Master Glyns REPLY TO THE EARLE OF STRAFFORDS DEFENCE OF The severall Articles objected against him by the House of COMMONS Published by speciall direction out of an authentick Copy LONDON Printed for Lawrence Chapman Anno 1641. Master GLYNS Reply to the Earle of STRAFFORDS Defence My Lord of Strafford having concluded the recapitulation of his evidence Mr. Glyn applied himselfe to their Lordships in manner following MAy it please your Lordships my Lord of Strafford as your Lordships have observed hath spent a great deale of time in his evidence and in his course of answering hath inverted the order of the Articles He hath spent some time likewise in defending the Articles not objected against him wherein he hath made a good answer if in any wee shall presume to withdraw a while and rest upon your Lordships patience and I doubt not but to represent my Lord of Strafford as cunning in his answer as hee is subtill in his practice The Committee withdrawing for about the space of halfe an houre and then returning to the Barre Mr. Glyn proceeded as followeth My Lords your Lordships have observed how the Earle of Strafford hath been accused by the Commons of England of high Treason for a purpose and designe to subvert the fundamentall Lawes of both the kingdomes of England and Ireland and to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannicall government The Commons have exhibited Articles in maintenance of that charge My Lord of Strafford hath thereunto answered in writing The Commons have proceeded to make good their charge by proofe and thereunto my Lord of Strafford hath made his defence and this day my Lord of Strafford hath taken upon him to recollect his evidence and make his observation upon it the most he could to his advantage My Lords wee that are intrusted for the house of Commons stand here to recollect the evidence on our part and to apply it to the generall charge and how farre it conduces thereunto My Lord of Strafford in recollecting the evidence of his defence as I did mention before hath under favour exprest very much subtilty and that in divers particulars which I shall represent to your Lordships My Lords before I enter upon the recollection of the proofes produced on the behalf of the Commons I shall make some observations and give some answer to that recollection of his though very disorderly to the method I propounded to my selfe And first in generall it will appeare to your Lordships looking upon your notes and observing his recollection that he hath used the repetition of evidence on both sides in such manner as you know who useth Scripture that is to cite as much as makes for his purpose leave out the rest And likewise that in repetition of the evidence he hatâ— mis-recited plainly very much of the proofs on both sides likewise hath pretended some proofes to be for his defence which indeed were not and hee hath taken this farther advantage when it makes for his defence he hath disjoynted the proofes and testimonies and severed them asunder that it might appeare to your Lordships like raine falling in drops which considered in distinct drops bring no horrour or seeming inconvenience with them but when they are gathered together into an entire body they make an Inundation and cover the face of the earth He would not have your Lordships look on those Testimonies together but distinctly and asunder wch being put together look horrid as will appeare to your Lo. when you duly consider of them These bee the generall observations which in my Answer I doubt not but to make good But before I shall enter into observations of what hee hath spoken I shall answer in generall to some things which hee hath in generall alledged In the first place hee hath made a flourish this day and severall other dayes in the way of his defence That if hee could have had longer time hee could have made things appeare clearer and have produced more proofes Give mee leave to informe your Lordships that he is no way straightned of time for he hath bin charged above three months since he knew what was laid to his charge and therefore his pretence of want of time and of his disabilities to make better proofes are but flourishes And it appears plainly whatsoever he hath had occasion to make use of even the least paper though hee fetched it from Ireland there is not one wanting he hath copies of papers from the Councell Table from the Parliament of Ireland and all that may any way tend to his justification and yet he stands upon that flourish that if he had had time he could have made it more cleare My Lords he hath mentioned often this day and oftner the dayes before that many of the Articles laid to his charge are proved but by one witnesse and thereupon he takes the advantage of the Statute of E. 6. that sayes A man ought not to be condemned for high Treason without two witnesses My Lords this is a fallacy knowne to his own breast I doubt not and not taught him by any of his Councell or others learned The Treason laid to his charge is the subverting of the Lawes the evidence is the Articles proved and though some one Article appeares to be proved but by one yet put the evidence together you shall never find it to bee within the words or meaning of the Statute for the charge is proved by a hundred witnesses and because one part of the evidence