House resolved presently to send 12 of the Peers Messengers to the King humbly to signifie That neither of the Two Intentions expressed in the Letter could with duty in them or without danger to Himself his dearest Consort the Queen and all the Young Princes their Children possibly be Advised all which being done accordingly and the Reasons shewed to His Majesty He suffered no more words to come from them but out of the fulness of His heart to the observance of Justice and for the Contentment of His People told them That what He intended by His Letter was with an if if it might be done without Discontentment of His People if that cannot be I say again the same I Writ Fiat Justitia My other Intnetion proceeding out of Charity for a few days Respite was upon certain Information that his Estate was so distracted that it necessarily required some few days for settlement thereof Whereunto the Lords Answered Their purpose was to be Suitors to His Majesty for favour to be shewed to his Innocent Children and if himself had made any provision for them the same might hold This was well-liking unto His Majesty who thereupon departed from the Lords At His Majesties parting they offered up into His hands the Letter it self which He had sent but He was pleased to say My Lords What I have Written to you I shall be content it be Registred by you in your House In it you see my mind I hope you will use it to my Honour This upon return of the Lords from the King was presently Reported to the House by the Lord Privy-Seal and Ordered that these Lines should go out with the Kings Letter if any Copies of the Letter were dispersed The House being informed That the Queen-Mother apprehending Her self in some danger by reason that divers words were scattered among the Tumultuous Assembly as if they had some design upon Her Person and those Priests which she had for Her own Houshold desired a Guard for Her Security Concluded that as to the Security of Her own Person they were bound in honour not to suffer any Violence to be done unto Her and so referred it to a Committee to consider what was fit to be done in order thereto Which being Reported by Mr. Henry Martyn he declared That the Committee had duely considered Her Majesties just Fears and therefore should agree to all good ways and means that might conduce to the safety of her Person But fearing that the said means may notwithstanding prove ineffectual for Her Protection That therefore the House would intreat the Lords to joyn with them humbly to beseech His Majesty That the Queen Mother may be moved to depart the Kingdom the rather for the Quieting of those Jealousies in the Hearts of His Majesties well-affected Subjects occasioned by some ill Instruments about the said Queens Person by the flocking of Priests and Papists to Her House and by the Use and Practice of the Idolatry of the Mass. Wednesday the 12th of May. THe Earl of Strafford was brought from the Tower to the Scaffold upon Tower-Hill where the Bishop of Armagh the Earl of Cleeveland Sir George VVentworth Brother to the said Earl of Strafford and others of his Friends were present to take their Leaves of him But before he fitted himself to Prostrate his Body to Execution he desired patience of the People to hear him speak a few words which the Author took from his Mouth being then there on the Scaffold with him viz. MY Lord Primate of Ireland and my Lords and the rest of these Noble Gentlemen It is a great Comfort to me to have your Lordships by me this day because I have been known to you a long time and I now desire to be heard a few words I come here my Lords to pay my last Debt to Sin which is Death And through the Mercies of God to rise again to Eternal Glory My Lords if I may use a few words I shall take it as a great Curtesie from you I come here to submit to the Judgment that is passed against me I do it with a very quiet and contented Mind I do freely forgive all the World a forgiveness not from the Teeth outward as they say but from my heart I speak in the presence of Almighty God before whom I stand that there is not a displeasing thought that ariseth in me against any Man I thank God I say truly my Conscience beares me Witness that in all the Honor I had to serve His Majesty I had not any Intention in my heart but what did aime at the Joynt and Individual prosperity of the King and His People although it be my ill hap to be misconstrued I am not the first Man that hath suffered in this kind It is a Common Portion that befalls men in this Life Righteous Judgment shall be hereafter here we are subject to Error and Misjudging one another One thing I desire to be heard in and do hope that for Christian Charities sake I shall be believed I was so far from being against Parliaments that I did always think Parliaments in England to be the happy Constitution of the Kingdom and Nation and the best means under God to make the King and His people happy As for my Death I do here acquit all the World and beseech God to forgive them In particular I am very glad His Majesty conceives me not meriting so severe and heavy a punishment as the utmost Execution of this Sentence I do infinitely rejoyce in it and in that Mercy of His and do beseech God to Return Him the same that He may find Mercy when He hath most need of it I wish this Kingdom all prosperity and happiness in the World I did it Living and now Dying it is my Wish I profess heartily my apprehension and do humbly recommend it to you and wish that every Man would lay his hand on his heart and consider seriously Whether the beginning of the peoples Happiness should be Written in Letters of Blood I fear they are in a Wrong Way I desire Almighty God that no one drop of my Blood rise up in judgement against them I have but one word more and that is for my Religion My Lord of Armagh I do profess my self seriously faithfully and truly to be an obedient Son of the Church of England In that Church I was born and bred in that Religion I have lived and now in that I dye Prosperity and Happiness be ever to it It hath been said I was inclined to Popery if it be an Objection worth the answering let me say truly from my heart that since I was Twenty one years of age unto this day going on 49 years I never had thought or doubt of the truth of this Religion nor had ever any the boldness to suggest to me the contrary to my best remembrance And so being reconciled to the Mercies of Jesus Christ my Saviour into whose bosom I
Pattern from my Lord Faulkland my Lord Grandison and my Lord Chichester and he did it by the Power he had the Honour to hold under His Majesty as General That yet he used them so sparingly that neither in that time nor in the Government of Munster in which he had as large Authority as ever any man had he never did condemn a man to death in peaceable times and that the Authority hath been good That Martial-Law is so frequent and ordinary in Ireland that it is not to be denied and so little offensive there that the Common Law takes no exception at it That he hath lived to see three or four Parliaments there and they never complained of it And to Govern an Army without Martial-Law is impossible for occasions in an Army rise on a suddain and something must be done on a suddain for example-sake to others That Martial-Law was certainly in Ireland ever since he remembers and long before but it hath been used so sparingly that in the time of Peace for his part he did never know any executed in his time Being asked on the Lord Strafford's Motion Whether he hath known Sir Charles Coote as Provost-Martial of Conaught and Sir Iohn Bower Provost-Marshall of Leimster in time of Peace execute divers Persons Rebels and others by Martial-Law He Answered For Sir Charles Coote he can very well answer though he had Authority yet it is out of his memory that he ever executed any And for Sir Iohn Bower he dwelleth remote from him that the said Sir Iohn Bower hath Authority and so have many other Presidents Marshalls of the Army Provost-Marshalls of every Province and upon great Reasons for it for though they be Inferior men yet the intent of their Commission is but to prosecute those men that cannot be had into the Law that is Rebels and Fugitives and those men he hath heard have been hanged Whence my Lord of Strafford inferred That he had done nothing de Novo That Provost-Marshalls have been always appointed and executed those Places under the General for the time being The Committee admitted that there be four Provost-Marshalls but deny that they exercise Marshall-Law That those Provost-Marshalls have executed divers men to death by Marshall-Law Rebels and Traytors I desire to produce an Order of my Lord of Faulkland's taken from his Book of Entries but being not proved nor written with my Lord Faulkland's own hand the reading of it was not admitted but left to their Lordships Consideration To prove the Practise of the Provost-Marshalls Sir Adam Loftus being asked concerning the Provost-Marshalls executing of Marshall-Law before my Lord of Strafford's time and on what men He Answered That it is most apparent in all times since he can remember Martial-Law hath been executed that 's undoubted But it was on Rebels and Out-Laws and he hath known no other but such executed by Martial-Law Lord Robert Dillon being asked to the same purpose Answered He hath heard the Provost-Marshals have taken and hanged men by Martial-Law in time of Peace since the beginning of King Iames his Reign that of Rebels and Out-Laws there is no question My Lord of Strafford desired to compare his Orders with those of my Lord of Wilmotts And they were compared accordingly in divers Articles His Lordship produced a Copy of His Majesties Letter attested to be a true Copy by Charles Gibson Which was read being the Letter recited in the Sentence of my Lord Mountnorris I observe That the Sentence of my Lord Mountnorris takes notice that the Army was part of it in motion and divers Companies daily exercised and that my self was for the most part there present which shews the truth of my Answer to that Point in part To free my self from the said Sentence I desire a Letter from my self and Council of War to Secretary Cook 13. December immediately after the Sentence may be read to shew that I was a Suitor to the King in my Lord Mountnorris's behalf But being after the Sentence and written by himself and the Council of War for extenuating of the Fact the reading of it was over-ruled I conceive my Lord Renula and Lord Dillon made it appear that I declined giving Judgment in the Sentence But for further proof Sir Robert Farrer was asked Whether my Lord of Strafford did not declare he would be no Judge nor give Opinion in that Cause and whether he sate bare He Answered That he was present at the Sentence and heard my Lord of Strafford say that he would give no Judgment nor have to do with the business concerning my Lord Mountnorris and he sate a good time with his hat off Being asked on one of the Committees motion touching his pressing of both the Articles He said He acknowledged my Lord did require Judgment on both Articles and yet sate silent at the time they were upon the Sentence Being asked Whether my Lord of Strafford did not desire them to regard him no more than an ordinary Officer and do no otherwise than in reason and judgment they should think fit He Answered My Lord of Strafford said these very words That they should not look upon him but go to the Cause according to their Opinion directly And being asked Whether my Lord Mountnorris was a Captain of the Army He Answered Yes and the Council did admit it Sir George Wentworth being asked to the same purpose as Sir Robert Farrer He Answered He was present at the Sentence and heard my Lord of Stafford say publickly He did not sit there as a Judge and that he would give no Vote in it Being asked Whether my Lord of Stafford did not tell Sir George Wentworth that he should give no Vote in it because he was his Lordships Brother He Answered Yes and he gave no Judgment upon that reason that my Lord of Strafford did publickly bid them all look on him as a private man and sate by as a Suitor not as a Judge and put off his hat at the beginning to speak and sate uncovered all the while till Sentence was pronounced To shew that my Lord Mountnorris was enlarged by me presently after I here produce the Warrant Dated 18. December though indeed he was released 15. December The denial of my Lord Mountnorris to examine Witnesses was by my Lord Cromwell Sir Charles Coote Sir Iohn Burlacy not by me I sitting by as a private party For this I refer to my Lord Mountnorris's own Deposition and my Lord Renula's To prove it further Sir Robert Farrer was asked touching the denying of further time and Council He Answered He cannot tell who denied him he remembers my Lord Cromwell spake something but knows not whether to that effect Sir Robert Farrer being asked on one of the Managers Motion Whether before their coming together they did know the occasion of their meeting He Answered He did not he was warned to attend and did not know the business till he came thither I did never
found the affairs of Scotland so distempered that he thought fit to reduce the Kings Subjects there by force His Lordship says That if the Demands struck at the root of Government then it was fit to say they should be reduced by force But the words were spoken before the reasons of the Demands were known and before he could know how they could be warranted by the Laws of that Kingdom and it is part of the Charge of the House of Commons That he said They struck at the root of Government which it appears they did not for those very Demands against which my Lord of Strafford delivered his opinion are since enacted by the Parliament of Scotland and confirmed by His Majesties Royal Authority in the Treaty which is very well known to divers of their Lordships sitting here My Lord sayes It was first resolved a War should be had and then for him to debate Whether an Offensive or Defensive War is no Crime but that receives a clear Answer for it was his Resolution his Advice That there should be a War and an Offensive War which shewes his Design against the Kingdom of Scotland My Lord labours to prove That the seising of the Scotch Ships was not by his Warrant but by Warrants otherwise procured That was not insisted on in the Charge and therefore they will not insist upon it in the Reply there is enough besides My Lord is further pleased to say That there is no substantial or concluding proofe of his intent that the Parliament should be only called to try whether there would be supply given or no and that is only deposed by my Lord Primate a single Testimony But my Lord Primate concurs with others in the same sence and meaning To my Lord Conwayes Testimony my Lord sayes That for the King to help Himself is a Natural Motion and proper to every one But the other words of my Lord Conwayes Testimony That the King might help and supply Himself though it were against the will of His Subjects must be understood not of a Natural but a violent motion and it appears to be my Lord of Straffords Design to have it so He comes to the Testimony of my Lord Treasurer and sayes That doth not at all touch him that he promised to assist the King in any other way in case the Parliament did not succeed But this proves his intent That if the Parliament were dissolved as he was willing it should as it will afterwards appear he would assist the King in any other way whatsoever He took a good Pattern Stare super vias antiquas and we shall prove that too but this was not via antiqua of Parliaments to propose Supplies in the first place and to put off consideration of grievances to urge nothing but to give to the King and before a Resolution whether they would give or not to informe against the Parliament by Misinformation My Lord mentions the Declaration of the House of Commons in Ireland concerning the giving of Four Subsidies for the Kings supply of the War with Scotland which is in the Charge but was not insisted upon But by shewing this my Lord of Strafford hath procured that which is likewise in the Charge That the Parliament of Ireland did engage themselves in the War against Scotland and by the Preamble of his Answer This was in my Lord of Straffords Knowledge and may be easily proved to be by his Procurement being the Chief Governor there He sayes That had he ever entertained such thought as the words proved import he should give Judgment against himself But as no mans thoughts can be proved but by his words and actions so the words proved do manifest that his thoughts were no other and shew clearly his intention to bring in an Army on us to reduce this Kingdom My Lord calls Sir Robert Kings Testimony a Report on a Report and sayes the like of the Testimony of my Lord Ranalagh which shall be answered when he comes to lay the whole matter together according to the course of opening the Articles Diverse Witnesses his Lordship produces to prove that the 8000 Foot raised in Ireland were designed for Scotland and particularly for the Town of Aire which is very improbable for that Town as was informed and will be proved was at that time very well fortified and the Coasts thereof and the Haven so barred and narrow that one of my Lord of Straffords own Witnesses says there could be no probability of Landing an Army there The like may be said of the Frith of Dunbarton that was Fortified long before And if their Lordships repair to some part of my Lord of Straffords Answer where he sayes they were to be landed in some places near the Country of my Lord of Argile to divert him These places are so far from his Country and such Armes of the Sea and unpassable Mountains are interposed that they could not be landed there with any intention to go to Argyles Country But admit there were a primary intention of this Army in some part of Scotland the Witnesses speak onely to what was intended before the Army was raised But when the Army was on foot my Lord of Straffords intention might be changed and it seems it was for he laboured to perswade His Majesty to make use of it to reduce this Kingdom He sayes The Testimony touching Sir George Wentworths words is single and spoken by his Brother and could not reach him but though one Witness testifies the words yet it may be made appear to their Lordships that presently after the words spoken Sir Tho. Barrington related them to other Gentlemen who are ready to testifie that he so related them But their Lordships seeming satisfied in that point directed him to proceed Next my Lord Discourses of my Lord of Bristols Testimony and the differences of opinion between them touching the summoning of a Parliament But my Lord of Bristol proves the following words That the King was not to suffer himself to be mastered by the frowardness of His People c. and to these no Answer is given To which Mr. Whitlock said he would further answer in the General Reply And so for the words proved by my Lord of Newbrough my Lord of Holland and diverse other Noble Lords of this House My Lord of Strafford was pleased to mention the Statute of 1 E. 6. ca. 12. where to compass by Preaching or saying to deprive the King is not for the first offence Treason though words of a more transcendent and high nature and hence he inferr'd that the words charged on him are not Treason But that Statute is onely of Treasons spoken of the King but not of Words and Counsels that advise the thing to be done And there is no Question but at this day for any man to Advise and Counsel the Destruction of the King is High-Treason notwithstanding that Statute These words charged on my Lord are a Declaration of his intention to subvert
