committed or accusation exhibited or legal process issued out to summon the party to make any defence in the world or ever calling or permitting him to speak one word for himself Which is an act or proceeding against the light and law of Nature Reason the Law of God against the Law of Honour Conscience and common-honesty yea a dealing worse with the party then ever the cruel Jewes did with Christ or then the bloudy Butchers Bishop Gardiner and Bonner did with the ●oasted Martyrs in Queen Mary's dayes who alwayes suffered them to have due process of law and to know and see their Accusers and to have free liberty to speak for themselves and never condemned them but for transgressing a known and declared Law in being Yea also dealing worse with the party then ever the bloudy Gunpowder Traitors were dealt with by King James who always allowed them fair trials in law from the beginning to the end at the Bar of Justice for their lives Yea it is a worse dealing with the party then ever the Parliament themselves dealt with the bloudiest and most massacring traitors that ever was in arms against them to cut their throats Yea the fore-mentioned practice of the foresaid most illegal and unrighteous Act of banishment is an Act and proceedings in the highest subversion of the fundamental law and liberty of England that can be invented or imagined and by consequence if it may without the highest offence or solicismes in Law be supposed that his Excellency the Lord Gen. Cromwel Major Gen. Harrison and the rest of the Members of the late supream Authority of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England sitting at Westminster had any real finger in it or were Actors of it they may and ought all of them with all the rest under them that have executed any part of the foresaid unjust injurious illegal Act of Parliament be apprehended indicted and processed against at the common-law as Traytors and subverters of the fundamental lawes liberties and freedoms of the free-born people of England As that learned man in the Lawes of England Sr Edward Cook in the second third and fourth parts of his Institutes all three of which are published by two special Orders of the late House of Commons in Anno 1641. for good Law doth declare and proof was dealt with by Empson and Dudley in lesse Cases then the before recited unjust Act of banishment Which Case of Empson and Dudley was thus At the Parliament holden by King Lords and Commons in Henry the sevenths time who was a most undoubted lawful King of England and by his Marriage of his Wife the Lady Elizabeth Heir apparent to the House of York as Himself was to the House of Lancaster had united the two claims of Lancaster and York in Himself and in pitcht-battel had slain King Richard the third the Usurper and by reason of the extraordinary many troubles of His Reign and the ignorant Regal time in which he lived considered He had a thousand times more grounds to be arbytrary and discretionary in his proceedings with the people of England then the late decapitated Parliament had Yet he summoned a free Parliament who sate peaceably and quietly without the force or purgings of soldiers and after that several Juries at Assizes and Sessions by corruption and favour had refused to fi●de persons that were judicially proved guilty before them of br●ach of penal laws as in full and free Parliament by King Lords and Commons is avowedly declared An Act of Parliament recorded in the 4th part of Cooks Institutes fol. 40 41. in the 11th of Hen. 7. chap. 3 was past by King Lords and Commons in full and free parliament to enable the Justices of Assize in open Sessions to be holden before them and the Justices of peace in each country in England upon information for the King before them to be made to have full power and authority by their discretion with ●ut trials by Juries to hear and determine all offences and contempts committed against penal laws In all which arbitrary or discretion I proceedings murther treason and felony was excepted out of their cognizance or jurisdiction as also all other offences whereby any person should lose life or member or lands tenements goods or chattels to the party complaining By pretext of which statute saith the Lord Cook in his last recited foli● Empson and Dudley privie Counsellors and Justices of peace to Henry the seventh did commit upon the subject insufferable pressures and oppressions which yet at the highest was but the taking away some small part of the persons estates from them that they condemned and therfor● this statute was justly soon after the decease of Henry the seventh repealed at the next Parliament after his decease by the statute of the 1 Hen 8. chap 6. A good caveat saith he to parliaments to leave all causes to be measured by the golden and streight wet-wand of the law and not to the uncertain and crooked cord of discretion For it is not almost credible to fore-see saith he when any maxime or fundamental law of this Realm is altered as elsewhere hath been observed what dangerous inconveniences do follow