Tenants and therefore they are called by Bracton Robur Belli how can we now expect the like from such as have no Tenants and are hardly able to maintain themselves But this is not all for the prejudice grows not primitively by defect of that assistance which they might give the State but positively they have been a great burthen to the Kingdom by Gifts and Pensions already received and yet stand in need of more for the future support of their Dignities This makes the Dukes offence the greater that in this weakness and consumption of the Commonwealth he hath not been contented alone to consume the qublick Treasure which is the blood and nourishment of the State but hath brought in others to help him in this work of destruction And that they might do it more eagerly by inlarging their Honors he hath likewise inlarged their Necessities and their Appetites He did second his Charge with two Presidents the first 28 Henry 6. in the Complaint against the Duke of Suffolk in the One and thirtieth Article of that Complaint this was one of his Charges That he William de la Pool Duke of Suffolk had procured one who had married his Niece to be made Earl of Kendal and obtained for him One thousand pounds per annum in the Dutchy of Guienne and yet this Party was the Son of a Noble and well deserving Father So you see this is no new thing for the House of Commons to complain that those that are neer the King should raise their Kindred to an unnecessary Honor and if that were worthy of punishment for advancing of one then what punishment is he worthy of that hath advanced so many The second President is 17 Edw. 4. There passed an Act of Parliment for the Degrading of Iohn Nevil Marquis Montague and Duke of Bedford the reason expressed in the Act is because he had not a Revenue sufficient for the maintaining of that Dignity to which is added another reason of that nature that when men of mean birth are called to a high Estate and have not livelihood to support it it induceth great poverty and causeth briberies and extortions imbraceries and maintenance And now my Lords how far these Reasons shall lead your Judgements in this Case I must leave it to your Lordships Then he read the Twelfth Article being the second part of his Charge the Title whereof was The Exhausting Intercepting and Misimploying the Kings Revenues My Lords This Article consists of several Clauses which in some respects may be called so many distinct Charges for though they all tend to one end and scope the diminishing the Kings Treasure yet it is by divers wayes so that every Clause is a particular Branch Therefore he desired to break it into parts and to select the most material either in point of offence or grievance intenâ—ing to pass through them with this order first to declare the state of the proof and then to add such reasons and inforcements as he did conceive most conduceable to that Judgement which the Commons were to expect from their Lorships He made two main Branches of this Article The first concerns Lands obtained from the Crown the second concerns Money in Pensions Gifts Farms and other kinde of profit Touching the Lands he observed four Things 1. The sum of Three thousand thirty five pounds per annum of old Rent besides the Forest of Layfield of which we have no value and we can finde no Schedule granted by the late King to my Lord of Buckingkham within ten years past as appeareth by the several Grants vouched in the Schedule annexed and it was in it self a great grievance That in a time of such necessity when the Kings Revenues are not able to support such a great charge that so much Land should be conveyed to a private man This he acknowledged was not the Dukes case alone for others had received divers Grants from the King but none in so great measure And because the Commons aim not at Judgement onely but at Reformation he wished That when the King should bestow any Land for support of Honors that the caution which was wont to be carefully observed might again return into use that is to annex those Lands to the Dignity lest being obtained and wasted the Party repair to the King for a new support by which provision the Crown will reap this Benefit That as some Lands go out by new Grants others will come in by spent Intails He said he would not trouble their Lordships with repetition of the Laws heretofore made for preventing the alienation of the Kings Lands and for resuming those that had been alienated nor of the Ordinances made in this high Court for the same purpose and Fines set upon those that presumed to break such Ordinances he onely added as a further enforcement of the Grievance That when the Kings Revenues be unable to defray publick necessities the Commons must needs be more burthened with Supplies 2. His second Point was the unusual Clauses which the Duke by his greatness hath procured to be inserted into the Warrants for passing of those Lands of which two were mentioned the first That the casual profits should not be rated in the particulars the second That all Bailiffs Fees should be reprised Both which are to be proved by the Warrants remaining with the Auditor of the Rates and other Auditors whereupon he presented these Considerations First That it was a mark of Ingratitude and Insatiableness in the Duke thus to strain the Kings Bounty beyond his intention and that he would not receive this Bounty by the ordinary way but by the way of Practice Secondly It argued Unfaithfulness in him that being a sworne Counsellor he should put the King into such Courses of so much prejudice deceitfully in concealing the value of that which he bought so that the King gave he knew not what For under the proportion of Two thousand pounds he gives it may be Four thousand pounds And by this the King did not only sustain great loss for the present but it opened a way of continual loss which hath ever since been pursued by all those who have passed Lands from the Crown Thirdly The King is hereby not left Master of his own Liberality neither in proportion nor certainty for it might so fall out that the Quantity passed from him might be treble to that he intended 3. The third was The Surrender of divers Parcels of these Lands back to the King after he had held them some years and taking others from the King in exchange Where he noted That the best of the Lands and most vendible being passed away the worst lay upon the Kings hand that if he shall have occasion to raise money by sale of Lands that Course is not like to furnish him Besides that in the mean time betwixt the Grants and the Surrenders opportunity was left to the Duke to cut down Woods to infranchise Copiholds to make long Leases and yet
of the People Certainly hereafter it will be conceived that an House of Parliament would not have made an unnecessary addition to this Petition of Right and therefore it will be resolved that the Addition hath relation to the Petition which will have such operation as I have formerly declared and I the rather fear it because the late Loan and Billeting have been declared to have been by Soveraign Power for the good of our selves and if it be doubtful whether this Proposition hath reference to the Petition or not I know not who shall judge whether Loans or Imprisonments hereafter be by that Soveraign Power or not A Parliament which is made a Body of several Writs and may be dissolved by one Commission cannot be certain to decide this question We cannot resolve that that the Judges shall determine the words of the Kings Letter read in this House expressing the cause of Commitment may be such that the Judges have not capacity of Judicature no Rules of Law to direct and guide their judgements in Cases of that transcendent nature the Judges then and the Judgements are easily conjectured it hath been confessed by the Kings Councel that the Statute of Magna Charta bindes the King it bindes his Soveraign Power and here is an Addition of Saving the Kings Soveraign Power I shall endeavor to give some Answer to the Reasons given by the Lords The first is That it is the intention of both Houses to maintain the Just Liberty of the Subject and not to diminish the just Power of the King and therefore the expression of that intention in this Petition cannot prejudice us To which I answer First That our intention was and is as we then professed and no man can assign any particular in which we have done to the contrary neither have we any way transgressed in that kinde in this Petition and if we make this addition to the Petition it would give some intimation that we have given cause or colour of offence therein which we deny and which if any man conceive so let him assign the particular that we may give answer thereunto By our Petition we onely desire our particular Rights and Liberties to be confirmed to us and therefore it is not proper for us in it to mention Soveraign Power in general being altogether impertinent to the matter in the Petition There is a great difference between the words of the Addition and the words proposed therein for reason viz. between just Power which may be conceived to be limited by Laws and Soveraign Power which is supposed to be transcendent and boundless The second Reason delivered by their Lordships was That the King is Soveraign That as he is Soveraign he hath power and that that Soveraign Power is to be left for my part I would leave it so as not to mention it but if it should be expressed to be left in this Petition as it is proposed it must admit something to be left in the King of what we pray or at least admit some Sovergain Power in his Majesty in these Priviledges which we claim to be our Right which would frustrate our Petition and destroy our Right as I have formerly shewed The third Reason given from this Addition was That in the Statute of Articuli super Chartas there is a Saving of the Seigniory of the Crown To which I give these Answers That Magna Charta was confirmed above thirty times and a general Saving was in none of these Acts of Confirmation but in this onely and I see no cause we should follow one ill and not thirty good Precedents and the rather because that Saving produced ill effects that are well known That Saving was by Act of Parliament the conclusion of which Act is that in all those Cases the King did well and all those that were at the making of that Ordinance did intend that the right and Seigniory of the Crown should be saved By which it appears that the saving was not in the Petition of the Commons but added by the King for in the Petition the Kings will is not expressed In that Act the King did grant and depart with to his People divers Rights belonging to his Prerogative as in the first Chapter he granted That the People might choose three men which might have Power to hear and determine Complaints made against those that offended in any point of Magna Charta though they were the Kings Officers and to Fine and Ransome them and in the 8.12 and 19. Chapter of that Statute the King departed with other Prerogatives and therefore there might be some reason of the adding of that Soveraign by the Kings Councel But in this Petition we desire nothing of the Kings Prerogative but pray the enjoying of our proper and undoubted Rights and Priviledges and therefore there is no cause to adde any words which may imply a Saving of that which concerns not the matter in the Petition The fourth Reason given by their Lordships was That by the mouth of our Speaker we have this Parliament declared That it was far from our intention to incroach upon his Majesties Prerogative and that therefore it could not prejudice us to mention the same resolution in an Addition to this Petition To which I Answer That that Declaration was a general Answer to a Message from his Majesty to us by which his Majesty expressed That he would not have his Prerogative straitned by any new Explanation of Magna Charta or the rest of the Statutes and therefore that expression of our Speakers was then proper to make it have reference to this Petition there being nothing therein contained but particular Rights of the Subject and nothing at all concerning his Majesties Prerogative Secondly That Answer was to give his Majesty satisfaction of all our proceedings in general and no man can assign any particular in which we have broken it and this Petition justifies it self that in it we have not offended against the Protestation and I know no reason but that this Declaration should be added to all our Laws we shall agree on this Parliament as well as to this Petition The last Reason given was That we have varied in our Petition from the words of Magna Charta and therefore it was well necessary that a Saving should be added to the Petition I Answer That in the Statute 5 E. 3.25 E. 3.28 E. 3. and other Statutes with which Magna Charta is confirmed the words of the Statute of Explanation differ from the words of Magna Charta it self the words of some of the Statutes of Explanation being that no man ought to be apprehended unless by Indictment or due process of Law and the other Statutes differing from the words of Magna Charta in many other particulars and yet there is no Saving in those Statutes 〈◊〉 much less should there be any in a Petition of Right There are the Answers I have conceived to the Reasons of their Lordships and the
