a case of Felony That if a bloudy knife should bee produced in the hand of the party suspected to have slaine the man if the party had bin there seen before the death it were a strong evidence but there must bee death in the case the fact must be committed else there can be no murther but he himselfe might answer himselfe for there is a great difference There cannot be murther but there must be death but hee knowes very well there may be Treason and yet no death it is too late to forbeare questioning Treason for killing the King till the King be killed God forbid wee should stay in that case for the very intention is the Treason and it is the intention of the death of the Law that is in question and it had beene too late to call him to question to answer with his life for the death of the Law if the Law had been killed for there had been no Law then and how should the Law then have adjudged it Treason when the same were subverted and destroyed and therefore he is much mistaken The greatest Traytor in the memory of any that sits here to heare me this day had a better a fairer excuse in this particular then my Lord of Strafford and that is Guido Faux for hee might have objected that the taking of the Cellar the laying of the Powder under the Parliament House the kindling of the match and putting it neare are not so much as a misdemeanor if you look no further for it was no offence in him to lay Barrels under the Parliament House and to kindle the match and to lay it neere but collect all together that it was eâ intentione to blow up the King and the State there is the Treason but God be blessed it was not effected So that the rule is the same Nay my Lord of Strafford hath not so much to say when he is charged with a purpose and intention to subvert the Law for to that purpose gave he trayterous counsels and executed actions thereby discovering his intentions to destroy the Kingdome and to destroy the Kings claime by Law and discent It is true they were not put in execution but they declared his intentions therefore this gives an answer to his first flourish which is not so great an Argument as the greatest Traytor might use for himself and yet it proved Treason in him My Lords he hath been pleased to divide his Treasons into two parts and his division I allow of that is Treason by Statute-Law as he tearmes it though it be Treason by the Common-Law and constructive Treason And upon that method hee hath recited the evidence produced on either part Give mee leave to follow and trace him a little and afterwards to discharge my duty in taking my owne course and representing the evidence as it appeares truly and I will avoid as much as I can to fall into my Lord of Straffords errour in mis-reciting a Particle if I doe it shall be against my will He begins with the fifteenth Article and pretends that that is not proved the ground and foundation of that Article was a warrant issued out by himselfe to a Sergeant at Armes one Savill which gave directions and power to that Serjeant to lay souldiers on any person that should contemne the Processe of the Councell boord in Ireland that was the effect Now sayes he this warrant is not produced and addes that the Judges will tell your Lordships that if a man bee charged with any thing under hand and seale the deed must be produced and proved or else no credit is to bee given to it Truely my Lords it is true if it had beene a Bond or a Deed where those that seale it use to call their neighbours to testifie and be witnesses to it perhaps it might be a colourable answer that because we do not produce the Deed and prove it by witnesses you can therefore give no credit to it But my Lords in case of authority to commit high treason I suppose my Lord of Strafford nor any other did call witnesses to prove the signing sealing and delivering of the warrant for execution of high treason and therefore it is a new way and invention found out by his Lordship for ought I see to commit high treason and to give authority for it and it is but taking away the originall warrant and hee shall never be touched for any treason But I beseech your Lordships patience till I come to open that Article and your Lordships will finde the warrant though it be not produced proved by three or foure witnesses and his hand seale proved too And wheras he pretends the Sergeant at Armes is no competent witnesse because he excuses himselfe my Lord mistakes himselfe for I take it to bee no excuse to prove a warrant from any person whatsoever if it be to commit high treason and therefore Savills testimony is the more strong being so farre from excusing that hee doth accuse himselfe And though he is charged with laying of souldiers upon the Kings people contrary to an expresse Act of Parliament made in 18. H. 6. yet my Lord is pleased I know not how to terme it whether it be merrily or otherwise to use his Rhetorick Here is a great levying of war when there is not above foure Musketiers or six at most laid upon any one man My Lords it is a plain levying of warre and without all question and in all sense it is as much mischievous to me to be surprized by foure or six Musketiers to enforce me to any thing they would have as if there were an Army of forty thousand brought upon me for if that strength will but over master me it is all one to me whether I be mastered by foure or by foure thousand And therefore let not this be a rule that to send foure or six or ten Musketiers up and downe is not considerable because of the smalnesse of the number the danger is the same yet this is no levying of warre because they goe not in troops of greater number as it pleases my Lord of Strafford to affirm My Lords your Lordships remember what the effect of the Warrant is sworn to be that howsoever the Sergeant at Armes and his Ministers that executed it brought but foure or six or ten yet the Sergeant might have brought all the Army of Ireland for there was authority so to doe And admitting the matter of fact proved he mentions an Act of Parliament made 11. Eliz. whereby a penalty is laid upon men that shall lay souldiers on the Kings subjects and yet as my Lord observes it must now be Treason in the Deputy My Lords the very casting of an eye upon that Act shewes it to be as vainly objected as if he had said nothing for in truth it is no other than as if he should say The King hath given me the command of an Army in Ireland and therefore I may turne
