which the Court adjourned and the Lords sent a Message to the Commons that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar again on Monday morning at 10 a Clock The sixth Day MOnday December 6. 1680. about 11 the Court being sat and the Prisoner at the Bar his Petition was read which was for leave to offer a few things more to clear himself and which the Ld. H. Steward told him the Lords had granted He then said that seeing he had received their Order that his Counsel should not be heard touching the continuance of Impeachments from Parliament to Parliament he desired that he might offer them his own Conceptions concerning that urging that they had not yet declared their own Judgments either as to that or whether they did acquiesce in the Judges Opinions praying that his Counsel might be heard as to the other points protesting his own Innocency and Abhorrency of Treason reading then his Case and repeating his Defence c. After which the Lords adjourned into the Parliament Chamber and the Commons returned to their House and received a Message from the Lords that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar to receive Judgment to morrow at 10. The seventh Day TUesday December 7 1680. About 11 the Court being sat the Ld. H. Steward took the Votes of the Peers upon the Evidence beginning at the Puisne Baron and so upwards in order the Lord Stafford being as the Law required absent The Ld. H. Steward began then saying My Lord Butler of VVeston Is VVilliam Lord Viscount Stafford Guilty of the Treason whereof he stands impeached or not Guilty Lord Butler Not Guilty upon my Honour The same Question was put to the rest whose Names and Votes follow Ld. Arundel of Trerice Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Crewe Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Cornwallis Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Holles Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVootton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Rockingham Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lucas Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Astley Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVard Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Byron Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Hatton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Leigh Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Herbert of Cherbury Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Howard of Escrick Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Maynard Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lovelace Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Deincourt Not guilty upon my Honour Ld. Grey of Wark Guilty upon my honour Ld. Brook Guilty upon my honour Ld. Norreys Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Chandos Guilty upon my honour Ld. North and Grey Guilty upon my honour Ld. Paget Guilty upon my honour Ld. Wharton Guilty upon my honour Ld. Eure Guilty upon my honour Ld. Cromwel Guilty upon my honour Ld. VVindsor Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Conyers Guilty upon my honour Ld. Ferrers Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Morley Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Mowbray Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Viscount Newport Guilty upon my honour Ld. Visc Faulconberg Guilty upon my honour Earl of Conway Guilty upon my honour E. of Berkley Not guilty upon my honour E. of Maclesfield Guilty upon my honour E. of Hallifax Not guilty upon my honour E. of Feversham Not guilty upon my honour E. of Sussex Guilty upon my honour E. of Guilford Guilty upon my honour E. of Shaftesbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Burlington Guilty upon my honour E. of Ailesbury Not guilty upon my honour E. of Craven Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carlisle Guilty upon my honour E. of Bath Not guilty upon my honour E. of Essex Guilty upon my honour E. of Clarendon Not guilty upon my honour E. of St. Albans Not guilty upon my honour E. of Scarsdale Guilty upon my honour E. of Sunderland Guilty upon my honour E. of Thanet Not guilty upon my honour E. of Chesterfield Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carnarvan Not guilty upon my honour E. of Winchelsea Guilty upon my honour E. of Stamford Guilty upon my honour E. of Peterborough Not guilty upon my honour E. of Rivers Guilty upon my honour E. of Mulgrave Guilty upon my honour E. of Barkshire Guilty upon my honour E. of Manchester Guilty upon my honour E. of Westmoreland Guilty upon my honour E. of Clare Guilty upon my honour Earl of Bristol Guilty upon my honour E. of Denbeigh Not guilty upon my honour E. of Northampton Guilty upon my honour E. of Leicester Guilty upon my honour E. of Bridgwater Guilty upon my honour E. of Salisbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Suffolk Guilty upon my honour E. of Bedford Guilty upon my honour E. of Huntington Guilty upon my honour E. of Rutland Not guilty upon my honour E. of Kent Guilty upon my honour E. of Oxford Guilty upon my honour Ld. Chamberlain Not guilty upon my honour Marquess of Worcester Not guilty upon my honour D. of Newcastle Not guilty upon my honour D. of Monmouth Guilty upon my honour D. of Albemarle Guilty upon my honour D. of Buckingham Guilty upon my honour Ld. Privy-Seal Guilty upon my honour Ld. President