Common right What needed written Acts when as it was anciently esteemed part of his Corwne oath His Crowne oath is well knowne and may not be tryed by estimation but inspection The libellers estimation hath as litle proofe as authoritie He referrs the lawerlie mooting of this point to a booke called the rights of the Kingdome written it seemes by some Author of as much fidelitie in his quotations as this libeller in his narrations and to other law Tracts being neither his Element nor proper worke since the booke which he hath to answeare pretends to reason not to Authoritie And he holds reason to be the best Arbitratour and the law of law it selfe And it appeares by his writings that reason is neither his Element nor worke heere for had he vse of reason he would not referr vs to bookes that are onely of Authoritie to prove the ignorance and boldnes of the writer neither could reason judge it a law that a king should not dissolve a Parliament till all particular greivances were considered though the setting of it might prove an incurable greivance but his reason would have the Parliament defend the Kingdome with their votes as the Roman Senatours their Capitall with their robes against the Gaules The King must not be at such distance from the people in judging what is better and what worse That the people are not the best judges of what is better and what is worse the libeller himselfe acknowledges saying they are excessive in all their motions and is it not reason that the King then should be at such distance in judging but the libeller seekes to be at greate distance with truth that sayes the Kings owne words condemned him that he had not knowne as well with moderation to vse as with tarnestnes to desire his owne advantages Where as the King spake not of himselfe but others his words were If some men had knowne as well with moderation to vse as with earnestnes to desire advantages of doing good or evill Doth this man thinke reason the law of law or falshood the Master of both law and reason that soe palpably belyes the booke before him The King sayes a continuael Parliament he thought would keepe the Commonwealth in tune To this sayes to Libeller Iudge Commonwealth what proofes he gave that this boasted profession was ever in his thought The king doubtles thought not that every Parliament would keepe the Commonwealth in tune but a Parliament that preferred publique good before private faction The King saith as he relates him some gave out that I repented me of that setling Act. The Libeller sayes his owne Actions gave it out beyound all supposition for be went about soe soone after to abrogate it by the sword Heere the Libeller omitts a materiall word which the King vsed which was soone for the Kings words are that I soone repented It is well knowne that the wicked vse which the Traytours made of that setling Act might give the king just cause to repent him of it but as the king vsed not the sword till many Moneths after the passing of that Bill soe the cause of his Armes were the violent and Trayterous Actions of a faction not the abrogation of that Bill The King calls those Acts which he confesses tended to their good noe more Princely then friendly contributions as if sayes the Libeller to doe his dutie were of Courtesie and the giving backe of our Liberties stood at the mercy of his contribution He would have it beleived that Parents can doe nothing for their childrens good out of favour all is of dutie and noe thankes belongs to them from their children nor any from subjects to their Soveraignes or rulers for the greatest benefitts they receive by good Government and all the vigilance watchfullnes pietie of Princes for the peoples good is not at all thankes worthy theis are the Maximes of Rebells and if Kings will not yeelde vp their power they may be compelled and the quitting of Government for which Kings must give account to God is by theis mens Divinitie the giving backe of liberties being noe other then to give licence to all wickednes and beare the sword in vaine The kings sayes he doubts not but the affections of his people will compensate his sufferings for those Acts of confidence To this sayes the libeller not his confidence but his distrust brought him to his sufferings and he trusted nere the sooner for what he tells of their pietie and Religious strictnes but rather hated them as Puritans whome he allwayes sought to extirpate The libeller himselfe cannot deny but that if the king had not had confidence that those Acts of his would not have beē abused he would not have graunted them for if the had not been so confident it had been much more eligible for him to hav run the peril of a war without graunting them and wee have seene by experience that many as well as the king were deceived in those that profest pietie and Religious strictnes and though the king had just cause to hate the faction of the hipocriticall Puritan yet he thought that there could not soe much impietie lurke in many vnder such profession of pietie and Religious strictnes as hath since exceeded the most blasphemous Atheist and had the king sooner distrusted he had in humane reason prevented much of the Calamitie that hath befallen himselfe and his kingdome That those Acts of the Kings did not argue that he meant peace knowing that what he graunted out of feare he might assoone repeale by force It is noe argument that he would doe it