Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	henry_n	thomas_n	william_n	45,902	5	7.8067	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91243	A plea for the Lords: or, A short, yet full and necessary vindication of the judiciary and legislative power of the House of Peeres, and the hereditary just right of the lords and barons of this realme, to sit, vote and judge in the high Court of Parliament. Against the late seditious anti-Parliamentary printed petitions, libells and pamphlets of Anabaptists, Levellers, agitators, Lilburne, Overton, and their dangerous confederates, who endeavour the utter subversion both of parliaments, King and peers, to set up an arbitrary polarchy and anarchy of their own new-modelling. / By William Prynne Esquire, a well-wisher to both Houses of Parliament, and the republike; now exceedingly shaken and indangered in their very foundations.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1648 (1648)	Wing P4032; Thomason E430_8; ESTC R204735	72,921	83

right to award Judgement in these cases without the King or them then which a fuller and clearer proofe cannot be desired In the self-same Parliament 1. R. ● num 41 42 43. Dame Alice Piers was brought before THE LORDS and charged by Sir Richard le Scrope with sundry misdemeanors which she denied hereupon divers Witnesses were examined against her Whereupon JVDGEMENT WAS GIVEN BY THE LORDS AGAINST HER that she should be banished and forfeit all her lands goods and tenements whatsoevèr To this Judgement neither King nor Commons were parties but the Lords only To these I might adde the cases of c See the doom of 〈◊〉 and treachery 〈◊〉 14 15. where the record is transcribed Sir William de Eleuham Sir Thomas Trivet Sir Henry de Ferriers and Sir William Farnden Knights and Robert Fitz Ralph Esquire Rot. Parl. 7. R. 2. num 24. sentenced and condemned by judgement of the Lords in Parliament pronounced by the Chancellour for selling the Castle of Burbugh with the armes and amm●nition in it to the Kings enemies without the Kings license 21. R. 2. Parl. Rot. Plac. Coronae num 27. where Sir Robert Pleasington is adjudged a Traytor after his death by the King by ●SSENT OF THE LORDS and num 15. 16. Sir Thomas Mortimers case num 17. Sir John Cobhams case * 31. H. 6. n. 45. 64. 65. ● 3. n. 16. to ●8 and num 28. Henry Bonoits case condemned in like manner of treason by the Lords with hundreds of Presidents more I shall only cite three more at large which are punctuall In the Parliament of 8. R. 2. n. 12. Walter Sybell of London was arrested and brought into the Parliament before the Lords at the suit of Robert de Veer Earl of Oxford for slandering him to the Duke of Lancaster and other Nobles for maintenance Walter denied not but that he said that certain there named recovered against him the said Walter and that by maintenance of the said Earl as he thought The Earl there present protested himself to be innocent and put himself upon the triall Walter thereupon was committed to Prison by the Lords and the next day he submitted himself and desired the Lords to be a mean for him saying he could not accuse him whereupon THE LORDS CONVICTED and FINED HIM FIVE HVNDRED MARKS TO THE SAID EARL for the which and for his fine and ransome he was committed to prison BY THE LORDS A direct case in point In the second Parliament in 7. R. 2. num 13. to 19. Iohn Cavendish a Fishmonger of London accused Michael de la Pool Knight Lord Cha●cellour of England first before the Commons and afterward before the Lords for bribery and injustice and that he entere●●●nto a Bond of x. l. to Iohn Ottard a Clerk to the said Chancellour which he was to give for his good successe in the businesse in part of payment w●●●eof he br●ught Herring and Sturgeon to Ottard and ye was delayed a●d could have no justice at the Chancellours h●nds and upon hearing he cause and examining wi●● o●fes upon Oath before THE LORDS the Chancellour was cleared The Chancellour thereupon required reparation for so great a slander the Lords being then troubled with other weighty matters let the Fish-monger to Bail and referred the matter to be ordered by the Judges who upon hearing the whole matter condemned Cavendish in three thousand marks for his slanderous complaint against the said Chancellour and adjudged him to prison till he had paid the same to the Chancellour and made fine and ransome to the King also which the Lords confirmed In the Parliament of 15. R. 2. nu 21. Iohn Stradwell of Begsteed in the County of Sussex was committed to the fleet by JVDGEMENT OF THE LORDS there to remain during the Kings pleasure for that he informed the Parliament that the Archbishop of Canterbury had excommunicated him and his neighbours wrongfully for a temporall cause appertaining to the Crown and Common Law wh●ch was ADIVDGED BY THE LORDS upon examination and hearing to BE VNTRVE These three eminent Presidents to which many more might be added of the Lords fining and imprisoning meere Commons only for slandering Peeres of Parliament even by false accusations against them in Parliament by way of complaint will ●●stify the Lords proceedings against Lilburn and Ov●rton for their professed Libells both against their Persons and Jurisdictions too To proceed to latter times in Parliaments of 18. and 21. Jacobi and 3. Car. not only the Lord * Cook 4. Instit p. 23. Chancellour Bacon and the Earl of Middlesex Lord Treasurer upon complaint of the Commons were censured and judged by the Lords alone but likewise Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michell and Dr Manwering all Commoners JUDICIALLY SENTENCED Doctor Pocklinton and Doctor Bray even for erroneous Books and Sermons were sentenced this Parliament by the Lords alone since these Master Clement Walker Esquire was imprisoned in the Tower and fined by the Lords for some words pretended to be spoken against the Lord Say and within these few moneths on● Morrice and foure or five more of his confederates were censured fined and impr●soned by the Lords alone for forging an Act of Parliament upon Sir Adam Littletons complaint with all the Commons privity or consents and above one hundred Commoner more have been imprisoned by them or fined this very Session of Parliament for breach of Priviledge contempts or misdemeanours by the Lords alone without the Commons yet no demurrer nor exceptions were taken by them or the Commons to their Iurisdiction who applauded this their Justice in some of these cases From all these cleare confessions of the Commons themselves in Parliament and punctuall presidents in print in former late Parliaments and in this now sitting it is undeniable That the King and Lords joyntly and the Lords severally without the King have an indubitable right of Judicature without the Common● vested in them not only of Peers themselves but likewise of C●mmoners in all extraordinary cases of Treason Felony Trespasse and other Misdemeanors triable only in Parliament which hath been constantly acknowledged practised and submitted to without dispute much more then have they such a just and rightfull power in case of breach of their owne priviledges of d Cooke 4 Instit p. 15. which none are or can be Judges but themselves alone And to deny them such a power is to make the Highest Court of Iudicature in the Realme inferiour to the Kings Bench and all other Courts of Justice who have power to judge and try the persons and causes of Commoners and to commit and fine them for contempts and breaches of Priviledges as our e See Brooke and Ashes Tables Tit. Contempts Fines pur Contempt Imprisonment Law bookes resolve and every mans experience can testifie The Lords right of Judicature being thus fully evicted against the false and ignorant pretences of illiterate Sectaries altogether unacquainted with our Histories and Records of Parliament