sayes these are all the words produced against him in the time of seven yeeres government there your Lordships have heard of many words and if we would trouble your Lordships further in this kind we could prove such words spoken as often almost as he remained dayes in Ireland that is for the mis-recitall The other part two witnesses proved but the residue That they must expect law from the King as a Conquerour That Acts of State should be equall to Acts of Parliament And when an Act of Parliament would not passe he would make it good by an Act of State these speeches at other times were proved by five witnesses Then he falls back to the second Article touching the words That the Kings little finger should be heavier then the loines of the Law My Lords these words were proved expresly by five witnesses to be by him spoken and if he had produced five hundred that had said he did not speak them they had not been equivalent to disprove five but he produces none Sir William Penniman repeats other words and inverts them and none but he Another party a Minister reports a report that hee heard concerning these words but my Lord saith he the occasion of the speaking of them was not mentioned Truly perhaps it might bee the forgetfulnesse of my Lords memory but let me put him in mind And your Lordships remember that the occasion was exprest by one and that is Sir David Fowles that he laying a command upon Sir David to repaire a bridge and calling him to account why it was not repaired Sir David Fowles told him he could not doe it by law And therefore omitting it my Lord said to him Sir some are all for Law and Lawyers but you shall know that the Kings little finger will be heavier then the loines of the Law Here is the occasion though he would have another businesse the knighting money to be the occasion From the second he falls to the three and twentieth Article that is concerning words That he should counsell his Majestie that he might use his Prerogative as he pleased but in saying there was no proofe offered hee here begins to fall upon the other fallacy that is to pull things asunder whereas we produce them together and would make that that is a faggot to be but a single stick but under favour when I come with your Lordships patience to open the force of the proofes and put them together he shall find contrary to his expectation that they are fully proved by the testimony of many witnesses upon consideration of the precedent concurrent and subsequent acts and intentions of my Lord of Strafford I shall not now run over my Lord Primates testimony or my Lord Conwayes or master Treasurers or my Lord of Bristols but make use of them in their proper places when I shall put all together to shew his design and to prove his speaking of the words Then hee comes to the five and twentieth Article which I shall not insist on though he pretends it not proved I shall referre that to my recollection that I may not answer to his pieces but bring all together and then the horrour of his fact shall more speciously appeare Onely this under favour I cannot passe over when he comes to justifie an advice and counsell of the Kings being loose and absolved from all rules of government and that he might use his Prerogative as hee pleases he is pleased to mention the argument of the Judges in the ship-money and what they should deliver he makes the warrant of his counsell Now your Lordships may observe he would justifie his actions by law in some cases where it is to his advantages but in other cases hee must be ignorant of the Law But my Lords for him to mention any thing in the Argument of the Judges concerning the ship-money which is now condemned and to make that a ground of his counsell and advice to the King and not the judgement in truth but the argument of the Councell at Barr that therefore he is loose and absolved from all rule of government for him to make the Parliaments deferring to give supply to be that necessity which was insisted upon in the Councells argument and to be such an unavoidable necessity as to beget an Invasion upon propriety and liberty it rests in your judgements and the judgements of all that heare me what argument this is and what he declares his opinion to be this day In the latter part let me close hands and agree with him he sayes Proofes must be taken by themselves they must not be judged by peeces but together and now in good time I shall joyne with him and shall desire the same judgement That things may not be taken asunder but judged together according to his owne words For the twentieth Article he is thereby charged with being an Incendiary between both Nations and an occasion of drawing two Armies into this kingdome and to incense the warre My Lords I remember if I did not mis-conceive and my memory misprompt me my Lord said he could have no occasion to incense a war being a man of estate and should have no benefit by it having sufficient to live without it but in due time I shall make it appeare to my apprehension and I beleeve to your Lordships when you have heard it that the incensing of this war and provoking of it was the principall instrument of bringing to passe his designe of subverting the Lawes through the whole work of it My Lords in the passage of this he takes occasion to speak of the testimony of master Secretary Vane who testifies that my Lord was for an offensive and himselfe for a defensive warre whence my Lord argues here is no great difference for both were for a warre but my Lords is there no difference betweene an offensive and defensive warre in case of subjects that live under one King is there no difference to bring an Army to offend them and for the King to raise a force to defend himselfe truly I think there is a great difference and a very materiall one too but your Lordships see hee makes no difference between them My Lords in the foure and twentieth Article he mentions that he is charged with being an occasion to breake the Parliament and layes hold of that as in the other Articles that it was not proved but declined My Lords when hee shall heare the repetition of the evidence though part of the Article was not particularly insisted upon yet I beleeve it will appeare to your Lordships and the world that he was the occasion of breaking the last Parliament and it is expresly proved by witnesses enow and though he sayes how should any body thinke him an occasion of it that did so often advise Parliaments yet I shall shew anon that when he did advise them it was to compasse his owne designe and plot without which his ends could not be brought to passe