which my Lord Mayor sayes that he the Earl of Strafford should say to His Majesty Sir there will be no good done with the Citizens of London till you have hanged some of them up which at first he said was to his best remembrance and upon recollection he says directly and absolutely for my Lord said he must not make it weaker against himself than it is and he wishes that rule might be kept on both sides which is to repeat the Evidence to their Lordships clearly and plainly as it is which duty he said he had Religiously observed since the beginning of the Cause and will perform to the last not misrecyting any thing for his advantage or disadvantage This being howsoever his comfort and joy that their Lordships are so wise as not to hearken to what is repeated of the Evidence but to the Evidence it self as it is plainly and clearly represented and that will not deceive them and therefore my Lord said to the best of his remembrance and the Witnesses said no more at the first he spake them not but he thinks they were spoken in so good company before their Lordships of the Council-Board that it cannot but be remembred by some of their Lordships if the words had been spoken and by His Majesty to whom it is said they were directed But being an equal Testimony however in this condition and misfortune and affliction it may be between this Gentleman and himself he thinks that before these troubles befell him he was as equally to be believed as the other and therefore all the difference is one sayes it the other denies it My Lord added That he denyed it in his Answer and he denies it at the Bar and in truth to his best remembrance he never spake the words and it is a thing of no great moment being a hasty word and at the most very excusable especially to a free spoken man as he is and he smarts for it which hath further engaged him perhaps than wiser man would have been that hath much worse thoughts than ever he had but he hoped it will be pardoned and not amount to make good the Charge against him but that their Lordships Honor and Justice will excuse it rather than punish it and so his Lordship said he would say no more to it Mr. Maynard made Reply thereunto in substance as followeth The Committee shall need to to say little to this Answer of my Lord of Strafford for whereas he sayes nothing of High Treason is proved their Lordships will be pleased to remember how oft this hath been answered for if their Lordships will look back to what they have proved from the beginning They charge not this as a particular Treason but having charged him with a design to subvert the fundamental Laws it appears he threatened it That the Kings little finger should be heavier than the loins of the Law They have shewed what he did in Ireland how he did not only threaten but gave sentence of death on one for words how there he hanged another it appears what a Jurisdiction he erected against Law and wayes were taken to maintain them how Soldiers were forced on mens Houses against their Wills and what Insolency they committed and that must not be questioned when it is propounded When he comes into England their Lordships hear what Counsels he gives which compared with the Plots he laid there is reason to think that these words proceeding from my Lord of Strafford that men should be Fined and Ransomed Hanged up and laid by the Heels comes not out of suddain passion but rise from those Principles and Resolutions that were in him to do all things according to his Will and Pleasure against Law They beseech their Lordships these may not pass as hasty words when they appear to be suitable and conformable to Actions and Counsels preceding for many years and not yet laid down by him for ought can be discerned The singleness of the Testimony hath been often Objected and as often Answered but this is no single Testimony My Lord Treasure speaks of his Advice to go on vigorously with Ship-Money Others prove Fine and Ransome and Hanging up Threatened which have all concurred to the general Charge being several circumstances proved by several Witnesses But whereas my Lord thinks to excuse himself because there was a Judgement in the Exchequer-Chamber God be thanked it appears to be a Judgement against Law and my Lord of Strafford spake these words after the King offered to lay down the Ship-Money for it was after the Parliament But there was never any Judgement that a man might be hanged in such a case nor be Fined and Ransomed for not certifying in matter of Loan my Lord of Strafford knows as well as any man that it is against Law himself having had a great hand in the Petition of Right Mr. Glyn desired he might observe one thing that fell from my Lord of Strafford not at this time only but at several times That it is hard he should for words be questioned as High Treason being a word spoken and no ill effect of it their Lordships may be pleased to call to mind that for words spoken concerning Treading on his Toe he prosecuted so far as to life and yet they were spoken as accidentally as these and not of less consequence and nothing came of them and yet he procured a sentence of death against the Speaker but here he extenuates it and must not be charged with words And so the 25th Article was concluded THE Six and Twentieth Article The Charge 26. THat the said Earl by his wicked Counsels having brought His Majesty into excessive charge without any just cause he did in the month of July last for the support of the said great charges Counsel and approve two dangerous and wicked Projects viz. To seize upon the Bullion and the Money in the Mint And to imbase His Majesties Coyn with the mixtures of Brass And accordingly he procured One hundred and 30000 l. which was then in the Mint and belonging to divers Merchants Strangers and others to be seized on and stayed to His Majesties use And when divers Merchants of London owners of the said Bullion and Money came to his House to let him under stand the great mischief that course would produce here and in other parts and what prejudice it would be to the Kingdom by discrediting the Mint and hindring the importation of Bullion he the said Earl told them that the City of London dealt undutifully and unthankfully with His Majesty and that they were more ready to help the Rebels than to help His Majesty And that if any hurt came to them they may thank themselves and that it was the course of other Princes to make use of such Moneys to serve their occasions And when in the same month of July the Officers of His Majesties Mint came to him and gave him divers reasons against the imbasing the said
that their Estates being beyond Sea my Lord of Strafford should make so little of it But my Lord Answers nothing to these words That the City of London was more ready to help the Rebels than to help the King and he doth well not to do it for whosoever doth help a Rebel is of the same condition with the Rebel For the matter of the Letter it is of no great importance whether it be so or no But the matter is What Speeches were used My Lord sayes the Speeches are proved by only one witness But the truth is one Witness positively swears one part and another the other part but both agree That my Lord Cottington was there though Sir William Parkhurst doth not remember it Mr. Whitlock added That my Lord of Strafford is pleased to mention a Letter from an Honouable person my Lord of Leicester and now he observes it was a Gazette and no Letter at all from my Lord of Leicester But my Lord of Strafford desired he might not be mistaken he being very tender to have it laid on him that he should in any thing speak untruth or contradict himself Their Lordships know the Letters sent familiarly every week from my Lord of Leicesters Secretary as News to the forreign Committee are only in the nature of a Gazette and so he intended to open it Mr. Strowd added there is something in the Tract of this Article that sticks near to me and I cannot let it pass Whereas my Lord sayes Words are only laid to his Charge which argues his innocency in Fact in that he hath been sparing in doing whatsoever his Language is First The Laws are clear that words may be Treason and to every mans reason it sounds thus far That words in consequence may go beyond some actions and words of the highest nature he hath used all trenching deeper on us than some Acts might have done to counsel His Majesty in things of that consequence it touches not only on the safety of His Majesties Crown but also on the Liberty of his People and may go beyond force for if my Lord of Strafford had brought in his 8000 Irish by force we might have withstood them by force But when he goes to the Ear of a pious Prince and insinuates that we know not of and brings a desolation on a Kingdom who shall repell such Language when force may repell Forces And surely had he plotted and devised against His Majesty by any one which God forbid he should or that His Majesty should be in that danger the pretence of a Prince might have daunted a Traitor that he could not have done the work yet had he done it which God forbid a Prince may dye with fair reputation to posterity but when he shall inspire a Prince in his ear and provoke tyrannical Carriage to His Subjects he may abuse a good Prince but how he may leave him to posterity I leave to your Lordships But my Lord stays not singly in Counsel and Advice but something was done upon it I appeal to your Lordships when proof shall be brought in the case and First consider the misery that England is now in what could have been done more to have made us miserable but absolute desolation The Aldermen were committed that very day and though it cannot be proved he gave the immediate Counsel yet he gave the Counsel that hath been proved and that day four of them were committed and this the Aldermen are ready to prove Sir Henry Garaway Interrogated Whether any of the Aldermen were committed He Answered That he shall not need to Answer that for my Lord will confess it there were four Aldermen committed Alderman Rainston Alderman Somes Alderman Geere Alderman Atkins and it was the same day they were there to give an account of the able Men and the loan of 100000 l. Their Answer not giving satisfaction they were committed the same day to several prisons by what Order or Direction he knows not So Mr. Glyn desired their Lordships to observe the words proved against him That no good will be done on them till they were laid by the heels which my Lord sayes produced no effect yet that very day four were laid by the heels and it rests upon their Lordships Judgements by whose advice And Mr. Strowde concluded That my Lord of Straffords Words and Actions Agree in this Kingdom and the miseries of this Kingdom do agree with his Words and Actions And so the 26th Article was concluded THE Seven and Twentieth Article The Charge 26 THat in or about the month of August last he was made Lieutenant-General of all His Majesties â—orces in the North prepared against the Scots and being at York did then in the month of September by his own authority and without any lawful Warrant impose a Tax on His Majesties Subjects in the County of York of eight pence per diem for maintainance of every Soldier of the Trained-bands of that County which sums of Money he caused to be levied by force And to the end to compel His Majesties Subjects out of fear and terror to yield to the payment of the same he did Declare that he would commit them that refused the payment thereof and the Soldiers should be satisfied out of their Estates and they that refused it were in very little better condition than of High Treason MR. Maynard proceeded to the 27 the Article That the Earl of Strafford imposed a Tax on His Majesties Subjects in the County of York of 8 d. per diem for the maintainance of every Soldier of the Trained Band of that County causing it to be levied by force Threatening them that refused with Commitment and that they that did not pay the Soldiers should be satisfied out of their Goods and they were in little better case than the case of High Treason that refused to pay The state of their proofs will stand thus There were three Levies First a months Contribution and that was for the general The Second a Contribution for a fornight and that was for two particular Regiments or Companies A Third for a month more so it was for ten weeks in the whole My Lord of Strafford pretends two things in his Answer for his excuse First That it was upon a Petition from the Country To that we say this The Country did petition His Majesty offering their endeavour in that Petition they likewise desire a Parliament for redress of grievances with which Petition some principal Gentlemen of the Countrey attended my Lord of Strafford desiring his assistance He likes well the clause concerning the Petitioners endeavours but not that touching the Parliament and therefore he would not deliver it though he said it would fall out there would be a Parliament His Majesty having resolved it but he likes not that they should Petition it They refusing to retract from their Petition he doth in the name of some of his Lordships Friends and Dependants