which they never yet read nor understood there remaines nothing but to answer some Presidents and Objections The Principall president insisted on by Lilburne Object 1. is the Protestation of the Lords in the case of * Cooke 2. Instit p. 50. Sir Simon Beresford 4. E. 3. nu 6. which I have already fully answered retorted and shall therefore here pretermit The second is Sir Edward Cookes Authority Object 2. and the presidents cited by him in his 4. Institutes p. 23. 24. of Judicature in Parliament where thus he writes It is to be knowne THAT THE LORDS IN THEIR HOUSE HAVE POWER OF JUDICATURE And the Commons in their House have power of Judicature and both Houses together have power of Judicature But the handling thereof according to the weight and worth of the matter would require a whole Treatise of it selfe and to say the truth it is best understood by reading the Judgements and Records of Parliament at large and the Journalls of the House of the Lords and the Booke of the Clerke of the House of Commons which is a Record as it is affirmed by Act of Parliament in An. 6. H. 8. c. 16. To which he addes these marginall Notes Vide Placita in Parlians Anno 33. E. 1. rot 33. Nicholas Seagrave adjudg● Par Praelatos COMITES BARONES ET ALIOS DE CONCILIO At the Parliament at Yorke Ap. 12. E. 3. Consideratum est per Praelatos Comites BARONES ET COMMVNITATEM ANGLIAE the Lord Audleys care At the Parliament at Westm 15. E. 2 Hugh le pier adjuge per les SEIGNIEURS COMMONS Rot. Parl. 50. E. 3. n. 34. Lord Nevils case Then he a●des See Rot. Claus 1 R. 2. n. 5. 8. 38. ●0 A tresage Councell le Roy Les SEIGNIORS COMMONS c. Rot. Parl. 2. H. 5. nu 1● Err●ra sinned THAT THE LORDS gave Judgement WIT●OVT PETITION OR AS●●NT OF THE COMMONS Rot. Parl. 28. H. 6. nu 10. and many others in the Reigne of King H. 6. and Kin E. 4. And of later times see divers notable Judgements at the prosecution of the Commons By THE LORDS at the Parliaments ●●●den 18. and 21. Iac. Regis against Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michell Viscount St. Albon Lord Chancellor of England the Earle of Middlesex Lord Treasurer of England whereby the due proceedings of Iudicature in such Caces doth appeare Then hee cites the cases of * 8. Eliz. Thomas Long * 23 Eliz. Arthur Hall * 2. A●●●l 1. Ma●●● and Muncton censured by the House of Commons only and by them fined and imprisoned without the Lords A●d concludes thus If any Lord of Parliament spirituall or temporall have committed any Oppression Bribery extortion or the like the HOUSE OF COMMONS BEING THE GENERALL INQUISITORS OF THE REALME comming out of all parts thereof may examine the same and if they find by the Vote of the House the charge to be true then they TRANSMIT THE SAME TO THE LORDS WITH THE WITNESSES and PROOFES From which passages of his some ignorantly have concluded That the Lords have no power of Judicature without but only joyntly with the Commons That all Commoners ought to be judged only by the Commons not by the Lords and That the Commons have a sole power of Judicature in cases of Commoners and the Lords no power but joyntly with them or upon their preceding Petitions and impeachments neither in case of Commoners nor Peers I answer that Sir Edward Cookes words are much mistaken and rightly understood warrant no such inferences but the contrary For first he clearely confesseth in direct termes That the Lords in their House have a power of judicature even without the Commons ha he de●med particularly in whose and in what cases out of the Judgements Records and Journals of Parliament at large to which he refers the Reader a being best understood by reading them which warrant the Lords judging fining imprisoning and condemning to death not only of Peers but of Commoners themselves without the Commons as I have fully manifested their could no such inference have been made Secondly ●e adde● That the Commons in their House have a power of Judicature From whence Lilburne and others inferre That they are and ought to be the sole Judges of all Commoners and not the Lords in all cases triable in Parliament But this is a most grosse mistake Sir Edward Cooke confining this Judicature of theirs only to these three c●ses First to matters and abuse concerning elections of Knights Citizens and Burgesses being Members of the Commons House the judgment and determination whereof the Commons alone of late times only have usually taken upon them without the Lords which he proves by Thomas Longs case 8. Eliz. and no greater antiquities of which elections the King and Lords in former times have been sole Judges for which I shall cite some memorable records worthy the Lords and ●●mmons consideration who now take upon them to suspend eje●● Judge their own Members elections without the Kings or Lords concurrence or privity a practice not heard of in former ages and of late originall In the Parliament holden at Westminster 5. H. 4. Rot. Parl. num 38. Thomas Thorpe his case Item because that the writ of summons of Parliament returned by the Sheriffe of Roteland was not sufficiently nor duely returned as the Commons conceived the said Commons prayed our Lord THE KING and THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT that this matter might be duly examined in Parliament and that in case their shall be default found in this matter that such a punishment might be inflicted which might become exemplary to others to offend againe in the like manner Whereupon our said Lord the King IN FULL PARLIAMENT commanded THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT TO EXAMINE THE SAID MATTER and to doe therein AS TO THEM SHOULD SEEME BEST IN THEIR DISCRETIONS And thereupon the SAID LORDS caused to come BEFORE THEM IN PARLIAMENT as well the said Sheriffe as William One by who was returned by the said Sheriffe for one of the Knights of the said County and Thomas Thorpe who was elected in full Countie to be one of the Knights of the said Shire for the said Parliament and not returned by the said Sheriffe And the said parties being duely examined and their reasons well considered in the said Parliament IT WAS AGREED BY THE SAID LORDS that because the said Sheriffe had not made a sufficient returne of the said writ THAT HE SHALL AMEND THE SAID RETURN and THAT HE SHALL RETURN THE SAID THOMAS FOR ONE OF THE SAID KNIGHTS as he was elected in the said Countie for the Parliament and moreover that the said Sheriffe for this default SHALL BE DISCHARGED OF HIS OFFICE and COMMITTED PRISONER TO THE FLEET and that he should MAKE FINE and RANSOME AT THE KINGS PLEASURE Loe here the Lords in Parliament at the Commons request and by the Kings command examining and giving judgement in case of undue election even without the