seek if I were to expresse an arbitrary power and tyrannicall government how to expresse it in fitter words and more significant terms than these that the people shall be governed at the Kings will that their Charters the sinewes and ligatures of their liberties lands and estates should be nothing worth and bind no longer then the Kings pleasure specially being spoken upon such an occasion and the words proved by two or three witnesses of credit and quality From thence we descend to Articles that shew the execution of his purpose There be three things a man enjoyes by the protection of the law that is his life his liberty and his estate And now my Lords observe how he invades and exercises a tyrannicall jurisdiction and arbitrary government over them all three I shall begin with the fifth Article that is concerning my Lord Mountnorris and Denwit My Lord Mountnorris a Peere of that Realm was sentenced to death by procurement of my Lord of Strafford who howsoever hee pretends himselfe not to be a Judge in the cause yet how farre he was an Abettor and Procurer and Countenancer and drawer on of that sentence your Lordships very well remember he was sentenced to death without law for speaking words at a private Table God knows of no manner of consequence in the world concerning the treading upon my Lord of Straffords toe the sentence procured seven moneths after the words spoken and contrary to law and himselfe being put in mind of it my Lord Mountnorris desiring to have the benefit of the law and yet he refusing it And then it was in time of peace when all the Courts of justice were open and to sentence a man to death of that quality my Lord of Strafford himselfe being present an author a drawer on of it makes it very hainous Your Lordships remember this Article was fully proved and though he pretends his authority by a letter from his Majesty I shall in due time give a full answer to that so that it shall rise up in judgement against him to aggravate his offence and that in a great measure Here he exercises a power over life his excuse was that he procured a pardon for my Lord Mountnorris but the power was exercised and the tyranny appeared to be the more he would first sentence him to death and then rejoyce in his power that he might say There remaines no more but my command to the Provost Marshall to doe execution To exercise a power over his life and to abuse him afterwards is very high but no thanks to him that the sentence of death was not executed it was the grace and goodnesse of his Majesty that would not suffer my Lord Mountnorris a person of that eminence to be put to death against law But the other was hanged and as appeares against law and though my Lord pretends the party was burnt in the hand yet that was not proved nor materiall and for him to doe this in time of peace when the Courts of justice were open it argues a desire in his breast to arrogate a power above law And in truth I may not omit some observations that my Lord made this day he hopes his Majesty would bee pleased to grant him a Pardon I perceive hee harboured in his thoughts that hee might hang the Kings subjects when he would and then get a Pardon of course for it The Lord blesse me from his jurisdiction My Lords give me leave to goe back againe here is power over the lives and liberties of the subject but he exercised likewise a Tyrannicall power over his estate Your Lordships may be pleased to remember the fourth Article where he judges my Lord of Corks estate in neither Church land nor plantation land and therefore had no pretence of a jurisdiction for it is a lay fee divolved by Act of Parliament to the Crown yet he deprives him of his possession which he had continued for twenty nine yeeres upon a paper petition without rules of law And whereas my Lord of Cork went about to redeeme himselfe the law being every mans inheritance and that which he ought to enjoy he tels him hee will lay him by the heeles if he withdraw not his proces and so when he hath judged him against an expresse Act of Parliament and Instructions and bound up a great Peere of the Realme hee will not suffer him to redeeme that wrong without a threat of laying him by the heeles and he will not have Law nor Lawyers question his Orders and would have them all know an Act of State should be equall to an Act of Parliament Which are words of that nature that higher cannot be spoken to declare an intention to proceed in an arbitrary way The next was in my Lord Mountnorris his case and Rolstone And here I must touch my Lord with misrepetition Rolstone preferred a petition to my Lord Deputy my Lord Deputy himselfe judges his estate and deprived him of his possession though he cannot produce so much as one example or precedent though if he had it would not have warranted an illegall action but hee cannot produce a precedent that ever any Deputy did determine concerning a mans private estate and if hee hath affirmed it he proved it not some petitions have been preferred to him but what they be non constat But though never any knew the Deputy alone to determine matters of land yet he did it To the seventh Article we produce no evidence but my Lord of Strafford cannot be content with that but he must take upon him to make defence for that which is not insisted upon as a charge but since he will doe so I refer it to the book in print where he determines the inheritance of a Nobleman in that Kingdome that is my Lord Dillon by a case falsly drawne and contrary to his consent and though he deprives him not of his possession yet he causes the Land to be measured out and it is a danger that hangs over his head to this day And had we not knowne that we had matter enough against my Lord of Strafford this should have risen in judgement against him but I had not mentioned it now if he had not mentioned it himselfe The eighth Article containes severall charges as that of my Lord Chancellour how he imprisoned him upon a judgement before himselfe and the Councell how he inforced the Seale from him when hee had no authority nay though it were excepted by his Patent that hee should no way dispose of it but he looked not to Authority further then might make way to his will Another concerns the prime Earle of that Kingdome my Lord of Kildare whom he imprisoned and kept close prisoner contrary to the Kings expresse command for his deliverance and in his answer my Lord acknowledges it but sayes that that command was obtained from the King upon a mis-information These things I would not have mentioned if he had passed them over but since he
