Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A75434
|
An answer to the Lord Digbies speech in the House of Commons; to the bill of attainder of the Earle of Strafford, the 21th. of Aprill. 1641. Written by occasion of the first publishing of that speech of his Lordships. And now printed in regard of the reprinting of that speech.
|
|
1641
(1641)
|
Wing A3420; Thomason E198_3; ESTC R11361
|
12,154
|
27
|
no expectance of more then a single testimony fortified with circumstances some time before his Lordship gave over his former fervor Or if it should bee admitted that there is no improbality of such an unwilfull mistake in Mr. Secretary Vane then it cannot be denyed but that an other Counsellor of that Iunto might as easily have committed the same or the like errour in his notes and allowing me this I shall then beseech his Lordship without prejudice to Mr. Secretary to give himselfe a good reason why that ground of his accusation that spurre of his prosecution that basis of his Iudgement of the Earle of Strafford as unto Treason should be quite vanisht away to his understanding so soone as hee knew the notes were Sir Henry Vanes which till that instant had beene in such force of beliefe with him that had it remained in the same hee should not have beene tender in the Lord Straffords condemnation For in the scales of my weake Iudgement there is no such difference in the weight of two Counsellors notes especially those which proved to be Mr. Secretary Vanes having beene at last though slowly confirmed by his memory upon oath without helpe of his paper whereas those of some other Counsellors might have proved inferior in those two great credentiall circumstances for ought his Lordship had then heard or had reason to imagine For it will not helpe his Lordship to say that hee hath expressed himselfe in those wary termes that to his understanding that ground is quite vanisht away as unto Treason toward the legall proofe whereof a single witnesse is no better then none because no notes could have supplyed the defect of another witnesse and all the rest of the Iunto had already upon their oathes remembred nothing of this matter Before his Lordship changed his judgement and for ought hee could know might have continued to doe so not withstanding the production of any of their notes which they upon their re-examination might also have evaded as his Lordship would these of Mr. Secretaries So that upon the whole matter had this particular of the Irish Army beene the sole charge and proved no otherwise then his Lordship imagined it would have beene that is to say by Sir Henry Vanes single testimony without his notes and some other Counsellors nores without his testimony I cannot see how his Lordship could judiciously have condemned the Lord Strafford of treason with innocence according to his plinciples And as for a diffusing of a complexion of treason over all if that particular had beene sufficiently witnessed or becomming a With to bind all the scattered and lesser branches as it were into a faggot of Treason Sure the antecedent words are so much more powerfull to that effect as they are more comprehensive and they were clearly deposed by my Lord the Earle of Northumberland as well as by Sir Henry Vane though no other of the Iunto remembred any thing of them neither which doth take off much of the strangenesse of Mr. Secretaries single testimony and I beleeve hath bin the ground whereupon many a tender conscience hath passed that Bill wherein his Lordship was more scrupulous then I canyetfind sufficient cause for For I crave leave to aske his Lordship this Question whether if some miscreant had been tampering with others to take away the life of the King and this had beene evidenced by two witnesses whereof one had deposed that hee advised the doing of it by poyson as the surest and safest way the other denying those words upon oath should notwithstanding have sworn clearely that hee heard him perswade the killing of the King and giving reasons for the necessity and lawfulnesse thereof and his Lordship had beene one of the Iury whether hee would have made any more bones of condemning that villany then if they had both agreed in a tale touching the matter of poyson And if his Lordship could have swallowed that difference in their depositions well enough it may then be a matter worthy of his further enquiry from what quarter that Gnat came which stuck so fast with his Lordship in a case fully paralell There resting as little doubt in one that his Majesty might lawfully have imployed the Irish Army to reduce this kingdome if he might and was to have done every thing that power would admit for the raising of monies otherwise after the Parliament had not supplyed him as there would have rested in another whether he might have poysoned the King after he had been satisfied that he might have killed him The Lord Strafford saw very well that the knot of the With was in this part of that desperate advise of his and the Lord Digby may remember the poor shift he made to loose it by explaining himselfe thus His Majesty was to doe every thing that power would admit that is every thing that power would lawfully admit to the doing wherof I suppose his Majesty needed not to be loosed and absolved from all rules of government And so for those other words in the end of the 22. Article that his Majesty should first try the Parliament here and if that did not supply him according to his occasions he might then use his prerogative as he pleased to leavy what he needed that he should be acquitted both of God and man if he tooke some other courses though it were against the will of his subjects And the declaration he made in open counsell mentioned in the end of the 21 Article That he would serve his Majesty in any other way in case the Parliament did not supply him that is lawfull way and lawfull courses said the Lord Strafford now he found the point of these mischievous words turned upon himselfe And yet there was a time when no man urged with more vehemencie that no such Prerogative courses to raise monies could be lawfull and I am sure no lawfull courses at any time would have beene against the wills of any of his Majesties subjects This was all that the mighty wit of the Lord Strafford could devise in avoydance of the stabbing guilt of that most treacherous and wicked Counsell of his But the Lord Digby helpeth him with many better guards First by professing that he can have no notion of any bodies intent to subvert the Lawes treasonably but by force What a wide doore hath his Lordship in few words set open to wicked Iudges and Counsellors to trample the publike liberty of Kingdomes and States under foot and then to escape without punishment or with lesse then can restraine them or secure others from their lewd practises May not their concurrence and constancy in giving such wicked judgements counsels upon all emergent occasions be as sure evidences of their intents to subvert the Lawes as the readinesse of sword-men to abet and maintaine them therein May not a free mighty Monarchy be thus in an age or two quietly converted into a most slavish and impotent tyrannie by the pen and