Lords I must tell you the First Articles exhibited are Grounds and Foundations whereupon the rest are gathered and to which they resort and apply themselves severally I do conceive my self in a manner by themselves clear of seven of these for they have in a manner relinquished Five of them So that the First Article is the main Article whereupon I must be touched and that is laid in the Charge thus That I have Trayterously endeavoured to subvert the Fundamental Lawes and Government of the Realmes of England and Ireland and have by Trayterous Words Councils and Actions declared the same and have advised His Majesty to Compel His Subjects to submit thereunto by force My Lords I must confess I have many times with my self considered with wonder at the Wisdom of our Ancestors that set the Pillars of this Monarchy with that singular Judgment and Providence that I have ever observed that so oft as either the Prerogative of the Crown or Liberty of the Subject Ecclesiastical or Temporal powers exceed those modest bounds set and appointed for them by the sobriety and moderation of former times the exercise of it over-turn'd to the Prejudice and to the Detriment of the Publick Weale all the Strings of this Government and Monarchy have been so perfectly tuned through the skill and attention of our Fore-Fathers that if you wind any of them any thing higher or let them lower you shall infallible interrupt the sweet accord that ought to be entertained of King and People With this Opinion I had the honour to sit many years in the Commons House and this Opinion I have carry'd along with me exactly and intirely for Fourteen years in the Kings Service ever Resolving in my heart Stare super vias antiquas to prove with equal care the Prerogative of the Crown and the Liberty of the Subject to Introduce the Laws of England into Ireland ever setting before my self a Joynt and Individual well-being of King and People for either they must be both or neither which made my Misfortune the greater to be now in my Gray Haires charged as an under-worker against that Government a Subverter of that Law I most affected and a Contriver against that Religion to the truth whereof I would Witness by the Sealing of it with my Blood My Lords As to the latter part concerning my Religion they have quitted me and I have nothing to answer to that because it is waved and I trust my Lords I shall clear my self in the first part concerning my being a Subverter of the Fundamental Laws that I shall stand clear to your Lordships Judgments in that Case My Lords This Subversion must be by words by Councils and by Actions in Ireland and in England My Lords I shall first give you an Accompt of the words wherewithall I am Charged forth of Ireland and the first words are in the third Article where I am Charged to have said That Ireland is a Conquered Nation and that the King may do with them as he pleaseth And to the City of Dublin That their Charters are nothing worth and bind the King no farther than he pleaseth These are the words Charged My Lords methinks it is very strange under favour that this can be made an Inducement to prove this Charge because I said That Ireland is a Conquer'd Nation therefore I endeavour to subvert the Fundamental Laws when I speak the Truth for certainly it is very true it was so My Lords under favour I remember very well there was as much said here at this Bar since we began and yet I dare well Swear and acquit him that spake it from intending to Subvert the Lawes For my Lords you were told and told truely That Ireland was a Conquered Nation and that it was Subordinate to England and God forbid that it should be otherwise and that they have received Lawes from the Conqueror My Lords the words testified by my Lord Gormonstone and Kilmalock to be spoken are not the words wherewith I am charged and so under favour I conceive cannot be brought to my prejudice as to this Tryal and they are words that are denied by me For my words concerning their Charters your Lordships remember very well I doubt not wherefore I said they were void For their misuse of them and that I told them so not with the intent to overthrow their Patents or Charters but to make them more conformable to those things that the State thought fit for encrease of Religion and Trade and encouraging and bringing English into that Town And that it was meant so and no otherwise Whatsoever was said it appeares by this their Charters were never touched nor infringed nor medled withal by me during the time I was in that Kingdom so that words so spoken and to such a purpose that they should go to prove such a Conclusion I conceive there is great difference betwixt those Premises and that Conclusion The next Charge for words in Ireland is in the Fourth Article where I am Charged to have said That I would neither have Law nor Lawyers Dispute or Question my Orders and that I would make the Earl of Cork and all Ireland know that as long as I had the Government there any Act of State should be as binding to the Subjects of that Kingdom as an Act of Parliament My Lords I humbly beseech your Lordships to give me leave to say for my self that these words of the Charge are onely Sworn by my Lord of Corke and no man else and his Lordship appeared a little mistaken the other day in one point on the Reading of an Order of the Council-Board for so it appears as I conceive so that for one single Witness and he the Party Aggrieved by these words to be the Man that must convince me I conceive your Lordships will not think that to stand with the ordinary Rules of proceeding For the rest to say Acts of State in Ireland should be Binding so long as they are not contrary to Law I confess I then conceived it had been no Offence for I thought them to be as binding being not contrary to Law but the Elder we grow the wiser we may grow if God give us the Grace and Attentions and so I trust I shall by these Gentlemen that have taught me to forbear those kind of Speeches hereafter My Lords These are all the Words charged against me for Ireland saving onely some things that I shall come to anon that is Charged upon me in one of the latter Articles concerning Scotland I say my Lords these are all the Words that have slipped from me in Seven years time having been well watched and observed as your Lordships may perswade your selves I have been But in Seven years time I say these are all the words brought to my Charge and in truth I conceive a wiser Man than my self might be forgiven for one Error or slip of his Tongue of that Nature in a years time seeing it is in
was an Unadvised Speech and he is a wise man and much wiser then my self that some time offends not with his Tongue And in truth my Lords though there be no Treason in it they are the most unwarranted words that appeare in the whole Proofe made against me In the 26th there are some words that I should speak to my Lord Cottington concerning a Foolish Pamphlet or Gazette which I then had in my hand and it is such a Toy in it self and all the Circumstances of it that I hold it not worth the mentioning but only that I would not forget any thing in the Proofes as near as I could and the Proofe is uncertain for onely one Man sayes it and the very words he cannot express Now he that shall Swear when he cannot express the Words his Testimony is but of small value and he is but a Single Proofe at best to disprove what is deposed by Sir William Parkhurst who sayes he was by yet heard not the Words And Cogam sayes he remembers not the words and so upon the matter there are two against one and the whole being so uncertain I conceive it is of very little moment in your Lordships Judgments My Lords These are as near as I can gather all that are charged as unto words spoken either in England or Ireland Councils other then these I am not charged withall and so there remains nothing but my Actions and if I can free them as well as I have freed the Words I conceive then under favour I have fully Answered all that hath been objected against me My Lords The first of these is the Fifth Article in the Case of Sentence of the Council of War against my Lord Mountnorris and the Sentence of the Council of War against Denwit For that of my Lord Mountnorris I have shewed plainly and clearly to your Lordships that I was no Judge in the Cause but a Party and therefore not Responsible for any Judgment given against his Lordship I gave no Vote and so consequently am not to Answer for any Guilt if there were any which under favour I conceive since all Martial Law is Adjudged to be against the Law I may be of another Opinion but formerly conceiving that that might have stood with the Law I might say something more for the Justification of it then now I do but hower I was no Party They say he was a Peer and it is very true but as he was a Peer so he was a Captain of the Army and in this Case we consider Men as Members of the Army not as Peers And if a Peer will not submit himself to an Officer of the Army he must submit himself to the Order of the Army Besides I say it was intended only as a Discipline to him the better to remember him to govern his Tongue afterwards towards other Men and that there was no more Prejudice fell upon him by it but two or three days Imprisonment so there was no great Animosity in the business besides it appeared to your Lordships that two or three dayes after we writ to the King and obtained his Pardon so that I conceive the Inconvenience was not very great to him nor the Proceedings such as should make it unpardonable or Criminal in them that gave Sentence upon him whereof I was none For that other concerning Denwitt your Lordships may remember he was found Guilty of Stealing a Quarter of Beef and for Running from his Collours and was formerly Burnt in the Hand for that he should be Proceeded against another way But falling out at that time when Five hundred Men were going over to Carlisle and they being unwilling to be put to Sea we were inforced to those proceedings for the preventing of further Mischief And there is another thing that the Martial-Law hath been alway in Force and executed in all times in Ireland and never so sparingly as in my time for this is the only Man that suffered all the time I had the Honour of the Government And I dare Appeal to them that know the Country Whether in former times many Men have not been committed and Executed by Martial-Law by the Deputies Warrant that were not Thieves and Rebels but such as went up and down the Country if they could not give Account of themselves the Provost-Martial by direction of the Deputies using in such Case to Hang them up I dare say there are Hundreds of Examples in this kind so that as to that I do not Justifie it But I say it is a Pardonable Fault and that others are of Course Pardoned for it And I trust that what falls of Course shall not be laid upon me as High-Treason or conducing to it The next is the Sixth Article and that is in the Case of Richard Rollston and therein I am said to have Subverted the Fundamental Laws by executing a Power and a Jurisdiction which was not Warranted by Law upon a Paper Petition putting out of Possession of his Freehold and Inheritance my Lord Mountnorris My Lords That Sentence will appear to your Lordships to be no more then the relieving a Poor Man in case of Equity and it is proved to you to be a Power that hath been formerly practised by the Deputies and I humbly conceive the Decree is just So that my Lords I must Confess it is something strange to me That having the Kings Letter to Warrant me in the Course of Proceedings and having the Power of former Deputies in like Case and doing no more therein then the Lord Chancellor by the very self-same Law should do in other places And that which should be done by the Chancellor should be Innocent and Just yet become High-Treason when done by me is a thing I understand not The next is the Case of Tonnres and that is waved by them and well may it be for it was in a Case of Plantation there was no Possession altered and it is fully within the Book of the Kings Instructions The next is in the Case of Sir Iohn Gifford against the Lord Viscount Loftus which they have Waved and well they may for it was grounded on a Letter from the King Commanding it to be heard by the Deputy and Council which is clearly within the Instructions and hath been since heard by the King and Council-Board and by them Confirmed for a Just Decree The next is the Case of my Lord of Kildare and that they may well Wave too the Proceedings being grounded upon a Letter from His Majesty and nothing done but in persuance of an Award between the Lord Digbyes House and that House of Kildare made by King Iames. The next is the Lady Hibbots Case and that was Relief given to Poor Men circumvented by Practice to the Prejudice of himself My Lords I had Power to hear that Cause and all Causes of that Nature by the King's Letter and according to the Practice of former Deputies And I conceive it will appear when it comes to
at Plough in the Parish of Ofley in the County of Hertford Bernard asked Balshal what news he told him that the news was That King Richard the Second was alive in Scotland which was false for he was dead and that by Midsummer next he would come into England Bernard asked him What were best to be done Balshal answered Get Men and go to King Richard In Michaelmas Term in the Third year of Hen. 4th in the Kings Bench Rot. 4. This advice of War adjudged Treason In Queen Mary's time Sir Nicholas Throckmorton conspired with Sir Thomas Wyat to Levy War within this Realm for alteration in Religion he joyned not with him in the execution This conspiracy alone declared to be Treason by all the Judges this was after the Statute of Queen Mary so much insisted upon That Parliament ended in October this opinion was delivered the Easter Term following and is reported by Justice Dyer fol. 98. It 's true Sir Thomas Wyat afterwards did Levy War Sir Nicholas Throckmorton he only conspired This adjudged Treason One Story in Queen Elizabeths time practised with Foreigners to levy War within this Kingdom nothing done in persuance of the practice The intent without any adhering to enemies of the Queen or other cause adjudged Treason and he executed thereupon It 's true my Lords that year 13 Eliz. by Act of Parliament it 's made Treason to intend the levying of War this Case was adjudged before the Parliament The Case was adjudged in Hillary Term the Parliament begun not till the April following This my Lords is a Case judged in point that the practising to levy War though nothing be done in execution of it is Treason Object It may be Objected That in these Cases the Conspiring being against the whole Kingdom included the Queen and was a compassing Her destruction as well as of the Kingdoms here the Advice was to the King Answ. The Answer is first That the Warrant was unknown to His Majesty that was a Machination of War against the People and Lawes wherein His Majesties Person was engaged for Protection Secondly That the Advice was to His Majesty aggravates the Offence it was an Attempt which was the Offence it was an Attempt not only upon the Kingdom but upon the Sacred Person and His Office too himself was hostis patriae he would have made the Father of it so to Nothing more unnatural nor more dangerous than to offer the King Poyson to drink telling Him that it is a Cordial is a passing of His death the Poyson was repelled there was an Antidote within the Malice of the giver beyond expression The perswading of Foreigners to invade the Kingdom hold no proportion with this Machination of War against the Law or Kingdom is against the King they cannot be severed My Lords If no actual War within the Statute if the Counselling of War if neither of these single Acts be Treason within the Statute The Commons in the next place have taken it into consideration what the addition of his other Words Counsels and Actions do operate in the Case and have conceived that with this Addition all being put together that he is brought within the Statute of 25 E. 3. The words of the Statute are If any Man shall Compass or Imagine the death of the King the words are not If any Man shall plot or Counsel the Death of the King No my Lords they go further than to such things as are intended immediately directly and determinatively against the Life and Person of the King they are of a larger extent to compass is to do by Circuit to Consult or Practice another thing directly which being done may necessarily produce this effect However it be in the other Treasons within this Statute yet in this by the very words there is room left for constructions for necessary inferences and consequences What hath been the Judgment and Practice of former times concerning these words of compassing the Kings Death will appear to your Lordships by some Cases of Attainders upon these words One Owen in K. Iames His time in the 13 th year of His Reign at Sandwich in Kent spake these words That K. Iames being Excommunicated by the Pope may be killed by any Man which killing is no Murther Being asked by those he spake to how he durst maintain so Bloody an Assertion Answered That the matter was not so heinous as was supposed for the King who is the Lesser is concluded by the Pope who is the Greater and as a Malefactor being Condemned before a Temporal Judge may be delivered over to be Executed So the King standing Convicted by the Popes Sentence of Excommunication may justly be slaughtered without fault for the Killing of the King is the Execution of the Popes Supreame Sentence as the other is the Execution of the Law For this Judgment of High Treason was given against him and Execution done My Lords there is no clear intent appearing that Owen desired the thing should be done onely Arguments that it might be done this is a Compassing there is a clear Endeavour to corrupt the Judgment to take off the Bonds of Conscience the greatest security of the Kings Life God forbid saith one of better Judgement then he that I should stretch out my hand against the Lords Annointed No saith he the Lord doth not forbid it you may for these Reasons lawfully kill the King He that denies the Title to the Crown and plots the means of setting it upon anothers head may do this without any direct or immediate desiring the death of Him that wears it yet this is Treason as was adjudged in the 10th of Hen. 7. in these of Burton and in the Duke of Norfolkes Case 13 Eliz. This is a compassing of His Death for there can no more be two Kings in one Kingdom then two Suns in the Firmament he that conceives a Title counts it worth venturing for though it cost him his life he that is in possession thinks it as well worth the keeping Iohn Sparhauk in King Henry the Fourth's time meeting too men upon the way amongst other talk said That the King was not rightful King but the Earl of March and that the Pope would grant Indulgencies to all that could assist the Earles Title and that within half a year there would be no Liveries nor Cognizances of the King that the King had not kept promise with the People but had laid Taxes upon them In Easter-Terme in the third year of Henry the Fourth in the Kings Bench Rot. 12. this adjudged Treason this denying the Title with Motives though not implyedly of Action against it adjudged Treason this is a compassing the Kings death How this was a compassing of the Kings Death is declared in the Reasons of the Judgment that the words were spoken with an intent to withdraw the affections of the People from the King and to excite them against him that in the end they might rise up against