stirring of sedition Seditio as an approved Author saies imports discordiam to wit when the members of one body fight one against another The Lord of St. Albans who was lately the Lord Chancellor of England and was a Lawyer and great States-man likewise and well knew the acceptation of this word Sedition in our Law hath made an Essay of Sedition and the Title of the Essay is Of Seditions and Tumults the whole Essay deserves the reading And there is a Prayer in the Letany From sedition and heresie c. So that there Sedition is taken as a kind of Sect. This being the naturall signification of the word then the next labour shall be to see if any thing in our Law crosse this exposition And it seems clearly that there is not 2 H. 4. cap. 15. And it is in the Parliament-Roll numb 48. against Lollards who at that time were taken as hereticks saies That such Preachers which excite and stir up to sedition shall be convented before the Ordinary c. There sedition is taken for dissention and division in doctrine And this is not made treason by the said Statute although the said Statute be now repealed by the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 4. 1 and 2 Phil. Mar. c. 3. which is in Rastall Newes 4. which is an act against seditious words and newes of the King and Queen which is a great misdemeanor and yet the punishment appointed to be inflicted by the said Statute is but the Pillory or a Fine of 100 l. And the said Statute by the Statute of 1 Eliz. c. 16. was extended to her also which Statute now by her death is expired which I pray may be observed 13 Eliz. cap. 1. against those who seditiously publish who are the true heirs of the Crown that they shal be imprisoned for a year c. And 13 Eliz. c. 2. the seditious bringing in of the Pope's Buls is made treason which implies that it was not so at the Common Law 23 Eliz. c. 2. If any person shal devise write or print any book containing any fals seditious and slanderous matter to the stirring up or moving of any rebellion c. every such offence shal be adjudged Felony And in an Indictment upon the said Statute which see Cook 's Entries f. 352.353 there are the words rebellionem seditionem movere and yet it is but felony 35 Eliz. c. 1. made against seditious Sectaries Also there are certain Books and Authorities in Law which expresse the nature of this word Sedition C. 4.13 the Lord Cromwell's case In an action for those words You like of those that maintain seditions against the Queens proceedings the Defendant pleaded That he intended the maintenance of a seditious Sermon and this was adjudged a good plea and â—ustification From which it followes that the Seditious Sermon mentioned in the Declaration and the maintaining of sedition against the Queen is all of one signification for if they might have been taken in a different sense the justification had not been good Phillips and Badby's case which is in C. 4. 19. a. which was objected by Serjeant Berkley makes strongly for me for there an action upon the case was brought by a person for those words Thou hast made a seditious Sermon and moved the people to sedition this day And although it were there adjudged that the action lay yet the reason of the Iudgment is observable which was because the words scandalize the Plaintiff in his profession which imply that if they had not scandalized him in his profession no action would have lain And ordinary words if they scandalize a man in his profession are actionable as to say to a Iudge that he is a corrupt man or to a Merchant that he is a Bank-rupt although if they were spoken to another man they would not bear an action And although the Book say that no act followed there yet if the matter objected had been treason the very will had been punishable and by consequence a great slander But it is observed that words which imply an inclination onely to sedition are not actionable as Seditious knave but inclination to treason is treason therefore words which imply it are actionable And also for divers words an action upon the case will lye which induce not treason or felony as for calling a woman Whore by which she loseth her marriage and such like Then sedition is no offence in it self but the aggravation of an offence and no Indictment as I have said afore was ever seen of this singly by it self Tr. 21. E. 3. roll 23. Sir John Garbut's case which was put before by Mason the Indictment was in prejudice of his Crown and in manifest sedition and yet the offence there was but a Robbery It is true that upon his arraignment he stood mute therefore the Roll is that he was put to penance that is so strong and hard pain and this proves that it was not treason for if a man arraigned of treason stand mute yet the usuall judgment of treason shall be given on him And it is true also that he cannot have his Clergy because insidiator viarum was in the Indictment which if it was outs the party of his Clergy untill the Statute of 4 H. 4. c. 2. as is observed in C. 11. Poulter's case And upon the same Roll of 21 E. 3. there are four other Indictments of the same nature where Seditiosè is contained in them Anno 1585 Queen Elizabeth sent a Letter which I have seen by the hands of the noble Antiquary Sir Robert Cotton to the Maior of London for the suppressing of divers seditious Libels which were published against her Princely Government and yet in the conclusion of the Letter it appears that they were onely against the Earl of Leicester and this was to be published onely by Proclamation in London 5 H. 4. numb 11. and 13. The Earl of Northumberland preferred a Petition to the King in Parliament in which he confesseth that he had not kept his Majesties Laws as a liege subject and also confesseth the gathering of power and the giving of Liveries Wherefore he petitioned the worship of the King for so are the words for his grace The King upon this Petition demanded the opinion of the Lords of Parliament and of the Iudges assistant if any thing contained within the said Petition were treason or no and it was resolved by them all that nothing as it is mentioned in the said Petition was treason but great misdemeanors and yet truly though not fully there mentioned it was a great rebellion and insurrection But they adjudged according to the said Petition as you are now to judge upon the Return as it is made here In Mich. 33 Cawdry's case Sedition and Schism were described As schism is a separation from the unity of the Church so sedition is a separation from the unity of the Common-wealth And an Author saies that a seditious person differs from a
d. interfecit I. S. upon prepensed malice is good for the nature of the thing is expressed although the formall word be wanting but out of the Return the substance of the offence ought alwaies to appear which appears not here But it hath been said by the other side That let the cause in the Return be as it will yet is it not traversable 9 H. 6.54 and I confesse it But as C. 11. James Baggs case is the Return ought to have certainty so much in it that if it be false the party grieved may have his action upon the case And the grievance complained of in the Petition of Right is that upon such Return no cause was certified that is no such cause upon which any Indictment might be drawn up for we never understand that the party shall be tryed upon the Habeas Corpus but that upon the matter contained within it and Indictment shall be made and he shall have his tryall upon it And yet it is clear and it hath been agreed of all hands in the Argument of the grand Habeas corpus Mich. 3. Car. in this Court that if the cause be certified upon the Return of the Habeas corpus that the Court may judge of the legality of that cause 2. Consider the parts of this Return as they are coupled together for notable contempts by him committed against Our Self and Our Government and for stirring of sedition against Us Upon the entire Return the King joynes sedition with notable contempts so that it is as much as if he had said that Sedition is one of the notable contempts mentioned in the first part of the Return so that he makes it but a contempt For the generality and incertainty of the Return I refer my self to the cases put by Mr. Ask and I will not waive any of them True it is if the Return had been that it was for Treason he had not been bailable but by the discretion of the Court and such Return would have been good but it is not so of sedition Gard. 157. Treason is applyed to a petty offence to the breach of trust by a Guardian in Socage but it is not treason And so sedition is of far lesse nature then treason and is oftentimes taken of a trespasse it is not treason of it self nor seditiosè was never used in an Indictment of treason It was not treason before the 25 of Edw. 3. nor can it be treason for 25 E. 3. is a flat Barre as I have said before to all other offences to be treason which are not contained within the said Act or declared by any Statute afterwards And there are offences which are more heinous in their nature then sedition is which are not treason as Insurrections c. which see in the Statute 11 H. 7. cap. 7. 2 H. 5. cap. 9. 8 H. 6. cap. 14. 5 R. 2. cap. 6. 17 R. 2. cap. 8. and by 3 and 4 E. 6. cap. 5. the assembly of twelve persons to attempt the alteration of any Law and the continuance together by the space of an hour being commanded to return is made treason which Act was continued by the Statute of 1 Mar. cap. 12. and 1 Eliz. cap. 16. but now is expired by her death and is not now in force although the contrary be conceived by some which I pray may be well observed By the Statute of 14 Eliz. cap. 1. rebellious taking of the Castles of the King is made treason if they be not delivered c. which shewes clearly that such taking of Castles in its nature was not treason But the said Statute is now expired and also all Statutes creating new treasons are now repealed But for a conclusion of this part of my Argument I will cite a case which I think expresse in the point or more strong then the case in question And it was M. 9. E. 3. roll 39. B. R. Peter Russells case he was committed to prison by the Deputy-Iustice of North-Wales because he was accused by one William Solyman of sedition and other things touching the King And hereupon a Commission issued out of the Chancery to enquire if the said Peter Russell behaved himselfe well or seditiously against the King and by the Inquisition it was found that he behaved himself well And upon an Habeas Corpus out of this Court his body was returned but no cause But the said Inquisition was brought hither out of Chancery and for that no cause of his caption was returned he prayed Delivery but the Court would not deliver him till it knew the cause of his Commitment Therefore taking no regard of the said Inquisition they now send a Writ to the now Iustice of Wales to certifie the cause of his commitment And thereupon he made this Return That the foresaid Peter Russell was taken because one William Solyman charged him that he had committed divers seditions against the Lord the King and for that cause he was detained and for no other And because the Return mentions not what sedition in speciall he was bayled but not discharged And I desire the baylment of the prisoner onely and not his deliverance I desire that the case be well observed In the said case there was an actuall sedition against the King here is onely a stirring up of sedition The words of the said Award are Videtur curiae which are the solemn words of a Iudgment given upon great deliberation There it was for other things concerning Us This is all one as if it had said for other things against Us Concerning the King and Against the King are all one as appears by 25 E. 3. c. 4. de Clero Stamf. 