is proved onely by one witnesse since when you put them together you will find a hundred witnesses it is not within the words nor meaning of the Statute neither will his Councell direct him to say so I am confident My Lords another observation I shall be bold to make is that hee was pleased to cast an aspersion as we must apprehend upon them that be trusted by the house of Commons this day That we that stand here alledged and affirmed things to be proved that are not proved Hee might have pleased to have spared that language we stand here to justifie our selves that we doe not use to expresse any language but what our hearts and consciences tels us is true and howsoever he is pleased to cast it upon us I am confident I shall invert it upon himselfe and make it appeare that hee hath bin this day guilty in the highest degree of what he most unjustly layeth to our charge And now my Lords to enter upon the particulars hee hath beene pleased to make it his generall Theame to day though hee hath not spoke much to day but what he hath spoken formerly that these particulars considered by themselves make not a Treason and therefore put together he wonders how they should make a Treason Several misdemeanours can never make a murther and severall murders can never make a Treason and he wonders it should be otherwise in this case My Lords he did instance it if my memory failes me not in
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
gives them in give mee leave to mention and say we had a ground to put them into charge and could have proved them if there had been need punctually and expresly and I beleeve little to my Lords advantage But Your Lordships I think doe remember my Lady Hibbots case where the Lady Hibbots contracts with Thomas Hibbots for his inheritance for 2500. l. executes the contract by a Deed and Fine levied deposits part of the money and when a Petition was exhibited to the L. Deputy and Councell for the very estate your Lordships remember how this came in judgement before my Lord Deputy there was but a petition delivered there was an answer made and all the suggestions of the petition denied yet my Lord spake to Hibbots himselfe that was willing to accept the money not to decline the way that he was in by petition five hundred pound more will doe him no hurt to carry into England with him and yet without examination of a witnesse a Decree was made to deprive this Lady of her estate And the purchasing of this land by my Lord of Strafford was proved by two witnesses though not absolutely yet by confession of Sir Robert Meredith and others whose names were used in trust for my Lord of Strafford and that it proved according to my Lord of Straffords prophecie for the man had five hundred pounds gaine above the Contract with my Lady Hibbots But after the lands were sold for seven thousand pound so that the Lady Hibbots offence was her making of a bargain whereby to gain five hundred pounds But there was no offence in my Lord to make a bargaine for three thousand pounds and to gain foure thousand pound presently this you see proved by Hibbots the party and by master Hoy the son of the Lady Hibbots So that here is a determination of a cause before the Councell Table touching land which was neither plantation nor Church-land without colour of the instructions contrary to law to statute to practice and if this be not an exercising of an unlawfull jurisdiction over the Land and Estates of the subject I know not what is In his answer to this case hee did open it yet whether he mistook or no I know not that hee had a letter from the King but he produces none in evidence and that is another mis-recitall I am sorry he should mis-recite and fix it upon the person of his Soveraigne in a case of this nature Now he falls more immediately upon the liberty of the subject and that is by the Warrant mentioned in the ninth Article to be issued to the Bishop of Downe and Conner whereby he gives power to him and his Officers to apprehend any of the Kings subjects that appeared not upon Proces out of his Ecclesiasticall Courts expresly contrary to law and your Lordships have heard how miserably the Kings subjects were used by this warrant as hath beene proved by a Gentleman of quality Sir James Mountgomery And howsoever hee pretends it was called in it was three whole yeers in execution before it was called in and though he pretends his Predecessours did ordinarily grant Warrants of that nature yet he proves no such thing My Lord Primate was examined and he sayes that Bishop Mountgomery did tell him there was such a Warrant and one witnesse more speakes of one Warrant and that is all the witnesses produced and that but to be a copy too Your Lordships have heard how he exercises his jurisdiction and power over particulars and that in a numerous manner now your Lordships shall find it universall and spread over the face of that Kingdome that was under his jurisdiction and that is in the tenth Article which concernes the Customes where hee doth impose upon the Kings subjects a rate and taxe against law and enforces them to pay it or else punishes them for it which is expresly an arrogating to himselfe of a jurisdiction above the law My Lords in his answer he pretends that this is rather a matter of fraud than otherwise in truth and so it is and that