him in mortem destructionem of the King My Lords in this Judgment and others which I shall cite to your Lordships it appears that it is a compassing the Kings death by Words to endeavour to draw the Peoples hearts from the King to set discord between the King and them whereby the People should leave the King should rise up against Him to the death and destruction of the King The Cases that I shall cite prove not onely that it is Treason but what is sufficient Evidence to make this good Upon a Commission held the 18th year of Ed. 4. in Kent before the Marquess of Dorset and others an Indictment was preferred against Iohn Awater of High Treason in the Forme before-mentioned for Words which are entred in the Indictment Sub hac forma That he had been servant to the Earl of Warwick that though he were dead the Earl of Oxford was alive and should have the Government of part of that Country That Edward whom you call King of England was a false Man and had by Art and Subtilty slain the Earl of Warwick and the Duke of Clare his Brother without any cause who before had been both of them attainted of High Treason My Lords This Indictment was Returned into the Kings Bench in Trinity-Terme in the Eighteenth year of Edward the Fourth and in Easter-Terme the Two and twentieth of Edward the Fourth he was outlawed by the stay of the outlawry so long as it seemes the Judges had well advised before whether it were Treason or not At the same Session Thomas Heber was Indicted of Treason for these words That the last Parliament was the most simple and insufficient Parliament that ever had been in England That the King was gone to live in Kent because that for the present he had not the Love of the Citizens of London nor should he have it for the future That if the Bishop of Bath and Wells were dead the Archbishop of Canterbury being Cardinal of England would immediately lose his head This Indictment was returned into the Kings Bench in Trinity-Terme in the 18th year of Edward the 4th afterwards there came a Privy-Seal to the Judge to respit the Proceedings which as it should seem was to the intent the Judges might advise of the Case for afterwards he is outlawed of High-Treason upon this Indictment These words are thought sufficient evidence to prove these several Indictments that they were spoken to withdraw the Peoples Affections from the King to excite them against Him to cause Risings against Him by the People in mortem destructionem of the King Your Lordships are pleased to consider That in all these Cases the Treason was for words onely words by private persons and in a more private manner but once spoken and no more onely amongst the People to excite them against the King My Lords here are Words Counsels more then Words and Actions too not onely to disaffect the people to the King but the King likewise towards the People not once but often not in Private but in places most Publick not by a Private Person but by a Counsellor ofState a Lord Lieutenant a Lord-President a Lord-Deputy of Ireland 1. To His Majesty that the Parliament had denyed to supply Him a Slander upon all the Commons of England in their Affections to the King and Kingdom in refusing to yield timely supply for the Necessities of the King and Kingdom 2. From thence that the King was loose and absolved from Rules of Government and was to do every thing that Power would admit My Lords more cannot be said they cannot be aggravated whatever I should say would be in Diminution 3. Thence you have an Army in Ireland you may employ to reduce this Kingdom To Counsel a King not to Love His People is very Unnatural it goes higher to hate them to Malice them in his heart the highest expressions of Malice to destroy them by War These Coales they were cast upon His Majesty they were blown they could not kindle in that Breast Thence my Lords having done the utmost to the King he goes to the people At York the Country being met together for Justice at the Open Assises upon the Bench he tells them speaking of the Justices of the Peace that they were all for Law nothing but Law but they should find that the Kings Little Finger should be heavier then the Loynes of the Law as they shall find My Lords Who speaks this to the people a Privy-Counsellor this must be either to traduce His Majesty to the people as spoken from Him or from himself who was Lord-Lieutenant of the County and President intrusted with the Forces and Justice of those parts that he would Employ both this way Add my Lords to His Words there the Exercising of an Arbitrary and Vast Jurisdiction before he had so much as Instructions or Colour of Warrant Thence we carry him into Ireland there he Represented by his place the Sacred Person of His Majesty First There at Dublin the Principal City of that Kingdom whither the Subjects of that Country came for Justice in an Assembly of Peers and others of greatest Rank upon occasion of a Speech of the Recorder of that City touching their Franchises and Regal Rights he tells them That Ireland was a Conquered Nation and that the King might do with them what he pleased Secondly Not long after in the Parliament 10 Car. in the Chair of State in full Parliament again That they were a Conquer'd Nation and that they were to expect Laws as from a Conqueror before the King might do with them what He would now they were to expect it that he would put this Power of a Conqueror in Execution The Circumstances are very Considerable in full Parliament from himself in Cathedra to the Representative Body of the whole Kingdom The Occasion adds much when they desir'd the Benefit of the Laws and that their Causes and Suites might be determined according to Law and not by himself at his Will and Pleasure upon Paper Petitions Thirdly Upon like occasion of Pressing the Laws and Statutes that he would make an Act of Council-Board in that Kingdom as Binding as an Act of Parliament Fourthly He made his Words good by his Actions Assumed and Exercised a Boundless and Lawless Jurisdiction over the Lives Persons and Estates of His Majesties Subjects procured Judgment of Death against a Peer of that Realm Commanded another to be Hanged this was accordingly Executed both in times of High Peace without any Process or Colour of Law Fifthly By Force of a long time he Seized the Yarn and Flax of the Subjects to the Starving and undoing of many thousands besides the Tobacco business and many Monopolies and Unlawful Taxes forced a New Oath not to dispute His Majesties Royal Commands determined Mens Estates at his own Will and Pleasure upon Paper-Petitions to himself forced Obedience to these not only by Fines and Imprisonment but likewise by the Army sessed
Soldiers upon the Refusers in an Hostile manner Sixthly Was an Incendiary of the War between the two Kingdomes of England and Scotland My Lords We shall leave it to your Lordships Judgments whether these Words Counsels and Actions would not have been a sufficient Evidence to have Proved an Indictment drawn up against him as those before mentioned and many others are That they were spoken and done to the Intent to draw the Kings heart from the People and the Affections of the People from the King that they might leave the King and afterwards rise up against him to the destruction of the King If so here is a Compassing of the Kings Death within the Words of the Statute of 25th year of Edward the Third and that Warranted by many former Judgments My Lords I have now done with the Three Treasons within the Statute of the Twenty fifth of Edw. 3d. I proceed unto the Fourth upon the Statute of the Eighteenth year of Henry the Sixth Chapter the third in Ireland and I shall make bold to read the words to your Lordships That no Lord nor any other of what condition soever he be shall bring or lead Hoblers Kernes or Hooded Men nor any other People nor Ho rses to lie on Horseback or on Foot upon the Kings Subjects without their good wills and consent but upon their own costs and without hurt doing to the Commons and if any so do he shall be adjudged as a Traytor 1. The Argument that hath been made concerning the person that it extends not to the King and therefore not to him weighs nothing with your Lordships Rex non habet in Regno parem from the greatness of his Office to argue himself into the same impossibility with His Sacred Majesty of being incapable of High-Treason it 's an Offence no Treason The words in the Statute No Lord nor any other of what condition soever he be include every Subject In Trinity Terme in the Three and thirtieth year of Henry the Eighth in the Kings-Bench Leonard Lord Gray having immediately before been Lord Deputy of Ireland is Attainted of High-Treason and Judgment given against him for letting diverse Rebels out of the Castle of Dublin and discharging Irish Hostages and Pledges that had been given for securing the Peace for not punishing one that said That the King was an Heretique I have read the whole Record there 's not one thing laid to his Charge but was done by him as Lord Lieutenant He had the same Plea with my Lord of Strafford That these things were no adhering to the Kings Enemies but were done for Reasons of State that he was not within those words of the Statute of the 25 of Edw. 3. himself being Lord Lieutenant there Object It hath been said That the Soldiers sessed upon the Subjects by him were not such persons as are intended by that Statute Hoblers Kernes and Hooded Men those Rascally people Answ. My Lords they were the names given to the Soldiery of those times Hoblers Horsemen the other the Foot But the words of the Statute go further Nor any other People neither Horse nor Foot His Lordship sessed upon them both Horse and Foot Object The Statute extends onely to those that lead or bring Savil led them my Lord onely gave the Warrant Answ. To this I shall onely say thus Plus peccat author quam Actor by the rule of the Law Agentes consentientes pari plectuntur poena if consent much more a Command to do it makes the Commander a Traytor If there be any Treason within this Statute my Lord of Strafford is Guilty It hath been therefore said That this Statute like Goliah's Sword hath been wrapt up in a Cloath and laid behind the door that it hath never been put in execution My Lords if the Clarke of the Crown in Ireland had certified your Lordships upon search of the Judgments of Attainders in Ireland he could not find that any man had been attainted upon this Statute your Lordships had had some ground to believe it Yet it s onely my Lord of Straffords Affirmation besides your Lordships know that an Act of Parliament binds until it be repealed It hath been therefore said That this Statute is repealed by the Statute of the 8 Ed. 4. Cap. 1. and of the 10th of Hen. 7. Cap. 22. because by these two Statutes the English Statutes are brought into Ireland The Argument if I mistook it not stood thus That the Statute of the First of Henry the 4th the 10th Chap. saith That in no time to come Treason shall be adjudged otherwise then it was ordained by the Statute of the 25 E. 3. that the reason mentioned in the Eighteenth year of Henry the Sixth in the Irish Statute is not contained in the 25 Edw. 3. and therefore contrary to the Statute of the 1 Hen. 4. it must needs be void If this were Law then all the Statutes that made any new Treason after the First of Henry 4th were void in the very Fabrick and at the time when they were made hence likewise it would follow that the Parliament now upon what occasion soever hath no Power to make any thing Treason not declared to be so in the Statute 25 Edw. 3. This your Lordships easily see would make much for the Lord of Straffords advantage but why the Law should be so your Lordships have onely as yet heard an Affirmation of it no reason But some touch was given that the Statute of the tenth year of Henry the Seventh in words makes all the Irish Statutes void which are contrary to the English The Answer to this is a denial that there are any such words in the Statute The Statute declares that the English Statutes shall be effectual and confirmed in Ireland and that all the Statutes made before time to the contrary shall be revoked This repeals only the Irish Statutes of the tenth year of Henry the Fourth and the Nine and twentieth year of Henry the Sixth which say that the English Statutes shall not be in force in Ireland unless particularly received in Parliament it makes all the Irish Statutes void which say that the English Statutes shall not be in force there It is usual when a Statute sayes that such a thing shall be done or not done to add further that all Statutes to the contrary shall be void No likelihood that this Statute intended to take away any Statute of Treason but when in the Chapter next before this Murder there is made Treason as if done upon the Kings Person That this Statute of the Eighteenth year of Henry the Sixth remains on foot and not repealed either by the Statute of the Eighth year of Edward the Fourth or this of the Tenth year of Henry the Seventh appears expresly by two several Acts of Parliament made at the same Parliament of the tenth year of Henry the Seventh By an Act of Parliament of Henry the Sixth's time in Ireland it was made Treason for any Man
and Statutes made by these our Ancestors they are the Rules we go by in other Cases Why should we differ from them in this alone These my Lords are in part those things which have satisfied the Commons in passing the Bill it is now left to the Judgment and Justice of your Lordships Upon the Close of Mr. St. Iohns Speech the House Adjourned nor was there one word spoken but by Master St. Iohns onely the Lord Lieutenant used the last part of his Rhetorick and by a dumb Eloquence Manibus ad sydera tensis often holding up his hands towards Heaven all along Mr. St. Iohns Speech made his Replies with a deep silence Upon Fryday April the 30th he Petitioned the Lords to be heard again alleadging That his Lawyers had not fully spoken at their last meeting but this was denyed him because the House of Commons were to have the last Speech nor were they content to speak again The following SPEECH of Mr. Glyns is by a Mistake Misplaced for it ought to be next to my Lords Summary of the Evidence Mr. GLYN'S REPLY TO THE Earl of Strafford's DEFENCE My Lord of Strafford having concluded the Recapitulation of his Evidence Mr. Glyn applyed himself to their Lordships in manner following May it please your Lordships MY Lord of Strafford as your Lordships have observed hath spent a great deal 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 we 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 he is subtil in his practice The Committee withdrawing for about the space of half an hour and then returning to the Bar Mr. Glyn proceeded as followeth My Lords your Lordships have observed how the Earl of Strafford hath been accused by the Commons of England of High Treason for a purpose and design to subvert the Fundamental Laws of both the Kingdoms of England and Ireland and to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical 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 proof 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 We that are intrusted for the House of Commons stand here to recollect the Evidence on our part and to apply it to the general Charge and how far 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 proofs 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 self And First in general it will appear 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 and leave out the rest And likewise that in repetition of the Evidence he hath mis-recited plainly very much of the proofs on both sides and likewise hath pretended some proofs to be for his Defence which indeed were not and he hath taken this farther advantage when it makes for his Defence he hath disjoynted the Proofs and Testimonies and severed them asunder that it might appear to your Lordships like Rain falling in drops which considered in distinct drops bring no horror 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 which being put together look horrid as will appear to your Lordships when you duly consider of them These be the general observations which in my Answer I doubt not but to make good But before I shall enter into observations of what he hath spoken I shall answer in general to some things which he hath in general alledged In the first place he hath made a flourish this day and several other days in the way of his Defence That if he could have had longer time he could have made things appear clearer and have produced more proofs Give me leave to inform your Lordships that he is no way streightned of time for he hath been 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 proofs are but flourishes And it appears plainly whatsoever he hath had occasion to make use of even the least paper though he fetched it from Ireland there is not one wanting he hath copies of Papers from the Council-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 clear My Lords He hath mentioned often this day and oftner the days before That many of the Articles laid to his charge are proved but by one Witness 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 known to his own breast I doubt not and not taught him by any of his Counsel or others Learned The Treason laid to his charge is The subverting of the Laws the Evidence is the Article proved and though some one Article appears to be proved but by one yet put the Evidence together you shall never find it to be 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 only by one Witness 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 Counsel direct him to say so I am confident My Lords another observation I shall be bold to make is that he was pleased to cast an aspersion as we must apprehend upon them that are trusted by the House of Commons this day That we that stand here alledged and affirmed things to be proved that are not proved He might have pleased to have spared that language we stand here to justify our selves that we do not use to express any language