124. Westm. 1. c. 15. Bracton f. 119. 14 Eliz. c. 2. And the words of the Iudgment in the said case were not dimittitur but ideò dimittendus which imply the right of the party to be bayled The said case in some things was more particular then our case and more strong for there was an Accuser to boot which wants in our case There true it is that he was committed by the Iustice of Wales and here by the King himself but this makes no difference as to this Court for be the commitment by the King himself or by any other if it be not upon just cause the party may be bayled in this Court. And for the Inquisition which is mentioned it was no Tryall in the case nor did the Court give any regard thereto To detain the prisoner by the command of the King singly is against the Petition of Right but it being coupled with the cause the cause is to be considered and the truth of the cause is to be intended as well where it is mentioned to be by an inferiour Iudge as where by the King himself for it is traversable neither in the one nor other And 22 H. 8. roll 37. B. R. and 1 H. 8 roll 8. Harrisons case resolv'd that a man committed by the command of the King is
Edward Cook A Message from the King to the House of Commons to end the Sessions Mr. Pyms Speech at the delivery of the charge against Dr. Manwaring â—udgement given against Dr. Manwawaring Dr. Manwaings submissions Another Message from the King Sir Robert Phillips Sir John Elliot Sir Dudly Diggs Sir Nathan Rich. The Commons declare that no undutiful Speech hath been spoken Mr. Wandesford Sir Edw. Cook declares the Duke the cause of all our miseries Mr. Seldens advice for a Declaration against the Duke Several heads agreed on for a Remonstrance A Message from the King by the Speakâ—r Another Message from the King to the Commons A Message from his Majesty tâ— the house of Lords The Kings Message gâ—ves the Commons more hope then formerly Burlemack called into the House The Petition of both Houses to his Majesty for a further Answer to the Petition of right His Majesties second Answer to the Petition of right All Grand Committees to cease Sir Edward Cooks Observations upon the said Commission Sir Edward Cook mannageth the Conference between both Houses concerning the Commission Fâ—resh Debate in the House against the Duke Sir Iohn Elliot Sir Henry Martin Sir Benjamin Rudyard Sir Thomas Jermin Dr. Lamb killed A Letter to the City about Dr. Lambs Death Dr. Neal Dr. Laud suspected for Atminians Mr. Selden The Commons Remonstrance against the Duke The Speaker appointed to deliver the Remonstrance Order in Star-Chamber concerning the Duke The Duke desires to clear himself concerning some words The Comission for Excise cancelled Mr. Selden concerning Tunnage and Poundage The Commons Remonstrance of Tunnage and Poundage Mr. Noy The K. ends this Session in person and declares the reason Dr. Manwarings Sermon suppâ—essed by Proclamation A Proclamation and commissiâ—n concerning composition with Recusants A Proclamation against the Bâ—shop of Calcedon Romish Priests to be sent to Wisbitch Jesuites taken at Clerkenwell or acted to be proceeded against Order to search what Recusants are about London Sir Richard Weston and Bishop Laud advanced Mr. Montague advanced and his Apello Caesarem called in Preaching and Writing pro con about unnecessary questions prohibited A pardon granted to Dr. Manwaring Dr. Montague Rochel close besieged and relief designed The Duke slain Dr. Montague consecrated Bishop Rochel again attempted to be relieved but in vain The sad condition of Rochel at the surrender Defects in the relief of Rochel questioned Outrages committed by souldiers Advertisement of forreign designes The King of Denmark assisted with forces The German House disposed of Dr. Laud in â—avour with the King Conge d'esâ—ier for certain Bishops The meeting of the Parliament adjourned to Jan. 20. Great resort to Felton in prison Felton examined before the Council Threatned to be Racked The Judges opinions taken therein Merchants committed about Customs Merchants summonned to the Councel Table Mr. Chambers brought up with a Habeas Corpus and bailed Lords of the Councel dissatisfied with his bailing Felton brought to trial Confesseth the Fact Tenders his hand to be cut off Hung in chains Mr. Vassals goods seised on for denying Customes Information pâ—eserved against him Mr. Vassals plea to the Information Mr. Chambers goods seised on for not paying customes A Replevin sued ouâ— And superseaded Mr. Rolls a Merchant Private consultations about the ensuing Parliament The Parliament meets they enquire whether the Petition of Right be enrolled What were the violations of the Subjects Liberties since the last Parliament Sir Robert Philips Speech concerning that matter The matter was referred to a Committee The Kings Speech to both Houses in the Banqueting House The K. sends a Message to the House of Commons speedily to take Tunnagâ— Poundage in to consideration But the Commons resolvâ— to proceed in matters of Religion Mr. Rous Speech â—oncerning Religion A Report from the Commâ—tee for Religion The Remonstrance concerning Religion sent back by the King Precedency again given to Religion before Tunnage and Poundage Mr. Pyms speech concerning Religion Message by Secretary Cook about Tunnage and Poundage Sir Tho. Edmâ—nds Mr. Corriton An Answer resolved to be given to the Kings messages Sir Iohn Eliot concerning Religion The Commons enter into a Vow Both Houses Petition the King for a fast His Majesties Answer The Commons Declaration to the King to give precedency to Religion His Majesties Answer to the Commons Declaration Debate about the Kings Dâ—claration concerning disputes about Religion Mr. Rolls sitting in Parliament was called forth and served with a Subpaenâ Debate concerning the same The mistake of the Subpaenâ cleared A report from the Committee for Tunnage and Poundage Committee meeâ— agâ—n upon Tunnage and Poundage Mr. Noy concerning Tunnage and Poundage Barons of the Exchequer sent unto about staying the delivery of Merchants goods The Barons Answer Not satisfactory A report concerning pardons to Dr. Manwaring Mr. Montague c. Mr. Cromwel against the Bishop of Winchester A complaint of the noâ— licensing of Books against Popery Mr. Selden concerning Printing Debates about increase of Popery Secretary Cook concerning the Priests arraigned at Newgate Mr. Long a Justice of peace examined Sir Robert Heath his answer concerning the prosecution of the Priests A Fast. Mr. Dawes answer to the Commons Mr Carmarthens answer Mr. Selden The House in a Committee about the Customers answer Mr. Noy Message by Secretary Cook from the King about the Customers Order by the King and Council concelning the Costomers The Kings Commission to the Customers c. Resolve concerning Mr. Rolls Debates Sir Iohn Ellyots Speech against particular persons * Lord Weston afterwards died a Papist The Speaker refuses to put the Question Mr. Seldens Speech thereupon The Speaker again refuseth to put the Question Protestation in Parliament propounded whilst the Speaker was held in his chair The King sends the Usher of the Lords House Warrants to apprehend several Members of Parliament The Kings Speech at the Dissolution of the Parliament Libels cast abroad Members examined before the Lords of the Council 5 Caroli Anno 1629. Questions propounded to the Judges concerning the imprisoned Members Answer Mr. Stroud and Mr. Long brought upon a Habeas Corpus An Information in Star-Chamber against the Members Ro. Heath Hu Davenport Ro. Bartley Heneage Finch William Hudson An Information in Star Chamber against Sir Io. Elliot c. Proceedings in Star-Chamber against Mr. Chambers His Answer His Sentence A submission tendred His refusal Places of Scripture mentioned by him Isa. 29.21 Ecclus. 11.7 8 John 7.51 Act. 26.2 Exod. 23.6 Deut. 16.19 Mich. 2.1 2. Ezek. 45.9 and 46.8 Eccles. 5.8 London His Plea in the Exchequer H. 3.9 E. 1.3 H. 3.9 E. 3.5 t H. 7.3 H. 8.21 1629. 16 Iune London Order in the Exchequer Mr. Chambers brought by a Habeas Corpus His Petition to the Parliament His death Mr. Selden brought upon a Habeas Corpus A letter from the King to the Judges Another Letter L' Assembli des Notables A Letter to the Judges The King confers with some of them Motion to bail the prisoners An Information exhibited in the Kings Bench against vir Iohn Elliot c. The Plea of Sir Iohn Elliot Mr Long 's Case in the Star-Chamber Arguments concerning Sir Iohn Elliot Lord Chief Justice Hide Justice Whitlock Judgment Judgment pronounced The Kings Declaration of the causes which moved him to dissolve the last Parliament * Here are the passages concerning the Members deportment in the House mentioned in this Declaration which we â—orbear to repeat in regard the same are at large expressed in the Information in the Star-chamber before mentioned A Proposition presented to the King how to keep in awe this nation First to have a Fortresse in every considerable Town Secondly To cause high-waies to be made through such Townes Thirdly To choose the Souldiers of such Fortresses no Inhabitants of the place 4. To let none passe through such places without a Ticket 5. To have the names of all lodgers taken by Inkeepers The expence of these Forts To impose an oath on the Subjects Meanes â—o increase the King's revenewes 1 To demand a Decima of mens estates 2 To buy out all Leases upon the Crown-Lands 3 To take the Salt into his Majesties own hands 4 To demand a rate for Sealing the weights every yeare 5 To demand an Impost for Wools. 6 To put a Tax upon every Lawyers Fee 7 To put a Tax upon Inns and Victualling-houses for a License 8 To put a Tax upon all Carâ—le Flesh and Horses sold in the Market 9 To put a Tax upon all Lands alienated 10 To demand a rate upon all Offices in his Majestie 's grant 11 To reduce his Majesties Houshold to Board wages 12 To demand a rate for license to eat Lacticinia 13 To take an imposition upon the Catholicks lands At the Prince his marriage to make Earls in Principi to pay for it And Barons to be made Earls To make 200 rich men Titulate and they to pay for the Titles To make Gentlemen of low quality and rich Farmers Esquires Mr. Stroud Esq brought to the Kings-Bench-Bar upon a Habeas Corpus Also Walter Long Esq. Mr. Mason of Lincolns-Inn his Argument for Mr. Long. Serjeant Barckley his Argument against Stroud and Long. Serjeant Davenport's Argument against Stroud and Long Mr. Littleton's Argument for Mr. Selden See Fortoscue f. 115. the which was not cited there never Sedition Strife or Murmur is heard Sir Rob. Heath the Kings Atturney Generall his Argument against Mr. Selden An Information exhibited in the King's Bench against Sir Iohn Eliot and others Mr. Mason's Argument for Sir John Eliot Mr. Calibrop's Argument for Mr. Valentine Camden's Brit. 449. 1. Object 2. Object 3. Object 4. Object 5. Object 6. Object 7. Object 8. Object Sir Rob. Heaths Argument against Sir John Elliot 1 Car 16 Jac. 1618. 1 Car. 1625.