awarded him to the custody of the Marshall and to make fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure Whereupon the Commons REQUIRED by way of petition that he might lose all his Offices and no longer be of the Kings Councell which the King granted The Commons not joyning at all with the Lords in his judgement neither could they so joyne he being a Peer And for the Lord Nevill in that Parliament num 33. he was only accused not judged by the Commons Sixthly The case of 2. H. 5. rot Parl. num 15. that Error is there assigned that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons is a grosse mistake For the record only recites That Thomas Mountague Earle of Salisbury Sonne and Heire of Iohn Mountague Earle of Salisbury exhibited his petition in Parliament to reverse a judgement given against his said father in the Parliament at Westminster in the second year of King Henry the fourth Whereupon he exhibited certaine reversals of Judgements given in Parliament as making on his behalfe to the Lords consideration reversed for some errors assigned in those jadgements to wit one judgement given against Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster before King Edward the second at Pomfract the monday before the feast of the Annuntiation in the fifteenth yeare of his reigne and another Judgement against Roger de Mortymer late Earle of March in the Parliament of King Edward the third the Monday after the Feast of St. Katherine in the fourth yeare of his reigne at Westminster Which judgements being distinctly and openly read and fully understood Jo seemed TO THE KING and LORDS that the case of the death and execution of the said John late Earle of Sarum and of the judgement aforesaid against him given is not nor was like to the case of the executing of the said Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster nor to the case of the killing of Roger Earle of March nor to any judgement given against the said Thomas and Roger as aforesaid but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said Iohn late Earle of Sarum WERE A GOOD JUST and LEGALL DECLARATION and JUDGEMENT Per quod CONSIDERATUM FUIT in praesenti Parliamento PER PRAEDICTOS DOMINOS tunc ibidem existentes DE ASSINSU dicti Domini nostri Regis quod praefatus nunc COMES Sarum NIHIL CAPIAT PER PETITIONEM aut prosecutionem suam praedictam Et ulterius TAM DOMINI SPIRITUALES QUAM TEMPORALE supradicti JUDICIUMET DECLARATIONEM praedicta versus dictum Ioannem quondam Comitem Sarum ut praem●ttitur habita five reddita DE ASSENSU IPSIUS DOMINI REGIS AFFIRMARUNT FORE ET ESSE BONA JUSTA ET REGALIA et ea pro hujusmodi EX ABUNDANTI DISCREVERUNT ADJUDICARUNT TUNC IBIDEM This is all that is mentioned in this Parliament Roll concerning this businesse It appeares by the Parliament Roll of 2 H. 4. num 30. That Thomas Holland Earl of Kent Iohn Holland Earle of huntingdo● Iohn Mountagne Earle of Sarum Thomas Lord de Dispencer and Ralph omely Knight were impeached of high treason before the King and Lords in Parliament for levying actuall Warre against the King to destroy the King and his Subjects and for this taken and beheade and hereupon ALL ●●E LORDS TEMPORALL BEING IN PARLIAMENT BY ASSENT OF THE KING DECLARED AND ADJVDGED all the said persons TRAITORS for leavying Warre against the King and that as Traytors they should forfeit all the lands they had in fee simple the 5 day of Jannary the first yeare of the raigne of the King or after according to the Law of the Land with all their goods and chattells notwithstanding they were slaine upon the said levying of Warre without processe of Law So this Record To reverse this judgement was this Petition of Thomas Earle o● Sarisbury in 2. H. 5. exhibited without the errour assigned as appeares by the Par●iament roll but if it were that the Lords only gave Judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons as Sir Edward Cooke imagins 〈◊〉 the King and Lords who upon solemned bate over-ruled the errour abuses and Petitions and found this judg●ment and Declaration of 2. H. 4. given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent without the Commons TO BE GOOD JVST and LEGALL as they did ex abund●nti is a most undeniable proofe of the King and Lords sole right of JVDGEING and DECLARING HIGH TREASON in Parliament without the Commons as well in case of Commoners as Lords Ralph Lomely being but a Commoner and Knight though the rest were Peers and yet all joyntly adjudged Traytors and declared such only by the King and Lords without the Commons and the Judgement assured to be good by the Commons who in the Parliament of 13. H. 4. num 19. Petitioned the Iohn Lomley might be restored by act of Parliament and made capable to inherit his fathers lands thus attainted to which the King by ASSENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPORALL consented Seventhly the Parliament Roll of 28. H. 6. num 18. c. containes onely an Impeachment of High Treason against the King and other great misdemeanors against the Kingdome and wrongs to particular persons comprised by way of Articles in two distinct Bills brought up by the Commons and presented by William Tresham their Speaker to the King in the Lords House the 7. day of February against William de la Pole Duke of Suffolke to which they desired the Duke might give in his Answer by a certaine day which he did absolutly denying the Treason against the King and denying and excusing himselfe of the rest without putting himselfe upon the Tryall of his Peeres The Chiefe Iustice thereupon the 14. day of March by the Kings command asked this Question of the LORDS WHAT ADVISE THEY WOULD GIVE THE KING what is to doe futrher in this matter which advise was deferred till Monday then next following whereon nothing was done in that matter On Tuesday the 17. of March the King sent for all the Lords Spirituall and Temporall then being in Towne being 42. in all into his Inner Chamber within his Palace of Westminster where when they were all assembled hee then sent for the Duke thither who comming into the Kings presence kneeled downe and continued kneeling till the Chancellour of England had delivered the Kings command to him and demanded of him what he said to the Commons Articles not having put himselfe upon his Peerage Whereupon the Duke denyed all the Articles touching the Kings Person and state of the Realme as false and scandalous And so not departing from his said Answers submitted himselfe wholly to the Kings Rule and Governance without putting himselfe upon his Peerage Where thus the Chancellour told him That as touching the great and horrible things contained in the first Bill the King holdeth him neither declared nor charged And as touching the second Bill containing misprisons which are not criminall the King by force of his submission by his owne advise and