the King great service and that he sayes was the reason of our passing over it but that was not the reason it had beene a foule businesse if we had opened it but having enough besides we made not use of it for the substance of the proofes by multiplicity of witnesses had beene That the parties themselves that bought the Pipe-staves for foure pound odd money were faine to sell them to his Instruments for six pounds and after to buy them againe for ten pounds else there must be no licence to export them But that I would not have mentioned if he had let it slip over I come to the twelfth Article and that is concerning the Tobacco wherein he pretends the Kings service and if my memory faile me not the desire of the Parliament that hee should take this into his hands for the King My Lords therein under his favour hee hath mis-recited the evidence and spoken that hee cannot justifie for he can shew no such desire of the Parliament It is true there was a desire of the Parliament that the King would be pleased to take his Customes into his hands for the advancement of his revenew that it might goe to maintaine himselfe and he might not be abused and others live by it but to take the Tobacco into his hands he never did nor can produce a witnesse to prove such their desire and therefore under favour he fixes a wrong upon the Parliament and injures your Lordships by his reciting that he neither did nor can make good for there was no such thing But if you observe the course he takes he makes Proclamation to hinder the importing of Tobacco into Ireland that if it be imported it must be sold to him at his own rate and by this meanes he first hinders the liberty of the subject from doing what the law allowes him and so takes on him an arbitrary power and secondly he ingrosses this commodity to himselfe deceiving his Majestie to whom he professeth so much fidelity for whereas there is 5000. l. rent to the King he by the computation of Merchants receives neere 140000 l. a yeer And because their computations are not alwayes true I doe not care if I allow him 40000. l. mistaken and then he will gaine neere 100000. l. so that if he intends the Kings benefit it is wonder he told not his Majestie of the great profit that might thereby have risen and let him partake of it as in justice he should have done according to the trust reposed in him but you have heard of no such matter And surely my Lord of Strafford would not have omitted it if it had been for his advantage especially in this presence where hee omits nothing to cleere himselfe or to insinuate with his Majesty Now I come to the thirteenth Article the Article concerning Flax which I know is fresh in your Lordships memories and I beleeve will be so in the memories of the subjects of Ireland for many yeeres how he ingrossed it into his hands and interrupted the trade of the poore people whereby such miseries and calamities befell many of that Nation that as you have heard it proved thousands dye in ditches for want of bread to put in their mouths And whereas he pretends that this was proved but by one witnesse and that man to be imprisoned and of no credit though he was his owne instrument your Lordships remember Sir John Clatworthy his testimony and anothers and his own Warrant produced and acknowledged here to justifie the execution of it and such a thing was thereby taken into his owne hands that I professe I never heard the like that the poore people should be constrained to use their owne as he pleased and that pleasing of himselfe laid an impossibility on the people to execute his pleasure which was a bondage exceeding that of the Israelites under the Egyptians for there was not laid so much upon the Children of Israel but there was a possibility to performe they might with much labour perchance get stubble to burn their brick but the natives here must have a charge laid upon them without possibility to performe and the disobedience must cost them no lesse then the losse of their goods which drew with it even the losse of their lives for want of bread This was not proved by onely one witnesse but by many And your Lordships remember the remonstrance of that Parliament of Ireland which declares it to a greater height than I have opened it The fifteenth Article is that of levying warre upon the Kings subjects expresly within the Statute of 25. E. 3. and 18. H. 6. Your Lordships have heard the Warrant proved by the party himselfe to whom it was directed whereby power was given to lay souldiers upon any party that did not obey my Lord of Straffords orders at the Councell Table but not to circumscribe him to a certain number but the Seargeant at Arms and his ministers might lay as many as they would It is true this warrant was not it selfe produced but a copy was offered which was not read and therefore I will not offer it to be proved but the party that executed the Warrant it self proves it to be under the hand and seale of my Lord of Strafford he proves the expresse authority of it which was to the effect I opened three or foure more who saw and read it proved the same and that it was under the hand and seale of my Lord of Strafford that accordingly it was executed upon divers of the Kings subjects it was proved by three witnesses expresly in the point how by colour of this Warrant the Sergeant at Armes and his Officers sent souldiers to lye in the houses and lands of the Kings subjects how the owners were thereby forced out from their own habitation how their goods were wasted and devoured their corn and victuals eaten up and the souldiers never left them as long as any part of their estates remained to maintain them My Lord of Straffords defence is that it hath been used before his time in Ireland wherein hee hath againe mis-recited for he did not offer a proofe nor a particle of a proofe that ever any man did know souldiers laid upon any party for refusing to appeare to a Warrant or for other contempt at Councell Table before himselfe did it but hee offered to prove that formerly souldiers were sent against Rebels and that after they were declared to be Rebels and justly too and he proved an use and custome to force men to pay the contribution mony due to the King but that was by consent of the people who granted a contribution of 20000. l. a yeere for encrease of the Kings revennue and that it might not be upon record in the Exchequer and so claimed as due in time to come they consented that souldiers should be laid upon them that refused it and the word consent is within the Statute of 18. H. 6. Againe did he prove all