complained of and what punishment it may deserve His fault consisteth in the unjust extorting and receiving the Ten thousand pounds from the East-India Company against their wills by colour of his Office Yet as offenders in this kinde have commonly some colour to disguise and mask their Corruptions so had he His colour was the Release of his pretended right to the Tenth part or some other share of the Goods supposed to be Piratically taken at Sea by the Captain and their Servants of the Company And though his Lordship may perhaps call his act therein a lawful Composition I must crave pardon of your Lordships to say thus That if his supposed right had been good this might peradventure have been a fair Composition The same pretence being unsound and falling away it was a meer naked Bribe and unjust extortion For if way should be given to take money by colour of Releases of pretended rights men great in power and in evil would never want means to extort upon the meaner sort at their pleasures with impunity It remains therefore that I should prove unto your Lordships onely two things First That a pretence of right by the Duke if he had none will not excuse him in this case and in the next place to shew by reason and good warrant That he had in Law no right at all to Release For the former I will relie upon the substance of two noteable presidents of Judgments in Parliament the one antient in the 10 Rich. 2. At which time the Commons preferred divers Articles unto the Lords in Parliament against Michael de la Pool Earl of Suffolk Lord Chancellor of England accusing him amongst other things by the first Article of his Charge That while he was Lord Chancellor he had refused to give Livery to the cheif Master of St. Anthonies of the profit pertaining to that Order till he had security from them with Sureties by Recognisance of Three thousand pounds for the payment of One hundred pounds per annum to the Earl and to Iohn his Son for their lives The Earl by way of Answer set forth a pretended Title in his Son to the cheif Mastership of that Order and that he took that One hundred pound per annum as a Composition for his Sons right The Commons replied shewing amongst other things That the taking of Money for that which should have been done freely was a selling of the Law and so prayed Judgment In conclusion the pretended right of his Son not being just or approved the offence remained single by it self a sale of Law and Justice as the Law termeth it and not a Composition for the Release of his Interest So the Earl for this amongst the rest was sentenced and greatly punished as by the Records appeareth The other President of like nature is more Modern in the Case of the Earl of Middlesex late Lord Treasurer of England who was charged by the Commons in Parliament and transmitted to your Lordships for taking of Five hundred pounds of the Farmers of the Great Customs as a Bribe for allowing of that Security for payment of their Rent to the late Kings Majesty which without such reward of Five hundred pounds he had formerly refused to allow of The Earl pretended for himself That he had not onely that Five hundred pound but Five hundred pounds more in all One thousand pounds of those Farmers for a Release of his Claim to Four of Two and thirty parts of that Farm But upon the proof it appearing to your Lordships That he had not any such part of that Farm as he pretended it was in the Thirteenth day of May in the Two and twentieth year of his late Majesties reign Adjudged by your Lordships in Parliament which I think is yet fresh in your Memories That the Earl for this amongst other things should undergo many grievous Censures as appeareth by the Records of your Lordships house which I have lately seen and perused And now being to prove that the said Duke had no title to any part of the Goods by him claimed against the East-India Company I shall easily make it manifest if his Lordships pretence by his own Allegation in the Admiralty were true That the Goods whereof he claims his share were Piratically taken From which Allegation as he may not now recede so is it clear by Reason and Authority That of such Goods no part or share whatsoever is due to the Lord Admiral in right of his Office or otherways 1. For that the parties from whom the same were taken ought to have restitution demanding it in due and reasonable time and it were an injury to the intercourse and Law of Nations if the contrary should be any way tolerated 2. Secondly by Law for so are the Statutes of this Kingdom and more especially in 27 Edw. 3.13 whereby it was provided That if any Merchant privy or stranger be robbed of his Goods upon the Sea and the same come afterwards into this Realm the owner shall be received to prove such Goods to be his and upon proof thereof shall have the same restored to him again Likewise 1 2 3 Edw. 6.18 in the Act of Parliament touching Sir Thomas Seymour Great Admiral of England who therein amongst divers other things is charged with this That he had taken to his own use Goods Piratically taken against the Law whereby he moved almost all Christian Princes to conceive a grudge and displeasure and by open War to seek remedy by their own hands And therefore for this amongst other things he was attainted of High Treason as appeareth by that Act wherein the Law is so declared to be as before is expressed But if it should be admitted that the Duke had a right in this case for which he might compound yet the manner of his seeking to try and recover such his right is in it self an high Offence and clearly unlawful in many respects whereof I will touch but a few As in making the most Honorable House of Parliament an Instrument to effect his private ends for his profit In proceeding to arest and stay the Ships of men not apt to flie but well able to answer and satisfie any just Suits which he might have against them though their Ships had gone on in their Voyage In prosecuting things so unseasonably and urging them so extreamly by his Advocate for bringing in of so great a sum of money upon the sudden and formally under colour of Justice and Service of the State In reducing that Company into that straight and necessity that it was as good for them to compound though the Duke had no title as to defend their own just right against him upon these disadvantages which by his power and industry he had put upon them Then he read the Seventh and Eighth Articles which he handled joyntly as being not two Charges but two sevearl parts of one and the same Charge and when he had read them he went on speaking further to
the old Rent remaining still the Land may be surendred at the same value Whether this have been practised he could not affirm not having had time to examine it yet he desired the Lords to enquire after it the rather for that the Manor of G. in Lincolnshire being dismembred and Seventeen pounds of the old Rents sold out of it was by a Surrender turned back upon his Majesty 4. The fourth point of this Branch was The colourable Tallies divers parcels of these Lands had from the Crown in lieu of this surrender being sold and contracted for by his own Agent and the money received by himself or to his use and yet Tallies were stricken out as if it had really come to the Exchequer for his Majesties service This is to be proved by his own Officers by the Officers of the Exchequer and by the Tallies themselves which Tallies amount unto 20563 l. 16 s. 8 d. Whence he observed First That there ran a trade of Falshood toward the King throughout all this his dealing Secondly That this was a Device thought upon to prevent the wisdom of Parliament for by this means the Grant seems to have the face of valuable purchases whereas they were indeed free gifts Thirdly If the Title of those Lands should prove questionable it appearing by Record as if the King had received the money he was bound in honor to make restitution and yet the Duke had the profit But it may be said This was the Purchasors desire for their own security Of which objection he made this use That the Subjects generally took notice of so much Lands given to the Duke that there is good cause 〈◊〉 expect a Resumption In the second general branch of this Article concerning Money the first point observed was the Total sum received by him in Ten years space amounting to 162995 l. besides the Grant he hath of the Overplus above Three thousand pounds per annum to be made of the Third imposed upon Strangers goods and besides the Moyetie of Seven thousand pounds out of the Customs of Ireland which he is bound to pay to the King but whether it hath been paid or no is doubtful This he delivered as a Sum Estimative yet so computed as it may be more but not less And this Total ariseth by free gifts by Pensions to himself else by profit of Farms by Pensions to others For Offices whereof he received the profit as the Admiralty and Mastership of the Horse All which appear by a Schedule annexed to this Charge The Grievances consist in this That the Commonwealth hath been bereaved of the use and imployment of so Publick Treasure in a time of as great want and great occasions in this State as it hath had in many Ages when the expences of the Kings Court can hardly be supplied when his Houses and Castles are unfurnished when the Seas have been unguarded the Coasts subject to the incursion and spoil of Enemies by default of provision in the Navy to the dishonor of the Nation and damage of the Subjects and the hazard of the whole And the offence in this that the wants in the Navy and the Stores being within his own Charge he was no more sensible of them whereby it appears he preferred the serving of his own turn before his duty and before the safety of this State The second point observed in this branch was That the Duke under pretence of secret services hath procured great sums of money to be issued by Privy-seals to sundry persons named by himself but afterward imployed to his own use Hereof two instances are propounded The one of Eight thousand pounds paid to Sir Robert Pye 12 Aug. 1620. and by him disbursed for the Dukes purchase of Burleigh and Sir Robert Pye discharged by another Privy-seal 4 Iunii following The second instance is of Sixty thousand pounds paid to Burlimach by a Privy-seal in September 1625. Which time he rather noted because the Parliament at Oxford was broken up a little before out of discontent that the King was not supplied for the setting out of the Fleet which would have been done with a less sum For the proof of that the House of Commons will offer to your Lordships Witnesses The quality of this offence he left to their Lordships judgment yet propounding some things by way of enquiry from whence it might receive measure and proportion 1. Whether it had not affinity with the Crime in the Civil Law called Crimen peculatus which was when a man did unjustly turn to his own use that money which was either sacra dedicated to Gods service religiously or religiosa used about Funerals and Monuments of the dead or publica of which kind the matter now in question is And this offence by that Law was Death and Confiscation of goods and estate Which he notes the rather that their Lordships might perceive that in the wisest State the Publick Treasure was held in the same reputation with that which was dedicated to God and Religion 2. And whether it doth not resemble◠other Crime in the same Law termed Crimen falsi and is defined to be when a man shall imitatione veri suum compendium alieno dispendio per dolum facere by semblance of truth make gain to himself of other mens losses Which in the case of a Bondman was Death and in case of another man Banishment and Confiscation or otherwise very penal as the Judges should find cause of moderation or rigor in the nature and circumstances of the Fact 3. Whether their Lordships will estimate it according to any Sentences in the Star-chamber which have been very frequent in cases of Fraud Or according to the Common-Law which so much detests this kind of dealing as that they term it Covin and make it vitiate ordinary and lawful actions Or lastly whether they will measure it by that Judgment which the Duke hath pass'd against himself in the guilt of his own Conscience Direct Actions are not afraid to appear open-faced but Injustice and Fraud desire to be masked with Subtilty and Closeness It were offence enough if there were no more but a cunning concealing of unthankfulness to hide his Majesties bounty or guilt of unworthiness as if he durst not avow the receit of that which he had not merited both which proceed from Malum culpae Or else that other kind of guilt which proceeds from Malum poenae the fear of punishment foreseeing this Inquisition into his actions and hoping under this disguise of Publick service to escape their Lordships censure The third point in this branch is That he hath received sundry sums of money intended for the maintenance of the Navy whereof there are two instances the one whereof is 20000 l. the other of 30000 l. both in Ianuary 1624. By Privy-seal by the which these sums are issued they appear to be Free gifts But by the affirmation of some in answer for the Duke it hath been said He was only the hand