Guilty upon my honour Ld. H. Steward Guilty upon my Honour Prince Rupert Duke of Cumberland Guilty upon my Honour The Ld. H. Steward then declared that upon telling the Votes he found there were 31 that think the Prisoner Not Guilty and 55 that have found him Guilty Whereupon the Prisoner was brought to the Bar and the Ld. High Steward informing him the Lords had found him Guilty He said God's Holy Name be praised for it confessing it surpriz'd him for he did not expect it and that he had only this to say for suspending of Judgment That he did not hold up his Hand at the Bar which he conceived he ought to have done and that though he was tried upon the Act of 25. Edw. 3. yet there being nothing more in that Act than what is included in the Act of the 13th of this King he ought only to lose his Seat in Parliament which was the Punishment there put down for a Peer submitting to their Lordships and desiring their Judgments in these Points Then the Lords Adjourned into the Parliament-Chamber and the Committee of Commons returned to their own House and the Speaker having re-assumed the Chair the whole Body of the House went with their Speaker to the Bar of the House of Lords to demand Judgment of High-Treason against William Viscount Stafford upon the Impeachment of the Commons of England in Parliament in the Name of the Commons in Parliament and of all the Commons of England Then the Commons with their Speaker went back to their House Then the Lords took into Consideration what Judgment was to be given and it was moved that he might be beheaded After some Debate the Judges were asked Whether if any other Judgment than the usual Judgment for High-Treason were given upon him it would attaint his Blood The Judges were of Opinion that the Judgment for High-Treason appointed by Law is to
next Design was to be on Novemb. the 17th but the Country not being then in a readiness the Earl of Shaftsbury upon hearing it went away for Holland That after this they all began to lie under a sense that they had gone so far and communicated it to so many that it was unsafe to make a Retreat And for the carrying it on thought it necessary there should be some General Council that should take upon them the care of the whole Whereupon they erected the Council of six which consisted of the Duke of Monmouth Earl of Essex Lord Russel Mr. Hambden jun. Col. Sidney and himself That these met at Mr. Hambden's House about the middle of January last and there the Particulars offer'd to their Consideration whereto they were to bring their Advice were Whether the Insurrection were most proper to be begun in London or in the Country or both in an Instant What Countries and Towns were fittest and most dispos'd to Action What Arms were necessary to be got and how to be disposed How to raise a Common Bank of 25 or 30000 l. to answer all Occasions And lastly How to draw Scotland to consent with them it being thought necessary that all Diversion should be given That about ten Days after the same Persons met again at the Lord Russel's where it was resolv'd to send into Scotland to invite some Persons hither who could give the best accompt of the State thereof viz. Sir John Cockram the Lord Melvil and Sir Hugh Campbel and that in Discourse it was referr'd to Col. Sidney to take care of that Business who afterwards told him he had sent Aaron Smith and given him 60 Guinies for his Journey That to avoid Observation they concluded not to meet till the return of this Messenger and he going in the mean time to his Estate in Essex and thence to the Bath he knew nothing more only when he came back he was informed Smith was come back and Sir John Cockram with him That he was sure the Lord Russel was present at these Meetings and to his understanding did consent though nothing was put to the Vote And he wished he could say the Lord Russel was not there To this the Prisoner insisted that most he had said was only hearsay and the two times they met was not upon any formed Design but to talk of News and they were delighted to hear the Lord Howard talk being full of Discourse of a voluble Tongue and talk'd well And that he never saw any of the Scotch Gentlemen only the Lord Melvil but never upon this Account Here the Attorny General urged that Aaron Smith did go into Scotland and that Campbel he went for was taken which Mr. Atterbury swore that he was then in his Custody and that he had been by his own Confession four days in London before he was took Then Mr. West deposed That he never had any Conversation with the Prisoner only he had heard Mr. Ferguson and Col. Rumsey say that the Lord Russel in the Insurrection in November intended to take his Post in the West where Mr. Trenchard had failed them and that they most depended upon him because he was looked upon as a Person of great Sobriety But this being all but Hear-say the Court would not admit it as Evidence The King's Counsel therefore left the Evidence here and call'd on the Prisoner to make his Defence who to all this made Answer That he could not but think himself mighty unfortunate to stand there charg'd with so high a Crime and that intermixed with the horrid Practices and Speeches of other People the King's Counsel taking all Advantages and improving and heightning things against him That he was no Lawyer an unready Speaker and not so well prepared as he should be c. That he thought his Jury