which most expresly appeareth by this most unjust and strange Act of 11 H. 7. For hereby not onely Empson and Dudley themselves but such Justices of peace corrupt men as they caused to be authorised committed most grievous and heavy oppressions and exactions grinding the face of the poor subjects by penal laws be they never so obsolete or unfit for the time by information onely without any presentment or trial by Jury being the ancient birth-right of the subject but to hear and determine the same by their discretion inflicting such penalty as the statutes not repealed imposed These and other like actions and oppressions by or by the means of Empson and Dudley and their instruments brought infinite treasures to the Kings Coffers whereof the King himself in the end with great grief and compunction repented as in another place we have observed This statute of 11 H. 7. we have recited and shewed the just inconveniences therof to the end that the like should never hereafter

be attempted in any Court of Parliament and that others might avoid the fearful end of those two Time-servers Empson and Dudley Qui eorum vestigia insistant eorum exitus perhorrescant That is to say Those that follow their foot-steps may fear the same destruction that they had whose end in the third part of the Institutes fol. 208. and the fourth part fol. 198 199. may be seen was severally to be indicted at Common law whose indictments is there to be read and convicted and executed as Traitors for subverting the fundamental Law and Liberties of England viz. Trials by Juries which the Conquests of the Romans Saxons Danes or Normans could never blot out of the Kalendar of Englishmens fundamental Liberties but hath from time to time with the infinite hazards of their lives and blouds been preserved as the choisest of their jewels and as one of their chiefest fundamental right Of whom the said Lord Cook in his exposition of the 29 Chapter of Magna Charta in his second part Institutes fol. 51 upon the words of lex terra or the law of the Land where he plentifully shews that no Englishman whatsoever ought not for any crime whatsoever in any Court whatsoever by any power or authority whatsoever to be tried but by Juries and due process of Law as is before shewed expresly saith Yet Against this ancient and fundamental Law and in the face thereof I finde an Act of Parliament made saith he that aswel Justices of Assize as Justices of Peace without any finding or presentment by the verdict of twelve men upon a bare information for the King before them made should have full power and authority by their discretions to hear and determine all offences and contempts committed or done by any person or persons against the form ordinance and effect of any Statute made and not repealed c. By colour of which Act shaking this fundamental Law it is not credible what horrible oppressions and exactions to the undoing infinite numbers of people were committed by Sir Richard Empson Knight and Edmond ●●dley being Justices of the Peace throughout England and upon this unjust and injurious Act as commonly in sixe cases it falleth out a new Office was erected and they made Masters of the Kings forfeitures But at the Parliament hold●n in the first year of Henry the 8 this Act of the 11th of Henry the 7th is recited and made void and repealed and the reason thereof is yeilded for that by force of the said Act it was manifestly known that many sinister and crafty feigned forged informations had been persued against divers of the Kings subjects to their great dammage and wrongfull vexations and the ill success hereof and the fearful ends of the two Oppressors should deterr others from committing the like and should admonish Parliaments That instead of the ordinary and pretious trial per legem terra by the law of the Land they bring not in Absolute and partial trials by discretion And in the fourth part of his Institutes fol. 37. he expresly saith That he findes an Attainder by Parliament of a subject viz. Thomas Cromwel then Earl of Essex of High Treason who was committed to the Tower and thereby forth comming to be heard and yet was never called to answer in any of the Houses of Parliament Of the manner of which proceeding he thus saith Auferat oblivio si potest si non utcunque silentiam tegat That is Let the Parliaments crime be buried in oblivion if it be possible and if not nevertheless yet let it give place to silence for the present For saith he the more high and absolute the jurisdiction of the Court is the more just and honourable it ought to be in the proceeding and to give example of Justice to inferiour Courts And fol. 38. he is confidently perswaded that the rehearsal of this unjust Attainder will hereafter cause the Honourable Members of both Houses of Parliament to be so tender of their duty in preserving the fundamental Lawes and liberties of the people of England as that never hereafter such an unjust Attainder shall be brought where the party is forth comming to condemn him without hearing of him And consonant unto this is