because he might doe it but it is one of the libellers vsuall Arguments to conclude from the possibilitie to the being and there cannot be a greater Argument of a mans desire of peace then to part with his right to prevent a warr and by this rule of the libeller there must never be peace nor end of Rebellion but by the destruction of the king because their guilt is still vnsecure That the Tumults threatned to abuse all acts of grace and turne them into wantonesse This sayes the libeller is abusing of Scripture not becomming such a saint to adulterate sacred words from the grace of God to the acts of his owne grace And is it an abuse of Scripture to say the King did Acts of grace and whence then comes it to be an abuse of Scripture to say the people abused the Kings grace or turned it into wantonesse was it not a sin of wantonesse in the people and may it not be soe exprest without any abuse of Scripture Scripture is abused when it is applyed to a prophane ludicrous sense but the words heere are not transferred from a right signification There are diverse words that signifie both divine and humane Actions there is noe abuse of them in either sense And the libeller having excepted to the vse of an expression of Scripture presently makes bold with Scripture saying that
them Though Armyes have been defeated a good cause can never and though he would have his Trayterous faction beleive them that followed the king a defeated partie yet it seemes by his jealosie him selfe doth not Tyrants cannot sleepe while lawfull heires survive and the guilt of their consciences and vsurped power make their Enemies as terrible after they have lost Armyes as before When Rebells prevaile they declaime against Treason and in contempt of God and their consciences reproach such with their Crymes that most oppose them in their first Actions they made vse of the Kings name and authoritie their declarations cannot be retracted wherein they profest to be for King and Parliament that they fought not against the king but his evil councell The Cryme of fighting against the king was a Treason so knowne that shame as well as feare would have lessened their partie had they not made vse of the kings name pretended his authoritie and vnles they thinke that their assertions of apparent vntruths will have the same power over the reasons of men as their Armes have gotten over their persons they would not patch vp discourses with such incongruities objecting that the kings partie vsed his name and authoritie which vndoudtedly they had and which those men professe to destroy and which had been vseles to any had it not been the acknowledged power of the kingdome and a confessed Cryme to oppose it and which those Traytours would never have pretended had not the evidence of its right been so apparent nor have destroyed after so much vse of it had they not exceeded all former Traytours as farr as he did his Predecessours of whom the spirit of God saies there was none like him that sold himselfe to worke wickednes It s the drift of the Rebell partie to confirme and continue their power by the same Arts they have gained it deny justice to the memory of his Majest as before obedience to his Government Those whose power hath been gottē by the peoples credulitie would willingly deprive them of reason whereby they might see their errour which is the cause that the Rebells having misted many into the present mischeyfe by Calumnies of insufficiencie in his Majest and disaffection to the established Religion account any proofe published to the contrary the plot of a faction against their Rebell Common-wealth and although their often accesses to him and debates with him during his restraint and the observation of his devotion gave such proofe of both as diverse of their followers were vndeceived both in him and the cause they had prosecuted yet this they would have an effect of faction any relation of his Maj afflictions a designe His Maj actions neede no defence the Rebells impious actions against him are incapable of any this Author hath some reason to coniecture that all mention of the sufferings of his late Maj tends to the ruine of the Rebell power True narrations of the horrid Actions of Traytours though they recount the greatenes glory of theyr triumphs sting them with an expectation of vengeance destruction of their power There are a great number that since they have seene that booke thinke it had been agreat losse to the world if it had perished yet they are farr from designe by it and if it were published with any designe it was an innocent one to publish what a murthered King had left written of himselfe for the reason of his Actions and cleering of mistakes The designe is now the third time to corrupt the people to the dishonour of the present Government retarde a generall peace so needeful to this afflicted nation They cannot say any were corrupted that followed their King vnles the lawes their legall oaths and Scripture it selfe corrupted them for theis were the guides they followed and the Rebells may rest assured that if there were not these bonds vpon the loyall English humane Treatises though never so excellent would little move them to the losse of life and fortunes For the dishonour of that which he calls the present Government themselves have written enough though the King and his partie were silent Their power was gotten by often repeated propositions