were Men of Consciences and would consider that the Witnesses against him swore to save their own Lives Neither was what Col. Rumsey swore enough to take away his Life or if it were the Time was elapsed by the 13th of this King which limits Prosecution to six Months Neither was a design of Levying War Treason unless it appeared by some Overt-Act as appears by the 25th of Edw. 3d. And then desiring to know upon what Statute he was indicted it was told him upon the 25th of Edw. the 3d. Whereupon he desired Counsel upon these two Points as Matter of Law Whether the Treason were duly proved and if it were Whether it were punishable by the Statute In Answer to which the Court inform'd him That if he were contented that the Fact should be taken as proved against him and desired Counsel upon what was bare Matter of Law he should have it granted but there could be no Matter of Law admitted but upon a Fact admitted and stated And whereas he insisted that the Business at Mr. Shepherd's House was sworn to only by one Witness It was answered that if there were one Witness of one Act of Treason another of a 2d and another of a 3d that manifested the same Treason it was sufficient The Statute then of 25th of Edw. 3d. c. 2. was read And then the Prisoner insisted that he was never but at one Meetings at Mr. Shepherd's and Col. Rumsey was there before he came in but Rumsey said No the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Russel went away together Then in behalf of the Prisoner the Earl of Anglesey declared That visiting the Earl of Bedford last week the Lord Howard came in and told the Earl of Bedford that his Son could not be in such a Plot or suspected of it and that he knew nothing against the Lord Russel or any Body else of such a Barbarous Design And then going on to tell what the Lady Chaworth had told him the King's Counsel interrupted him telling him as the Court would not permit them to give Hear-say-Evidence against the Prisoner so they must not permit his Lordship to do it for the Prisoner Mr. Edward Howard declared That the Lord Howard took it upon his Honour and his Faith he knew nothing of any Person concerned in that Business and noâ— only thought the Lord Russel unjustly suffered but he took God and Man to Witness he thought the Lord Russel the Worthiest Man in the World Dr. Burnet declared The Lord Russel was with him the Night after the Plot broke out and did then as he had done before with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven protest that he knew nothing of any Plot nor believ'd any and treated it with great Scorn and Contempt The Lord Cavendish testified to the Prudence and Honour of the Lord Russel and how unlikely it was for him to be concern'd and had heard him declare his ill Opinion of Rumsey two or three Days after the Discovery and therefore that it was unlikely he would entrust him with such a Secret Dr. Thomas Cox and Dr. Burnet again testified as to his Life and Conversation and of his aversness to
where the Case was evident But this Court he took to be of the same Nature though of a Degree higher with the other Ordinary Courts of Judicature where there could be no Adjournment after Evidence given But for satisfaction the Judges were ordered to withdraw to Consult which they did and then the Lords Nottingham and Falconbridge moved that the Peers ought to be the Judges hereof because it concerned their Priviledg and so it was also permitted for them to withdraw And after about half an hour the Judges returned and after an Hour the Peers And then the Ld. Ch. Justice Herbert deliver'd the Opinion of the Judges that this Matter being wholly new to them they could not determin but only tell what the Law was in Inferiour Courts in Cases of the like Nature and the Reason of the Law in those Points and then leave the Jurisdiction of this Court to its proper Judges After which the Ld. H. Steward told them he was the only Judg of that Court and therefore he was to determin it shewing of what ill Consequence the Adjournment of the Court might prove if it should happen to be illegal and therefore he ordered the Prisoner to proceed The Lord Delamere therefore did begin his Defence in Protesting his Innocency and Reflecting on the Loyalty of his Family particularly his Father who had been so signally instrumental in the Restoration of the Royal Family that the late King caused it to be inserted in the Patent which created his Father a Peer which Clause he read out of the Patent to the Court. And as to the Evidence against him he observed that it was all but Circumstantial and by hear-say only except that of Saxon's and therefore he apply'd himself particularly against that and called his Witnesses Mr. Richard Hall testify'd how in 1683 Saxon counterfeited a Letter in the Name of one Richard Hildage to him for 6 l. which he ow'd him and Saxon brought the letter and received the Mony and afterwards Hildage demanded the Mony denying that he ever writ for it Mr. Francis Ling declared how this Saxon received 25 s. at this same Hildage's at Newcastle for Mrs. Wibbram without her order nor did she ever receive any of it Richard Shaw declared how he also forg'd a Letter in William Paugston a Bayliffs Name and sent it to him because he owed him a little Mony Peter Hough declared how Saxon cheated him in making him of a Bond for 20 s. less than was due from Saxon to him reading it