Committees and proceedings contrary to the rules of Law and Iustice to right all grieved Petitioners especially such who have waited at least seven yeares space at your doores for reparations relieve poore starved Ireland and raise up the almost lost honor power freedome and reputation of Parliaments by acting Honorably and heroically like your selves without any feare favour hatred or selfe-ends and confining your selves the Commons House to the ancient bounds and rules of Parliamentary Iurisdiction and proceedings and to excell all others as farre in Iustice Goodnesse and publike resolutions as you do in Greatnesse and Authority Which that you may effectually performe shall be the the prayer of Your Lordships in all humble Service W. PRYNNE A PLEA For the LORDS OR A short yet full and necessary Vindication of the Judiciary and Legislative Power of the House of Peeres and the Hereditary just Right of the Lords and Barons of this Realme to sit vote and judge in the high Court of Parliament THe treasonable and destructive designe of divers dangerous Anabaptists Levellers Agitators in the Army City Countrey and of Lilburne Overton their Champions and Ring-leaders in this Seditious Plot to dethrone the King unlord the Lords new-modell the House of Commons extirpate Monarchy suppresse the House of Peers and subvert Parliaments the onely obstacles to their pretended Polarchy and Anarchy are now so legible in their many late printed Petitions Libells Pamphlets and visible in their actings and publike proceedings that it rather requires our diligence and expedition to prevent then hesitancy to doubt or dispute them they positively protesting against and denying both King and Monarchy in their a A Remonstrance of many thousand a●zens to their own House of Commons p. 6. the just mans Justification p. 10. Regall Tyranny Discovered A Declaration from his Excellency and the Generall Counsell of the Army Ian. 11. 1647. p. 7. Speeches c. at a Conference newly published by Walker printed verbatim out of Dolman the Iesuit his Booke condemned Pamphlets and Remonstrances with the Power and Judicature of the House of Peers and their undoubted just Hereditary right to Vote act or sit in Parliament because they are not elected by the people as Knights and Burgesses are asserting b Lilburnes Iust Man in Bonds p. 1 2. A Pearl in a Dunghill The Free-mans Freedome Vindicated An Anatomy of the Lords Tyranny his Argument and Plea before the Committee against the Lords Authority his Petition to the Commons his Letters to Henry Martin Overtons Arrow of Defiance shot into the Prerogative Bowells of the House of Lords his Petition and Appeale A Defiance against Arbitrary Vsurpation The Agreement of the People and Petitions wherein it was presented to the House of Commons An Alarum to the House of Lords See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. p. 192. to 204. That they are no naturall issues of our Lawes but the Exorbitances and Mushromes of Prerogative the Wenns of just Government the Sons of Conquest and usurpation not of choice and election intruded upon us by power not made by the people from whom ALL POWER PLACE and OFFICE that is just in this Kingdome OUGHT TO ARISE meere arbitrary Tyrants Vsurpers an illegitimate and illegall power and Judicatory who act and Vote in our affaires but as INTRUDERS who ought of right not to judge censure or imprison any Commoner of England even for libelling against them refusing to appeare before them reviling and contemning them and their Authòrity to their faces at their very Barre as Lilburne Overton bost and print they did or breaking any of their undoubted Priviledges And to accomplish this their designe the better they endeavour by their most impudent flattery to ingage the House of Commons against the House of Peers the better to pull them downe stiling and proclaming them in their c Overtons Petition and Appeal to the High and mighty States the Knights and Burgesses in Parliament assembled Englands legall Soveraigne Power The R●monstrance of many thousands to their own House of Commons A printed Petition now in agitation of many Freeborne people to the only Supreme Power of this Realme the Commons in Parliament assembled The Anatomy of the Lords Tyranny An Alarum to the House of Lords See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. p. 154. to 204. Petitions and Pamphlets The ONLY Supreme legall Judicatory of the Land who ought BY RIGHT to judge the Lords and their proceedings from whom they appeale for right and reparations against the House of Peeres affirming That in the Commons House alone resides the formall and legall Supreme Power of England who ONELY are chosen by the people and THEREFORE IN THEM ONELY is the power of binding the whole Nation by making altering or abolishing Lawes without the Kings or Lords concurrent assents to whom they now absolutely deny any Negative voice making the Commons a compleat Independent Parliament of themselves and therefore present all their Petitions and addresses to them alone without any acknowledgement or notice of the House of Peers to whom they deny any right or title to sit or vote in Parliament unlesse they will first divest themselves of their Peerage and Barons right of Session and submit to stand for the next Knights and Burgesses place in the House of Commons that shall fall void where if they may have any voice or influence the meanest Cobler Tinker Weaver or Water-man shall be elected a Knight or Burgesse sooner then the best and greatest Peer and John of Leyden preferred before King or Prince Charles Sic Sceptra ligonibus aequanti which Petitions and Pamphlets of theirs have so puffed and bladdered up many Novices and raw Parliament-men in the Commons House unacquainted with the bounds proceedings and originall Constitution of Parliaments and the Lawes and Customes of England that they begin to act vote and dispose of the Army Navy c. without and against the Lords not expecting their concurrence contrary to all former proceedings of Parliament the Lords just Priviledges and their own Solemne League and Covenant to maintaine them which may prove destructive to both Houses the Parliament Kingdome and oppressive to their Representatives the people who generally dislike it if not timely redressed and breeds such a deadly feud between the Houses as may ruine them both and the Kingdome to boot The end of these Anabaptists Levellers and Lilburnians being only to * See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. where this is fully demonstrated destroy the Parliament by setting both Houses at variance they inveighing as bitterly against the power proceedings Ordinances Votes Power Members undue Elections and unequall Constitutions of the House of Commons as the Lords and therefore have so earnestly pressed in their d Lilburnes Letter to a friend Innocency and Truth justified and his late Letters to Cromwell Martin Sir Thomas Fairfax and others Englands Birthright Englands lamentable Slavery Another word to the wise Comparata Comparandis Liberty against Slavery The