a great one too But as it is a fraud a dis-service and deceit to his Majestie so it is likewise an exercise of a tyrannicall jurisdiction over his subjects That it is a fraud to his Majestie it plainly appeares for the King lost exceedingly by it whereas before the rent affoorded the King was 11050. l. there was improved by the new lease that my Lord of Strafford took but 1350. l. and I beseech your Lordships observe how much the King lost by it for my Lord had comprehended in his new lease the impost of wine for which the King before that time received 1400. l. a yeere and likewise the Custome of London Durry Colerane and Knockfergus for which the King had reserved 1700. l. a yeere besides the moity of the seisures so here is 5000. l. that the King lost of the old rent expresly and if your Lordships please observe the gain and benefit my Lord of Strafford made by it in one yeere he and his sharers received 39000. l. and in the last yeere 51000. l. and that expresly proved upon two accounts and if this be his dealing where is his service to the King in his pretence to advance the Customes It is true he sayes the King hath five eighth parts but it was but within these two yeeres the King had it not before And I would very gladly have heard whether the King received his part of an account of 55000. l. if he had received it I beleeve wee should have heard of it My Lords there is something more here is a new imposition on the Kings people without law and yet I will doe my Lord of Strafford no injury but I tell you how the proofe stands It was a book of rates framed before he came to the forme for the booke of rates was in March and the date of his assignment is in April following and therefore my Lord saith it could not be for his benefit But my Lords all this while my Lord of Strafford was in England and in agitation for the procuring of it and they come one upon the heeles of another and I beseech you observe cui bono the book of rates was procured within a moneth of the Patent but God knowes whether it were not within the compasse of his intentions to take the Patent and therefore whether he were not the Instrument of raising rates it rests in your Lordships judgement and all that heare me I am sure the benefit redounded to himselfe and so here is an arbitrary government in imposing and forcing to pay for that I desire your Lordships to take with you and hee might as well have raised nineteen shillings on a pound as nine pence or three pence by the same rule of Law The next Article in number was the eleventh and I would be glad my Lord had not mentioned it it concernes the Pipe-staves wherein he pretends he did
manner of rents were levied by souldiers no such thing but such rents as were designed for payment of the Army he proved by Sir Arthur Terringham the laying of souldiers once for the payment of a summe of mony but sir Arthur being demanded whether it were the Kings rents or comprehended within the same generall rule he could make no answer thereunto Your Lordships remember he sayes he did not know it and therefore probably it was the Kings rents and doubtlesse it was so But if he had produced presidents it could not be an authority for Treason that if people did not appeare to his orders he must levie warre against the Kings subjects and for his extenuation of the warre that the same was of no great danger there being not above five or six souldiers layd at a time I would to God the people oppressed by it had cause to undervalue it I am sure foure or six Musketiers are as strong to oppresse a man as foure thousand so the matter of fact is strongly and expresly proved Besides though there came not above foure or five to a house yet the authority given to the Sergeant was generall he might have brought more if hee had listed and in truth hee brought as many as the estate of the party would maintain And as to the not producing of the Warrant I have already answered it If it were in the case of a Deed wherin men call for witnesses it were something but God forbid that the Treason should be gone and the Traitor not questionable if his warrant can be once put out of the way The next Article which is laid to his charge is for issuing out a Proclamation and Warrant of restraint to inhibit the Kings subjects to come to the Fountaine their Soveraigne to deliver their complaints of their wrongs and oppressions Your Lordships have heard how hee hath exercised his jurisdiction and now he raises a battery to secure and make it safe If he doe wrong perhaps the complaint may come to the gracious eares of a King who is ready to give reliefe and therefore he must stop these cries and prevent these meanes that hee may goe on without interruption And to that end he makes propositions here that the Kings subjects in Ireland should not come over to make complaint against Ministers of State before an addresse first made to himselfe It is true hee makes a faire pretence and shew for it and had just cause of approbation if he had intended what he pretended But as soon as he came into Ireland what use made hee of it he ingrosses the proceedings of almost all the Courts of Justice into his owne hands and so pre-possesses the King by a colourable proposition and prevents their comming over before they had made their addresse to himselfe and then he becomes