the Scripture and the Law of God therein contained as appears by the third of Gen. vers 9. where God after Adam had transgressed his Law summons him before him to answer for himself before he would pass judgement against him And when Sodom had abhominably defiled its wayes with the height of wickedness yet the just God of heaven and earth would not judge condemn or pass sentence against them Till he went down to see whether they have done altogether according to the cry that is come up against them or not And saith God I will know Gen. 18. And Deut. 17.6.11 and Chap. 20.15 God saith expresly One Witness shall not rise against a man for any iniquity or for any sin in any sin that he sinneth at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses shall the matter be established And by the hand of Moses he required the people of Israel to do according to the sentence of the Law the judgment which shall be given thereupon and not to decline from the law to the right hand or to the left And suitable to this is the judicial and legal proceedings of the great Congregation of the children of Israel consisting to the number of four hundred thousand able men in the case of the Levite and his ravished and slain Concubine who in their judicial proceedings in that Case first demanded of him how so great a wickednes came to be committed in Israel And the conclusion after their hearing and examining the cause was to consider consult and then to give sentence And saith Nicodemus that learned man in the Law of God against the Scribes and Pharisees in behalf of Christ Doth our Law judge any man before it hear him John 7.51 And saith Festus the Heathen Roman Governor in Judea that had no other guide to walk by but the Light and Law of Nature in the behalf of Paul against his bloudy enemies It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any one to die before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face and have licence to answer for himself Act. 25.16 And saith righteous Paul who writ the Oracles of God infallibly by the Spirit of God where there is no law there is nor can be no transgression Rom. 4.15 And as evil saith the Lord Cook in the last fore-cited fol. was the proceeding in Parliament in the second of Henry the 6. against Sir John Mortimer the third son of Edmund the second E. of March descended from Lionel Duke of Clarence who was indicted of High Treason for certain words which Indictment without any Arraignment or pleading being meerly feigned to blemish the Title of the Mortimers and withall being insufficient in Law as by the

Lieu. Col. John Lilburn's Plea in Law Against an Act of Parliament of the 30 of January 1651. Entituled An Act for the execution of a Judgment given in Parliament against Lieu. Col. John Lilburn Contrived and penned on purpose for him by a true and faithful lover of the Fundamental Laws and Liberties of the free people of England a great deal more then of the person of Lieu. col John Lilburn though now he be a prisoner for the said Lawes and Liberties and his own innocency in Newgate All which compels and forceth the Penman to be very studious of his own good and preservation very much concerned and very much incroached upon in that harsh unjust and illegal dealing that at present is exercised upon him And therefore for his own good and benefit the honest Readers information and for Mr Lilburns the prisoners advantage he presents these ensuing lines to thy view and his as the form of a Plea that the Penman hereof as a true well-wisher of his and the people of England would have him to ingross into Parchment and to have ready by him to make use of in case his own braines cannot contrive a better when he is called up to answer for his life before the Judges of the Upper-Bench or any other Bar of Justice whatsoever and the said form of a Plea for him thus followeth verbatim The second Edition much inlarged corrected and amended July 2. 1653. JOhn Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar saith that he having heard the Charge contained in the Scire facias Indictment or Information now read unto him at the Bar For plea thereunto he saith That it appeareth by the Act of Parl of the 30 of Jan. 1651. That upon the 15. of Jan. 1651. a Judgment was given in Parl. against one Lieu. Col. Jo. Lilburn in the Act named for high crimes and misdemeanors by him committed as by the same appeares for which the fines and other punishments were promulgated against him mentioned in the said Act. But the said John Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar saith that the said J. Lilburn in the said Act named and he the now prisoner at the Bar be not one and the self-same person for that he the now prisoner at the Bar is a free-born English Gentleman and never was legally charged indicted convicted either by the Parl. or any other Court of Judicature being a Court of Record in the English Nation or Commonwealth Neither ever was there any Judgment given in Parl. against him the now prisoner at the Bar for high crimes and misdemeanors