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	lord_n	parliament_n	4,338	5	6.4183	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25871	The arraignment, tryal & condemnation of Algernon Sidney, Esq. for high-treason ... before the Right Honourable Sir George Jeffreys ... Lord Chief Justice of England at His Majesties Court of Kingsbench at Westminster on the 7th, 21th and 27th of November, 1683	Sidney, Algernon, 1622-1683, defendant.; Jeffreys, George Jeffreys, Baron, 1644 or 5-1689.; England and Wales. Court of King's Bench.	1684 (1684)	Wing A3754; ESTC R23343	69,533	67

THE ARRAIGNMENT OF Algernon Sidney Esquire November 7th 1683. ALgernon Sidney Esquire was by Habeas Corpus brought up to the Bar of the Court of King's-Bench and the Clerk of the Crown having read the Return Mr. Attorney General informed the Court there was an Indictment against the Prisoner and prayed he might be charged with it Clerk of the Crown Algernon Sidney hold up thy hand which he did Midd. ss THe Iurors for our Lord the King upon their Oath do present That Algernon Sidney late of the Parish of St. Martin in the Fields in the County of Middlesex Esquire as a false Traytor against the Most Illustrious Most Excellent Prince our Lord Charles the Second by the Grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland and his Natural Lord Not having the fear of God in his Heart nor weighing the Duty of his Allegiance but moved and seduced by the instigation of the Devil utterly withdrawing the cordial Love and true due and natural Obedience which a true and faithful Subject of our said Lord the King should bear towards him the said Lord the King and of Right is bound to bear Contriving and with all his Strength intending to disturb the Peace and Common Tranquility of this Kingdom of England and to stir up and move War and Rebellion against the said Lord the King and to subvert the Government of the said Lord the King in this Kingdom of England and to Depose and Deprive the said Lord the King from the Title Honor and Regal Name of the Imperial Crown of his Kingdom of England and to bring and put the said Lord the King to Death and final Destruction the thirtieth Day of June in the Five and thirtieth Tear of the Reign of our Lord King Charles the Second new King of England c. and divers other Days and Times as well before as after at the Parish of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex Maliciously and Trayterously with divers other Traytors to the Iurors aforesaid unknown did Conspire Compass Imagine and intend to Deprive and cast down the said Lord the King his Supreme natural Lord not only from the Regal State Title Power and Rule of his Kingdom of England but also to Kill and ●ring and put to Death the same Lord the King and to change alter and utterly Subvert the Ancient Government of this his Kingdom of England and to cause and procure a miserable Slaughter among the Subjects of the said Lord the King thorow his whole Kingdom of England and to move and stir up an Insurrection and Rebellion against the said Lord the King within this Kingdom of England And to fulfil and perfect those his most horrid wicked and diabolical Treasons and trayterous Compassings Imaginations and Purposes the same Algernon Sidney as a false Traytor then and there and divers other Days and Times as well before as after Maliciously Trayterously and advisedly did Assemble himself meet and consult with the aforesaid other Traytors to the Iurors aforesaid unknown and with the same Traytors did Treat of and for those his Treasons and Trayterous Compassings Imaginations and Purposes to be executed and fulfilled And that the aforesaid Algernon Sidney as a false Traytor maliciously trayterously and advisedly then and there and divers other Daies and Times as well before as after upon himself did assume and to the aforesaid other Traiters did promise That he would be Aiding and Assisting in the Execution of their Treasons and Trayterous Compassings Imaginations and Purposes aforesaid and to fulfil perfect and reduce to effect those their most horrid Treasons and Trayterous Compassings Imaginations and Purposes aforesaid the same Algernon Sidney as a false Traytor then and there Falsely Maliciously Advisedly and Trayterously did send one Aaron Smith into Scotland to invite procure and incite divers evil disposed Subjects of our said Lord the King of his Kingdom of Scotland to come into this Kingdom of England to advise and consult with the aforesaid Algernon Sidney and the aforesaid other unknown Traytors in this Kingdom of England of Aid and Assistance to be expected and supplied from the Kingdom of Scotland to fulfil perfect and reduce to effect those their most Wicked Horrid and Traiterous Treasons aforesaid And that the aforesaid Algernon Sidney to fulfil and perfect those most Wicked Horrid and Devilish Treasons and Traiterous Compassings Imaginations and Purposes aforesaid And to perswade the Subjects of the said Lord the King of this Kingdom of England That it is lawful to make and stir up on Insurrection and Rebellion against the said Lord the King that now is the said Thirtieth day of June in the Five and Thirtieth year of the Reign of the said Lord the King that now is at the Parish of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex falsely unlawfully wickedly seditiously and Traiterously did make compose and write and caused to be made composed and written a certain false Seditious and Traiterous Libell in which said False Seditious and