Throne endeavours to corrupt the Kings goodnesse with wicked counsels but God be thanked he finds too much piety there to prevaile And therefore the next Article is that that charges him to be an Incendiary to the warre betwixt the two Kingdomes and now I shall be bold to unfold the mysterie and answer his objection To what purpose should he be an Incendiary were it not better to enjoy his estate in peace and quietnesse then have it under danger of a warre Now your Lordships shall have the Riddle discovered The first thing hee doth after his comming into England is to incense the King to a warre to involve two Nations of one faith and under one Soveraigne to imbrue their hands in each others blood and to draw Armies into the field That he was this Incendiary give me leave to revive your Lordships memories with the proofes which will make it plaine and first give me leave to note unto your Lordships that his Majestie with much wisedome did in July 1639. make a pacification with his subjects and even at the very heeles of this pacification when all things were at peace upon the tenth of September which was the next moneth but one your Lordships remember the sentence of Steward in the Star-chamber of Ireland for not taking the oath your Lordships may call to mind the language my L. of Strafford was pleased to use of the Scots when all was in quietnesse he then calls them no better then Traitours and Rebels if you will beleeve what the witnesse testifies whom my Lord is pleased to call a School-master And truly admit hee were so because he is a School-master therefore not to be beleeved is a non sequitur And another witnesse one Loftus speaks to the words though not in the same manner but I say the tenth of September when things were at peace and rest when the King was pleased to be reconciled to them by that pacification what boiled in his breast then to the breaking forth of such expressions I know not unlesse it were an intention to be an Incendiary My Lords I must say and affirme and he hath not proved it to the contrary that all this while I am confident there was not any breach of the pacification on either side and it lyes on his part to prove there was But the Parliament of Scotland then sitting and making preparation for their demands in pursuance of the Articles of pacification hee comming over into England in September immediately upon the pacification answers That he found things so distracted here that it was fit the Scots should be reduced by force if they could not be otherwise yet no breach appeares no war was denounced there was no intention of a warre But see what harboured in his breast all the while The fourth of December following my Lord Traquaire made his relation to the Councell of the Scots proceedings and all this while there was no Demands brought by the Scots themselves nor reason of their Demands brought by others though they were prepared yet you have heard his advice was for an offensive warre and that the Demands were a just cause of the war And though he pretends hee said no more then what the rest of the Lords of the Councell concurred with him in I will joyne in issue with him in that and if some of your Lordships be not satisfied you have many noble Lords among you from whom you may be satisfied that it is not so I am sure he proves it not It is true in the proposition of the Demands some of the Lords of the Councell did say that these Demands hypothetically if the Scots did not give satisfaction by their reasons were a just cause of warre but not any Lord of the Councell was of opinion that the very Demands positively without hearing of the reasons were a just cause of warre but himselfe and I beleeve the noble Lords of the Councell their Consciences can tell them and I beleeve will deliver it to the rest of the Peeres that I speake truth For the offensive warre he pretends a concurrence of the rest but it was disproved many were for it upon these termes if they did not give reasons and shew just cause for their Demands and many were against an offensive warre upon any terms and therefore herein he fixes that upon the Lords of the Councell that hee cannot make good All this while his intentions are discovered by a matter precedent but after the breach he discovers his anger further towards the Scottish Nation and makes it his designe to incense the King to this warre My Lords hee is not at an end yet for he confesses himselfe that hee advised the King to call a Parliament and now I come to his work of merit but it was to his destruction and serves to prove this Article directly for to what purpose was this Parliament called Exitus acta probat it was no sooner set but within three weekes a proposition is made for supply towards a warre against the Scots who was the cause of calling the Parliament himselfe and therefore who was the cause of this proposition but himselfe and so the calling of the Parliament is a concurring evidence of his being an Incendiary to put on the warre and it shall appeare anon absolutely that he was the occasion of it though he thinkes there be no proofe of it Did not he goe over into Ireland and by his solicitation there Subsidies were granted by the Parliament onely to maintaine this warre and to shew their ingagement in it and who was the occasion of drawing them on I referre to your Lordships judgements by the circumstances precedent Your Lordships heard his good opinion of the Scots when he began to discourse with the Citizens touching money and their affording of the King supply and seising the mint by giving them no better expressions than Rebels for saith he you are more forward to help the Rebels than to pay the King his owne I know not who hee meant but certainly the Scots were in his thoughts so that from the beginning he incensed the warre against them first hee exclaimed against them during time of peace He alledges in his answer that things were found in such distraction that it was fit the Scots should be reduced by force he gave advice precipitately without hearing the reasons and not concurrent to the Councell for an offensive warre and putting all together I referre it to your Lordships judgement who is the Incendiary for how can it be proved more cleerely unlesse it should appeare under his hand and seale proved by two or three witnesses Now my Lords how comes this to be his designe here the mystery comes to be unfolded Having thus incensed to the warre and ingaged the King to the uttermost and having a Parliament now dissolved without supply he sets up an Idol of his owne creation as a means to draw on his designe and that was necessity necessity is it