the Denmark Forces had the advantage of the Ground Tilly being much scanted in the Rear of his Army for want of ground to place his Reserves in The Dane stood to the shock a while but was presently put to his Retreat and all his Infantry dispersed Train of Artillery taken and Two and twenty peeces of Cannon He lost many great Commanders in the fight and many were taken prisoners In the Moneth of September the King being informed of the disaster that had befaln his Uncle and principally also the King of Denmark whose engagement was chiefly for the cause of the Elector Palatine commanded his Council to advise by what means and ways he might fitly and speedily be furnished with moneys suitable to the importance of the undertaking Hereupon after a Consultation of divers days together they came to this Resolution That the urgency of Affairs not admitting the way of Parliament the most speedy equal and convenient means were by a general Loan from the Subject according as every man was assessed in the Rolls of the last Subsidy Upon which Result the King forthwith chose Commissioners for the Loan and caused a Declaration to be published wherein he alledged for this course of Supply the Reasons set down at large in his late Declaration touching the Dissolution of the Parliament Adding further That the urgency of the occasion would not give leave to the calling of a Parliament but assuring the People that this way should not be made a President for the time to come to charge them or their Posterity to the prejudice of their just and antient Liberties enjoyed under his most Noble Progenitors endeavoring thereby to root out of their mindes the suspition that he intended to serve himself of such ways to the abolishing of Parliaments And promising them in the word of a Prince first To repay all such sums of Money as should be lent without Fee or Charge so soon as he shall in any ways be enabled thereunto upon shewing forth the Acquittance of the Collectors testifying the Receipt thereof And secondly That not one penny so borrowed should be bestowed or expended but upon those Publick and General Services wherein every of them and the Body of the Kingdom their Wives Children and Posterity have their Personal and common Interest Private Instructions were given to the Commissioners how to behave themselves in this Negotiation As first That they should themselves for a good example to others lend unto his Majesty the several sums of money required of them testifying it by their names with their own hands That when they shall in his Majesties name require others to lend they may discern the said Commissioners forwardness Secondly To take for their guide those Rates at which men were assessed in the Book of the last Subsidy and to require the Loan of so much money as the entire rate and value comes to at which they are rated and set as namely he that is set at a Hundred pounds in Goods to lend a Hundred marks and he that is set at a Hundred pounds in Land to lend a Hundred pounds in money and so per rata for a greater or lesser sum Thirdly To use all possible endeavors to cause every man willingly and chearfully to lend opening unto them the necessity and unavoidableness of this course the Honor and Reputation of the Nation the true Religion and common safety of Prince and People of our Friends and Allies engaged in the common Cause that there is no time now of disputing but of acting Fourthly That they appoint the days of payment to be within Fourteen days and perswade such as shall be able to pay it at one entire payment the better to accommodate his Majesties occasion otherwise to accept of the one half at Fourteen days and the other to be paid before the Twentieth of December now next coming Fifthly That they Treat apart with every one of those that are to lend and not in the presence or hearing of any other unless they see cause to the contrary And if any shall refuse to lend and shall make delayes or excuses and persist in their obstinacy That they examine such persons upon Oath whether they have been dealt withal to deny or refuse to lend or to make an excuse for not lending Who hath dealt so with him and what speeches or perswasions he or they have used to him tending to that purpose And that they shall also charge every such person in his Majesties name upon his Allegiance not to disclose to any other what his Answer was Sixthly That they shew their discretion and affections by making choice of such to begin with who are likely to give the best examples and when they have a competent number of hands to the Roll or List of the Leaders that they shew the same to others to lead them in like manner Seventhly That they endeavor to discover whether any publickly or underhand be workers or perswaders of others to dissent from or dislike of this course or hinder the good disposition of others And that as much as they may they hinder all discourse about it and certifie to the Privy Council in writing the names qualities and dwelling places of all such refractory persons with all speed and especially if they shall discover any Combination or Confederacy against these proceedings Eightly That they let all men know whom it may concern that his Majesty is well pleased upon lending these sums required to remit all that which by Letters in his name was desired upon the late Benevolence for free Grant and what ever hath been already paid upon that account shall be accepted for part of this Loan and if it exceed the sum desired that the overplus shall be repaid without Fee or Charge so likewise for Privy Seals if any have been already paid But if not that the agreeing of the Loan of the sum required be excused of the payment of the Privy Seal Ninethly That they admit of no Suit to be made or Reasons to be given for the abating of any sum the time and instant occasion not admitting any such dispute which would but disturbe and protract the Sheriff Lastly The Commissioners were required and commanded upon their Faith and Allegiance to his Majesty to keep secret to themselves and not to impart or disclose these Instructions to others To the Imposition of Loan was added The burthen of Billeting of Soldiers formerly returned from Cadiz and the Moneys to discharge their Quarters were for the present levied upon the Countrey to be repaid out of sums collected upon the general Loan The Companies were scattered here and there in the Bowels of the Kingdom and governed by Martial Law The King gave Commissions to the Lords Lieutenants and their Deputies in case of Felonies Robberies Murders Outrages or Misdemeanors committed by Mariners Soldiers or other disorderly persons joyning with them to proceed according to certain Instructions to the Tryal
Decemviri there is some Claudius Appius that seek their own revenges we complain of Loans and Impositions but when Deputy Lieutenants may send warrants to imprison our persons at pleasure if we pay not what they sent for it concern us to preserve the Country in Freedom and to consider of this kind of people There is now necessity brought in for an argument all know that necessity is an armed man and that necessity is an evil Councellor I would we had never known that Council we are almost grown like the Turks who send their Janizaries who place the Halberd at the door and there he is master of the house We have Soldiers billetted and warrants to collect money which if they do not the Soldiers must come and rifle The Romans sending one into Spain found no greater complaint then the discontent that did arise from Soldiers placed amongst them I would you would look into Fortescue where he puts the Prince in minde what misery he saw where Soldiers were put upon the people But saith he No man is forced to take Soldiers but Inns and they to be paid by them I desire we resort to his Majesty for redress and to reduce all into bounds The other way of Grievance is a Judgement in a legal course of proceeding we have had three Judgements of late times all exceeding one another in prejudice of the Subject The first was That that was judged in all formality the Postnati Case which people I honor for we finde many of them love us more then we do our selves I do not complain of it but onely mention it The other Judgement was for Impositions which was given in the Exchequer and this House two times after damned that Judgement how remiss our eyes are upon that I grieve to see There is a Judgement if I may so call it a fatal Judgement against the Liberty of the Subject Mich. 3. Car. in Sir Iohn Heveninghams case argued at the Bar and pronounced but by one alone I can live although another without title be put to live with me nay I can live although I pay Excises and Impositions for more then I do but to have my liberty which is the soul of my life taken from me by power and to be pent up in a Goal without remedy by Law and this to be so adjudged to perish in Goal O Improvident Ancestors Oh unwise forefathers to be so curious in providing for the quiet possession of our Lands and Liberties of Parliament and to neglect our persons and bodies and to let them die in prison and that durante beneplacito remediless If this be Law what do we talk of our Liberties why do we trouble our selves with the dispute of Law Franchises Propriety of goods It is the Summa totalis of all miseries I will not say it was erroneous but I hope we shall speak our minds when that Judgment comes here to be debated What may a man call his if not Liberty Having passed in some confusion in the fashion of my deâ—â—very I conclude We will consider two particulars his Majesty and his People his Majesty cals to us and craves our assistance to revive again his Honor and the Honor of the Nation The people send us as we hope with that direction that we shall return to them with that Olive-branch that assurance of being free from those calamities under which they can hardly breathe Our sins have brought on us those miseries let us all bring our Portion to make up the wall we come with Loyal hearts his Majesty shall find that it is we that are his faithfull Councellors let all Sycophants be far removed from his Majesty since we cannot help this Majesty without opening our Grievances let us discharge our duties therein yet while we seek Liberty we will not forget Subjection all things a State can be capable of either blessings or punishments depend on this meeting if any think the King may be supplied and the Commonwealth preserved without redress of Grievances he is deceived The Kings of England were never more glorious then when they trusted their Subjects let us make all haste to do the Errand for which we came let the House consider to prepare our Grievances fit for his Majesties view not to make a Law to give us new Liberties but Declaratory with respective Penalties so that those which violate them if they would be vile they should fear infamy with men and then we shall think of such a Supply as never a Prince received and with our monies we shall give him our hearts and give him a new people raised from the dead Then I hope this Parliament will be entituled The Parliament of wonders and Gods judgements diverted and these beams of goodness shall give us life and we shall go home to our Countries and leave our Posterity as free as our Ancestors left us But this day as also the two next dayes Debate produced no Resolutions the time being spent in a general opening of Grievances from all parts of the Kingdom Monday 24 March Secretary Cook renewed the motion of Supplies for his Majesty yet so that Grievances be likewise taken into Consideration We all think fit said he that both these go hand in hand together but let me put you in mind of that which concerns the King let him have the precedency of honor if not of time let the heads of the Kings Supply first be propounded this will be an honor to the King and will do service to the House the end of this Parliament is the subsistence of the King as he himself hath declared and such a Command is not to be slighted the King himself propounded it and then he will agree with us in other requests that are fit for a King to give we that have the happiness to attend his Majesty can tell you that no King is more ready to hear the complaints of his Subjects and withal you know no King is more sensible of all reproaches which touch his Honor. Will it not be fit to grant him this Honor to have the Precedency It was the Speech of an ancient Parliament man Let us deal gently with our King by these Laws that we make we do bind our selves and it is an addition of his power None that dies but leaves his heir to the favor of the King none that lives but needs the favor of the King we having made our first union with God it is next intended that we be at one with our King is it not fit we be at peace with our Head his Majesty desires it and expects it After this unity with our head there is consideration to be had of unity with our selves after this we shall be all knit in one body we shall all pronounce clearly Shiboleth and we shall consider of the Grievances and irregularities of the times which none desires to be reformed more then his Majesty and those whom you think most averse Let us take