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 Council there made or to be made should be as binding as any Act of Parliament This he said was proved but by one witness and I extreamly marvel to hear him say so for the latter words we proved by four or five or six witnesses that is That he would have Acts of State as binding as Acts of Parliament Whereas he sayes these are all the words produced against him in the time of seven years Government there your Lordships have heard of many words and if we would trouble your Lordships further in this kind we could prove such words spoken as often almost as he remained dayes in Ireland that is for the mis-recital The other part two witnesses proved but the residue That they must expect Law from the King as a Conqueror That Acts of State should be equal to Acts of Parliament and when an Act of Parliament would not pass he would make it good by an Act of State these speeches at other times were proved by five witnesses Then he falls back to the second Article touching the words That the Kings little finger should be heavier than the loins of the Law My Lords These words were proved expresly by five witnesses to be by him spoken and if he had produced five hundred that had said he did not speak them they had not been equivalent to disprove five but he produces none Sir William Penniman repeats other words and inverts them and none but he Another party a Minister reports a report that he heard concerning these words but my Lord he saith the occasion of the speaking of them was not mentioned Truly perhaps it might be the forgetfulness of my Lords memory but let me put him in mind and your Lordships remember that the occasion was exprest by one and that is Sir David Fowles that he laying a command upon Sir David to repair a Bridge and calling him to an account why it was not repaired Sir David Fowles told him he could not do it by Law And therefore omitting it my Lord said to him Sir some are all for Law and Lawyers but you shall know that the Kings little finger will be heavier than the loins of the Law Here is the occasion though he would have another business the knighting Money to be the occasion From the second he falls to the three and twentieth Article that is concerning words that he should counsel His Majesty that he might use His Prerogative as he pleased but in saying there was no proof offered he here begins to fall upon the other fallacy that is to pull things asunder whereas we produce them together and would make that which is a Fagot to be but a single Stick but under favour when I come with your Lordships patience to open the force of the proofs and put them together he shall find contrary to his expectation that they are fully proved by the testimony of many witnesses upon consideration of the precedent concurrent and subsequent Acts and Intentions of my Lord of Strafford I shall not now run over my Lord Primates testimony or my Lord Conwayes or master Treasurers or my Lord of Bristols but make use of them in their proper places when I shall put all together to shew his design and to prove his speaking of the words Then he comes to the five and twentieth Article which I shall not insist on though he pretends it not proved I shall refer that to my recollection that I may not answer to his pieces but bring all together and then the horror of his Fact shall more speciously appear Only this under favour I cannot pass over when he comes to justify an Advice and Counsel of the Kings being loose and absolved from all rules of Government and that he might use his Prerogative as he pleases he is pleased to mention the Argument of the Judges in the Ship-money and what they should deliver he makes the Warrant of his Counsel Now your Lordships may observe he would justify his actions by Law in some cases where it is to his advantage but in other cases he must be ignorant of the Law But my Lords for him to mention any thing in the Argument of the Judges concerning the Ship-money which is now cendemned and to make that a ground of his Counsel and advice to the King and not the judgement in truth but the Argument of the Counsel at Bar that therefore he is loose and absolved from all rule of Government for him to make the Parliaments deferring to give supply to be that necessity which was insisted upon in the Counsels Argument and to be such an unavoidable necessity as to beget an Invasion upon Propriety and Liberty it rests in your Judgements and the judgements of all that hear me what argument this is and what he declares his opinion to be this day In the latter part let me close hands and agree with him he sayes Proofs must be taken by themselves they must not be judged by pieces but together and now in good time I shall joyn with him and shall desire the same judgement that things may not be taken asunder but judged together according to his own words For the twentieth Article he is thereby charged with being an Incendiary between both Nations and an occasion of drawing two Armies into this Kingdom and to incense the War My Lords I remember if I did not mis-conceive and my memory misprompt me my Lord said He could have no occasion to incense a War being a man of an Estate and should have no benefit by it having sufficient to live without it but in due time I shall make it appear to my apprehension and I believe to your Lordships when you have heard it that the incensing of this War and provoking of it was the principal instrument of bringing to pass his design of subverting the Laws through the whole work of it My Lords in the passage of this he takes occasion to speak of the testimony of Mr. Secretary Vane who testifies That my Lord was for an offensive and himself for a defensive War Whence my Lord argues here is no great difference for both were for a War But my Lord Is there no difference between an offensive and defensive War in case of Subjects that live under one King is there no difference to bring an Army to offend them and for the King to raise a force to defend himself truly I think there is a great difference and a very material one too but your Lordships see he makes no difference between them My Lords
S r THOMAS WENTWORTH Kt. EARLE of STRAFFORDE Viscount Wentworth Baron Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhowse Newmarch Oversley Raby Ld. Lievtenant Generall and Generall Governor of the Kingdome of Ireland and Ld. President of y e Councill established in y e North parts of England L d Lievtenant of y e County City of York one of his Ma ty most hon ble Privy Councill and Knight of y e most Noble order of the Garter THE TRYAL OF Thomas Earl of Strafford Lord Lieutenant of IRELAND Upon an Impeachment of High Treason BY The COMMONS then Assembled in PARLIAMENT In the Name of THEMSELVES and of All the Commons in England Begun in Westminster-Hall the 22 th of March 1640. And Continued before Judgment was Given until the 10 th of May 1641. Shewing the Form of PARLIAMENTARY Proceedings In an IMPEACHMENT of TREASON To which is Added A short Account of some other MATTERS of FACT Transacted in Both Houses of PARLIAMENT Precedent Concomitant and Subsequent to the said TRYAL With some Special Arguments in LAW Relating to a BILL of ATTAINDER Faithfully Collected and Impartially Published Without Observation or Reflection By IOHN RUSHWORTH of Lincolnes-Inn Esq LONDON Printed for John Wright at the Crown on Ludgate-Hill and Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1680. To the Right HONOURABLE GEORGE EARL OF HALIFAX One of His Majesties most Honourable PRIVY COUNCIL My LORD NO Man I believe understands better than your Lordship the Interest and Concern that Posterity hath in a true account of all matters of moment that were transacted by their Ancestors and I know none in whose Devotion to the service of the King and Kingdom I could so confide as in your Lordships to Patronize this plain and full Relation of the proceedings in Parliament in the Case of the greatest Minister of State in his time I some times doubted that the Dedication of these Papers to your Lordship might be improper because of your Lordships Descent from the Sister of that great Personage whose unhappy Fate is here related But having well considered that Honor Truth and Justice have the Supreme Empire in your truly Noble Soul and that a full and clear Narrative of all the Matters of Fact that occurred in this great Affairs with the Intentions and Constructions of them as declared from the mouth of your Noble Ancestor himself is the fairest and justest way to represent him truly to future Ages I conceived it not unfit for your Lordship to favour this true Account of him which may protect his Name from the injuries both of Ignorance and Malice I ought not neither can I flatter your Lordship you are too well known to need any thing that can be said by me of your Worth and true Nobleness and the Character of this your Ancestor is best to be collected from the following Papers His Letters published by me in the Second Part of my Historical Collections and his Behaviour in this solemn Tryal here published discovers the greatness of his Parts the quickness of his Apprehension the excellence of his Wit and Eloquence the contempt he had of Death and the serene Composure of his mind in that Part of his Life which falls within this History I should not have dared to present this Work to your Lordship so nearly related to this eminent Minister of State if I had not been a Witnesse to all the steps of the proceedings in this great Action and if I had not taken in Characters as well and truly all that was said for him as what his Accusers said against him and therefore I can with great assurance aver it to be a candid Representation of Matter of Fact which is all I pretend to publish to the World andas far as the exactest care could carry me I have done it so punctually true that I am hopeful there is none can have any just Exception to any part of it My Lord There is none alive can judge of a Work of this nature better than your self who as you are descended from a Race of Statesmen being Nephew and Grandson to the Two chief Ministers of the last age this Great Earl and the Wise and Fortunate Lord Keeper Coventry so are you lookt on by all as a Person born for the Service of the KING and the publique good of your Countrey And as I have always had a constant Experience of your Goodness and Indulgence to my self so I humbly hope your Lordship will favourably construe my intentions in this Dedication and accept of it as a tribute of Duty and Acknowledgement humbly offered by May it please your Lordship Your Lordships most Humble Most Faithful and Most obliged Servant JO. RUSHWORTH March 25. 1680. THE PREFACE I Cannot think that there wants an Apology for publishing the ensuing Papers although the Press seems over-charged The Trial of Thomas Earl of Strafford was and is some way or other the Concern of every Man of England and the Commissioners of Scotland and Ireland thought those Kingdoms also Sufferers by his Deportment and joyned in the Prosecution against him All the Commons of England by their Deputies in Parliament were his Accusers and the Impeachment against him was in their Names The Matter of his Charge had Reference to every English Man and all their Posterities He was accused of designing to destroy the security of every of their Estates Liberties and Lifes and to reduce them all to be subject to meer Will and Pleasure It may therefore be said in the Maxim of our Government not much varying the sense Quod Omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet Every man ought doubtless to know his own Case to understand whether that Great Man was justly accused of such a hainous Crime and whether the Kingdom escaped such a fatal blow as was then alledged by his exemplary Fall under the Iudgement of the King and Parliament For this purpose I expose to the common view the whole Proceedings of his Trial being the most solemn deliberate and every way the greatest Tryal whereof we have any Account in our English Story The Preparations for his Tryal were made with an unusual solemnity and were the Results of the Prudence of many selected Lords and Commons as a Committee of both Houses The usual places for Administring Iustice and Tryals of Offenders were thought too mean upon so great an occasion and therefore Scaffolds were erected in Westminster-Hall fit to receive so great an Assembly as were to attend his Trial. His Majesty had a Closet provided for him the Queen and Prince near the place where the House of Peers sate and was every day at the Tryal of the said Earl and might hear what was said and see what Witnesses were produced and take a full view of the greatness of the Assembly and yet remain privately in His Closet unseen Seats were prepared for the Lord High Steward and all the House of Lords who sate as his Iudges Woolsacks
to this High Court and to testifie in a Case of the highest Nature in case of Treason informed of against Sir George Ratcliff We did conceive it to be no breach of Priviledge of Parliament that he should be sent for and if the House require of us our Opinions concerning the manner of sending for him we shall tell you what we conceive of it Which Report being made It was Resolved upon the Question That Sir George Ratcliff shall be forthwith sent for to answer the Information that is Charged against him here of High Treason Resolved upon the Question That Sir Robert King shall forthwith be sent for hither as a Witness to testifie in case of High Treason Mr. Solicitor likewise offered from the Committee to the Consideration of the House two Orders which were read in haec verba and by Vote Ordered accordingly viz. It is Ordered by this House upon the Question That Sir George Ratcliff being as is informed a Member of the Parliament in Ireland because there is an Information in this House of High Treason against him shall be forthwith sent for and brought hither in safe Custody no Priviledge of Parliament extending to this Case Ordered two Messengers to be sent with these Orders and each Messenger to have Copies of both the Orders It was likewise Offered from the Committee That the Honourable Persons near the Chair would beseech His Majesty that He would be pleased to give such Directions as in His Wisdom He shall think fit for the more Expeditious sending for these Parties Mr. Treasurer delivered this Message to His Majesty Saturday November 14th 1640. Mr. Treasurer after he had read out of a Paper the Message which Yesterday the House desired him to deliver to His Majesty Declared that he had acquainted the King therewith who this morning hath given Order to Mr. Secretary Windebank who deals for the Affairs into Ireland to make instant Dispatch to the Deputy there that all Expedition be done according to the Message Secondly Concerning the three Letters desired by my Lord Mountnorris they were procured by Mr. Secretary Cook who was imployed about the Affairs for Ireland at that time that he is now in the Country in Darbyshire His Majesty will take some time to be informed in this and no time shall be lost and there shall be an Account given Wednesday November 18th 1640. Ordered that no Member of this House shall visit the Earl of Strafford during the time of his Restraint without Licence first obtained from the House Ordered a Message be sent to the Lords to desire them that they would please to appoint a Committee of a very few that in the presence of some of this House might take such Depositions and examine such Witnesses as they should name upon Interrogatories and Questions as shall