of Strafford hath done appeare to have been harboured in his thoughts and settled in his heart long before it was executed You see what his Counsels were That the King having tryed the affections of his people was loose and absolved from all rules of government and might doe every thing that power would admit and his Majesties had tryed all wayes and was refused and should be acquitted of God and man and had an army in Ireland wherewith if hee pleased he might reduce this kingdome so there must be a triall of his people for supply that is denyed which must be interpreted a defection by refusall and this refusall must give advantage of necessity and this necessity must be an advantage to use his Prerogative against the rule of the Law and consent of the People this is his advice which shewes that this very thing that hapned did harbour in his thoughts long before the breach of the Parliament and the occasion of the Armie Your Lordships have heard it confessed by himselfe That before this last advice he had advised the calling of a Parliament to the Parliament a proposition of twelve Subsidies was made for supply and which may be spoken with great assurance before they had consulted or given any resolution to that proposition the Parliament was dissolved upon a supposal that the supply was denied Now that this was predesigned by my L. of Strafford himselfe I beseech you observe these things following that is the words in the two and twentieth Article That his Majestie was first to try the Parliament and if that did not supply him then he would serve the King any other way His words are proved by Mr. Treasurer That if the Parliament supplyed him not hee would serve him any other way and this is before the Parliament set now if your Lordships heare the proofes of my Lord Primate which my Lord of Strafford slights taking it singly My Lord Primate before the Parliament was called when my Lord of Strafford was in Ireland and not yet come into this kingdome testifies my Lords saying That if the Parliament will not supply his Majestie the King was acquitted before God and Man if hee tooke some other course to supply himselfe though against the will of the Subjects I beseech your Lordships observe how he prophecies these things must come to passe and advised them accordingly My Lord Conway testifies that before the Parliament sate my Lord of Strafford said that if the Parliament would not supply his Majestie the King was acquitted before God and Man if hee tooke another course to supply himselfe though it were against the will of the subject and he doubts not but the Parliament would give what twelve Subsidies and your Lordships very well remember twelve were propounded but I beseech you observe the coherence of all the Parliament must be called they must be tryed if they deny there is necessity and this necessity is a warrant for the King to proceed so that my Lord of Strafford must be judged to be either a Prophet or to have this designe before hand in his thoughts Now the Parliament being broken before answer to the demand given he vents his counsell in the three and twentieth Article and how far it is proved your Lordships have heard Now comes the Bullion to be seized the Copper money to be advised and now comes he to tell the King that the Aldermen of London must be put to fine and ransome and laid by the heeles and no good would be done till some of them bee hanged so you heare his advice I beseech your Lordships observe what successe this advice tooke foure Aldermen were instantly committed and then the Councell of the three and twentieth Article is fomented First he foments the warre then there is a necessitie the defection of the Parliament must set the King loose from rules of government and now see whether the occasion of the warre the calling of the Parliament the dissolving of it be not adequate to what he propounded to himselfe namely to set up an arbitrary government Your Lordships remember how fresh my Lord of Bristowes memorie is touching my Lord of Straffords opinion upon the dissolution of the Parliament how he declared unto my Lord of Bristow instantly within three or fower dayes after That the King was not to be mastered by the frowardnesse of his people or rather of some particular persons and your Lordships remember Sir George Wentworths words spoken the very day of dissolving the Parliament which may be very well applyed as a concurrent proof to his intentions of bringing the Army into England He was my Lords owne brother that knew much of his Councell and his words are That the English Nation would never be well till they were conquered over againe So my Lords put all together if he declared his owne intentions if actions in executing of this tyrannicall and arbitrary power if Counsels of as dangerous consequence in as high a strain as can be be not a sufficient evidence to prove an intention and desire to subvert the Law I know not what can prove such an Interpretation and now I referre it to your Lordships judgements whether here be not a good proofe of the Article laid to his charge My Lord in the seven and twentieth Article hee is charged with levying of warre upon the Kings people by forcing them in Yorkshire to pay money to prove they were so forced you have heard by two witnesses that Sergeant Major Yaworth by Musketeers fower together in the towne and one by one out of the towne did compell them to pay the fortnights contribution else they were to serve in person That hee did this by warrant is likewise confessed by Sir William Penyman and whether this were an authoritie derived from or commanded by my Lord of Strafford that is the question and my Lords it is plainly proved that it was commanded by my Lord of Strafford for Sr. William Penyman himselfe being examined alledged that the warrant was made in pursuance of the relation and direction made by my Lord of Strafford Your Lordships heard what my Lord of Strafford did say before hand as is proved by two witnesses Sir William Ingram and Mr. Cholmeley that this money should be paid or levied on the subjects goods Then his declaration to Sir William Penyman in pursuance of which he made his warrant That it was the assent of the Lords of the great Councell that this money should be levied and taking all together whether it fixes it not upon him to be the authour and instrument it rests in your judgements in point of fact and so I suppose the seven and twentieth Article rests on him and so I shall conclude the evidence produced on the behalfe of the Commons And now give me leave to put your Lordships in mind of some evidences offered by my Lord of Strafford himselfe in his answer and in the passages of his defence for his clearing and