the best way for Reformation And will not this be a happy union if the whole body concur to reduce all into regularity if Laws be our Birth-rights we shall hereby recover them and their splendor this will have good aspect abroad and it will give courage to our men that have been despised and will prevent practises to continue divisions amongst us both at home and abroad The first Sower of seeds of distractions amongst us was an Agent of Spain Gondomar that did his Master great service here and at home Since that we have had other Ministers that have blown the fire The Ambassador of France told his Master at home what he had wrought here the last Parliament namely divisions between King and people and he was rewarded for it Whilst we sit here in Parliament there was another intended Parliament of Jesuites and other well-willers within a mile of this place that this is true was discovered by Letters sent to Rome The place of their meeting is changed and some of them are there where they ought to be if you look in your Calendar there is a day of St. Ioseph it was called in the Letter the Oriental day and that was the day intended for their meeting I speak this to see Gods hand to work our union in their division they are not more rent from us then they are from themselves I desire the meanest judgement to consider what may follow by giving precedency to his Majesty and by so doing we shall put from our selves many imputations If we give any occasion of breach it is a great disadvantage if otherwise it is an obligation to his Majesty which his Majesty will not forget Then he made a motion that the same Committee may hear Propositions of general heads of Supply and afterward go to other businesses of the day for Grievances Others preferred the Consideration of Grievances as a particular root that invades the main liberty of the Subject It is the Law said they that glorious fundamental Right whereby we have power to give we desire but that his Majesty may see us have that right therein which next to God we all desire and then we doubt not but we shall give his Majesty all supply we can The time was when it was usual to desire favors for sowing discords as Gondomar did for Raleigh's head But the debates of this day came to no Resolution The day following Mr Secretary Cook tendred the House certain Propositions from the King touching Supply and told them That his Majesty finding time precious expects that they should begin speedily lest they spend that time in deliberation which should be spent in action that he esteems the Grievances of the House his own and stands not on Precedence in point of honor Therefore to satisfie his Majesty let the same Committee take his Majesties Propositions into consideration and let both concur whether to sit on one in the forenoon or the other in the afternoon it is all one to his Majesty Hereupon the House turned themselves into a Committee and commanded Edward Littleton Esquire unto the Chair and ordered the Committee to take into Consideration the Liberty of the Subject in his Person and in his Goods and also to take into Consideration his Majesties Supply In this Debate the Grievances were reduced to six Heads as to our Persons 1. Attendance at the Council Board 2. Imprisonment 3. Confinement 4. Designation for Forein Imployment 5. Martial-Law 6. Undue Proceedings in matter of Judicature The first matter debated was the Subjects Liberty in his Person the particular instance was in the Case of Sir Iohn Heveningham and those other Gentlemen who were imprisoned about Loan-money and thereupon had brought their Habeas Corpus had their Case argued and were nevertheless remanded to Prison and a Judgment as it was then said was entred Whereupon Mr. Creswell of Lincolns-Inn spake to this purpose Justice said he is the Life and the Heart-blood of the Common-wealth and if the Commonwealth bleed in the master vein all the Balm in Gilead is but in vain to preserve this our Body of Policy from ruin and destruction Justice is both Columna Corona Reipublicae She is both the Columne and the Pillar the Crown and the Glory of the Commonwealth this is made good in Scripture by the Judgement of Solomon the wisest King that ever Raigned upon Earth For first She is the Pillar for he saith By Justice the Throne shall be Established Secondly She is the Crown for he saith That by Justice a Nation shall be Exalted Our Laws which are the rules of this Justice they are the ne plus ultra to both the King and the Subject and as they are the Hercules Pillar so they are the Pillar to every Hercules to every Prince which he must not pass Give me leave to resemble her to Nebuchadnezar's Tree for she is so great that she doth shade not onely the Palace of the King and the House of Nobles but doth also shelter the Cottage of the poorest Begger Wherefore if either now the blasts of indignation or the unresistable violater of Laws Necessity hath so bruised any of the Branches of this Tree that either our Persons or Goods or Possessions have not the same shelter as before yet let us not therfore neglect the root of this great Tree but water it with our Tears that so these bruised Branches may be recovered and the whole Tree again prosper and flourish I know well that Cor regis inscrutabile and that Kings although they are but men before God yet they are gods before men And therefore to my gracious and dread Soveraign whose vertues are true qualities ingenerate both in his judgment and nature let my arm be cut off nay let my soul not live that day that I shall dare to lift up my arm to touch that forbidden Fruit those Flowers of his Princely Crown and Diadem But yet in our Eden in this Garden of the Commonwealth as there are the Flowers of the Sun which are so glorious that they are to be handled only by Royal Majesty So are there also some Daysies and wholesom Herbs which every common hand that lives and labors in this Garden may pick and gather up and take comfort and repose in them Amongst all which this Oculus Diei this bona libertas is one and the chief one I will now descend to the Question wherein I hold with all dutiful submission to better judgments that these acts of Power in imprisoning and consining of his Majesties Subjects in such manner without any Declaration of the Cause are against the fundamental Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom The first from the great favor which the Law doth give unto and the great care which it hath ever taken of the Liberty and safety of this Kingdom To proceed therefore in maintenance of my first reasons I find our Law doth so much favor the Subjects Liberty of
onely an Award and no Judgement and in the L. Chief Justice his Argument there was no word spoken that the King might commit or detain without cause For the King to commit a man is indignum Regi Mercy and Honor flow immediately from the King Judgement and Justice are his too but they flow from his Ministers the Sword is carried before him but the Scepter in his hands These are true Emblems of a good King The Law admits not the King power of detaining in Prison at pleasure In antient times Prisons were but pro custodia carceres non ad poenam sed ad custodiam Admit the King may commit a man yet to detain him as long as he pleaseth is dangerous and then a man shall be punished before his offence Imprisonment is a Maceration of the body and horror to the minde it is vita pejor morte Mr Selden last of all produced the Statutes Presidents and Book-Cases which were expresseâ— in point to the Question in hand and the House commanded that Case in the Lord Chief Justice Andersons Book all of his own hand-writing to be openly read And for the Presidentâ— cited by the Kings Council in 34 years of the Queen as the Opinion of all the Judges certainly there was a great mistake in it and the mistake was the greater when it passed as currant by the Judges of the Kings-Bench in the last Case of the Habeas Corpus And that the truth of the Opinion may clearly appear let us read the words out of the Lord Chief Justice Andersons Report out of the Book written with his own hand which will contradict all those Apocrypha Reports that go upon the Case The words of the Report were these Divers persons fueront committes a several temps a several prysons sur pleasure sans bon cause parte de queux estiant amesnes en banck le Roy. Et parte en le Commune banck fuerunt accordant a le ley de la terre mise a large discharge de le imprisonment pur que aucunt grands fueront offendus procure un commandment a les Iudges que ils ne fera ainsi apres Ceo nient meins les Iudges ne surcease mes per advise enter eux ils fesoint certain Articles le tenour de queux ensus deliver eux al seignieurs Chancelor Treasurer eux subscribe avec touts lour mainies les Articles sont come erisnoint We her Majesties Iustices of both Benches and Barons of the Exchequer desire your Lordships that by some good means some order may be taken that her Highness Subjects may not be committed or detained in prison by commandment of any Noble man or Councellor against the Laws of the Realm either else to help us to have access to her Majesty to the end to become Suitors to her for the same for divers have been imprisoned for suing ordinary Actions and Suits at the Common-Law until they have been constrained to leave the same against their wills and put the same to order albeit Iudgement and Execution have been had therein to their great losses and griefs for the aid of which persons her Majesties Writs have sundry times been directed to sundry persons having the Custody of such persons unlawfully imprisoned upon which Writs no good or lawfull cause of imprisonment hath been returned or certified Whereupon according to the Laws they have been discharged of their imprisonment some of which persons so delivered have been again committed to prison in secret places and not to any common or ordinary Prison or lawfull Officer or Sheriff or other lawfully authorized to have or keep a Goal So that upon complaint made for their delivery the Queens Courts cannot tell to whom to direct her Majesties Writs and by this means Iustice cannot be done And moreover divers Officers and Serjeants of London have been many times committed to Prison for lawfull executing of her Majesties Writs sued forth of her Majesties Court at Westminster and thereby her Majesties Subjects and Officers are so terrified that they dare not sue or execute her Majesties Laws her Writs and Commandments Divers others have been sent for by Pursevants and brought to London from their dwellings and by unlawfull imprisonment have been constrained not only to withdraw their lawfull suits but have been also compelled to pay the Pursevants so bringing such persons great sums of money All which upon complaint the Iudges are bound by Office and Oath to relieve and help by and according to her Majesties Laws And where it pleaseth your Lordships to will divers of us to set down in what Cases a Prisoner sent to custody by her Majesty or her Councel are to be detained in Prison and not to be delivered by her Majesties Court or Iudges We think that if any person be committed by her Majesties command from her person or by order from the Council board and if any one or two of her Council commit one for high Treason such persons so in the Cases before committed may not be delivered by any of her Courts without due Trial by the Law and Iudgement of acquittal had Nevertheless the Iudges may award the Queens Writ to bring the bodies of such Prisoners before them and if upon return thereof the causes of their commitment be certified to the Iudges as it ought to be then the Iudges in the Cases before ought not to deliver him but to remand the Prisoner to the place from whence he came which cannot conveniently be done unless notice of the cause in general or else in special be given to the Keeper or Goaler that shall have the Custody of such a Prisoner All the Iudges and Barons did subscribe their names to these Articles Ter. Paschae 34 Eliz. and delivered one to the L. Chancellor and another to the L. Treasurer after which time there did follow more quietness then before in the Cause before mentioned After the reading of this Report Sir Edw. Cook said That of my own knowledge this Book was written with my L. Andersons own hand it is no flying report of a young Student I was Solicitor then and Treasurer Burley was as much against Commitment as any of this Kingdom It was the White Staves that made this stir Let us draw towards a conclusion The Question is whether a Feeman can be imprisoned by the King without setting down the cause I leave it as bare as Aesops Crow they that argue against it Humores moti non remoti corpus destruunt It is a Maxime the Common-Law hath admeasured the Kings Prerogative that in no Case it can prejudice the Inheritance of the Subjects had the Law given the Prerogative to that which is taken it would have set some time to it else mark what would follow I shall have an Estate of Inheritance for life or for years in my Land or propriety in my Goods and I shall be a Tenant at will for my liberty I shall have