Traiterous Libel among other things is contained as followeth in these English words viz. The Power Originally in the People of England is deligated unto the Parliament He the most Serene Lord Charles the Second now King of England meaning is subject unto the Law of God as He is a Man to the People that makes him a King inasmuch as He is a King the Law sets a measure unto that subjection and the Parliament Judges of the particular Cases thereupon arising He must be content to submit his interest unto theirs since He is no more then any one of them in any other respect then that He is by the consent of all raised above any other if He doth not like this Condition He may renounce the Crown but if he receive it upon that Condition as all Magistrates do the Power they receive and swear to perform it He must expect that the performance will be exacted or revenge taken by those that He hath betrayed And that in another place in the said false Seditious and Trayterous Libel among other things these False Seditious and Trayterous English Sentences are contained that is to say We may therefore change or take away Kings without breaking any Yoke or that is made a Yoke which ought not to be one the injury is therefore in making or imposing and there can be none in breaking it Against the Duty of his Allegiance against the Peace of the said now Lord the King His Crown and Dignity c. And against the Form of the Statutes in this Case made and provided c. How sayst thou art thou guilty of this High Treason whereof thou standest Indicted or not Guilty Col. Sidney My Lord I find here an heap of Crimes put together distinct in nature one from another and distinguished by Law and I do conceive My Lord That the Indictment it self is thereupon voyd and I cannot be Impeached upon it L. C. Iustice. We are not

Fact you say well Col. Sidney I say there are several Judgments of Parliament that doe shew what ever is Constructive-Treason does not belong to any private Court that of 1 Mary 1 E. 6. 1 Eliz. 5 Eliz. 18. another 13 Car shew this Now my Lord I say that the business concerning the Papers 't is only a similitude of hands which is just nothing In my Lady Carrs Case it was resolved to extend to no criminal Cause if not to any then not to the greatest the most Capital So that I have only this to say That I think 't is impossible for the Jury to find this matter for the first point you proved by my Lord Howard that I think is no Body and the last concerning the Papers is only imagination from the similitude of hands If I had published it I must have answered for it or if the thing had been whole and mine I must have answered for it but for these scraps never shewed any Body That I think does not at all concern me And I say if the Jury should find it which is impossible they can I desire to have the Law reserved unto me Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord and you Gentlemen of the Jury The Evidence hath been long but I will endeavour to repeat it as faithfully as I can The Crime the Prisoner stands accused for is compassing and imagining the Death of the King That which we go about to prove that compassing and imagining by is by his meeting and consulting how to raise Arms against the King and by plain matter in writing under his own hand where he does affirm It is lawful to take away and destroy the King Gentlemen I will begin with the first part of it the Meeting and Consultation to raise Arms against the King The Prisoner Gentlemen hath endeavoured to avoid the whole force of this Evidence by saying that this in point of Law can't affect him if it were all proved for this does not amount to a proof of his compassing and imagining the death of the King and he is very long in interpreting the Act of Parliament to you of 25 E. 3. and dividing of it into several Members or Branches of Treason And does insist upon it that tho' this should be an offence within one Branch of that Statute yet that is not a proof of the other which is the Branch he is proceeded upon that is the first Clause against the compassing and imagining the Death of the King And sais he conspiring to Levy War is not so much as one Branch of that Statute but it must be War actually levyed This is a matter he is wholly mistaken in in point of Law It hath been adjudged over and over again That an Act which in one Branch of that Statute may be an overt Act to prove a man Guilty of another Branch of it As levying War is an overt Act to prove a man Guilty of Conspiring the Death of the King And this was adjudged in the Case of Sir Henry Vane so is meeting and consulting to raise to Arms. And reason does plainly speak it to be so for they that conspire to raise War against the King can't be presumed to stop any where till they have Dethron'd or Murdered the King Gentlemen I won't belong in citing Authoritys It hath been setled lately by all the Judges of England in the Case of my Lord Russel who hath suffered for this Conspiracy Therefore that point of Law will be very plain against the Prisoner He hath mentioned some other things as that there must be two Witnesses to every particular Fact and one Witness to one Fact and another to another is not sufficient it hath been very often objected and as often over-ruled It was over-ruled Solemnly in the Case of my Lord Stafford Therefore if we have one Witness to one overt Act and another to another they will be two Witnesses in Law to convict this Prisoner In the first part of our Evidence we give you an account of the general Design