mentioned in the said Act upon the said 15 of Jan. 1651 Votes or Resolves being not in the least any judgments in law It being impossible that a Judgment in any legal Court of England should be past against a free-born English man and that man dayly forth-coming and never to hear read nor see any of the proceedings ante-ceding the said Judgment and never summoned by any legal process to any legal proceedings nor called to any legal Bar whatsoever and demanded according to Law what he could say why Judgment should not be past against him Neither ever did the pris●ner J. Lilburn now at the Bar ever in all his life-time by kneeling at the Bar of the P. of the Commonwelth of England lately sitting at Westm ever acknowledge that the said Parl. in law ever had in all their life times any the least jurisdiction in the world to sentence him or any other free-born English man of England that are none of their Members of immedi●te Officers for any crimes whatsoever as I. Lilburn the prisoner at th● Bar hath fully and undeniably proved by Law in his P●ea upon the Writ of Habeas Corpus before the late Judges of the Kings Bench viz. Judge Bacon and Judge Rolls upon the 8th of May 1648. as in that printed Law-Argument entituled The lawes funeral is fully to be read in pag. 8 9 10 11. All crimes whatsoever being for him onely and solely to be h●ard determined and judged at the Common-law and no where else For Magna Charta th● P●tition of Right and the Act that abolished the Star-Chamber expresly saith That no free-man of England shall be taken or imprisoned or be disseized of his free hold or liberties or free customes or be out-lawed or be ex●led but by a lawful Judgment of a Jury of 12 sworn men of his equals of the same neighborhood according to the Law of the Land And that none shal be taken for any crime whatsoever by any person or Court whatsoever unless it be by indictment or presentment of good and lawful people of the same neighborhood where such deeds be done in due manner or by process made by Writ original at the Common law and that none be put out of his franchise or free-hold unless he be duly brought in to answer and adjudged of the same according to the course of the Law and if any thing be done by any persons or Courts wha●soever against the tenor of the same it shall be void in Law and holden for error And the Petition of Right expresly saith No man whatsoever shall be any wayes punished especially in criminal cases but according to the Laws and Statutes already established in the Land And those also by the said Petition of Right and the Statute that abolished the Star-Chamber are precisely declared to be according to our good old native fundamental Rights Liberties This very thing or the securing therof alone being the principal and chief declared cause of all the late Parl. and present Armies wars with the late King and his son and without the inviolable preservation of these our fundamental laws and liberties it is impossible that any in the Army from the highest to the lowest in the least can acquit themselves of being justly esteemed both before God and all just men real and wilful murderers of all those persons that they have slain in the late civil wars and if so woe unto them when God makes inquisition for innocent bloud Neither indeed is he the now prisoner at the Bar guilty of any such high crimes and misdemeanors as is expressed in the said Act Neither ever was he the now prisoner at the Bar in the least duly and legally banished and fined by the said Act nor yet is a fellon nor guilty of fellony in no manner of respect as by the said Scire facias Indictment or Information now read unto him is supposed Neither can he rationally imagine that by the Parl. that is mentioned in the said Act of the 30 of Jan. 1651. for banishing one Lieu. Col. Iohn Lilburn is not in the least meant the late Parl. of the Common-wealth of England sitting at Westminster especially because it is not so exprest who had taken many Oaths and past abundance of Declarations and particularly that of the 9 of Feb. 1648. inviolably to maintain the funda●ental Lawes of the Land in reference to the peoples lives

liberties and properties with all things incident appertainining and belonging thereunto But that rather it was some ignorant sottish French Parl. sitting at Paris or elsewhere in France that understand nothing of the laws liberties and freedomes of England or that it was the Malignant Cavalier Parl. lately sitting at Oxford in the Kings Quarters there post-dating their Act and thereby endeavoring by the said Act to create such a a president as in the consequence of it would destroy all the lawes liberties and properties of the free-born people of England and thereby absolutely set up the Kings Will and Prerogative above Law the bare endeavouring of which in the Earl of Strafford hath bin long since adjudgd high Treason Or in the next place if the Authors of the said monstrous and illegal Act of banishment be neither the ignorant Parliament of Paris nor the Cavalier Parliament of Oxford then