justification but tending directly to his condemnation I will enter upon some passages he mentioned to day and often before When he is charged with invading the estates of the Peeres of the kingdome of Ireland and determining them upon paper petitions in an arbitrary way your Lordships have heard him speake it before and repeat it this day that he did it out of compassion for the more expeditious proceeding on behalfe of the poore against these mighty But then my Lords I beseech you compare some other part of his proceedings Your Lordships remember the businesse of the Flax which concernes the poore wholly and universally and if compassion had beene the rule and direction of his actions towards the poore surely this would have beene a just cause to have commiserated them in this case but hee exercised his power over them and over them wholly and over them universally and therefore it shewes it is not his compassion to the poore nor respect to the rich or mighty that will any way restraine or obstruct his wayes to his owne will And therefore you may see what truth there is in his answer by comparing one part of the charge with another when the businesse of the Flax brought that calamity upon the Kings Subjects that thousands of them perished for lacke of bread and dyed in ditches Secondly your Lordships have often heard him use a Rhetoricall insinuation wondering that he should be charged with words and they strained so high as to be made treason to question his life and posterity though the words might be spoken unadvisedly or in discourse or by chance your Lordships remember the fifth Article touching his proceedings against my Lord Mount-Norris where words were spoken in an ordinary discourse at dinner and slight ones God knowes of no consequence at all such as another man would scarce have harkened after and yet my Lord extends them to the taking away of my Lord Mount-Norris his life gets a sentence of death against him and that against Law with a high hand in such a manner as I thinke your Lordships have not heard the like and therefore I beseech you compare one part of his answer with another and see how ready he is to make use of any thing that may excuse himselfe and yet when he comes to act his power you see his exercise of it You have heard how hee magnifies his zeale for advancing the Kings benefit revennue and his care of his service and would shelter and protect himselfe under it to justifie an exorbitant action but if your Lordships call to mind the businesse of Customes for Tobacco which in truth were the Kings right and due and a great profit was thereby advanced and he trusted to advance it The King must loose of his former rents in the case of Custome and received a small rent in the case of Tobacco my Lord himselfe in the meane time imbursing such vast summes of money where is then the discharge of his trust where is his care to advance the Kings rents to encrease his revennue Compare that part of his answer with this and see what credit is to be given to his affirmation My Lords throughout the passages of his discourse he insinuates and never more then this day with the Peeres of the Realme magnifying them almost to Idolatrie and yet my Lords when he was in his kingdome in Ireland and had power over them what respect shewed he then to the Peeres of the kingdome when he judged some to death trampled upon others in misery committed them to prison and seized on their estates where then was the Peerage he now magnifies And to shew it was an insinuation for his owne advantage you may remember when there was an unlawfull Act to be committed that is the levying of money in the North what regard had he then to the Peeres of the kingdome when hee comes to justifie and boulster up high treason it selfe under the name and authoritie of the great Councell where most of the Peers of the Realm then were and so by this time I know what credit your Lordships give to his words spoken when he lyes under your mercy and power But what doe I speake of the Peers of the kingdome and his using of them My Lords he spared not his Soveraigne his Majestie in his whole defence for being charged with offences of a high nature hee justifies those offences under the pretence and under the authoritie of his Majestie our gracious King and Soveraigne even murder it selfe in the case of Denwit and my Lord Mountnorris Treason it selfe in the fifteenth Article by a command in Ireland and in the seven and twentieth by a pretended authoritie from his Majestie in the face of his people hee justifies my Lord Mountnorrice his sentence by a letter from his Majestie Denwits sentence by a Commission from his Majestie and hee read three or fower clauses to that purpose My Lords my Lord of Strafford doth very well know and if he doth not know it I have a witnesse to produce against him which I wil not examine but refer it to his owne Conscience that is the petition of right that the Kings servants are to serve him according to law and no otherwise he very well knew if an unlawfull act be committed specially to a degree of Treason and Murder the Kings authority and warrant produced is no justification at all So then my Lords to mention the Kings name to justifie an unlawfull act in that way can doe him no good and his owne understanding knowes it may doe the King harme if wee had not so gracious a King that no such thing can doe harme unto But my Lords to produce the Kings warrant to justifie his actions under his Patent and Command what is it else but so farre as in him lies in the face of his people to raise a cloud and exhale a vapour to interpose betwixt the King and his subjects whereby the splendour of his glory and justice cannot bee discovered to his people My Lords what is it else when the people make complaint against the Ministers that should execute justice of their oppression and slavery and bondage For the Minister when he is questioned to justifie this under the Kings authority what is it I say but as much as in that Minister lies to fix this offence to fasten this oppression upon the King himself to make it to be beleeved that the occasion of these their groanes proceeded from his sacred Majestie yet God be thanked the strength of that Sunne is powerfull enough to dispell these vapours and to disperse the cloud that hee would have raised but in the meane time my Lord is nothing to bee excused My Lords he may pretend zeale to the Kings service and affection to his honour but give me leave not to beleeve it since when he is questioned by all the Kings people and in the face of his people and offences laid to his charge which