protestations of affection and loyaltie to his late Majest which they never meant to performe many false pretences to the people to defend the King and estabilshed lawes and Religion breach of oaths murther of the King and of theis nothing can be denyed by themselves and there is nothing can be said of any to dishonour beyound swearing and fore swearing Treason and Murther And can they thinke their peace is retarded by the Kings partie when themselves have so often sworne by the name af God in hipocrisie to deceive made Religion the Maske of sacriledge and murther and pretend pittie to the afflicted nation while they afflict it continue the same wickednes where by they brought the miserie vpon it They may be sure though they destroy the King and his partie God will raise them Enemies they thinke not of and prepare destroyers they feare not It s a Good deede he sajes to the living by remembring men of the truth of what they know to he misaffirmed to keepe them from entring into warr But it is wickednes to oppose truth and offer that to be beleived by men which they know to be false If this Author would remember men only of truth he would finde no adversary and if his partie would act accordingly there would be no neede of a new warr for then they would restore King and lawes but this Author by falsifying of Actions att corrupting of principles endeavours to draw men into a state of Rebellion against God and their King and make the warr endles the people helpeles and his pretended Charitie is more odious then the Hipocrites Almes this respecting only selfe glory that of this Author a snare to destroy others As to moment of soliditie he sayes in the booke it selfe stuft with nought els but the Common grounds of Tyranny and Poperie suguered a little over or any neede of answearing in respect of stayed and well principled men I take it on me as a worke assigned rather then by me chosen or affected He would have it thought there was no moment of soliditie because he hath none in this Iconoclastes stuft full of the common grounds of Rebellion confusion which are only of Moment to the support of vsurpation the measure of his well principeld men to whome a rayling libell is more convincing then a Logicall Argument That the booke is stuft with nought els but grounds of Tyrany and Popery when the most part of his exceptions comprehended not those heads is an Hiperbole vnbefitting any but such as had sacrificed shame and conscience to a wicked cause If the publishing of his Majest booke as he sajes conteyning nothing but grounds of Tyrany and Popery were a designe of his partie surely it must concurre with the Authors ends for
Treason in Kings to have sold Jewells of the Crowne would have made it some Cryme to have bought Jewells for the Crowne and it is noe Treason now to sell the Crowne Jewells and all by his cut throate crew The Parliament was not ignorant to what intent these summs were raysed their owne actions told all the world they were necessary to be raysed The Kings refusing to settle the military power in trustie hands vpon their petitions and doubting he would possesse himselfe of Hull they were necessitated by the turbulence and danger of the times of their owne authoritie to putt the Kingdome into a posture of defence and to send Sr. Iohn Hotham to take Hull into his possession How many lewde lyes have they sent abroade into the world that the King made warr vpon them and it was the Libellers owne pretence in the beginning of the last Chapter now plainly tells they seized Hull because they suspected the King intended it and because he would not settle the militia as they desired If he had no power over the Militia why did they petition him If the Parliament be his superiour why did they petition at all Doe superiours petition inferiours But what was that turbulence danger of the Kingdome was there any more then what themselves had made by rumours and Tumults and is not the seizing of a fort an Act of warr The King had attempted the same before And was that any cause for them because the King sends to his Castles or forts must they therefore take them from him And he sayes letters of the Lord Digby were intercepted wishing the King to retire to some safe place And therefore these Rebells would provide he should be safe in noe place The King offred to goe in person into Ireland and that he would Arme his guard from his Magazine of Hull The Parliament he sayes foreseeing the kings drift petition him that they might have leave to remove the Magazine of Hull to the Tower of London Soe carefull they were to have the Rebellion in Ireland proceede that they desired his Majest to forbeare his going into Ireland out of consideration of danger to his person when as they intended to destroy him at home and the true cause was that they would deteine theis Armes to make warr against him if he would not submitt to be deposed and to keepe the money given for Ireland to drive on the warr heere The King afterward going to Hull required the Governour to deliver him the Towne whereof the Governour humbly desired to be excused till be could send to the Parliament It seemes the libeller would not have that a denyall The King proclaimed Hotham Traytour before the Towne walls And noe man dobuted but he was soe The King gave order to stopp all passages betweene him and the Parliament And had he not reason to prevent supplies and intelligences