AN ANSWER TO THE LORD DIGBIES Speech in the House of COMMONS To the Bill of Attainder of the Earle of Strafford the 21th of April 1641. Written by occasion of the first publishing of that speech of his Lordships And now printed in regard of the reprinting of that Speech Printed in the yeare 1641. AN ANSWER To the Lord Digbies Speech in the House of COMMONS To the Bill of Attainder of the Earle of Strafford the 21. of April 1641. THE interest which every good subject hath in the actions of the King and State is sufficient to defend him from the imputation of being a busie body in maintaining the Justice of them That and my desire to doe the Lord Digby service by endeavoring to give him satisfaction in those scruples which made him differ from his former selfe have moved me to enter into an examination of the grounds of that change which his Lordsh hath declared in his speech to the Bill of Attainder of the Lord Strafford They are but two The first and maine is the fayling of that in the proofe which induced his Lordsh to consent that it was fit the Lord of Strafford should be accused of Treason which was his advising the King to imploy the Army of Ireland to reduce England For admitting the circumstances of Master Secretary Vanes three severall examinations at the Preparatory Committee to be the same his Lordship hath reported yet why they should prevaile so much with his Lordship as to work to an utter overthrow of his evidence as unto the Army of Ireland I must confesse I therefore cannot comprehend because all his Lordship doth or would have others inferre thereupon is That hee who twise upon oath with time of recollection could not remember any thing of such abusines might well a third time misremember somewhat For certainely notes taken by Sir Henry Vane himselfe of words spoken by the Lord Strafford either at the time and upon the place when and where they were uttered or soone after when they were fresh in memory are a stronger confirmation that his remembrance at last fixed upon the point of truth notwithstanding the long trepidation about it then the notes of any other Counsellor could have beene And there was a time when his Lordship avoweth that hee was fortified in his beliefe by the imagination that the notes hee had beene told of would have proved some other Counsellors So strong indeed to my understanding that I cannot see how the validity of Mr. Secretaries testimony can be in the least degree infringed without making a great breach into his conscierce For if I should allow which I doe not that there could be no other use of committing those venemous parts of discourses to paper but to accuse men and to bring them into danger certainely it then behooved Mr. Secretary to bee very carefull that the notes he tooke were no such disioynted fragments as by falling into other hands as it hapned might make a great Minister of state and his fellow Counsellor to bee thought to have said that which was never intended by him And if it betrue as I rather beleeve that Mr. Secretaries end in registring that indeed truly venemous advise of the Lord Strafford was to make sure of his memory in case hee should ever be called to testifie what had passed at that Iunto which hath also hapned it then behoved him no lesse to consider well what hee put downe in writing for the support of his memory and much more to recollect himselfe very well before hee deposed any thing in remembrance of his notes after the paper was burnt And considering his having at first rashly said that hee could not charge the Lord Strafford with that of the Irish Army it was a great providence of God that a copy of the paper hee had burned should have beene taken produced and attested in the manner it was without his having had any hand in any of them For I doe not know even what I should have thought of Master Secretaries testimony without this forraine helpe although with it I think no single testimony can be stronger and that his had not beene so strong though hee had at first deposed the same hee did at last as it is now notwithstanding his variation taking in the confirming circumstances from without I humbly beseech the Lord Digby who I see hath a noble and Christian care not to have any thing driven to an aspertion on Master Secretary first to thinke well upon the things I have now suggested to his consideration touching the necessity which in duty lay on Mr. Secretary to take heed that there were not a syllable nor title amisse in his notes and then to tell himselfe what place there is left for imagining there might bee a mistake of herefor there or this for that and that it is probable there was so since it is confest on all hands that the debate then was concerning a warre with Scotland For that there was any such mistake in the copy of his notes cannot be fancied without infinite injury to Mr. Secretaries sonne and to that most worthy Gentleman Master Pimme who took the copie with a purpose to make the use hath beene made of it and who I heare have in generall but high termes averred the truth thereof having both had a sight of the originall and being both of untainted and undoubted veracity And that Master Secretary could not so mistake in the making of his memoriall is very manifest by the incoherence of the Lord Digbies Criticisme with the whole context of the preceding words viz. That having tryed the affections of his people his Majestie was loose and absolved from all rules of government and was to doe euery thing that power would admit and that his Majesty had tryed all wayes and was refused and should be acquitted both with God and man and that hee had an Army in Ireland which hee might imploy to reduce this Kingdome For what need was there to make so great a Muster of things done in England for the acquitting of his Majestie with God and man towards the employing of the Irish Army to reduce the Kingdome of Scotland And though the primary debate of that day was concerning a warre with Scotland yet that debate must needs bring in a second viz. how monies might be raised in England towards the making of that warre the Parliament having refused to supply his Majestie as the Lord Strafford most wickedly slaundered the house of Commons And if in the Lord Digbies conceit it were not hard for Mr. Secretary to mistake in the manner aforesaid then why was his Lordship so easily engaged to prosecute his accusation of the Lord Strafford of high Treason with so much earnestnesse founding his judgement on a Basis that might so easily faile and which by the wavering of Mr. Secretary in his testimony hee had cause to feare would faile nay which had already actually fayled so farre that there was