them upon the bowels of the Kings subjects It is no more in effect Your Lordships have heard him the other day mentioning two Acts of Repeale and I expected he would have insisted upon them but it seemes he hath beene better advised and thinks them not worthy repetition nor indeed are they And if the matter of fact be proved upon the fifteenth Article I am confident he will find the Statute of 18. H. 6. to be of full force My Lords I am very sorry to heare that when levying of warre upon the Kings subjects is in agitation and he charged with high Treason he should make mention of the Yorkshire men and the army now on foot whereby he would insinuate that if he be charged with high Treason then they must be likewise though they lye quartered and have meat and drink with the assent of the people which may breed ill bloud for ought I know From the fifteenth Article he descends to the three and twentieth and that is the Article whereby he stands charged with speaking of words and giving of councell to his Majestie to incense him against his Parliament pretending a necessity and telling him he is loose and absolved from all rules of government that he had an Army in Ireland which he might make use of to reduce this kingdome In this he is pleased to begin with the testimony of my Lord Ranelagh conceiving an apprehension and feare in him that the Army should goe over to England which my Lord sayes is no more but his saying and master Treasurer Vane's I pray God my Lord Ranelagh had not much cause to feare but by the same rule he may lay a charge of unwarrantable feare upon all the Commons for sure the Commons of England did feare it else they would not make an Article of it But my Lord Ranelagh's feare did not arise from a slight cause and he shewed himselfe a good Common-wealths man in expressing it and he is to be commended for it howsoever it be apprehended by my Lord of Strafford For his observation of the single testimony of Mr. Treasurer Vane give me leave to take the same latitude as his Lordship did for he shewes to three or foure Articles what he could have proved as to the Article concerning the Army he could have proved the designe of it by Sir John Burlacy and some others if they had beene here But by this rule and liberty hee hath taken to alledge what he could have showne give me leave to tell you what we might have showne and are ready to shew We could have made it expresse and proved it by notes taken by Secretary Vane the fifth of May when the words were spoken which notes should have beene proved if we had proceeded on the three and twentieth Article to corroborate the testimony of Mr. Secretary Vane and that by two witnesses Wee could likewise have showne how we came to the knowledge of it it being by means unknowne to master Secretary Vane and have made him an upright Councellour and witnesse but we shall prove his intentions to bring in the Irish Army another way when I come to open my owne course and method My Lords hee pretends these words were spoken the fift of May but when they were testified by master Treasurer he did not speak of the fifth of May and yet now my Lord remembers the day and I wonder how hee came to the knowledge of the day unlesse he likewise remembred the words But that my Lord observes is That being spoken then how should he perswade the King that he had an Army in Ireland when in truth he had none there for the Army was not on foot till a moneth after This my Lords is plainly answered and if he had thought of his owne answer he had answered himselfe for he tels you that in April before he had taken a course for the levying of the Army he had nominated the officers giving direction for raising it And the day of the Rendezvous of the Army was appointed the 18. of May And so in his owne answer he makes an answer to the objection and the objection is taken away out of his own confession From that Article he falls to the seven and twentieth Article whereby he stands charged with levying money by force upon the Kings people in Yorkshire he is pleased to observe that all the proofes for the maintenance of that Article is onely the levying of money with foure souldiers by Sergeant Major Yaworth Where he is pleased to disdaine the war because it was so weak yet it was too strong for them God help them that were forced upon pain of life to pay it And whereas he pretends the warrrant was not from him I shall reserve that till I come to the Article and when I come to the proofes I beleeve it will remain fixed upon him And there he left his Statute Treason and now he fals to the second kind of Treason and that was the introductive or constructive Treason He begins with the third Article that is concerning some words that he should be charged to have spoken in Ireland I shal desire that your Lordships would be pleased to look upon your notes how he answers that Article My Lords sayes he I am charged to say that Ireland was a conquered Nation and that their Charters were nothing worth and bind the King no further then he pleaseth therefore I am a Traitor because I speak the truth There was his answer in his collection And for their Charters he sayes he might might very well say so for he intended it no otherwise but according to the validity of them for they were severall wayes questionable and ought not to bind unlesse they were good in law But if you look upon his Arguments he hath like a cunning Oratour omitted the principall part of the Article and that is that Ireland is a conquered Nation and they were to be governed as the King pleaseth the King might doe with them what he lists this hee omits although they be proved by three witnesses and are appliable to his intentions fully yet he could make use of so much as makes for him and leaves out the rest like your Lordships know whom Then he descends to the fourth Article and this concerns some words he should speak upon an occasion betwixt him and my Lord of Cork that he should tell my Lord of Cork he would have neither Law nor Lawyers dispute or question his orders And upon another occasion that he would make my Lord of Cork and all Ireland know that all Acts of State which are Acts of Councel there made or to be made should be as binding as any Act of Parliament This he said was proved but by one witnesse and I extremely marvell to heare him say so for the latter words wee proved by foure or five or six witnesses that is that he would have Acts of State as binding as Acts of Parliament Whereas he