be presented to them by Order of this House concerning the Earl of Strafford and the Interrogatories Testimonies and Witnesses to be kept private until the Charge be made full and perfect Ordered that Mr. Pym go up with this Message accompanied with so many as shall be pleased to go Then the House fell into Debate concerning those Lords who petitioned the King for a Parliament to be called Whereupon it was Resolved upon the Question That those Lords which were Petitioners to His Majesty at York in their Petition a Copy whereof was here now read have done nothing but what was Legal Just and Expedient for the good of the King and Kingdom and is now approved by the whole body of the Commons Resolved upon the Question That the Copy of the Petition now read and formerly preferred by the Lords to His Majesty at York shall be here Entred Thursday November 19th 1640. It is Ordered That if occasion shall be for the examination of any Members of this House in the business concerning the Earl of Strafford they shall be ready upon Notice to be examined upon Oath It is likewise Ordered That upon the Message to be sent from this House the Lords be desired to make the like Order for the Members and Assistants of their House and to desire their Lordships that if occasion be that any Privy-Counsellors be produced as Witnesses they will take such course as in their Judgments they shall think fit that they may be examined This Message to be sent to morrow morning by the Messengers formerly sent Mr. St. Iohns Mr. Palmer Mr. Glimer Mr. Selden Mr. Grimstone Mr. Maynard Sir Simond D'ewes Mr. Whstiler Mr. Thomas Widerington Mr. Sollicitor This Select Committee or any two of them are appointed to search the Record of Attainder in the Kings Bench in such manner and at such time as they shall think fit for the furtherance of the Charge in hand against the Earl of Strafford Friday November 20th 1640. Mr. Whistler Reported from the Committee for Irish Affairs That he is required by the Committee to Report to the House the Affairs of that Kingdom as they were set forth in a Remonstrance made by the House of Commons in this present Parliament in Ireland wherein it appeared that Trading was destroyed Industry disheartned new and unlawful Impositions were Imposed the Arbitrary Determinations of all Causes for Goods Land and Possessions by Petitions and Act at Council-Table where no Writ of Error can lie and the King loseth a Fine upon the Original Writ thereby That His Majesties Gracious Inclination for the good of that Kingdom is kept from them That there is a Monopoly of the sole Trade of Tobacco of more gain to the Parties interessed therein than the King 's whole Revenue in Ireland The destroying of the Plantation of London-Derry The Exorbitant Power of the High Commission which cryeth loud in all the three Kingdoms The Proclamation forbidding any to depart thence for England without Licence and pay dear for it The many Subsidies given and Monies raised for the King and still he is in Debt and therefore demands an account of His Treasure and desires present Redress or Access to His Majesty A Copy of the Remonstrance was delivered in under the Hand of the Clerk of the Parliament there and was read and shall be entred if so Ordered That the Secretaries there Mr. Slingsby and Mr. Little be required to send hither the Book of Entries of the several Petitions presented to the late Lord Deputy now Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and the several Orders and Proceedings thereupon made That Mr. Little the younger and Mr. Carpenter who have the Monopoly for Tobacco be required to send hither those Warrants by which they demand and have laid those Taxes upon Tobacco That the several Affairs of the Custom-House and Ports viz. Dublin Kingsale Yowhall Waterford Corke Galloway Carrick-Fergus and Bangor be required to send hither their Books of Entries whereby the Impositions laid upon several Commodities may appear there were several Warrants issued forth according to this Order and
Quality and Trust are in Ireland material Witnesses to be examined as the Master of the Rolls the Lord Chancellor and others these can hardly be spared to come hither to give their Testimony The Committee desires the Advice of the House in this particular which without their Judgments cannot be determined to think of some way how these Parties might have their Testimony taken and the Truth might be known and Justice done This whole matter thus Reported from the Committee for Irish Affairs is recommitted to the same Committee again to consider of it and to draw those things that are to be inquired of under apt Heads and so present them to the judgment of this House to proceed accordingly Mr. Maynard Mr. St. Iohns Mr. Hide Mr. Whistler Mr. Ieofrey Palmer Mr. Glyn Mr. Sollicitor This Committee is to Collect and Offer to this House Reasons for this House to make use of and insist upon in maintainance of that Point of the Message of this House to the Lords which desires the presence of some of the Members of this House at the Examination of such Witnesses as shall be Proposed by this House in the Accusation of the Earl of Strafford To the Right Honourable the Lord-Deputy The Humble and just Remonstrance of the Knights Citizens and Burgesses of the Parliament assembled SHEWING THat in all Ages since the happy Subjection of this Kingdom to the Imperial Crown of England it was and is a Principal Study and Princely Care of His Majesty and His Noble Progenitors Kings and Queens of England and Ireland to the vast Expence of Treasure and Blood that their Loyal and Dutiful people of this Land of Ireland being now for the most part derived from British Ancestors should be Governed according to the Municipal and Fundamental Laws of England that the Statute of Magna Charta or the Great Charter of the Liberties of England and other Laudable Laws and Statutes were in several Parliaments here Enacted and Declared That by the means thereof and of the most Prudent and Benign Government of His Majesty and His Royal Progenitors this Kingdom was until of late in its growth a Flourishing Estate whereby the said people were heretofore enabled to answer their humble and natural desires to comply with His Majesties Princely and Royal Occasions by their free Gift of 150 Thousand Pounds Sterling and likewise by another free Gift of 120 Thousand Pounds more during the Government of the Lord Viscount Faulkland and after by the Gift of 40 Thousand Pounds and their free and chearful Gift of Six intire Subsidies in the 10th Year of His Majesties Reign which to comply with His Majesties then Occasions signified to the then House of Commons They did allow should amount in the Collections unto 250 Thousand Pounds although as they confidently believe if the Subsidies had been levied in a moderate Parliamentary way they would not have amounted to much more than half the Sum aforesaid besides the four intire Susidies granted in this present Parliament So it is May it please Your Lordship by the occasion of the insuing and other Grievances and Innovations though to His Majesty no considerable Profit this Kingdom is reduced to that extream and universal Poverty that the same is less able to pay Subsidies than it was heretofore to satisfie all the before recited great Payments And His Majesties most Faithful people of the Land do conceive great fears that the said Grievances and Consequences thereof may be hereafter drawn into Presidents to be perpetuated upon their Posterity which in their great Hopes and strong Beliefs they are perswaded is contrary to His Royal and Princely intention towards His said people some of which said Grievances are as followeth 1. The general apparent decay of Trades occasioned by the new and illegal raising of the Book of Rates and Impositions upon Native and other Commodities Exported and Imported by reason whereof and of extream Usage and Censures Merchants are beggered and both disinabled and discouraged to Trade and some of the honourable Persons who gain thereby are often Judges and Parties and that in the conclusion His Majesties Profit thereby is not considerably advanced 2. The Arbitrary decision of all civil Causes and Controversies by paper Petitions before the Lord Lieutenant and Lord Deputy and infinite other Judicatories upon reference from them derived in the nature of all Actions determinable at the Common Law not limitted into certain time cause season or thing whatsoever And the consequences of such proceedings by receiving immoderate and unlawful Fees by Secretaries Clerks Pursevants Serjeants at Arms and otherwise by which kind of proceedings His Majesty loseth a considerable part of his Revenue upon Original Writs and otherwise and the Subject loseth the benefit of his Writ of Error Bill of Reversal Vouchers and other legal and just Advantages and the ordinary Course and Courts of Justice declined 3. The proceedings in civil Causes at Council-Board contrary to the Law and great Charter not limited to any certain time or season 4. That the Subject is in all the material parts thereof denied the benefit of the Princely Graces and more especially of the Statute of Limitations of 21 of Iac. granted by His Majesty in the Fourth Year of His Reign upon great Advice of the Councils of England and Ireland and for great Consideration and then published in all the Courts of Dublin and in all the Counties of this Kingdom in open Assizes whereby all Persons do take notice That contrary to His Majesties Pious Intentions His Subjects of this Land have not enjoyed the benefit of His Majesties Princely Promise thereby made 5. The extrajudicial avoiding of Letters Patents of Estates of a very great part of His Majesties Subjects under the Great Seal the Publick Faith of the Kingdom by private Opinions delivered at the Council-Board without Legal Evictions of their Estates contrary to Law and without President or Example of any former Age. 6. The Proclamation for the sole emption and uttering of Tobacco which is bought at very low Rates and uttered at high and excessive Rates by means whereof thousands of Families within this Kingdom and of His Majesties Subjects in several Islands and other parts of the West-Indies as your Petitioners are informed are destroyed and the most part of the Coin of this Kingdom is ingrossed into particular Hands insomuch that your Petitioners do conceive that the Profit arising and ingrossed thereby doth surmount His Majesties Revenue certain or casual within this Kingdom and yet his Majesty receiveth but very little profit by the same 7. The universal and unlawful encreasing of Monopolies to the advantage of a few the disprofit of His Majesty and impoverishment of His people 8. And the extream cruel Usage of certain late Commissioners and other Stewards of the British Farmers and Inhabitants of the City and County of London-Derry by means whereof the worthy Plantation of that Country is almost destroyed and the Inhabitants are reduced to
the safe Custody of Sir George Ratcliff they had sent for him and had taken Order in it and touching the receiving of the Examinations in this Cause there should be the same course observed in them as was in the Earl of Strafford Thursday December 31. 1640. The Articles against Sir George Ratcliff by former Order ingrossed were twice Read And then it was Resolved upon the Question That these Articles thus ingrossed and read shall be sent up to the Lords by the Commons Assembled in Parliament in maintenance of their Accusation of Sir George Ratcliff whereby he standeth Charged of High Treason And it is Ordered That Mr. Pym go up with these Articles Resolved upon the Question That a Message be sent forthwith to the Lords to desire a Conference of both Houses concerning Articles exhibited in maintenance of the Charge against Sir George Ratcliff Sir Iohn Strangways went up with this Message It was moved That the House would think of some Answer to the Lords concerning the Charges against the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury and the Earl of Strafford delivered from the Scottish Commissioners at a Conference by a Committee of both Houses Monday Ianuary 4th 1640. Ordered That a Conference be desired with the Lords to morrow morning concerning the state the disorders and dangers of the new levied Irish Army and to present them to their Lordships and to desire them to join with the House in a Petition to His Majesty for the disbanding of that Army The Committee appointed for the Earl of Strafford's business are to prepare the Heads of this Conference and the Members of this House are required to bring into this Committee between this and to morrow morning such Informations as shall come to their Hands conducing to these matters Sir Walter Earle and Sir Iohn Clotworthy are to manage this Conference It was likewise moved That at this Conference Considerations might be had of the great Resort daily made to the Earl of Strafford Mr. Nathaniel Fines is to go up to morrow morning with a Message to the Lords to desire a Conference with their Lordships concerning the Disorders and Inconveniences of the new levied Irish Army And to desire a free Conference concerning those Declarations presented by the Scottish Commissioners against the Lord Lieutenant and the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury as Incendiaries Sir Peter Hayman to go up with this Message The Subject of his Conference to be to present to the Lords that it may be made known to the Lords Commissioners that the Scottish Commissioners be desired to bring in their Proofs against the Lord Lieutenant and the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury to the end the Parliament may proceed to Judgment Tuesday Ianuary 12th 1640. Ordered That the several Petitions of Sir Henry Wallop the Lord Viscount Nettersfield be referred to the Sub-Committee formerly appointed by the Grand Committee for Irish Affairs for the business of Sir Henry Wallop because there is something in those Petitions that will materially conduce to the Charge of the Earl of Strafford Ordered That the Committee appointed to prepare some fit way of Representing to the Lords the four Irish Causes formerly Reported here viz. That of the Lord Mountnorris the Lord Dillon Lord Viscount Ely and the Earl of Kildare do sit Friday Ianuary 15th 1640. Ordered That the Committee appointed to draw up the Charge against the Earl of Strafford shall desire to have the Depositions that are yet sealed up delivered unto them and may add and insert such particular Instances and other Circumstances as they in their Discretions shall think fit to the several Articles delivered in Charge against the Earl of Strafford according to the saving in the conclusion of those Articles and that they present the whole matter to the House on Monday morning next Saturday Ianuary 16th 1640. Mr. Pym went up to the Lords with a Message to this Effect To desire their Lordships That those Examinations which at the Request of this House were taken in the Case of the Earl of Strafford by the Lords deputed to that purpose may be delivered to the Commissioners of this House appointed to draw up the Charge against the Earl that they may make use of them for the enlarging of their Charge in particularities of Evidences according to the Clause of Resolution in the conclusion of the said Charge and likewise to make a Declaration That howsoever by the Course of Parliament this House might proceed with the Charge in general yet to avoid all scruples and to bring the business sooner to a conclusion they do desire to conclude in this way Saturday Ianuary 23. 1640. Mr. Selden Mr. Palmer Mr. Whitlock Mr. Maynard By Order are added to the Committee that are to draw up the Articles against the Earl of Strafford Thursday Ianuary 28th 1640. The further Impeachment of Thomas Earl of Strafford by the Commons Assembled in Parliament was this day read Friday Ianuary 29th 1640. Ordered That the Consideration of the Commission granted to the Earl of Worcester and his eldest Son the Lord Herbert and some Commissions by them granted to others for the levying of Forces in the several Counties of England and Wales and all the Circumstances depending thereupon be referred to the Committee to draw up the Charge against the Earl of Strafford and to consider of the Magazine in Sir Piercy Herbert's Custody Saturday Ianuary 30th 1640. The further Impeachment of Thomas Earl of Strafford was again read and the Title of the Impeachment and every Article and the Conclusion were every of them particularly put to the Question and were every of them assented unto and Resolved upon the Question And afterwards it was Resolved upon the Question That these Articles being engrossed shall be forthwith sent up to the Lords Ordered That Mr. Hambden go up with a Message to the Lords to desire a Conference with their Lordships presently if it may stand with their Lordships Occasions by a Committee of both Houses touching the further Impeachment of Thomas Earl of Strafford Mr. Pym is to manage this Conference and Mr. Maynard is to be Assistant to him Mr. Pym acquaints the House That according to their Command he had delivered unto the Lords the Articles for the further Impeachment of Thomas Earl of Strafford Ordered That the Thanks of this House be given to Mr. Pym and to the whole Committee for the great Service they have done this House in the great pains they have taken in preparing and drawing up the Charge and Articles against Thomas Earl of Strafford Tuesday February 16th 1640. Sir Philip Stapleton went up to the Lords with a Message to desire a Conference with their Lordships by a Committee of both Houses presently if it may stand with their Lordships Occasions concerning the Earl of Strafford Resolved upon the Question That the Heads Reported by Mr. Pym from the Committee appointed to prepare the Heads of the Conference to be desired with the Lords