of necessity in the third place it cannot in Charity and Reason but be judged that the said Act of banishment was drawn up by Mr Scobel the Parliaments Clerk Mr Hill their Chairman and Mr Prideaux their Attorney General when they were all riding Post and so jumbled or shaken with fast riding that it was impossible for them to hold their pens to write right and true and when they had framed it then by some cunning artifice or inchantment of theirs they preferred it to the said Parl. who in charity and common Reason must needs be judged to pass it when they were three quarters asleep against some sillie natural fool called Lieu. col John Lilburn that could not be imagined ever in his life to have read any thing of Law or Reason It being impossible in the least in Reason to be conceived that the late supream Authority the Parl. of the Commonwealth of England sitting at Westminster being onely by their own Declarations but trusted to provide for the Peoples weal but not in the least for their woe would ever in their right wits or not being three quarters asleep pass such an Act of Parliament against Iohn Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar who hath much read the law and very well understands the fundamental liberties of England and hath hazardously adventured his life a thousand times for the inviolable preserving of them because such an Act of Parl. as the foresaid Act of Parl. is is in the first place An Act of Parliament against common right common equity common reason and therfore is void and null in law and ought not to be executed as appears by these following Law Authorities viz. 1 part of Dr Bonhams Case fol. 118. and the 8th of Edw. 3. fol. 3. 30. 33 E. cassavit 32. and 27 H. G. annuity 41. and 1 Eliz. Dier 113. and 1 part Cooks Institutes lib. 2. chap. 11. sect 209. fol. 140. a. 4 Edw. 4. 12. 12 Ed. 4. 18. 1 H. 7. 12. 13. Plow com fol. 369. and Judge Jenkins learned Works in the Law printed for I. Gyles 1648. but particularly by his Discourse of long Parliaments pag. 139 140 c. See also Mr W. Prins notable book of the 16 of Iune 1649. called A legal Vindication of the liberties of England against illegal taxes p. 11 12 13. c. But especially see a book entituled The legal and fundamental liberties of England revived asserted and vindicated printed and reprinted in the year 1649. pag. 54 55 56 57. yea an Act of Parl. That a man shall be Judges in his own Case is avoid Act in law as appeares in Hubberts Case fol. 120. and by the 8th Part of Cookes Reports in Dr Bonhams Case and by the present Armies own Book of Declarations pag. 35 52 54 59 60 61 63 132 141 142 143 144. Yea saith that learned Oracle of the Law of England Sr Edw. Cook in the 4th part of his Institutes fol. 330. Where Reason ceaseth there the Law ceaseth for seeing Reason is the very life and spirit of the law it self the law-giver is not to be esteemed to respect that which hath no Reason although the generality of the words at the first sight or after the letter seem otherwise And saith the said learned Author in his first part Institutes fol. 140. a. All Customs and prescriptions Acts of Parliament Lawes and Iudgments that be against Reason are void and null in themselves And saith the Armies Atturny General John Cook in the late Kings Case stated pag. 23. that by the law of England any Act or agreement against the laws of God and nature is a meer nullity for as a man hath no hand in making the laws of God and nature no more hath he power to marre or alter them and he cites the E. of Leicesters adjudged Case for a proof And in pag. the 20t h he also saith That all the Judges in England cannot make one case to be law that is not reason no more then they can prove a hair to be white that is black which if they should so declare or adjudge it is a meer nullity For law saith he must be reason adjudged And excellent to this very purpose is that ancient Law Book called the Doctor and Student who in his second Chap. pag. 4. expresly saith Against the law of Nature which he cals the law of reason prescription statute nor custome may not prevail and if any be brought in against it they be no prescriptions statutes nor customs but things void and against justice And what this law of nature or reason is he excellently sheweth in the latter end of the 4th pag. and the beginning of the fifth and therefore in his 7th pag. he expresly saith That to every good law is required these properties viz. that it be honest rightwise possible in it self and after the custom of the country convenient for the place and time necessary profitable and also manifest that it be not captious by any dark sentence nor mixt with any private wealth but all made for the common good for saith he every mans law must be consonant to the law of God otherwise they are not righteous nor obligatory Secondly such an Act of Parliament as the foresaid Act of Banishment is not onely against common-right common-equity and common-reason but it is absolutely destructive to the very ends of the peoples trust conferred upon the Parliament and so the highest of Treasons that can be committed and that it is destructive to the ends of the peoples Trusts clearly appears by the Statutes of the 4th of Ed. the 3d chap. 14. and 36 Edw. 3. 10. which expresly saith That a Parliament at least shall be holden once every year and that for the maintenance of the Peoples lawes and liberties and the redress of divers mischiefs and grievances that dayly happen and suitable to these things are the ends contained in the Writs that summon them the intentions of those that chuse the Members and send them And suitable to this is the ends of Parl. sitting as the present General and