the liberties and priviledges of Parliament shall onely be discussed there and not in other Courts nor by the Common nor Civill-Law see this case more at large in Selden's Notes upon Fortescue f. 42. 11 R. 2. Roll of the Processe and Iudgment An appeal of treason was exhibited against the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and others and there the advice of the Sages of the one Law and the other being required but because the appeal concerned persons which are Peers of the Realm which are not tryed else-where then in Parliament and not in an inferiour Court 28 H. 6. numb 18. There being a question in Parliament concerning Precedency between the Earl of Arundell and the Earl of Devon the opinion of the Iudges being demanded they answered That this question ought to be determined by the Parliament and by no other 31 H. 6. numb 25 26. During the prorogation of the Parliament Thorp that was the Speaker was out in Execution at the Suit of the Duke of York and upon the re-assembly of the Parliament the Commons made Suit to the King and Lords to have their Speaker delivered Upon this the Lords demand the opinion of the Iudges who answer That they ought not to determine the priviledges of the High Court of Parliament 4 ly This accusation in Parliament is in legall course of justice and therefore the accuser shall never be impeached 13 H. 7. and 11 Eliz. Dy. 285. Forging of false deeds brought against a Peer of the Realm Action de scandalis Magnatum doth not lie C. 4.14 Cutler and Dixy's case where divers cases are likewise put to this purpose 35 H. 6.15 If upon the view of the body the slayer cannot be found the Coronâ—r ought to enquire Who first found the dead body and if the first finder accuse another of the murder that is afterward acquit he shall not have an action upon the case for it was done in legall manner So it is the duty of the Commons to enquire of the grievances of the Subjects and the causes thereof and doing it in a legall manner 1â— H. 6.19 8 H. 4.6 in conspiracy it is a good plea that he was one of the Indictors And 20 H. 6.5 that he was a grand-Iury-man and informed his companions And 21 E. 4.6 7. and 35 H. 6.14 that he was a Iustice of Peace and informed the Iury 27 ass p. 12. is to the same purpose And if a Iustice of Peace the first finder a Iuror or Indictor shall not be punished in such cases à fortiori a Member of the House of Commons shall not who as 1 H. 7.4 is a Iudge 27 ass p. 44. may be objected where two were indicted of conspiracy because they maintained one another but the reason of the said case was because Maintenance is matter forbidden by the Law but Parliamentary accusation which is our matter is not forbidden by any Law C. 9.56 there was conspiracy in procuring others to be indicted And it is true for there it was not his duty to prefer such accusation 2 The accusation was extra-judicial and out of Court but it was not so in our case 3 Words spoken in Parliament which is a superiour Court cannot he questioned in this Court which is inferior 3 E. 3.19 and Stamford 153. will be objected where the Bishop of Winchester was arraigned in this Court because he departed the Parliament without license there is but the opinion of Scroop and the case was entred P. 3. E. 3.19 And it is to be observed that the plea of the Bishop there was never over-ruled From this I gather that Scroop was not constant to his opinion which was suddain being in the same Term in which the plea was entred or if he were yet the other Iudges agreed not with him and also at last the Bishop was discharged by the Kings Writ From this I gather that the opinion of the Court was against the King as in Pl. 20. in Fogassas's case where the opinion of the Court was against the King the party was discharged by privy Seal 1 and 2 Phil. and Mar. hath been objected where an Information in this Court was preferred against Mr. Ployden and other Members of the House of Commons for departing from the House without license But in that case I observe these matters 1. That this information depended during all the life of the Queen and at last was sine die by the death of the Queen 2. In the said case no plea was made to the Iurisdiction of the Court as here it is 3. Some of them submitted themselves to the Fine because it was easie for it was but 53. 4 d. But this cannot be urged as a president because it never came injudgment and no opinion of the Court was delivered therein And it is no argument that because at that time they would not plead to the jurisdiction therefore we now cannot if we would 4 These offences were not done in the Parliament House but else-where by their absence of which the Country may take notice but not of our matters being done in Parliament And absence from Parliament is an offence against the Kings Summons to Parliament 20 R. 2. Parliament-Roll 12. Thomas Hacksey was indicted of high-treason in this Court for preferring a Petition in Parliament but 1 H. 4. num 90. he preferred a Petition to have this Iudgment voided and so it was although that the King had pardoned him before And 1 H. 4. numb 104. all the Commons made Petition to the same purpose because this tends to the destruction of their priviledges And this was likewise granted 4 H. 8. c. 8. Strood's case That all condemnations imposed upon one for preferring of any Bill speaking or reasoning in Parliament are void And this hath alwaies been conceived to be a generall Act because the prayers time words and persons are generall and the answer to it is generall for a generall act is alwaies answered with Le Roy voit and a particular Act with Soit droit fait al partyes And 33 H. 6.17.18 A generall Act is alwaies inrolled and so this is 2 ly For the second matter the contempt to the command of the Adjournment 18 Jac. it was questioned in Parliament Whether the King can adjourn the Parliament although it be without doubt that the King can prorogue it And the Iudges resolve that the King may adjourn the House by Commission and 27 Eliz. it was resolved accordingly But it is to be observed that none was then impeached for moving that question 2 It is to be observed that they resolve that the adjournment may be by Commission but not resolved that it may be by a verball command signified by another and it derogates not from the Kings prerogative that he cannot so do no more then in the case of 26 H. 8.8 that he cannot grant one acre of land by parol The King himself may adjourn the House in person or under the great Seal but not by verball message
upon the suddain as occasion is offered And there is no necessity that the King should expect a new Parliament The Lords may grant Commissions to determine matters after the Parliament ended but the House of Commons cannot do so And also a new House of Commons consists of new Men which have no conusance of these offences 1 H. 4. The Bishop of Carlile for words spoken in the Parliament that the King had not right to the Crown was arraigned in this Court of high-treason and then he did not plead his priviledge of Parliament but said That he was Episcopus unctus c. 5 ly 4 H. 8. Strode's case hath been objected But this is but a particular act although it be in print for Rastall intitles it by the name of Strode so the title Body and proviso of the Act are particular 6 ly That this is an inferiour Court to the Parliament therefore c. To this I say That even sitting the Parliament this Court of B. R. and other Courts may judge of their priviledges as of a Parliament-man put in execution c. and other cases It is true that the Iudges have oft-times declined to give their iudgment upon the privileges of Parliament sitting the Court But from this it followes not that when the offence is committed there and not punished and the said Court dissolved that therefore the said matter shall not be questioned in this Court 7 ly By this means the priviledges of Parliament shall be in great danger if this Court may judge of them But I answer That there is no danger at all for this Court may judge of Acts of Parliament 8 ly Perhaps these matters were done by the Uotes of the House or if they be offences it is an imputation to the House to say that they had neglected to punish them But this matter doth not appear And if the truth were so these matters might be given in evidence 9 ly There is no president in the case which is a great presumption of Law But to this I answer That there was never any president of such a fact therefore there cannot be a president of such a judgment And yet in the time of Queen Elizabeth it was resolved by Brown and many other Iustices that offences done in Parliament may be punished out of Parliament by imprisonment or otherwise And the case of 3 E. 3.19 is taken for good Law by Stamf. and Fitzh And 22 E. 3. and 1 Mar. accord directly with it But it hath been objected that there was no plea made to the Iurisdiction But it is to be obser-served that Ployden that was a learned man was one of the Defendanâ—s and he pleaded not to the Iurisdiction but pleaded license to depart And the said Information depended during all the Reigne of Queen Mary during which time there were four Parliaments and they never questioned this matter But it hath been further objected That the said case differs from our case because that there the offence was done out of the House and this was done within the House But in the said case if license to depart be pleaded it ought to be tryed in Parliament as well as these offences here Therefore c. And the same day the Iudges spake briefly to the case and agreed with one voice That the Court as this case is shall have Iurisdiction although that these offences were committed in Parliament Afterwards the Parliament which met the 3d. of Novemb. 1640. upon Report made by Mr. Recorder Glyn of the state of the severall and respective cases of Mr. Hollis Mr. Selden and the rest of the imprisoned Members of the Parliament in tertio Caroli touching their extraordinary sufferings for their constant affections to the Liberties of the Kingdom expressed in that Parliament And upon Arguments made in the House thereupon did upon the 6th of July 1641. passe these ensuing Votes which in respect of the reference they have in these last mentioned proceedings we have thought fit though out of order of time to insert viz. Iuly the 6th 1641. REsolved upon the Question that the issuing out of the Warrants from the Lords and others of the Privy Councill compelling Mr. Hollis and the rest of the Members of that Parliament 3. Car. during the Parliament to appeare before them is a breach of the priviledge of Parliament by those Privy Counsellours Resolved c. That the Committing of Mr. Hollis and the rest â—f the Lords and others of the Privy Councill dureing the Parliament is a breach of the priviledge of Parliament by those Lords and others Resolved c. That the searching and sealing of the Chamber Study and Papers of Mr. Hollis Mr. Selden and Sir Iohn Eliot being Members of this House and dureing the Parliament and issuing of warrants to that purpose was a breach of the priviledge of Parliament and by those that executed the same Resolved c. That the exhibiting of an Information in the Court of Star-Chamber against Mr. Hollis and the rest for matters done by them in Parliament being members of Parliament and the same so appearing in the Information is a breach of the priviledge in Parliament Resolved c. That Sir Robert Heath and Sir Humphrey Davenport Sir Hennage Finch Mr. Hudson and Sir Robert Berkly that subscribed their names to the Information are guilty thereby of the breach of priviledge of Parliament Resolved c. That there was delay of Justice towards Mr. Hollis and the rest that appeared upon the Ha. Corp. in that they were not bayled in Easter and Trinity Tearm 5. Car. Resolved c. That Sir Nicholas Hide then chief Justice of the Kings Bench is guilty of this delay Resolved c. That Sir William Jones then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench is guilty of this delay Resolved c. That Sir Iames Whitlock Knight then one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench is not guilty of this delay Ordered That the further debate of this shall be taken into Consideration on to morrow Morning Iuly the 8th 1641. Resolved upon the Question That Sir George Crook Knight then one of the Judges of the Kings Bench is not guilty of this delay That the continuance of Mr. Hollis and the rest of the Members of Parliament 3. Car. in Prison by the then Judges of the Kings Bench for not putting in sureties of the good behaviour was without just or legall cause That the exhibiting of the Information against Mr. Hollis Sir Iohn Eliot and Mr. Valentine in the Kings Bench being members of Parliament for matters done in Parliament was a breach of the priviledge of Parliament That the over-ruling of the plea pleaded by Mr. Hollis Sir Iohn Eliot and Mr. Valentine upon the Information to the Jurisdiction of the Court was against the Law and priviledge of Parliament That the Judgement given upon a Nihil dicit against Mr. Hollis Sir Iohn Eliot and Mr. Valentine and fine thereupon imposed and