Committee for the Earl of Strafford The House does declare That they are well satisfied that the Evidence to be produced against Thomas Earl of Strafford at his Trial be managed by those Members Friday March 5th 1640. Upon Mr. Whitlock's Report from the Earl of Strafford's Committee It was Resolved upon the Question That there shall be no Replication put 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 but that the further Proceedings shall be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is now 〈◊〉 by the Committee Mr. Whitlock is to go up to the Lords with this Message viz. That the House of Commons have considered of the Earl of Strafford's Answer and do aver their Charge of High Treason against him and that he is Guilty in such manner and form as he stands Accused and Impeached and that this House will be ready to prove their Charge against him at such convenient time as their Lordships shall prefix and intend to manage the Evidence by Members of their own and desire a free Conference with their Lordships by Select Committees of both Houses to consider of some Propositions and Circumstances concerning the Trial. Mr. Whitlock brings Answer from the Lords That their Lordships have taken the Message from this House into Consideration and will give a meeting for a free Conference by a Committee of 24 on Monday Morning at Nine of the Clock The Committee of the Commons Mr. Pym Mr. Strode Mr. Solicitor Mr. Grimston Lord Digby Sir Iohn Clotworthy Sir Walter Earle Mr. Hampden Mr. Whitlocke Mr. Palmer Mr. Selden Mr. Maynard Mr. Treasurer Sir Io. Culpepper Mr. Reynolds Mr. Hyde Mr. Prideaux Mr. Whitlock Mr. Martin Mr. Proxholm Mr. Gray Lord Faulkland Mr. Vaughan Lord Russell Sir Iohn Strangwaies Mr. Bellasis Sir Guy Palmes Mr. Sutton Mr. Whistler Sir Symon D'Ewes Sir An. Irby Sir Martin Lomly Mr. Waller Mr. Coventry Mr. Upton Sir Iohn Eveling Lord Fairfax Sir William Massam Mr. Pierepoint Sir Benjamin Rudyard Sir Thomas Barrington Sir Philip Stapleton Mr. Capell Mr. Cary Sir Ralph Hopton Sir Robert Hatton Sir Gilbert Gerrard Mr. Nathaniel Fines A Committee of these 48 are to meet a Committee of 24 of the Lords at a free Conference concerning the Trial of Thomas Earl of Strafford on Monday Morning next at Nine of the Clock in the Painted-Chamber The Committee for the Earl of Strafford are to manage this free Conference with the Lords Monday March 8th 1640. Upon Mr. Whitlock's Report from the Committee for the Earl of Strafford the Heads of a Conference appointed to be had this day concerning the Trial of the said Earl It was Resolved upon the Question 1. To Propose to the Lords That they will be pleased to take some Order that there may be a convenient Place appointed for the Trial of Thomas Earl of Strafford and to give such Directions as shall be fit for preparing conveniency of room for both Houses and for such Members of the House as are appointed to manage the Evidence and for Witnesses and for the Prisoner and for excluding of all such as ought not to be present at the Trial. 2. That whereas in the last Message to the Lords this House did Intimate unto them That they did intend to manage the Evidence by Members of their own They are now Commanded to explain their Reason That their Lordships may take notice That We do not expect any Council shall be admitted the Earl of Strafford at the giving of Evidence at the Trial. Thursday March 11th 1640. Mr. Whitlock Reports from the free Conference concerning the Trial of Thomas Earl of Strafford That the Lord Privy-Seal began with this Introduction That this Parliament both Houses have had often Conferences and to good Purpose which had preserved a true Understanding between both Houses That at the last free Conference their Lordships did receive from this House certain Propositions concerning the Trial of Thomas Earl of Strafford which We our Selves call Circumstances 1. Concerning Place 2. Persons 3. Managing the Evidence 4. Use of Counsel he was pleased to remember the words of the Proposition as they were delivered unto them and told Us those were Circumstances yet Circumstances were Servants to Execution and might be altered and if they should Change from the House they now sit in into the Painted-Chamber or the Court of Requests upon Survey of it by skilful men they were informed the Floor of it is so weak that it might be very dangerous for so great a Resort to be in together at the Trial therefore left that to Our further Consideration The Lords thought of this That the Bar in their House might be removed higher and the Room there made longer and that being made a Scaffold might be a Capacity sufficient to receive the Members of this House this he did only Propose and said The Bishops did desire to be absent at this Trial so there would be more room for the Earls would sit in their places Next that their Lordships did desire to understand Whether We meant to be there as a House which they thought We did or as single Members of the House 3. His Lordship was pleased to tell Us They desired an Exposition of the words managing of Evidence Whether We intended a marshalling and applying of the Proof 4. That the Lords did desire concerning the Place and Persons to know how they have been admitted in former times that they might be fortified by Presidents for Place and Persons and for Counsel Their Lordships are careful not to admit of more than is according to the Law of this Kingdom And thereupon their Lordships have made this Resolution That the Earl of Strafford in matters of meer Fact shall not make use of Counsel but in matter of Law he shall and if any doubt arise what is matter of Law and what is matter of Fact the Lords do reserve the Judgment hereof to themselves this came by intimation of Ours that We did intend to manage the Evidence and at a Conference We explained Our Selves That We did not expect they would allow Him any Council at the giving of Evidence After this he was pleased to tell us That he had not forgot another thing though he omitted it that he that delivered the Proposition at the Message used words to this purpose That this House did hold it necessary and fit that all the Members of the House might be present at the Trial to the end every one might satisfie his own Conscience in the giving of their Vote to demand Judgment Upon this We thought it not fit to make an Explanation till We had acquainted the House with it Ordered That the whole matter of the Report now made of the free Conference with the Lords concerning the Trial of Tho. Earl of Strafford be referred to the Committee for the Earl of Strafford to search and consider of Presidents and to prepare Reasons and to present them to the House to morrow morning and they are to meet this Afternoon at Two
things are not proved when any thing we urged is contained under an Article for then he refers the proof when he comes to the Article as many things concerning the Lands of the Clergy will be made good in the proofs of the proper Article That he hath preferred many Divines that is no part of his Merit nor takes away his fault though it be true That for the Value of his living we never heard of it till on this occasion but be it small or great it is nothing to justifie my Lord of Strafford being offered to this purpose That though his Lordship were careful of the Lands of the Ministers He was not careful of the Ministers themselves in suffering a Groom to execute that high Function Ministers being not to be chosen according to the Quality of the Living but according to the Quality of the Function That for the matter of Monopolies if his Lordship do stop any he may stop them for sinister Reasons and Respects and however there is no Compensation doing his Duty in one thing not satisfying for Neglect in another And then concluded That what we have not now replied unto shall be made good in the Charge and ought not in their Lordships Opinion make my Lord of Strafford more plausible for the Charge shall be made good against him in the truth of the Fact and the Aggravation of it Hereupon the Court was Adjourned and the Committee directed to proceed to the Proofs conducing to the particular Charge the next Morning The Third day Wednesday March 24. 1640. Gentlemen YOU who are of the Committee to manage the Evidence against the Earl of Strafford I am to acquaint you Their Lordships have considered of that point of Sir Pierce Crosby his being examined as a Witness and my Lord of Straffords Exceptions and have resolved that he shall be Examined and that the Validity of his Testimony shall be left unto their Lordships Judgments Your Lordships have with great Patience attended the Charge that hath been read and the Answer and the Exceptions taken to the Preamble which my Lord of Strafford to ingratiate himself did make to the main of his Defence My Lords I shall repeat little of that that hath been said only pardon me if I say this to Your Lordships That wherein my Lord of Strafford answered to very many particulars yet to that one main he answered not which was principally objected against him which I therefore speak to put him in mind of it that if he can he may Answer And that is Your Lordships were pleased to hear the Complaint and Protestation of the whole Kingdom of Ireland read before you The principal of their Aim seems to be to take off the Extolling of my Lord of Strafford that himself or his Agents had put upon him in a Bill of Subsidies wherein indeed the Praise and Honour due to His Majesty was much Attributed to my Lord of Strafford which grieved the Parliament who would take it off and my Lord of Strafford is now willing to lay it down and he doth well to do so when he can keep it no longer when those from whom he took it by fraud or force would wrest it again from him I desire Your Lordships to remember and I am sure you will That the main of our Complaint is His alteration of the fundamental Laws against Will His introducing of new Laws at his Will and Pleasure This is not only the Cry but the Testimony of a whole Kingdom before Your Lordships of all the Lords and Commons of Ireland I shall not touch that which concerns breach of Priviledge of Parliament he would fain put that off on Sir George Ratcliffe his bosom Friend and put it off himself My Lord of Strafford Sequestred Sir Pierce Crosby from the Council his Vote went with it others joined with him but I am sure he moved it he concurred with it But now My Lords I humbly Address my self to that we are ready to maintain The Body of the Charge And because some time hath been spent between the reading of the Charge and the main of the Defence I desire leave to open what is the Nature what the Height and Quality of the Offence of which this great Lord stands Accused before you My Lords It is a Charge of the highest Nature that can be against a man A Charge of High Treason It is a Treason not ending and expiring in one single Act of a discontented Heart but a Habit a Trade a Mystery of Treason exercised by this Great Lord ever since the Kings Favour bestowed on him My Lords It hath two Evils to deprive us of that which is good that is to subvert and take away the fundamental the ancient Laws whereby we are secure of whatsoever we do enjoy it hath My Lords a positive Evil in it to introduce instead of that an Arbitrary Government bounded by no Laws but by the Evil Councels of such Ministers as he hath been My Lords It is the Law that gives that Soveraign tye which wâ— all Obedience and Chearfulness the Subject renders to the Soveraign It is the Law My Lords that gives Honours to the Lords and Nobles Interest Property and Liberty to the Subject My Lords The Law as it is the Foundation and Ground of all these hath its distribution in a course of Justice Justice is derived as by so many Channels by the several Courts of Justice whereby the Kings Justice for it is His is brought and conveyed to the Subject My Lords Of all this hath my Lord of Strafford endeavoured not only to put the Subject out of present Possession but to make him uncapable of the future Benefit of it Other Treasons yea a Treason against the Person of a Prince which is the most Transcendent and High Treason that can be fall short of this Treason For a good Prince may be gathered to His Fathers yet another may succeed Him that supports the Glory and Justice of His Throne We have had Experience of it When blessed King Iames was taken from us to Heaven Sol occubuit nox nulla secuta est But if any one such a design as this should take effect That the Law and Justice should be taken from the Throne and Will placed there we are without hope of ever seeing Remedy Power in so great a measure taken is not easily laid down unless it be by the exceeding great goodness of so merciful and just a Prince as we have My Lords The Particulars of this Treason are Conveyed to Your Lordships in 28 several Articles I shall shortly and briefly touch but the Heads of those on which I shall insist and give some distribution of them And I think the best way will be this To consider first what he did and what he said before he went into Ireland then what he did and said there and what he hath done since And in all of them you will find this his main design which I
he stood within little distance of my Lord when he spake the words and hath not been deaf above two months and two other Witnesses concur fully with him For Doctor Duncombe whether he be the man that laid Aspersions in the North on some Noble Lords I know not but his Testimony only is that he heard so from one that spake it at the Table not upon Oath and not knowing what use would be made of it And another Witness shall be produced that will speak to the occasion and that it was not the matter of Knighting-money Sir Thomas Leyton being asked how long he hath had this Infirmity in his hearing Answered That he got a great Cold since he came to Town and had this Imperfection since Christmas and had his hearing well before Being asked how far he sate from my Lord of Strafford He Answered Four yards off My Lord of Strafford desired it might be asked the Witness Whether he sate on the Seat where the Sheriff uses to fit he answered Affirmatively His Lordship excepted against his Testimony himself sitting where the President uses to sit betwixt my Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Justice Vernon And he Appealed to my Lord Chief Baron Whether the Presidents Seat and the Sheriffs Seat be not as far distant very near as far as from his Lordships then station to the Lord Steward But the Committee observed it not to be material that there should be any Geometrical measure but be three four five six or seven yards off Here the Committee offered other Witnesses but my Lord of Strafford desired their Lordships Judgment Whether they should not bring all together which the Lord Steward declared they might as to this Point Sir David Fowles being produced was excepted against My Lords He is no competent Witnesse he lying in the Fleet on a Sentence in the Star-Chamber at my Suit being fined for divers things he had said which concerned my self which depended on this in question and conducing to it He comes not at his own Request or Suit but in a Suit that concerns His Majesty and the Commonwealth and might offer the Presidents own Rule in the Case but that the Law speaks for him that a Witness ought to be heard in this Cause though there have been particular ill affections between them and your Lordships well know how to compare him with other Witnesses and to value him accordingly This hath been Resolved in the Case of Sir Pierce Crosby that he should be sworn and then value his Testimony as the Lords shall see Cause and this may be put into the same way Sir David Fowles being sworn the Lord Steward put them in mind of the former Caution that their Lordships would judge the value of his Testimony the Committee not admitting what was excepted against him he being not to obtain any thing for himself nor his own Interest concerned but produced for the King and Commonwealth and therefore an indifferent Witness in the Case And then being Interrogated touching the words of Comparison between the King 's little Finger and the Loins of the Law whether he heard them and the occasion Sir David Fowles answered He heard him say the very same words That there were some for Law and nothing but Law but the King 's little Finger should be heavier on them than the Loins of the Law The occasion he cannot well remember but there was some discontent taken by my Lord against him he being desired by a Messenger to levy Mony to mend a Bridge he told the Messenger He could not well do it of himself for there was a Statute as he took it 24 H. 8. that appoints four Commissioners to be at the doing of such Service and he being but One durst not undertake to do it Besides he said He must see an Order or Warrant from the Sessions else he could not do it and none was shewed Some other Exceptions he took to the unlawfulness of the business and the Messenger reported this to my Lord and that he conceived was the cause my Lord broke out so violently against him But being Interrogated on what occasion the words in question were spoken He answered Before my Lord went to Ireland he made a Speech to the whole County and desired them to go on in their Service and so brake out Some are all for Law but they shall find the Kings little Finger heavier on them than the Loins of the Law And this is all he can remember Sir William Ingram sworn and examined touching his knowledge of these words Answered That he was on the Bench at that time Sir Thomas Leyton was Sheriff and he heard my Lord speak these words Some of you are all for Law but you shall find that the King 's little Finger is heavier than the Loins of the Law but he doth not remember the occasion The main point I must insist on is That the very words if they had been spoken by me as they are laid concerning which I call God to witness I have spoken the truth and the occasion It is no Treason within the Statute And that being a point of Law I crave leave to reserve my self according to your Lordships Order that my Counsel in time fitting and proper may speak as concerning that in point of Law We shall close this Article the last thing mentioned by his Lordship was spoken to before as to the words we had five Witnesses express in the Point and therefore shall expect your Lordships Judgment in that And so the Court was adjourned The Fourth day Thursday March 25. 