the wrong doer and issues Proclamations for the hindering of the Kings subjects to seeke redresse without his leave which is as great a proofe of his designe and as great an injury to the people governed under a gracious Prince as a heart can conceive And what his intention was in exhibiting this proposition it will appeare in the sentence of a poor man one David who was censured and most heavily fined for comming over into England to prosecute complaint against my Lord of Strafford It is true that this was not the cause expressed but this was the truth of the matter Your Lordships remember a clause in the order at Councell Boord whereby is set forth the cause wherefore the party is not sentenced which I never saw in an order before nor should now but that my Lord foresaw there was danger in it that he might be charged in this place for the fact and therefore puts in negatively why the party was not censured Clausula inconsulta inducit suspitionem And how defends he this Article he sayes his Predecessours issued Proclamations to hinder the Kings subjects from going over lest they should joyne with O Neale and Tirconnell beyond sea and so it might be dangerous to the State but because they may joyn with Forreiners shall they therefore not come to the King to make just complaint what this argument is I referre to your Lordships judgments Then he pretends a former president affirming that the like Instructions were given to my Lord of Faulkland but was there any that none should come to their Soveraigne to make their just appeale if injured Surely there was never any such Instruction before and I hope never will be againe The next Article is the nineteenth And now when hee had so plentifully exercised his tyranny over the lives the liberty and the estates of the Kings subjects A man would think he could goe no further but see a Tyranny exercised beyond that and that is over the Consciences of men hitherto hee dealt with the outward man and now hee offers violence to the inward man and imposes an Oath upon the Kings subjects and so exerciseth a tyranny over the Consciences of men And setting aside the matter of the Oath if he hath authority and power to impose such an Oath as he shall frame he may by the same power impose any Oath to compell Consciences He pretends a Warrant from his Majestie to doe it but the Kings Ministers are to serve the King according to law and I dare be bold to say and we have good reason to thank God for it if any of the Kings Ministers tell him that any Command he gives is against law there is no doubt but in his goodnesse and piety hee will withdraw his Command and not enforce execution and therefore if there were an errour the King is free and the Ministers to be justly charged with it But there was no Command from the King to compell and enforce them to take the Oath by the power of the Star-chamber to commit them to prison to impose heavie fines and tyrannize over them all which he did in the case of Steward And now one would have thought hee had acted his part when he had acted as much as lay in his own power and yet he goes beyond this he was not content to corrupt all the streames which was not a diverting of the course as he spoke in his answer for he not onely turned the course of the water but changed the nature of it converted it into poyson a legall and just proceeding into a Tyrannicall and Arbitrary government which is not turning but corrupting of the cleere and christall streams to bitternesse and death But yet the Fountaine remains cleere and perhaps when his hand is taken off you shall have the streames run as pure and uncorrupt as ever they did This is it troubles him remove but this obstacle and the work is perfect and therefore now he will goe about to corrupt the streames if hee can but infuse his poyson into the Kings heart which is the Fountain then all is done and now he attempts that and approacheth the
that must enforce the King what to doe to levie money to use his Prerogative to raise supplies upon his subjects without their consent against their will necessity must be his argument and this warre must be thē occasion of that necessity and without that he cannot suggest to the Kings eare or advise this necessity till this bee brought to passe And now he hath brought it to passe he began in the one and twentieth two and twentieth and three and twentieth Article to perswade the King that necessity hath surprized him by the Parliaments deserting of him that the Parliament had forsaken the King in denying supply and having tried the affections of his people hee was loose and absolved from all rules of government and had an Army in Ireland which he might employ to reduce this Kingdome That he spake these words to the King part is proved by two concurrent witnesses that is that having tried the affections of his people he was now loose and absolved from all rules of government which words are proved by two witnesses of eminent quality that is my Lord of Northumberland and Sir Henry Vane and truly howsoever my Lord in his speech pretends that the most materiall words are proved but by one witnesse it seeming that hee held it not a materiall charge that he counselled the King that he was absolved from all rules of government for my part if your Lordships be satisfied those words were proved