witnesse Ingulph Beda Huntingdon Mathew Westminster Florent●us Wigorniensis Malmesbury Hector Boetius Speed and other in their Histories Antiquitates Ecclesiae Britanicae Spelmanni Concilia Tom 1. Sir Edward Cooke in his Preface to the 9. Report and fourth Institut c. 1. and above all others Mr. Seldens Titles of Honor. part 2. c. 5. Truth triumphing over falsehood Antiquity over Novelty p. 56. to 90. and Mr. Lambert in his Archaion there being little or no mention at all of any Knights of Sbires Citizens or Burgesses in any of our Parliaments and Councels before the Conquest or in the Conquerors time and his next Successors but of Earles Barons Nobles Archbishops and Bishops onely for the most part whom Sir Edward Cooke and others conceive were comprehended under the names of Sapientum or wise men Seniores populi extending to Peers too as they confesse or at least wise under these phrases k Spelman C. p. 194. praesentibus omnibus Ordinibus illius Gentis cum vtris quibusdam Militaribus rather Souldiers than Knights of which we finde mention in the Councel of Be●henceld l Spelman Ibid p. 21● An. 697. or omnium Sapientum Seniorum POPVLORVM totius Regni coupled with these pre-eminent Titles of Omnium Aldermannorum Principum Procerum Comitum who met together in a generall Councell under King Jue An. 713. Or m Spelman p. 318. cujuscunque Ordinis viros in the Conncell of Cloveskro An. 800. which expressions we finde are now and then mentioned in some ancient Councels and Parliaments though rarely And if that of n Hist p. 870. Ingulph and other our Historians and some Lawyers be true which o First institut f. 108. Sir Edward Cooke and p Titles of Honour part 2. ● 5. sec 3. p. 614 615. c. Mr. Selden deny that King Alfred first divided the Realme into Counties as all grant he did into Hundreds and Tithings and erected Hundred Courts wherein Knights of the Shire were alwayes yet are ought to be elected there could be no Knights of Shires at least if any Citizens or Burgesses to serve in Parliament before this division though there were Earles Dukes and Barons before his raigne who were present by the Kings summons not peoples elections at our Parliaments and Generall Councels as q Titles of Honour 2. chap. 5. sec 2. 3. 4. 5. Mr. Selden and r Glossarium Tit. Comitis Comitatus Sir Henry Spelman undeniably manifest Their sitting voting and judging therefore in Parliament being so ancient cleare and unquestionable ever since their first beginning till now and the sitting of Knights Citizens and Burgesses by the peoples election in our ancientest Parliaments and Councells not so cleare and evident by History or Records as theirs we must needs acknowledge and subscribe to their Right and Title or else deny the Knights Citizens and Burgesses rights in Parliament rather than theirs who have not so ancient nor cleare a Title or right as they Fourthly This Right and Priviledge of theirs is vested legally in them by the very Common-Law and Custome of the Realme which binds all men the unanimous consent of all our Ancestors all the Commons of England from age to age assembled in Parliament since we had any Parliaments who alwaies consented to desired and never once opposed the Lords sitting voting power or Judicature in Parliament and by Magna Charta it selfe wherein they are first mentioned and provided for Hereupon King Henry the third not long after Magna Charta was granted and at the same time it was proclamed and confirmed with a most solemne Excommunication in the presence of all the Lords and Commons by all the Bishops of England against the infringers thereof summoning a Parliament at London in the yeare 1255. to ayde him in his warrs in Apulia the Earles and Barrons absolutely refused to give him any assistance at all not onely because he had undertaken that warre without their advice but also for this reason ſ Math. Paris An. 1255. p. 884 885. Daniel p. 172 That ALL THE BARONS were not summoned by him to this Parliament AS THEY OUGHT TO BE ACCORDING TO THE TENOR OF MAGNA CHARTA whereupon they departing in discontent and refusing to sit longer the Parliament was disolved t Mr. St. Johns Speech concerning Shipmony p. 33. 1. H. 4. n. 21. 22 25. 36. And upon this very ground among others the Parliament of 21 R. 2. with all the Acts and proceedings therein were repealed and nulled by the Parliament of 1. H. 4. because the Lords who adhered to their King were summoned by him to the Parliament and some of the opposite party imprisoned impeached and omitted and many Knights of the shire were onely elected by the Kings nomination Letters to the Sheriffes And the Parliament it self kept by force viris armatis sagittarijs minensis brought out of Cheshire as an extraordinary guard quartered in the Kings Court at Westminster and about Charing Crosse and the Muse of which u Chron p 389. 390. Grafton and other Historians writes thus That they fell suddenly into so great pride of the Kings favour that THEY ACCOVNTED THE KING TO BE AS THEIR FELLOW and THEY SET THE LORDS AT NOVGHT yet few or none of them were Gentlemen but taken from the plough and Cart and other Crafts And after these rusticall people had a while courted they entred into so great a boldnesse that they would not let neither within nor without the Court to beat and slay the Kings good subjects to take from them their victualls and pay for them little or nothing at their pleasure as our free-quarterers doe now falling at last to ravish mens wives and daughters And if any man fortuned to complaine of them to the King he was soone rid out of the way no man knew how or by whom so as they did what they listed the King not caring to doe justice upon them but favoring them in their misdoings confiding in them and their guards against any others of the Kingdome which gave Lieges of his Kingdome great matter of commotion and discontent The bringing up of which guard to Westminster to force and overawe the Parliament to effect his owne designes is one principle Article exhibited against him by the Parliament for which he was deposed I pray God our New armed Guard and Courtiers at Whithall and the Muse of as meane condition as those fall not by degrees to the selfesame exorbitances contempt of the King Lords Parliament and oppression of the people to their generall mutining and discontent In the Parliament of 6 E. 3 N 1. Parl. 2. N. 5. 6. 8. 9. and most of the ensuing Parliaments in this Kings reigne and in divers Parliaments in Ric. 2. Henry 4. c. 5. 6. was found in the Parliament Roules that the Parliaments have beene proroged and adjourned from the dayes they were summoned to meet and have not sate nor acted