of an Insurrection that was to have been that this was contrived first when my Lord Shaftsbury was in England that after my Lord Shaftsbury was gone the business did not fall but they thought fit to revive it again and that they might carry it on the more steadily they did contrive a Counsel among themselves of six whereof the Prisoner at the Bar was one They were the Duke of Monmouth my Lord of Essex my Lord Howard my Lord Russel the Prisoner at the Bar and Mr. Hambden This Counsel they contrived to manage this affair and to carry on that designe that seemed to fall by the Death of my Lord of Shaftsbury and they met this we give you an account of first by Witnesses that gave you an account in general of it And tho' they were not privy to it yet they heard of this Counsel and that Col. Sidney was to be one of this Counsel This Gentlemen If it had stood alone by it self had been nothing to affect the Prisoner at all But this will shew you that this was discours'd among them that were in this Conspiracy Then my Lord Howard gives you an account that first the Duke of Monmouth and he and Col. Sidney met and it was agreed to be necessary to have a Counsel that should consist of six or seven and they were to carry it on That the Duke of Monmouth undertook to dispose my Lord Russel to it and Col. Sidney to dispose the Earl of Essex and Mr. Hambden that these Gentlemen did meet accordingly and the substance of their discourse was taking notice how the design had fallen upon the Death of my Lord Shaftsbury that it was fit to carry it on before mens Inclinations were cool for they found they were ready to it and had great reason to believe it because this being a business communicated to so many yet for all that it was kept very secret and no body had made any mention of it which they looked upon as a certaine argument that men were ready to ingage in it This incouraged them to go on in this Conspiracy Then when the Six met at Mr. Hambden's house they debated concerning the place of rising and the time the time they conceiv'd must be suddenly before Mens minds were cool for now they thought they were ready and very much disposed to it and for place they had in debate whether they should rise first in the Town or in the Country or both together And for the Persons they thought it absolutely necessary for them to have the United Counsels of Scotland to join with them and therefore they did refer this matter to be better considered of another time and they met afterwards at my Lord Russel's House in February and there they had Discourse to the same purpose But there they began to consider with themselves being they were to destroy this Government what they should set up in the room of it to what

paid them and 't is like to this L. Ch. Just. And you were never called to account for mispayment Mr. Cooke No my Lord. Mr. Att. Gen. I pray it may be read We will read as much as is necessary to prove the Inditement Col. Sidney I pray it may be all read L. Ch. Just. Mr. Attorney must have what part he desires read and you shall have what part you will have read afterwards Col. Sidney I desire all may be read Mr. Att. Gen. Begin there Secondly There was no Absurdity in this because it was their own Case Clerk Reads 2dly There was no Absurdity in this tho it was their own Case but to the contrary because it was their own Case that is concerning Themselves only and they had no Superiour They only were the Competent Judges they decided their Controversies as every man in his own Family doth such as arise between Him and his Children and his Servants This Power hath no other restriction than what is put upon it by the municipal Law of the Country where any man and that hath no other force than as he is understood to have consented unto it Thus in England every man in a Degree hath a right of Chastizing them and in many places even by the Law of God the Master hath a power of Life and Death over his Servant It were a most absurd Folly to say that a man might not put away or in some places kill an Adulterous VVife a Disobedient Son or an Unlawful Servant because he is Party and Judge for the Case doth admit of no other unless he had abridged his own right by entring into a Society where other Rules are agreed upon and a Superiour-Judge constituted there being none such between King and People That People must needs be the Judg of things happening between Them and Him whom they did not constitute that they might be Great Glorious and Rich but that they might Judge them and fight their Battles or otherwise do good unto them as they should direct In this sence he that is Singulis Major and ought to be obliged by every man in his Just and Lawful commands tending to the Publick Good And must be suffered to do nothing against it nor in any respect more than the Law doth allow For this Reason Bracton saith that the King hath three Superiours to wit Deum Legem Parliament ' that is the Power Originally in the People of England is delegated unto the Parliament He is subject unto the Law of God as he is a man to the people that makes him a King in as much as he is a King the Law sets a measure unto that Subjection and the Parliament Judges of the particular Cases thereupon arising He must be content to submit his Interest unto Theirs since he is no more than any one of them in any other respect than that He is by the Consent of all raised above any other If he doth not like this Condition he may renounce the Crown but if he receive it upon that Condition as all