to a Traytour Yet sayes the Libeller he demaunded Iustice as vpon a Traytour vsing a strange iniquitie to require Iustice vpon him whome he had debarred from his apparence Traytours must be apprehended before their apparence and it was a strange iniquitie in them that would not apprehend a Traytour as in Justice they ought but a most execrable impietie in such as pretend Justice to cleere a malefactour without hearing both parties as the libeller sayes the Parliament did Sr. Iohn Hotham for he sayes the Parliament noe sooner vnderstood what had passed they declare Sr. Iohn Hotham had done noe more then was his dutie They meant noe doubt his dutie to them as fellow Traytours not to his king and soveraigne That this proves that to be false which is heere affirmed by the King that his greatest Enemies had scarce confidence enough to abett or owne it And such as knew the manner of their proceedings at that time know the truth of what the King affirmes and though the necessitie of their engagement made them owne it yet there were very few or none that esteemed it an act of Justice in them but of Policie for their owne securitie The king sayes it affected him more with sorrow for others then anger for himselfe nor did the affront trouble him soe much as their sin The libeller sayes there is vse of this booke to shew vs what a deluded thing the creature is which is called the vulgar who will believe such vaine glories as these And surely we cannot believe any creature soe deluded as those for whose capacitie the libeller writes that makes the deluded vulgar judges of lawes and kings yet heere spurnes it as a despised creature The strangenes of beleife that he imagines as that the King proclaimed him Traytour without due proces of law If he could have told what the due proces of law was no doubt he would If a theife or murtherer be taken in the Act or escape must there not be a proclamation for his apprehension If Traytours be in Armes against their King is it choler or rashnes to proclaime them Traytours The King had lately been convinced of his illegallitie with the five members He was injuriously denyed Justice against them which produced the second insolence of Hotham The Kings relation declares his anger to be incensed as he had but doth it follow from thence that he was not more sorry for others then angry May not a fathers sorrow for his sons disobedience exceede his anger and may not a King desire the punishment of a Malefactour because he pitties his person greives for the ill consequence of his offence Yet this trifling Libeller would inferr that the king could not be more sorry then angry because his words testifie impatience of delay till Hotham be punished It s a strange operation of sorrow that stirred him soe vehemently to have Hotham punished and not to have him repent But this exception is more strange that a man may not be vehement for the punishment of one for whose offence he is greived and there may be just cause of sorrow for an Act which the repentance of the Actour cannott remedy He knowes well how litle his Majest was likely to worke vpon Hotham at that time obstinate but it was a necessitie vpon his Majest to endeavour that he should be proceeded against injustice There hath not been observed in the King a sorrow for his owne sins nor for such sins of others as cannot be supposed a direct injury to himselfe This man will not have the Kings sorrow for his sins observed nor acknowledged wee have seene his malicious detractions of the Kings sorrow for his consent to the death of the Earle of Strafford and it cannot be expected from such men that they will give Testimony to any truth that deny all evidence of it The Kings labour to have the sinner only punished wil be called revenge And why They pretended justice not revenge that after cut of Sr. John Hothams head May not a King doe justice without revenge The jnjustice in abettinge protecting Sr.
vnderstanding of the nature and consequence of the things graunted and as his Majest professed a cleerer information after these Actions had passed him soe he evidently saw that they were more against his subjects good then his owne and that insteede of preventing an Arbitrary power it would have introduced an arbitrary licence and confusion into the Kingdome and such men as preferre the bondage of popular confusion or the licentious insolence of many Lords are eyther inchanted with a witch craft of Rebellion or stupidly benummed with a senseles Lethargy With what Zeale the Libeller reproves the abuse of Scripture when he exclaimes as if it offended his conscience we may perceive by the allusion he makes saying Ireland was as Ephraim the strength of his head meaning the Kings Scotland as Iudah was his law giver but over England as over Edom he meant to cast his shooe Hath this man reverence to Scripture or the Author of it He comes againe to accuse the King for persecuting the consciences of Religious men a knowne vntruth yet soe much beloved by the Libeller as he seemes impatient to misse the repetition of it and with this he joynes his reproving the Kings profession of being an Enemy of those that forced the conscience because he had made a warr and lost all rather then not vphold the Bishopps It is an Argument that he esteemed his conscience that lost all for it But the Libeller sayes they were persecuting Bishopps The King vpholding Bishopps vpholds not