false to him at the sealing Edward Wilkinson declared that Saxon hired his Horse June 23d last for only three days at 12 Pence a Day but he never came again nor had he had any satisfaction for his Horse it being supposed this was the Horse he rid into the Rebellion with William Wright said he had dealings with Saxon but never found him so good as his Word Then the Prisoner went off from this part of the Evidence to prove that neither Sir Robert Cotton nor Mr. Offley Crew nor himself were in Cheshire at that time Saxon had sworn he saw them at Mere together And to this end one Billing Margaret Davis Mrs. Sidney Lane Charles Reeves Mr. Ashburnham Sir William Twisden and Mr. Heveningham did all sufficiently testify that Sir Robert Cotton was in Town about that time and some of them being his own Servants that he was never in Cheshire since April 6th last nor never out of London till after June As to Mr. Offley Crew Sir Willoughby Aston declared every day particularly where he was from May 26. to June the 4th on which day he went from Sir Willoughby's House homeward Mr. Gregory and Thomas Kid his Servants testifyed that he went directly Home to Crew-Hall in Cheshire that Night and was not at Mere it not being in his way at all As to the Prisoner himself Mr. Booth one of his Brother's declared that he saw his Brother in Town June 3 4 5 6 and so on to June 10. till he went out of Town himself And another of his Brothers Mr. George Booth said he saw him in Town the 4th And the Lord Lovelace testified that he saw him the 5th of June in the House of Lords at the Lord Macclesfield's Trial against Mr. Fitton After it was thus cleared that none of them 3 were where Saxon had sworn they were at that time the Prisoner shew'd the incredibility of his Evidence and proceeded to give an account of his going down so often and so speedily That the first time he went which was betwixt the Coronation and the fitting of the Parliament was to take Possession of a Lease worth 6 or 7000 l. renewed to him by the Bishop of Chester of whose illness he had notice and this he proved by Mr. John Edmonds who said he was a Witness of his taking possession May 5th and by Mr. Henry who was Attorny and delivered him Possession at the same time And for his going out of Town May 27th the occasion of it was to see a sick Child of his and he went so suddenly and privately because he heard there was a Warrant out to apprehend him But while he was at Mere his Wife sent him an Express that as to the Warrant she hoped it was a Mistake but that his eldest Son was very ill and if he intended to see him alive he must make hast up He came but to his House in Cheshire on Sunday May 31. Whence he came on Tuesday morning June 2d and on Wednesday the 3d he was in Town To prove all this Mrs. Kelsey who was his Servant said my Lord told her there was a Warrant out for him which occasioned his coming and moreover his Childs illness The Lady Delamere his Mother testified the illness of his Child in the Country Mr. Kelsey testified his coming to Mere on Sunday Night and going thence on Tuesday Morning and that he had Letters dated June 4. which gave an account my Lord got to London the Night before And Sir Thomas Millington testified the illness of his Son in Town on May 28. he being sent for to him and remembring the time by the date of his Bills After this the Prisoner summ'd up his Evidence and concluded very handsomly and judiciously his Excellent Defence Then Mr. Sol. Gen. having summ'd up the Evidence and the Lord High Steward speaking a few words to this Point of Law which the Prisoner in his Defence seemed to urge That there is a necessity of two Positive Witnesses to convict a Man of Treason and shewing his Mistake about it The Peers withdrew for about half an hour the Prisoner being taken into a little Room appointed for him at the entrance into the Court and then being returned their appearance was took by a Serjeant at Arms and their Verdict took by the Lord H. Steward Seriatim beginning with the Puisne Peer who all declared the Prisoner Not Guilty upon their Honour's Which the Lord H. Steward acquainted him
Majesty's gracious Government So shall your Petitioner ever pray c. This being read the Bishop return'd and the Chancellor told him they were not concerned in it and asked him If he desired his Answer should be read The Bishop said Yes saying that what he did therein was by Advice of Counsel and therefore hoped would not be interpreted to be done maliciously or obstinately And that in effect he did what the King commanded to be done having advised Doctor Sharp to forbear Preaching till his Majesty had received Satisfaction concerning him and accordingly that he had forborn in his Diocess Then the Bishop's Paper was read which contain'd the King's Letter and Bishop's Answer thereto The King's Letter Dated Monday July 14. 1686. Delivered at Fulham on Thursday June 17. in the Afternoon by Mr. Atterbury the Messenger JAMES R. RIght Reverend Father in God We greet you well Whereas We have been informed and are fully satisfied that Dr. John Sharp Rector of the Parish Church of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex and in your Diocess notwithstanding Our late Letter to the most Reverend Fathers in God the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury and York and Our Directions concerning Preachers given at Our Court at White-hall March 15. 