the said Earle ought to make fine and ransome at the will of the King Whereupon the said Earle most humbly thanked our Lord the King and the sayd Lords his Peers of Parliament FOR THEIR RIGHTFULL JUDGEMENT and the Commoners for their good affectious and diligence used and shewen in this behalfe And the said Earle further prayed the King that in assurance of these matters to remove all jealousies and evill suspitions that he might be sworn a new in the presence of the King the Lords and Commons in Parliament and the said Earle tooke an Oath upon the Crosier of the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a faithfull and loyall lige to our Lord the King the Prince his sonne and to the heires of his body inheritable to the Crown according to the Lawes of England Whereupon the King out of his grace pardoned him his fine and rausome for the trespas aforesaid After which num 17. the Lords spirituall and temporall humbly thanked the King sitting in his royall Throne in the white Chamber for his grace and pardon to the said Earle of his fine and ransome and likewise the Commons thanked THE LORDS SPIRITUALL and TEMPORALL FOR THE GOOD and JUST JUDGEMENT THEY HAD GIVEN AS PEERS OF PARLIAMENT TO THE SAID EARLE From this memorable record I shall observe First that though this Declaration of this Earles case was made by his Petition in the presence of the King Lords and Commons in Parliament according to the Statnte of 25. E. 3. yet the Lords only by Protestation in presence of the King and Commons claimed to be THE SOLE JUDGES OF IT as Peers of Parliament and belonging to them OF RIGHT S●condly That this claime of theirs in this case was acknowledged and submitted to both by the King and Commons and thereupon the Lords only after serious consideration of the case and Statutes whereon it depended gave the definitive sentence and judgement in this case that it was neither Treason nor Felony but Trespas only c. Thirdly That the Earle thanked the King only for his grace the Lords FOR THEIR JUST JUDGEMENT and the Commons only for their good hearts and diligence having no share in the judgement though given by the Lords both in the Kings and their presence and that the Commons themselves returned speciall thanks to the Lords spirituall and temporall on Parliament for their good and just judgement Fourthly That this judgement of the Lords only was finall and conclusive both to the King and Commons who aquiesced in it All that can be objected to evade this President Object is that this Judgement was given in case of a Peer wherein the Lords only are the Judges by Magna Charta c. 29. but not of a Commoner which is the question I answer Answ that though this judgement of theirs was in case only of an Earle who was a Peer triable * See Cooke 2. Inslit on Ma●na Charta c. 29. only by his Peers yet the King Lords in this Parliament the very same day gave Judgement of High Treason against Henry and Thomw Peircy one of them no Peer and OTHERS who were in their companie who were but Commoners and no Peers for levying warre against the King and that without the Commons as is evident by the Parliament Roll of 5. H. 4. nu 15. Et anxy mesme le vendreay AIVGGES PAR LE ROY ET SEIGNEIURS EN PARLEMENT que levier de guerre fait per les ditz Mounsieur Henry Mounsieur Thomas furont tenuz pur treason ceo si bien de eux mesmes come DE AUTERS qui fueront en lour compaigne au temps de dit lever which quite takes off this Objection Se● Mr. Prynnes Doome of Cowardice and Treacherie p. 2. 3. 4. 5. c. where these records are cited at large verbatim To put all out of question I shall instance in some few ancient prefidents more which are full and punctuall In the Parliament of 1. R. 2. num 38. 39. 40. The Commons prayed that all those Captaines who had rendred or lost Castles or Townes through default might be put to answer it in this Parliament and severely punished according to their deserts BY AWARD or Judgement OF THE LORDS and BARONS to eschew the evill examples they had given to other Governours of Townes and Castles Whereupon Sir Alexander de Buxton Constable of the Tower was commanded to bring BEFORE THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT William de Weston and Lord of Gomynes both of them Commoners on Friday the 27. of November to answer such Articles as should be surmised against them on the Kings behalfe Being brought BEFORE THE LORDS in full Parliament they were severally articled against at the command of THE LORDS by Sir Richard le Scrop Knight Steward of the Kings House and their severall Articles and answers to them in writing being read before THE LORDS Which done the Constable was commanded to bring them againe before THE LORDS on Saturday next ensuing being the 20. of November on which day it was shewed unto them severally by the said Steward by THE LORDS COMMAND That THE LORDS OF THE PARLIAMENT whose names are particularly mentioned in the Roll had met together and considered of their respective answers and that IT SEEMED TO THE LORDS AFORESAID that the said William had delivered up the Castle of Outherwycke to the Kings enemies without any duresse or want of victuals contrary to his alleagiance and undertaking safely to keep it and therefore THE LORDS ABOVE NAMED SITTING IN FUL PARLIAMENT ADJVDGE you TO DEATH THAT you SHAL BE DRAWN and HANGED But because our Lord the King is not informed of the manner of the Judgement the ex●cution of it shall be respited till the King be thereof in●ormed A●ter which Judgeme●t given it was shewed to the said John Lord of Gomynes by the 〈◊〉 Steward how the said LORDS had assembled and considered of his answer and THAT ●●●●●EEMED TO THE LORD sitting in full Parliament that without duresse or default of victualls or other necessaries for the defence of the Town or Castle of Arde and without the Kings command hee had evilly delivered and ●urrendred them to the Kings Enemies by his own default against all apparance of right or reason against his undertaking safely to keep the same Wherefore THE LORDS aforesaid here in full Parliament ADJUDE YOU TO DEATH And because you are a Gentleman and a Baronet and have served the Kings Grandfather in his Warrs and are no Leige●man of our Lord the King you shall be beheaded without having OTHER JUDGEMENT And because that our Lord the King is not yet informed of the manner of this Judgement the execution thereof shall be put in respite untill our Lord the King be informed thereof Loe here two expresse Judgements given in Parliament by the Lords alone without King or Commons in case of Treason even against Commoners themselves And an expresse acknowledgement of the Commons of the Lords