same appeareth was confirmed by Authority of Parliament And the said Sir John being brought into the Parliament without Arraignment and Answer Judgment in Parliament was given against him upon the said Indictment that he should be carryed to the Tower of London and drawn through the city to Tyburn and there hanged drawn and quartered his head to be set on London Bridge his four quarters on the four gates of London as by the Record of Parliament appeareth And therefore in the next folio being fol. 39. he saith That whereas by Order of Law a man cannot be attainted of high Treason unless the Offence be in Law high Treason he ought not to be attainted by general words of high Treason by Authority of Parliament as somtime hath been used but the high treason ought to be specially expressed seeing that the Court of Parliament is the highest and most honourable Court of Justice and ought as hath been said to give example to inferior Courts And further to shew that Parliaments which in their right constitution are the best conservators of our Laws and Liberties are erroneous things when they walk by their own Wills and forsake their true and only guide the fandamental Lawes of England what need there any more instances then many of the Armies own Declarations in severall of which and their frequent Discourses they have declared the late parliament a trayterous Parliament Breakers of their Trust and embroylers of the Nation in bloudy wars and subverters of the peoples liberties and freedoms yea and in the conclusion the Lord Gen. Cromwel himself and Maj. Gen. Harrison with their own hands have pul'd them out by the ears and pluckt them up by the very Roots as final breakers of their trust as a pack of the vildest knaves and villaines that ever breathed in England Although they were fenced in and about by an Act of parliament made before the wars by King Lords and Commons that they should not be dissolved but by their own free and voluntary consents And also since they changed the Kingdom into a Commonwealth by two several Acts of parl of the 14 of May 1649. and the 17 of July 1649. in which it is expresly made high Treason for any Englishman or men by writing printing or words declaring or by endeavouring to raise or stir up Force to dissolve the late parliamment or their councel of state without their own consents or to say that the said late parl or their councel of state is tyrannical usurped or unlawful as by the said Acts of Parl. with reference thereunto being had more at large doth appear which Acts are printed in the first part of the Tryal or Arraignment of the prisoner at the Bar at Guild-hall Octob. 1649. pag. 86 87 88 89 And the said J. Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar for further plea saith That for supposed violating those two last forementioned Acts of Parl. and that but for supposed words and for the supposed compiling writing and causing to be printed Arguments founded at grounded upon the known and declared fundamental Lawes of England the received principals of Reason and the Armies own printed and published Declarations he the said Joh. Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar was arraigned and indicted as a Traytor for his life at Guildhall London in Octo. 1649. And that principally by the instigation and means of his Excellency the present L. G. Cromwel which Tryal was with that violence and fury that the said prisoner at the Bar was absolutely denied the declared benefit of the known Laws of England viz. the help of Councel learned in the Law and a copy of his Charge and Indictment which were not denyed but granted to the Lord Macquire that grand Irish Rebel and those arch Traytors as they are commonly called Strafford Canterbury Hambleton Capel c. and which also was granted to the prisoner at the Bar as his Right by Law when he was prisoner at Oxford and arraigned by Judge Heath c. for his life as a traytor so that the said J. Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar considering the several penalties declared to be due to any person or persons whatsoever that by force or otherwise should but indeavor to dissolve the late Pa●… or the● Councel of State he cannot either in Reason or Law see or apprehend which way his Excellency the said L.G. Cromwel and M. Gen. Harison c. if they continue and persevere as they have begun to execute the said unjust and injurious Act of parl upon the said J. Lilburn prisoner at the Bar which is one of the most wicked'st and unjust that ever the Parl. in their lives made and one of the highest and most notorious Acts of their breach of trust that ever they committed as is before fully proved can in the least either before God or Man acquit themselves of being guilty of the high●st of Treason both by the letter and equity of the two last forementioned Lawes lately made in part by themselves but principally by their instigation in forcibly dissolving the late parl against their own voluntary wills and consents or how they can acquit themselves in the least in the eyes of all the understanding people in England to be justly esteemed guilty of plucking up the parl by the roots not in the least for any evil oppression injustice or breach of trust they had committed against the Nation or honest people thereof that never yet in the least upon their own principles forfeited their liberties freedoms but onely because they would destroy the parl to have the power in their own hands thereby to dispose of all the lives liberties and proprieties of all the people of England by their absolute wills and pleasures and to deal worse and more arbytrary with the honest Inhabitants thereof then any Conqueror that ever went before them did although themselves against the late King have in the Kings Case stated p. 22. by John Cook their own Atturney Gen. publikely declared That Conquest is a Title or Government fit to be exercised amongst Beares and Wolves but not in the least amongst men And for any to aver Us in England to be a conquered Nation is not only expresly against all the tenour of the Armies many and remarkable Declarations but it is such an averment then which there can be none more pregnant and fruitful in Treason then it as Mr Jo. Pym in his learned and rational printed Argument by the special Order of the House of Commons the 29 April 1641. against the E. of Strafford avers And further in pag. 6. saith There are few Nations in the world that have not been conquered NO doubt but the Conqueror may give what Laws he please to those that are conquered but if the succeeding pacts and Agreements do not limit and restrain that Right what people can be secure England hath been conquered and Wales hath been conquered and by this Reason will be in little better case then Ireland

if the King by the right of a Conqueror give lawes to his people shall not the people by the same Reason be restored to the right of the Conquered to recover their liberty if they can What can be more hurtful more pernicious to both then such Propositions as these Which must needs be most truly averred have no end of bloud-shed and murder and all the miseries besides that Tongue can express or Heart can imagine And it is impossible that ever the honest people of England should intrust as in some measure they have done the General and His Officers with the Custody and preservation of their lives liberties freedoms and proprieties with any the least intentions that when they had subdued their common enemies they should subdue their fundamental laws and Rights for the preservation of which the onely Contest with the common enemy was begun and then give them a Law flowing from their uncertain discretionary Wils and pleasures Sure I am that righteous and just David calls those sons of Belial and wicked men that would go about to deprive those that staid with the stuff of an equall share in the Conquest even with those that went out to fight 1 Sam. 30.21 22 23 24 25 c. and sure I am that worthy man in his Age Mr John Pym in his foresaid excellent Speech pag. 22. saith That such Treasons as the subversion of fundamental laws violating of liberties can never be good or justifiable by any circumstance or occasion and therefore by how much the more a trust is upon a man or generation of men by so much the more it makes their Crime in this kind to be the more capital and haynous Therfore to conclude though J. Lilburn the prisoner at the Bar could and might in Law urge many things more against the Parl. legallest power in all manner of Acts of Attainder the Argumenes against which are excellently set down in that rationall highly to be commended Plea in Law entituled The Laws subversion p. 32. or Sr Iohn Maynards Case truly stated in 1648. by I. Houldin Gent. and their non-jurisdiction in the least as to punish any man whatsoever that is not of them for any crime whatsoever and also the absolute irrationallity and illegality of their making a particular law or their setting up of a particular Court for a particular man which are notably and rationally discussed upon in the 2d edition of the book entituled The Picture of the Councel of state p. 4 5 6. the 2d edition of The legal fundamental liberties of England revived asserted vindicated p 71 72 73. yea he might urge many Arguments lawfully to prove that the parl was no parl when they past the said Act of banishment but were long before dissolved and that by their own consents when the late parl took upon them the exercise of Regality