Magistrates do the Power they receive and Swear to perform it He must expect that the Performance will be Exacted or Revenge taken by those that he hath Betrayed If this be not so I desire to know of our Author how one or more men can come to be guilty of Treason against the KING As Lex facit ut sit Rea. No man can owe more unto him than unto any other or he unto every other man by any rule but the Law and if he must not be Judg in his own Case neither he nor any other by Power received from him would ever try any man for an Offence against him or the Law If the King or such as he appoints cannot Judge him he cannot be Judged by the wayes ordinarily known amongst us If he or other by Authority from him may Judge he is Judge in his own Case and we fall under that which he accounts the utmost of all absurdities if a remedy be found for this he must say that the King in his own Case may Judge the People but the People must not Judge the King because it is theirs that is to say the Servants entertained by the Master may Judge him but the Master must not Judge the Servant whom he took only for his own use The Magistrate is bound by no Oath or Contract to the People that Created him but the People is bound to its own Creature the Magistrate This seems to be the ground of all our Authors follies he cannot comprehend that Magistrates are for or by the People but makes this Conclusion as if Nations were created by or for the Glory or Pleasure of Magistrates and affect such a Piece of nonsence it ought not to be thought strange if he represent as an absurd thing that the Headless Multitude may shake off the Yoke when they please But I would know how the Multitude comes under the Yoke it is a badge of Slavery He sayes that the Power of Kings is for the preservation of Liberty and Property We may therefore change or take away Kings without breaking any Yoke or that made a Yoke which ought not to be one the Injury is therefore in Making or Imposing and there can be none in breaking it That if there be not an injury there may perhaps be an inconvenience if the headless Multitude may shake off the Yoke I know not why the Multitude should be concluded to be headless it is not alvvays so Moses was head of the Multitude that went out of Aegypt Othniel led them against the King of Mesopitamia under the conduct of Phaebidas they obtain'd a Victory against the Moabites they had the like success under Shamger Barac Gidion Jeptha Samuel Sampson and others against Cannanites Midianites Philistines and others the Multitude that opposed Saul and Ishbosheth had David for its head and the Ten Tribes that rejected Reoboam chose unto themselves Reoboam the Athenians rising against the Thirty Tyrants had Thracibulus those that drave from Thebes vvere conducted by Pelopidas vvhen the Romans drave out the Tarquins They chose Brutus and Publicola and they destroyed the decem Jurii under Horatius and Vellerius All the Multitudes that afterwards revolted from them under Mauritius Telerius Spartanus and others were not Headless and we know of none that were but all either found Heads or made them The Germans set up Arminius the Britans and others in latter times the Cartinians that rise against Peter the cruel had the Lord Detracta Mara The French when they grew weary of the corrupted Races of Pharomond and Pepin and the same Pepin and Hugh Capet The Scots when they slew James the Third had his Son to be their head and when they deposed and imprisoned Queen Mary the Earl of Murray and others supplyed the want of Age that was in her Son And in all the Revolutions we have had in England the people have been headed by the

instrumental to take away the life of any man that by Law his Life ought not to be taken away For I had rather many Guilty men should escape than one innocent man suffer The question is whether upon all the Evidence you have heard against the Prisoner and the Evidence on his behalf there is Evidence sufficient to Convict the Prisoner of the High Treason he stands charged with And as you must not be moved by the denyal of the Prisoner further than as it is backed with proof so you are not to be inveigled by any insinuations made against the Prisoner at the Bar further or otherwise than as the proof is made out to you But it is usual and it is a duty incumbent on the King's Counsel to urge against all such Criminals whatsoever they observe in the Evidence against them and likewise to endeavour to give answers to the Objections that are made on their behalf And therefore since we have been kept so long in this Cause it won't be amiss for me and my Brothers as they shall think fit to help your memory in the fact and discharge that Duty that is incumbent upon the Court as to the points of Law This Indictment is for High Treason and is grounded upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. By which Statute the compassing and imagining the death of the King and declaring the same by an Overt Act is made High Treason The reason of that Law was because at Common Law there was great doubt what was Treason wherefore to reduce that High Crime to a certainty was that Law made that those that were Guilty might know what to expect And there are several Acts of Parliament made between the time of Edward the Third and that of 1 M. but by that Statute all Treasons that are not enumerated by after Acts of Parliament remain as they were declared by that Statute of 25 E. 3. And so are Challenges and other matters insisted upon by the Prisoner left as they were