Judgment and Execution of such Offenders as in time of War and some were executed by those Commissions Nevertheless the Soldiers brake out into great disorders they mastered the people disturbed the peace of Families and the Civil Government of the Land there were frequent Robberies Burglaries Rapes Rapines Murthers and Barbarous Cruelties Unto some places they were sent for a punishment and where ever they came there was a general outcry The High-ways were dangerous and the Markets unfrequented they were a terror to all and an undoing to many Divers Lords of the Council were appointed to repair into their several Countreys for the advancement of the Loan and were ordered to carry a List of the names as well of the Nobility and Privy Counsellors as of the Judges and Serjeants at Law that had subscribed to lend or sent in money for the Publick service to be a Patern and leading Example to the whole Nation But Sir Randolph Crew shewing no zeal for the advancing thereof was then removed from his place of Lord Chief Justice and Sir Nicholas Hide succeeded in his room A person who for his parts and abilities was thought worthy of that preferment yet nevertheless came to the same with a prejudice coming in the place of one so well beloved and so suddenly removed but more especially by reason the Duke appeared in his advancement to express a grateful Acknowledgment to that Knight for the care and pains he took in drawing the Dukes Answer to the Impeachment in Parliament against him This business of the Loan occasioned a Complaint to the Lords of the Council against the Bishop of Lincoln for publickly speaking words concerning it which was conceived to be against the King and Government Whereupon Sir Iohn Lamb and Dr. Sibthorpe informed the Council to this purpose That many were grieved to see the Bishop of Lincoln give place to unconformable Ministers when he turned his back to those that were conformable and how the Puritans ruled all with him and that divers Puritans in Leicestershire being Convented his Lordship would not admit proceedings to be had against them That Dr. Sibthorpe being desired to stay at Leicester this year as Commissary for the High Commission there the Countrey being much over-spread with Puritanism Sir Iohn Lamb and the said Doctor did inform the Bishop of Lincoln then at Bugden what Factious Puritans there were in the County who would not come up to the Table to receive the Communion kneeling and that there were unlawful Fasts and Meetings kept in the County and one Fast that held from nine in the Forenoon till eight at night and that Collections for moneys were made without Authority upon pretence for the Palatinate And therefore they desired leave from the Bishop to proceed against those Puritans Ex Officio The said Bishop replied He would not meddle against the Puritans for his part he expected not another Bishoprick they might complain of them if they would to the Council Table for he was under a Cloud already and he had the Duke of Buckingham for his Enemy and he would not draw the Puritans upon him for he was sure they would carry all things at last Besides he said the King in the First year of his Reign had given Answer to a Petition of the Lower House in favor of the Puritans It appeared also by the Information of others who were present at the Conference at Bugden That Sir Iohn Lamb and Dr. Sibthorpe did notwithstanding the Bishops aversness again press the Bishop to proceed against the Puritans in Leicestershire the Bishop then asked them what manner of people they were and of what condition For his part he knew of none To which Sir Iohn Lamb replied Dr. Sibthorpe being present That they seem to the World to be such as would not Swear Whore nor Drink but yet would Lie Cozen and Deceive That they would frequently hear two Sermons a day and repeat the same again too and afterwards pray and sometimes fast all day long Then the Bishop asked whether those places where those Puritans were did lend money freely upon the Collection of the Loan To which Sir Iohn Lamb and Dr. Sibthorpe replied That they did generally resolve to lend freely Then said the Bishop no man of discretion can say That that place is a place of Puritans For my part said the Bishop I am not satisfied to give way to proceedings against them At which Dr. Sibthorpe was much discontented and said He was troubled to see that the Church was no better regarded These Informations being transmitted to the Council Table were ordered to be sealed up and committed to the Custody of Mr. Trumbal one of the Clerks of the Council nevertheless the Bishop of Lincoln used such means as he got a Copy of them For which and some other matters an Information was afterwards preferred against him in the Star-Chamber Of which more at large when we come in our next Volume to treat of the great and high proceedings of that Court. Bishop Laud not long before this Passage with the Bishop of Lincoln was informed That the Bishop of Lincoln endeavored to be reconciled to the Duke and that night that he was so informed he dreamed That the Bishop of Lincoln came with Iron Chains but returned freed from them That he leaped upon a Horse departed and he could not overtake him The Interpretation of this Dream may not unfitly be thus applied His Chains might signifie the imprisonment of the Bishop of Lincoln afterwards in the Tower his returning free to his being set at Liberty again at the meeting of the Parliament his leaping on Hors-back and departing to his going into Wales and there commanding a Troop in the Parliaments Service and that Bishop Laud could not overtake him might portend that himself should become a Prisoner in the same place and be rendred thereby incapable to follow much less to overtake him At this time the King had Six thousand Foot Soldiers in the Service of the United Provinces under the Command of Sir Charls Morgan Sir Edward Herbert Sir Iohn Burlacy Sir Iames Leviston c. for the assistance of the States against the increasing power of Spinola Upon the present occasion these Forces were called off from the States services to joyn with the King of Denmark under the Command of Sir Charls Morgan against the common enemy the King of Spain and his adherents Some few moneths after One thousand three hundred foot more were embarqued at Hull to be transported by Captain Conisby to the Town of Stoad in Germany and there to be delivered over to the charge of the aforesaid Sir Charls Morgan General of the English Forces in the service of the King of Denmark a person of known Valor and fit for conduct of an Army But the Assessment of the general Loan did not pass currantly with the people for divers persons refused to subscribe their names
and others was now moved by Mason to have the resolution of the Iudges and the Court with one voice said That they are now content that they shall be bailed but that they ought to find Sureties also for the good behaviour And Jones Iustice said that so it was done in the case which had been often remembered to another purpose to wit Russell's case in 9 E. 3. To which Mr. Selden answered with whom all the other Prisoners agreed in opinion That they have the Sureties ready for the bayl but not for the good behaviour and desire that the bayl might first be accepted and that they be not urged to the other Sir Robert Heath the Kings Atturney-generall exhibited Information in this Court against Sir John Eliot Knight Denzill Hollis and Benjamin Valentine Esquires the effect of which was That the King that now is for weighty causes such a day and year did summon a Parliament and to that purpose sent his Writ to the Sheriff of Cornwall to chuse two Knights by vertue whereof Sir John Eliot was chosen and returned Knight for Cornwall And that in the same manner the other Defendants were elect Burgesses of other places for the same Parliament And shewed further that Sir John Finch was chosen for one of the Citizens of Canterbury and was Speaker of the House of Commons And that the said Eliot publickly and malitiously in the House of Commons to raise sedition between the King his Nobles and People uttered these words That the Councill and Judges had all conspired to trample under-foot the Liberties of the Subjects He further shewed that the King had power to call adjourn and dissolve Parliaments And that the King for divers reasons had a purpose to have the House of Commons adjourned and gave direction to Sir Joâ—n Finch then the Speaker to move as adjournment and if it should not be obeyed that he should forthwith come from the House to the King And that the Defendants by confederacy afore-hand spake a long and continued Speech which was recited verbatim in which were divers malitious and seditious words of dangerous consequence And to the intent that they might not be prevented of uttering their premeditate speeches their intention was that the Speaker should not go out of the Chair till they had spoken them the Defendants Hollis and Valentine lay violent hands upon the Speaker to the great afrightment and disturbance of the House And the Speaker being got out of the Chair they by violence set him in the Chair again so that there was a great tumult in the House And after the said speeches pronounced by Sir John Eliot Hollis did recapitulate them And to this information the Defendants have put in a plea to the Iurisdiction of the Court because these offences are supposed to be done in Parliament and ought not to be punished in this Court or in any other but in Parliament And the Atturney-Generall moved the Court to over-rule the plea to the Iurisdiction And that he said the Court might do although he had not demurred upon the plea. But the Court would not over-rule the plea but gave day to joyne in Demurrer this Tearm And on the first day of the next Tearm the Record shall be read and within a day after shall be argued at Barre But Hyde chief Iustice said to the Counsell of the Defendants So far light we will give you This is no new question but all the Iudges of England and Barons of the Exchequer before now have oft been assembled on this occasion and have with great patience heard the Arguments on both sides and it was resolved by them all with one voice That an offence committed in Parliament criminally or contemptuously the Parliament being ended rests punishable in an other Court Jones It is true that we all resolved That an offence committed in Parliament against the Crown is punishable after the Parliament in another Court and what Court shall that be but the Court of the Kings Bench in which the King by intendment sitteth Whitlock The question is now reduced to a narrow room for all the Iudges are agreed That an offence committed in Parliament against the King or his Government may be punished out of Parliament So that the sole doubt which now remains is Whether this Court can punish it And Crook agreed That so it had been resolved by all the Iudges because otherwise there would be a failer of Iustice. And by him If such an offence be punishable in another Court what Court shal punish it but this Court which is the highest Court in the Realm for criminall offences And perhaps not onely criminall actions committed in Parliament are punishable here but words also Mason of Lincolns-Inne argued for Sir John Eliot one of the Defendants The charges in the Information against him are three 1. For speeches 2. For contempts to the King in resisting the Adjournment 3. For conspiracy with the other Defendants to detain Mr. Speaker in the Chair In the discussion of these matters be argued much to the same intent which he had argued before upon an information brought in the Star-Chamber against the same Defendants and others for the same offences therefore his Argument is reported here very briefly 1 st For his speeches They contain matter of accusation against some great Peers of the Realm and as to them he said That the King cannot take notice of them The Parliament is a Councill and the grand Councill of the King and Councills are secret and close none other hath accesse to those Councills of Parliament and they themselves ought not to impart them without the consent of the whole House A Iury in a Leet which is sworn to enquire of offences within the said Iurisdiction are sworn to keep their own counsell so the House of Commons enquire of all grievances within the Kingdom and their counsells are not to be revealed And to this purpose was a Petition 2 H. 4. numb 10. That the King shall not give credit to any private reports of their proceedings To which the King assents therefore the King ought not to give credit to the information of these offences in this case 2 ly The words themselves contain severall accusations of great men and the liberty of accusation hath alwaies been Parliamentary 50 E. 3. Parliament-Roll numb 21. The Lord Latimer was impeached in Parliament for sundry offences 11 R. 2. the Arch-Bishop of York 18 H. 6. numb 18. the Duke of Suffolk 1 Mar. Dy. 93. the Duke of Norfolk 36 H. 6. numb 60. un Uickar Generall 2 3 E. 6. c. 18. the Lord Seymer 18 of King James the Lord of St. Albans Chancellor of England and 21 of King James Cranfield Lord Treasurer and 1 Car. the Duke of Buckingham 3 ly This is a priviledge of Parliament which is determinable in Parliament and not else-where 11 R. 2. numb 7. the Parliament-Roll Petition exhibited in Parliament and allowed by the King That