the dissolution of Kingship and the House of Lords as is notably endeavored to be proved in the late Discourses of several of the Armies Champions as particularly one licensed to be printed for G. Calvert and another by R. Moon at the seven Stars in Pauls Church-yard Yet he shall close all at present with this last Plea viz. That although by the said unjust Act of banishment the Act it self doth authorize all Judges Mayors Sheriffs Bayliffs and all other other Officers as well Military as Civil in their respective places to be aiding and assisting in apprehending c. the said banished Lieu. Col. John Lilburn yet it authorizeth none of them in the least to arraign try condemn and execute the said John Lilburn mentioned in the said Act and therefore by reason of the insufficiency of the said Act in that very particular although John Lilburn Gentleman now prisoner at the Bar were that Lieu. Col. Iohn Lilburn mentioned in the said Act of banishment as with confidence for the just and legal Reasons at the beginning of this his Plea it mentioned he doth avow he is not yet in regard the Parliament is dissolved that made the said Act which in reason by reason of the said insufficiency of the said Act cannot otherwise be supposed but as they past the Act of banishment themselves against the Iohn Lilburn therein mentioned and meant so they resolved to reserve only to themselves the final judging and condemning of him which cannot be done now without their sitting again And further he avers that its impossible as things at present in England now stands to find a legal number of men or one single legal men to give a legal Commission to any man or men in England to hold a legal Court of Iustice to try Iohn Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar either upon pretence for transgressing the said unjust and illegal Act of banishment or for any other real or pretended Crime whatsoever And therfore the premises duly and legally weighed and considered he prayes and demands as his absolute Right the judgment of the Court upon the insufficiency invalidity of proceedings now had against him on the Keepers of the Liberties of England's behalf in point of Law before he put himself upon the Countrey for any further Trial. Iune 28. 1653. Iohn Lilburn Gent. The illegal Mittimus of the Lord Major WHeras it was enacted by a late Act of Parl. entituled an Act for the execution of a judgement given in Parliament against Lieu. Col. John Lilburne that the said John Lilburne should within twenty days to be accounted from the 15 day of Ianuary 1651. depart out of England Scotland Ireland and the Islands Territories and Dominions thereof and that in case the said John Lilburne at any time after the expiration of the said 20 days to be accompted as aforesaid should be found or should be remaining within England Scotland Ireland or within any of the Islands Territories or Dominions thereof the said J. Lilburne is thereby adjudged a Felon and to be executed as a Felon ●s in the said Act was mentioned And whereas the said J. Lilburne hath been remaining and found since the expiration of the said 20 dayes within the Liberties of the City of London in the Commonwealth of England contrary to the said Act These are therefore in the Name of the Keepers of the Liberties of England by Authority of Parl. to will and require you forthwith upon receipt hereof to receive into your custody the body of the said J. Lilburne whom I send unto you herewith for the Felony aforesaid and him safely to keep untill he shall be delivered by due course of Law and this shall be your Warrant Given under my Hand and Seal Dated this 16 day of Iune in the year of our Lord 1653. JOHN FOWK Major To the Keepers of the Goale of Newgate Postscript Reader if thou perusest the Charges or Proceedings against King Edward the second or King Richard the second or the late King Charles or against the Judges Trisillian Fulthorp Berknap Cary Holt Burge and Lockton with the rest of their Accomplices as also against the late Ship-money Judges Thou shalt clearly finde they were all principally proceeded against For subverting of the Peoples fundamental Laws and Liberties and the setting up Arbitrarines Will and Pleasure July the 2d. 1653. REader I am desired to entreat thee take notice that besides all the Petitions that Mr Lilburn and his friends in and about the City of London the last of which of the Citizens the Soldiers about London freely signed have delivered to the Councel of State for him which are all extant in Print There is besides this P●ea two notable Pieces in print about him The one is entituled A Jury-mans judgement upon the Case of Lieutenant Colonel John Lilburn The other is called A Defensive Declaration of Lieut. Col. John Lilburne printed and re-printed in a second Edition corrected and amended the first of July 1653. And also there i● this day come out in print Mr Lilburn's Letter to the Lord Major of London entituled The Prisoners most mournful Cry against the present Oppression and Tyranny that is exercised upon him Finis