Iudicature and this is all which is proved by 15. E. 2. Hugh Spencers case who was judged and banished by an Act of Parliament intituled Exilium Hugonis le Spencer printed in old Magna Chartaes as Sir Edward Cooke himselfe reports in Calvins case 7. Report f. 11. b. and the Lord Audlyes case 12. E. 2. is the same the Commons having no right to judge them being Peers by the very * See Cooke 2. Instit f. 49. 50. 51. Statute of Magna Charta c. 29. but only the Peer except in a Legislative way by Act or Bill Secondly That in all cases of difficultie where the King shall please to demand the advise and opinions of both Houses of Parliament joyntly there both of them may and ought to joyne in delivering their opinions and Judgements of the case or thing propounded and this is all that * Cooke 3. I●q● p 7. where is Case of ●●grave is cited at large Sir Nicholas de Seagraves case proves 31. E. 1. rot 33. Who being charged in Parliament in presence of the King Earles Barons and OTHERS OF THE KINGS COUNCEL not the Commons or Burgesses but the Iudges and Kings learned Councell at Law * See the Free-holders Grand Inquest 2. 39. 40. 41. 42. and Privy Councell who were assistants to the Lords as I conceive and others of his Privy Councell which Sir Edward Cooke would have to expresse the Commons in Parliament then and there present that the King in the wars of Scotland being among his enemies Nicholas Seagrave his leigman who held of the King by Homage and fealty and served him for his ayd in that warre did maliciously move discord and contention without cause with John de Crombewell charging him with many enormous crimes and offered to prove it upon his body To whom the said John answered that hee would answer him in the Kings Court c. and thereupon gave him his faith After which Nicholas withdrew himselfe from the Kings host and ayd leaving the King in danger of his enemies and adjourned the said John to defend himselfe in the Court of the King of France and prefixed him a certaine day and so as much as in him was subjected and submitted the Dominion of the King and Kingdome to the subjection of the King of France and to effect this hee tooke his journey towards Dover to passe over into France All which he confessed and submitted himselfe therein de alto et basso to the Kings pleasure And hereupon the King willing HABERE AVISAMENIUM to have the advise of the EARLES BARONS LORDS magnatum and OTHERS OF HIS COUNCELL enjoyned them upon the Homage fealty and allegiance wherewith they were obliged to him quod ipsi fideliter CONSVLERENT they should faithfully ADVISE HIM what punishment should be inflicted for such a fact thus confessed Qui omnes habito super hoc diligenti tractatu avisamento c. Who all having had thereupon diligent debate and advise having considered and understood all things contained in the said fact DICVNT not by way of Iudgement judicially pronounced but of answer to the Kings question propounded and as their opinion of the cause Said that this fact DESERVES losse of life and members c. So as this offence notes Sir Edward Cooke was then adjudged in Parliament to be High Treason But under his favour First here was no Judgement at all given against the party himselfe but only an opinion and advise touching his case not pending judicially in Parliament by way of Inditement or Impeachment but voluntarily proposed by the King in answer to the Kings question and so it can be no proofe of any actuall proper Judicature vested in both Houses Secondly For ought appeares this question was only propounded to the Earles Lords Barons and the Kings Councell that assisted them and so only to the House of Peers not to the commons and answered resolved only by them * See the Freeholders grand Inquest p. 39. 40. 41. 42. aliorum de Concilio suo not expressing nor including the Commons as I apprehend being never so intitled in any Parliament Records for ought I can find And then it followes that the LORDS ONLY IN THAT AGE were the Judges even of Commoners cases Thirdly Admit the Commons were included yet it proves only a right of advising and delivering their opinions with the Lords when required by the King not of judging or pronouncing sentence Fourthly Sir Edward Cooke citing this president to prove That both Houses together have power of Iudicature must grant that even in 33. E. 1. there were two distinct Houses of Parliament who upon speciall occasions as now at conferences c. met and advised together and therefore the division of the Houses was before Edward the third his raigne and very probable as ancient as this summoning of Knights Citizens and Burgesses of the Parliament which some make no ancienter then King Henry the first or King Henry the third In the 40. yeare of his reigne Father to King Edward the first So as this president makes quite against the Levellers and Lilburnians designes The Freeholders Garnd Inquest p. 13. 14. 15. and opinions Fourthly Sir Iohn at Lees case 42. E. 3. num 20. said to be adjudged by the Lords and Commons is somewhat mistaken For the record only mentions That the 21 day of May the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and ayd granted on which day ALL THE LORDS SVNDRY OF THE COMMONS dined with the ●ing After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee was brought before the King LORDS COMMONS next aforesaid who dined with the King to answer certaine objections made against him by William Latymer about the wardship of Robert Latymer that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London where by duresse of imprisonment he inforced the said William to surrender his estate unto him which done some other Articles were ob●ected against the said Sir Iohn Of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himselfe HE was committed to the Tower of London there to remaine till he had made fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly And then the said Lords and Commons departed After which he was brought before the Kings Councell at Westminster which COVNSELL ORDERED the said ward to be released into the Kings hands So as this record proves not this judgement was given in the Parliament house nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn but rather the King and his Councell in the presence of the Lords and Commons Fifthly The judgement given against the Lord Latymer 15. E. 3. Parl. rot num 27. which was for his default in government against the profit of the King and Realm procuring of grants to the destruction of the Staple and Towne of Calayes and levying Impositions upon woolls was given in full Parliament BY THE BISHOPS and LORDS who