at the time of that Act I am also to tell you that in point of Law it is not only the Opinion of us here but the Opinion of them that sate before us and the Opinion of all the Judges of England and within the memory of many of you That tho there be Two Witnesses required to prove a man Guilty of High-Treason yet it is not necessary there should be Two Witnesses to the same thing at one time But if two Witnesses prove two several Facts that have a tendency to the same Treason they are two Witnesses sufficient to convict any man of High-Treason In the Case of my Lord Stafford in Parliament all the Judges assisting it is notoriously known That one Witness to a Conspiracy in England and another to a Conspiracy in France were held two Witnesses sufficient to convict him of High-Treason In the next place I am to tell you That tho some Judges have been of Opinion that words of themselves were not an Overt Act but my Lord Hales nor my Lord Coke nor any other of the Sages of the Law ever questioned but that a Letter would be an Overt Act sufficient to prove a man Guilty of High-Treason For scribere est agere Mr. Sidney says The King is a Politick Person but you must destroy Him in His natural capacity or it is not Treason but I must tell If any man compass to Imprison the King it is High Treason so was the Case of my Lord Cobham and my Lord Coke When he says If a man do attempt to make the King do any thing by force and compulsion otherwise than he ought to do that it is High-Treason within that Act of 25 Eliz. III. But if it were an Indictment only for the Levying of War there must be an actual War Levied but this is an Indictment for compassing the Death of the King and the other Treason mentioned in that Act of Parliament for the Levying War may be given in Evidence to prove the Conspiracy the Kings Death For 't is rightly told you by the Kings Council That the imagination of a mans heart is not to be discerned but if I declare such my imagination by an Overt Act which Overt Act does naturally Evince that the King must be Deposed Destroyed Imprisoned or the like it will be sufficient Evidence of Treason within that Act. In the next place having told you what the Law is for Gentlemen 't is our Duty upon our Oaths to declare the Law to you and you are bound to receive our Declaration of the Law and upon this Declaration to inquire whether there be a Fact sufficiently proved to find the Prisoner Guilty of the High-Treason of which he stands Indicted And for that I must tell you what ever happens to be hearsay from others it is not to be applied immediately to the Prisoner but however those Matters that are remote at first may serve for this purpose To prove there was generally a Conspiracy to Destroy the King and Government And for that matter you all remember it was the constant rule and method observed about the Popish Plot first to produce the Evidence of the Plot in general This was done in that famous Ca●e of my Lord Stafford in Parliament Gentlemen I am also to tell you This alone does not at all affect the Prisoner at the Bar but is made use of as a circumstance to support the credibility of the Witnesses and is thus far applicable to the business before you That 't is plain by persons that don't touch the Prisoner at the Bar and I am sorry any man makes a doubt of it at this time of day that there was a Conspiracy to kill the King for after so full a proof in this place and in others and the Execution and Confession of several of the Offenders I am surprised to observe that the Prisoner at the Bar and some others present seem not to believe it But Gentlemen you hear the first Witness I speak of West He tells you he had the honour to be acquainted with Mr. Sidney and that he had Discourse with Walcot a person Convicted and Executed for this horrid Conspiracy Why says he he told me at my Chamber That they were not only the persons concerned but that there were other persons of great Quality that had their Meetings for the carrying on the Business in other places And Ferguson that was the Ring leader in this Conspiracy told him there was a Design of a general Insurrection it was once laid down but it is now taken up again There are other Councellors of great importance and he names among the rest the Prisoner at the Bar. Mr. West goes a little further and he tells you this says he He did not only tell me so but that there was a Design to conciliate a Correspondence with some persons in Scotland and they were to do it under the Cant of having business in Carolina There is Mr. Keeling he tells

Parliament or the Nobility and Gentry that composed it and when the Kings failed of their Duties by their own Authority called it The multitude therefore is not ever headless but doth either find or create heads unto it self as occasion doth requite and whether it be one man or a few or more for a short or a longer time we see nothing more regular than its motions But they may saith our Author shake off the Yoke and why may they not if it prove uneasie or hurtful unto them Why should not the Israelites shake off the Yoke of Pharaoh Jabin Sisera and others that oppressed them When pride had changed Nebuchadnezzar into a beast what should perswade the Assyrians not to drive him out amongst Beasts until God had restored unto him the Heart of a Man When Tarquin had turned the Legal Monarchy of Rome into a most abominable Tyranny why should they not abolish it And when the Protestants of the Low-Countries were so grievously oppressed by the power