persecution or abuse and the Libellers confounding the office ill exercise of it makes knowne his want of Argument The falshood of their Calumnies against the Bishopps is sufficiently manifested to the world that after soe many vehement outcryes they have not proved on such act of persecution done by any one of them not the presons but the office lawe were the persecution in this mans judgment The King obtruded new Ceremonies vpon vs vpon the Scotts a new Liturgie There were noe new Ceremonies obtruded by him in England and this horrid Rebellion to take away the Ceremonies and Government legally established and continually practised vnder the name of innovations detects both the fraude and outrage of their proceedings The new leiturgie offred the Scots by advice of their Bishopps and Clergie was an act befitting the care of a King and noe man will beleive that it was an offence te their consciences who made noe conscience of blood and Rebellion vpon pretence of their conscience which the world sees was an hipocriticall straining at a straw and swallowing a Camell and these tender conscience men have written their tendernes of conscience with the blood of their brethren which will remaine a memoriall of their dissembled sanctitie What hinderance of the search of truth he meanes is not vnderstood vnles he would have the dreames of mad sectaries confirmed by authoritie He would have the penalties of lawes thought persecution of the conscience and sectaries the Judges and sayes if himselfe meaning the King and his learned Churchmen were the obstinate part should Reformation suffer them to sit Lording like the greate whore And are sectaries Libells convictions of Kings and learned Churchmen and the clamours of malefactours a sentence against the Judge Such is the Government that must now rule the world and Reformation must be an Idoll in the hands of a seditious sectarie whereto the people must fall downe and such vnstable multitudes carried about with every winde of doctrine are likely to be those many waters on which the greate whore sits which hath for corruption and crueltie a greate resemblance vnto those false prophetts that now seduce the people These Clergimen were not to bedriven like sheepe but driven out like wolves But they are theeves and wolves that enter into the sheepefold by violence and stealth and the ambition and greedines of these wolves will finde occasion to sucke the blood and devoure the flesh of the sheepe The king sayes that he beleives the Presbiterie though proved to be the only institution of Iesus Christ were not by the sword to be set vp without his consent which is contrary saith the Libeller both to the doctrine and knowne practice of all Protestant Churches if his sword threaten those who of their owne accord imbrace it But then it cannot be sett vp by the sword vnles his sword threaten those that imbrace it And this jugler denies what the king sayes and yet in effect professes it and while he enrages the Tumults to sett vp their Presbiterie with the sword produces Arguments only for defence The reformed Churches professe to follow the ancients in suffering not associate themselves to bloody Sectaries in Rebelling And his next words impert that private men may not contend with Magistrates nor vse force against them Though Christ and his Apostles being to Civill affaires but private men contended not with Magistrates yet when Magistrates themselves and especially Parliament come to know Religion they ought to defend it against any King or Tyrant What is defence to the question in hand of setting vp Religion by the sword without the kings consent May an inferiour Christian Magistrate take Armes against his superiour a Pagan to sett vp Religion Is he not as much a private man as our Saviour and his Apostles where the Civill power hath not given him a right And as a Civill right is not imaginable soe the pretence of a power from Religion is execrable and false which will not permitt an vsurpation vpon the Civill right There may be a King where there is noe Parliament and it is noe more lawfull for an inferiour Migistrate or to Parliament who are but private men in regard of the Prince whose deputies they are to take the sword to sett vp Religion against the King their soveraigne then for any private men and were not the libeller distracted betweene evidence of truth and his owne corrupt inclinations he would not instance in the name of Magistrates and Parliament that but the line before pretended the power of the people to doe the same thing by the doctrine and practice of all Protestant Churches and would make them more publique persons then their Saviour and his Apostles he thinkes his reviling language of Tyrany and bloody Bishopps and the King their pupill are irrefragable Arguments in the judgment of his pubills There is a large difference betweene forcing men by the sword to turne Presbiterians and defending them who willingly are soe But then it is impious to force ment to be soe what those wretches did to the King for not being soe and for not consenting to impose it vpon the kingdome by a law the world knowes and the world is wittnes and they have robbed men of their possessions by the sword to sett vp this new Religion His charging Covetuousnes and ambition to be the events of Episcopacy is schismaticall malice for Episcopacie in the beginning of the Church was attended with povertie and