at all because some of the Lords were not come by reason of foule weather shortnesse of warning or other publike imployments all their personall presence in Parliament being reputed necessary and expedient And 20. R. 2. N. 8. The Commons themselves in Parliament required the King to SEND FOR SUCH BISHOPS and LORDS WHO WERE ABSENT to come to the Parliament before they would consult of what the Chancellor propounded to them in the Kings name and behalfe to consider of To recite no more ancient Presidents in the Parliament of 2. Caroli the Earle of Arundell sitting in the Parliament being committed by the King to the Tower of London about his sonnes marriage May 25 1626. without the Houses privity and consent whereby their Priviledges were infringed and the House deprived of one of their Members presence thereupon the Houses of Peeres adjourned themselves on the 25 and 26. of May without doing any thing and upon the Kings refusall to release him they adjourned from May 26. till June 2. refusing to sit and so that Parliament disolved in discontent his imprisonment in this case being a breach of Priviledge contrary to Magna Charta And not long after the beginning of this Parliament upon the Kings accusation and impeachment of the Lord Kimbolton and the five Members of the Commons House * An Exact collection part 1. both Houses adjourned and sate not as Houses till they had received satisfaction and restitution of those Members as the Journals of both Houses manifest it being an high breach of their Priviledges contrary to the Great Charter If then the Kings bare not summoning of some Peares to Parliament who ought to sit there by their right of Perage or impeaching or imprisoning any Peere unjustly to disable them to sit personally in Parliament be a breach of the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme and of Magna Charta it selfe confirmed in above 40. succeeding Parliaments then the Lords right to sit vote and Judge in Parliament is as firme and indisputable as Magna Charta can make it and consented to and confirmed by all the Commons people and Parliaments of England that ever consented to Magna Charta though they be not eligiable every Parliament by the freeholders people as Knights and Burgesses ought to be and to deny this birth-right and Priviledge of theirs is to deny Magna Charta it selfe and this present Parliaments Declarations and proceedings in the case of the Lord Kimbolton a member of the House of Peers Fifthly The ancient Treatise intituled * See Cooke ● Justit p. 12. for the Antiquity and for the Authority of this Treatise The manner of holding Parliaments in England in Edward the Confessors time before the Conquest rehearsed afterwards before William the Conqueror by the discreet men of the Kingdome and by himselfe approved and used in his time and in the times of his Successors Kings of England if the Title be true and the Treatise so ancient as many now take it to be determines thus of the Kings and Lords right to be personally present in all Parliaments The King IS bound by all meanes possible TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT unlesse he be detained or let there from by BODILY SICKNESSE and then he may keep his Chamber yet so THAT HELYE NOT WITHOUT THE MANOUR OR TOWNE WHERE THE PARLIAMENT IS HELD and then he ougth to send for twelve persons of the greatest and best of them that are summoned to the Parliament that is two Bishops two EARLES two BARONS two Knights of the Shire two Burgesses and two Citizens to looke upon his person to testifie and witnesse his estate and in their presence he ought to make a Commission and give Authority to the Archbishops of the Peace the steward of England and Cheife Justice that they joyntly and severally should begin the Parliament and continue the same in his name expresse mention being made in that Commission of the cause of his absence then which ought to suffice and admonish the OTHER NOBLES cheife men in the Parliament together with the evident testimony of the twelve Peers of theirs The reason is BECAVSE THERE WAS WONT TO BE A CRY OR MURMVR IN THE PARLIAMENT FOR THE KINGS ABSENCE BECAUSE HIS ABSENCE IS HURTFULL and DANGEROUS TO THE WHOLE COMMONALTY OF THE PARLIAMENT and KINGDOME WHEN THE KING SHALL BE ABSENT FROM HIS PARLIAMENT Neither indeed OUGHT OR MAY HE BE ABSENT BUT ONELY IN THE CASE AFORESAID After which it followes The Archbishops Bishops and other cheife of the Clergy ought to be summoned to come to the Parliament and Also EVERY EARLE and BARON and their PEERS OUGHT TO BE SUMMONED and COME TO THE PARLIAMENT c. Touching the beginning of the Parliament The Lord the King shall sit in the mi●st of the great bench and is bound to be present in the first and last day of Parliament And the Chancellors Treasurer and Barons of the Eschequer and justices were wont to record the defaults made in Parliament according to the order following In the third day of the Parliament the Barons of the Cinqueports shall be called and after wards the BARONS of England after them the EARLES Whereupon if the Barons of the Cinqueports be not come the Barony from whence they are shall be amerced at an hundred markes and an Earle at one hundred pounds After the same manner it must be done to those who are Peers to Earles and Barons After which it relates the manner of place of the Earles Barons and Peers in Parliament Then addes The Parliament may be held and OVGHT every day to begin at one of the clocke in the afternoone at which time THE KING IS TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT and ALL THE PEERS OF THE KINGDOME None of all the Peers of the Parliament MAY OR OUGHT TO DEPART alone from the Parliament unlesse he have obtained and that in full Parliament leave from the KING and of ALL HIS PEERS so to doe and that with all there be a remembrance kept in the Parliament roll of such leave and Liberty granted And if any of the Peers during the terme of the Parliament shal be sick or weake so as he is not able to come to the Parliament then he ought three dayes together send such as may excuse him to the Parliament or else two Peers must go and view him and if they finde him sicke then he may make a Proxy Of the Parliament the King is the Head the beginning and ending So this ancient Treatise The Statute of 5. R. 2. Parl. 2. ch 4. enacts by COMMAND of the King and ASSENT of the Prelates LORDS and COMMONS in Parliament That all and singular persons and Commonalties which from henceforth shall have the Summons of the Parliament shall come from henceforth to the Parliament in the manner AS THEY BE bound TO DOE and hath been ACCVSTOMED within the Realme of England OF OLD TIME And every person of the said Realme which from henceforth shall have the