of Spain under the proud cruel and savage conduct of the Duke of Alva why should they not make use of all the means that God had put into their hands for their deliverance Let any Man who sees the present state of the Provinces that then united themselves judge whether it is better for them to be as they are or in the condition unto which his fury would have reduced them unless they had to please him renounced God and their Religion Our Author may say they ought to have suffered The King of Spain by their resistance lost those Countries and that they ought not to have been Judges in their own case To which I answer That by resisting they laid the foundation of many Churches that have produced multitudes of men eminent in gifts and Graces and established a most glorious and happy Commonwealth that hath been since its first beginning the strongest Pillar of the Protestant Cause now in the World and a place of refuge unto those who in all parts of Europe have been oppressed for the name of Christ Whereas they had slavishly and I think I may say wickedly as well as foolishly suffered themselves to be butchered if they had left those empty Provinces under the power of Anti Christ where the name of God is no otherwise known than to be blasphemed If the King of Spain desired to keep his Subjects he should have governed them with more justice and mercy when contrary unto all Laws both Humane and Divine he seeks to destroy those he ought to have preserved he can blame none but himself if they deliver themselves from his tyranny and when the matter is brought to that That He must not reign or they over whom he would reign must perish the matter is easily decided as if the question had been asked in the time of Nero or Domitian Whether they should be left at liberty to destroy the best part of the World as they endeavoured to do or it should be rescued by their destruction And as for the peoples being Judges in their own case it is plain they ought to be the only Judges because it is their own and only concerns themselves Mr. Att. Gen. The latter end the last sheet of all § 35. L. C. J. The argument runs through the book fixing the power in the people Cl. of the Cr. The general revolt of a Nation from its own Magistrates can never be called rebellion Mr. Att. Gen. § 37. Cl. of Cr. The power of calling and dissolving Parliaments is not in the King Mr. Att. Gen. So much we shall make use of if the Colonel please to have any other part read to explain it he may Then the Sheets were shewn to Col. Sidney Colonel Sidney I do not know what to make of it I can read it L. C. J. Ay no doubt of it better than any man here Fix on any part you have a mind to have read Colonel Sidney I do not know what to say to it to read it in pieces thus L. C. J. I perceive you have disposed them under certain heads To what heads will you have read Colonel Sidney My Lord let him give an account of it that did it Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord we will not delay Colonel Sidney from entring on his defence only we have this piece of Evidence to give further One of his Complices was my Lord Russel we will give in Evidence his Conviction We will only ask my Lord Howard Was your Lordship sworn as a Witness at the Tryal of my Lord Russel L. Howard Yes Mr. Att. Gen. Whether or no when you met were there in those debates any reflections upon the King that he had broken his duty L. Howard Not that I remember Mr. Att. Gen. Why would you rise L. Howard If you mean upon the misgovernment not personally upon the King Mr. Att. Gen. Ay. L. Howard Yes and principally and chiefly that which we thought was the general disgust of the Nation the imposing upon the City at that time Mr. Iust. Wythins That was complained of at that time L. Howard Yes my Lord We took it all along to be the chief grievance L. Ch. Iust. Have you any more Witnesses Mr. Att. Gen. Only the Record Mr. Sol. Gen. I know there is no time mispent to make things clear If the Jury have a mind to have the words read again L. Ch. Iust. If they have a mind let it Then Mr. Trinder was Sworn and testified it to be a true Copy of the Record and said he examined it at Fishmongers-Hall with Mr. Tanner Then the Record of the Conviction of the Lord Russel was read L. Ch. Iust. What will you go to next Mr. Attorney Mr. Sol. Gen. We have done unless the Jury desire to have the words of the Libel read again But they did not Col. Sidney My Lord I desire to know upon what Statute I am Indicted Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord I will give as plain an Answer You are Indicted upon the old Statute of 25 E. 3. Col. Sidney Then I desire to know upon what branch of that Statute Mr. Att. Gen. Why I will acquaint you 'T is upon the first branch of that Statute for Conspiring and Compassing the Death of the King Col. Sidney Then I conceive what does not come within that does not touch me Mr. Att. Gen. Make what Inferences you please Colonel we will answer you Col. Sidney I desire to know what the Witnesses have sworn against me upon that point Mr. Att. Gen. Go on You have heard the Witnesses as well as we L. Ch. Iust. He says You are Indicted upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. which Statute makes it High Treason to Conspire the Death of the King and the Overt Act is sufficiently set forth in the Indictment now the Question is whether 't is proved Col. Sidney They have proved a Paper found in my Study of Caligula and Nero that is Compassing the Death of the King is it L. C. J.