1685. in the Second Year of Our Reign yet he the said Dr. John Sharp in contempt of the said Orders hath in some of the Sermons he hath since preached presumed to make unbecoming Reflections and to utter such Expressions as were not fit or proper for him endeavouring thereby to beget k the Minds of his Hearers an evil Opinion of Us and Our Government by insinuating Fears and Jealousies to dispose them to Discontent and to lead them into Disobedience and Rebellion These are therefore to require and command you immediately upon receit hereof forthwith to suspend him from further Preaching in any Parish Church or Chappel in your Diocess until he has given Us Satisfaction and Our further Pleasure be known herein And for so doing this shall be your Warrant And so We bid you heartily farewel Given at our Court at Windsor June 14. 1686. in the Second Year of Our Reign By His Majesty's Command SVNDERLAND The Bishop of London's Answer sent by Dr. Sharp to the Earl of Sunderland then at Hampton-Court on Friday June 18. Who could have no Answer To the Right Honour able the Earl of Sunderland Lord President c. My Lord I Always have and shall count it my Duty to obey the King in what-ever Commands he lays upon me that I can perform with a safe Conscience But in this I humbly conceive I am obliged to proceed according to Law and therefore it is impossible for me to comply because though his Majesty commands me only to execute his Pleasure yet in the Capacity I am to do it I must act as a Judg and your Lordship knows no Judg condemns any Man before he has knowledg of the Cause and has cited the Party However I sent to Mr. Dean and acquainted him with his Majesty's Displeasure whom I find so ready to give all reasonable Satisfaction that I have thought fit to make him the Bearer of this Answer From him that will never be unfaithfull to the King nor otherwise than My Lord Your Lordships most humble Servant H. LONDON After this the Chancellor ask'd the Bishop if he had any more to say Who then desired his Counsel might be heard by whom they would have more clear and full Satisfaction concerning what he had said Whereupon the Bishop was desired to withdraw and after half an hour he and his Counsel were called in who were Dr. Oldish Hodges Prince and Newton Dr. Oldish pleaded That the King's Letter did not take cognizance of the Cause so that it could not be an absolute Suspension because that supposeth a Proof of the Crime charged upon him That there was no such word in their Laws as suspend from Preaching which therefore must be meant silencing and this the Bishop did and in such a Method as is observed in their Courts Dr. Hodges then pleaded That the Bishop had done what the King commanded and that he could not Suspend which is a Judicial Act without first a Citation and Hearing which is the Method of proving before all Courts and appeared to be so in this otherwise the Bishop needed not to have been cited before them And that in returning the King an Answer why he did not do what he commanded him he did but what was his Duty and what was Law Dr. Price pleaded that a Citation was Jure Gentium and could never be taken away by any Positive Command or Law whatsoever that therefore the Bishop had obeyed the King so far as he could in that he had silenced the Doctor the Advice of a Bishop being in some sense an Admonition which is a Judicial Act and was given by the Bishop and obeyed by the Doctor Dr. Newton pleaded that the Bishop had obeyed the King for as in Nature no Man can be desired to do what is impossible so no man can be obliged to do an unlawful Act which Suspension without Citation and Hearing is That the Bishops are Custodes Canonum and therefore must not break them themselves That he had done what was in his Power to do and it was in effect what the King commanded to be done For where he did Rescribere and heard not the further Pleasure of the King returned he ought to conclude the King was satisfied with what he had written according to his Duty and the King had altered his Commands Then the Bishop of London said If he had erred in any Circumstance he was very ready to beg his Majesties Pardon and would be ready to make any reparation he was capable After which the Bishop withdrew for half an Hour and then being called in was desired to attend the Court again on Sept. 6. So the Bishop desiring that care might be took concerning the Minutes taken by the Clerks of what passed that he might not be misrepresented to the King by the Mistake of the Pen-man he went away While the Counsellors were pleading Dr. Pinfold the King's Advocate stood at the Chancellor's Elbow and took Notes by which it was expected that he should make a Reply but he said nothing and 't is supposed that he staid with the Council when the Bishop withdrew and gave them Reasons for his silence On Monday Sept. 6. 1686. There being present in Council the same as before and the Bishop appearing he was desired to sit down and hear his Sentence which to prevent Mistake they had ordered to be put in Writing The Bishop then would have spoke but was not suffered And then Mr. Bridgman their Register read the Instrument whereby the Bishop of London was suspended from the Execution of his Episcopal Office upon pain of Deprivation during his Majesties Pleasure sealed with their Seal but signed by no Body at all And some day after one of the