I could willingly satisfie my owne Conscience in it and make no great matter to quit the rest for I know not how he could expresse it in higher termes then that the King was absolved from rules of government for then he might doe what he would It is true the latter words touching the Irish Army are expresly proved but by one witnesse master Secretary Vane but are fortified againe with such circumstances as make up more then one yea more than two other witnesses if your Lordships will have the patience to have it represented as it is proved For howsoever it be slighted by him if your Lordships will call to mind the words of Sir George Radcliffe his bosome friend to whom he had contributed without question his advice in all causes the said Sir George Radcliffe expressed it before and told some of his friends supposing that he never should be called in question and that the power of my Lord of Strafford had been enough to protect any thing he had done and out of the aboundance of the heart his mouth spake the King must now want no money if he did no body would pity him now he had his sword in his hand Sir Robert King proves it so My Lord Renula discovered the smoake of the fire that hee had just cause to suspect and on good grounds I am sure and if the Commons of England had not just cause to suspect him as I beleeve he is convinced they had good cause what is the reason this suspition should bee entertained at that time my Lord of Strafford being not then questioned for it and yet my Lord Renula should say Shall wee turne our swords upon our owne bowels shall we bring this Army to turne the points of our blades upon that Nation from whence we were all derived and that was before any conference with master Secretary Vane Sir William Penniman himselfe his owne witnesse and friend sayes at York before my Lord of Strafford was questioned that there was a common fame of bringing the Army into England and there is something in that surely and after all this to produce one witnesse that expresly proves the very words spoken in terminis as they bee charged if your Lordships put the whole together see whether there be not more then one witnesse And under favour my Lord Cottington if you call to mind his testimony I must justifie he did declare that he heard my Lord of Strafford tell the King that some reparation was to be made to the subjects property which must inferre he had advised an invasion upon the property else by no good coherence should a reparation bee made And that he testifies this I must affirme and most here will affirme it and I think your Lordships well remember it and that is an addition to it for if your Lordships cast your eye upon the interrogatory administred to my Lord Admirall and my Lord Cottington that very question is asked so that his owne Conscience told him he had advised something to invade upon the people when he advised to a restitution after things should be settled and so I referre it to your Lordships consideration whether here bee not more then one witnesse by farre It is true he makes objections to lessen this testimony first that this Army was to be landed at Ayre in Scotland and not here and this was declared to Sir Thomas Lucas master Slings by Sir William Penniman and others Secondly that others that were present when the words are supposed to be spoken did not heare any such words For the first perhaps the Army might be originally intended for Scotland and yet this is no contradiction but he might intend it afterwards for England surely this is no Logick that because it was intended for one place it could never be intended for another place so his allegarion may be true and the charge stand true likewise Beside that it was intended orriginally for Scotland what proofe makes hee Hee told severall persons of the designe but I will be tryed by himselfe he told some it was for Scotland he told others it was for England and why you should beleeve his telling on one side more then on the other side I know not though he pretends a reason of his severall allegations that the world should not know his designe but if you will not beleeve him one way why should he be beleeved the other way and if not the other way why the first way For the second severall persons were present when the words were spoken touching the Irish Armie and they were examined and remember not the words but one man may heare though twentie doe not heare and this is no contradiction at all For those persons whom he examined the Lord Treasurer Marquesse Hambleton my Lord Cottington did not heare the words that are proved by two witnesses concerning the Kings being loose and absolved from rules of government and if they did not heare those words no marvaile they did not heare the other and therefore that which hee himselfe pretends to be a convincing testimonie is nothing at all so that his objections are clearely taken away and the single testimonie fortified with testimonies that make above one witnesse and so the words are fully proved But to fortifie the whole I shall handle all these Articles together This designe to subvert the Law and to exercise an arbitrary power above the Law in this kingdome will upon the proofes putting them altogether and not taking them in pieces as my Lord
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