1641. THE Third Article The Charge THat the Realm of Ireland having béen time out of mind annexed to the Imperial Crown of this His Majesties Realm of England and governed by the same Laws The said Earl being Lord-Deputy of that Realm to bring His Majesties Liege-Subjects of that Kingdom likewise into dislike of His Majesties Government and intending the Subversion of the Fundamental Laws and setled Government of that Realm and the destruction of His Majesties Liege-people there did upon the 30th day of September in the Ninth Year of His now Majesties Reign in the City of Dublin the chief City of that Realm where His Majesties Privy-Council and Courts of Iustice do ordinarily reside and whither the Nobility and Gentry of that Realm do usually resort for Iustice in a publick Speech before divers of the Nobility and Gentry of that Kingdom and before the Mayor Aldermen and Recorder and many Citizens of Dublin and other His Majesties Liege-people declare and publish That Ireland was a Conquered Nation and that the King might do with them what he pleased And speaking of the Charters of former Kings of England made to that City He further then said That their Charters were nothing worth and did bind the King no further than he pleased I Humbly move your Lordship That since diverse things were spoken by the Witnesses Yesterday which
had the fortune to have all the Examinations whereupon they proceeded and looked over them all and now I protest and call God to witness not any way as making to me I found the said Lord to have proceeded as Honourably Justly and Nobly to his understanding as any man could do and yet was decryed as much as any man could be And so I beseech Your Lordships to consider me the Kings Servant and that in the Administration of the Commands and Justice intrusted with me I had occasion to give offence to many and that it hath been the ill fortune of those that have been Governours there when they have left the Government not to be so well reported as otherwise they might be Besides There is nothing in this Charge can possibly amount to Treason admit all to be as it is laid though perhaps to a Misdemeanour That if it be no Treason it will fall to be but Misdemeanour and then I conceive it stands with the Justice and Practice of this Court to allow Councel and Witnesses which I am debarred from by the involving me under the general Charge of Treason and having no further time to prepare then since Friday last That though before I durst not say Your Lordships were bound by Rules of any Judicature but stood to Your own Honour and Nobleness and were a Rule to Your selves and herein I take Your Lordships to witness yet since the Gentlemen at the Barr have prest the rules of other Courts I desire leave to offer That in all ordinary Courts of Judicature that ever I heard of where the Criminal party doth Answer and that Answer is not replyed to nor he admitted to make his proof the Answer of the party is taken and confest from which universal Rule of Justice no man can shew him a transgression And therefore since I cannot be admitted my proofs it being impossible to fetch Witnesses out of Ireland since Friday last my Answer I conceive ought to be admitted and the Charge taken as I confest it not as it is on proof Saving to my self that I said I would go on to give the best Answer I could on a suddain professing That if I had had time I am confident through the mercy and goodness of God and the Innocency of my own heart I should be able to clear my self of Treason the greatest Crime between man and man towards His Majesty and towards his People my heart being innocent of it and never having suggestion or thought but for the Greatness and Honour of His Majesty and the Prosperity and blessed Estate of His People all the days of my life and ever desiring the best things and never satisfied I had done enough but did always desire to do better but also of all other foul Crimes of Injustice or Oppression Errours I may have many perhaps my Tongue hath been too free my Heart perhaps hath lain too near my Tongue but God forbid every word should rise up in Judgment against me If every word that 's spoken amiss should be observ'd who is able to endure it for words spoken ten twelve eight or nine years ago to be brought in Judgment of me is a very heavy Case and I beseech your Lordships to turn the Case inward and to tell me if it be not a hard Case to be put upon such an Examination I shall observe further that words ought to be charged within a certain time by the Proviso in the Stat. in E. 6. time they must be brought in question within 30 days as I take it which Proviso stands good in Law but I go now into a Learning that God knows I have little skill of to this I desire my Councel may in due time be heard to open and Plead In the mean time I desire to say that if popular actions must be concluded within a year or two at the most sure words should be questioned within a less time I shall proceed to maintain the truth of my Answer That Ireland is not governed by the same Laws that England is and for that I shall read a few words in my Lord Cooks Learning which God knows I understand not it is in Calvins Case where the words are So as now the Laws of England became the proper Laws of Ireland And therefore because they have Parliaments holden there whereat they have made divers particular Laws as it appears in the 20 H. 6. 8. and 20. and in Ed. Dyer 360. And for that they retain to this day divers of the ancient Customs the Book of 20 H. 6. holds That Ireland is governed by Laws and Customs separate and divers from the Laws of England Therefore in all things belonging to my Charge that came out of Ireland I hope Your Lordships will take along with you the consideration of the Customs and Practices of that Kingdom and not judge me according to that which hath been the Custom and Practice of the Kingdom of England In the second place I come to the words of Ireland being a conquered Nation The words laid in the Charge being that I should say That Ireland was a conquered Nation and the King might do with them what he pleased And first I should do extreamly ill to the Honour of the English Nation and to the memory of divers of Your Lordships Noble Ancestors if I should not both say and think that Ireland is a conquered Nation when here 's mention made in the Laws and in the Acts of State of English Rebels and Irish Enemies certainly there is something in that for till the Kings of England gave them the advantage and benefit of the Laws of England it is well known they were held Irish Enemies and so termed and stiled in all the Records one shall meet withall in these times And that it was a conquered Nation I have very good Authority in the Statute made 11 Eliz. at the Attainder of that famous Rebel Shan Oneale In one part of which it is said That all the Clergy of the Realm assembled in Armagh at the time of the Conquest c. See the Statute Is it then so much for me to say what 's in the Act and is it not for the Honour of the English Nation to say it and it must be said to the Worlds end for 't is a truth And therefore there is no cause it should be taken so hainously or heard with so much displeasure and if I displease for telling the truth I cannot help it He reads another part of it viz. And therefore it is to be understood that King Hen. 2. the first Conqueror of this Realm c. And so it hath been acknowledged in all stories and times and many an English man hath spent his blood in it whose Posterity will be ashamed to view it other than as a conquered Kingdom Nay I believe many Noble Persons are yet living that have bled for it and will take it ill if it be termed less than a Conquest in them
who lived in those famous times and spent their blood in Obedience to their Soveraigns Command So that by these words candidly and rightly taken no manner of ill could come being spoken not with any sharpness or upbraiding but meerly to let them see That being in that Condition they were infinitely bound to the Kings of England who were pleased to communicate to them the Laws of their own Kingdom And so far were they from being taken ill that no man at that time took offence at them For the words The King might do with them what he pleased let them relate to the Conquest and there is no offence in them for the Conqueror might give them what Laws he pleased and yet nevertheless hath been so gracious and good as to give them the Laws of his own People Give me that understanding of the words and then where is the Crime how can it be brought in Judgment against me in it self or be aggravated to High Treason I acknowledge I did speak to the Recorder of Dublin yet some things I am put in mind of which I am forced to deny with a great asseveration That I do not remember the words nay I am sure I never spake them let all the world and a cloud of Witnesses say the contrary when I know in my own heart I did not speak them though I offer not this to Your Lordships to convince your Judgments And on the other side there is nothing that is true but I will acknowledge it with all Ingenuity in the world on the Testimony of any one single Witness I desire that Mr. Slingsby his Servant might be asked whether he was not present when I spake these words and whether then any offence was taken at me in respect of the high manner of my speaking or whether they were not rather extreamly well satisfied Now if Your Lordships take words in pieces and not altogether any man living may be convinced but taking my words altogether though something might be thought harsh yet something gave abundant satisfaction I am upon a mighty prejudice in being denied to have my Witnesses examined upon Oath in these things that are not Treason But they be persons of good credit and I trust your Lordships will believe them as much as if they spake on Oath since I think none of them would say a word to your Lordships which they would not swear Mr. Slingsby being asked Whether he was present when my Lord of Strafford spake to the Recorder of Dublin what he said and what acceptance it received He Answered He was then present being on the occasion of presenting Sir Robert Dixton the Mayor of Dublin that he cannot remember the particular words nor deliver them to their Lordships as they were spoken by the Lord-Lieutenant But he remembers particularly the scope of the Discourse was to ingratiate His Majesties present Government to them That the words were well accepted by several persons whom he spake with and took that Effect that his Lordship was thereupon invited to the Mayors House where divers of the City Congratulated his coming to them I shall now proceed to the second part of the words That their Charters were nothing worth and they bind the King no farther than he pleases and I conceive I may say so still If their Charters be nothing worth they do not bind the King but he may do with them what he pleases In that I desire your Lordships to call to mind what my Lord of Corke said That Ireland was a Conquer'd Nation and the King might give them what Laws he pleased and that the Charters were Antiquated and no farther good than it pleased His Majesty to make them It is likely I confess I might say so and yet not say amiss for it is most evident and clear their Charters are void in point of Law and therefore it is in the King 's good will and pleasure Whether he will make them good or no. And that they were void the King's Council informed me so that they were questioned at Council-Board upon it for divers unlawful Exactions they took under colour of Charters for divers by-Laws that they had made against Law by those Charters for divers neglects of Duties that they ought to do by those Charters and generally for not performing the trust reposed in them by those Charters with that Integrity and Care they ought to do And for the truth of it that many Complaints were made against the Mayor and Aldermen at that Board for neglecting their Duty I dare Appeal to my Lord of Corke I adding this That the greatest part of the Aldermen were Recusants and would never be brought to obey the Order of the Board but stood on their Charters and would be Masters and by that means great Disorders continued And to prove that upon Examination they appeared to be void in Law I desire Sir George Ratcliffe may be admitted to speak on what Grounds those Charters were called in and are now as I think deposited with the Clerk of the Council Sir George Ratcliffe standing charged with High Treason by the Commons of England before your Lordships and of a Conspiracy with my Lord of Strafford and whether it be fit to hear one charged with High-Treason to clear another so charged we Appeal to your Lordships That Sir George Ratcliffe is charged to be a Conspirator with me indeed and in truth I must confess Sir George Ratcliffe and my self under favour are equally guilty of Treason and I hope we shall both justifie our selves but I know so much of him that I am not ashamed to say That I think that Sir George Ratcliffe is my Friend and I wish him well and so I think will all other men I trust in God when they hear him But I conceive Sir George Ratcliffe might be heard in these Points if he be examined as a Witness against me I desire he may be examined as a Witness for me Sir George Ratcliffe is not examined nor at all sworn in the Cause on our Motion and admitted that if they produced him as a Witness they would not deny my Lord of Strafford to cross examine him The Lord Steward declared the sense of their Lordships That Sir George Ratcliffe could not be examined I shall readily obey but yet observe That if it were only matter of Misdemeanor he might be examined though charged But this is my unhappiness to be debarred of my Witnesses because I am charged with Treason in general though there be nothing in particular that 's near the complexion of Treason We desire to observe that this justifies a part of our Charge for the Charter of the Subjects Liberties are as his Lordship confesseth brought to the Council Table and judged there and not to the proper Courts where they ought to be judged the Council-Table having no Power to declare the Validity or Invalidity of Charters from the King to the Subject
for him towards the upper end of the Table And there stood charged with several dis-respectful words spoken by him and the words mentioned in the Censure that was read were the words That he was charged to have spoken those words in breach of certain Articles by which the Army of Ireland was Governed the 13th and the 41st That there was much interlocution from my Lord Deputy to my Lord Mountnorris and returned from my Lord Mountnorris to my Lord the substance was That he was ready to give his Charge That he had violated those Articles That my Lord Mountnorris desired time to answer by Counsel and that he might have his Charge in writing That being not readily granted he insisted on it That he might have time to prepare his Answer but was told it was contrary to the form of that proceeding But whether that Objection of the form came from my Lord himself or from some other Member of the Board that I heard before named I cannot possibly say But thus stands the state of it my Lord Mountnorris neither confessing nor denying the Charge my Lord Deputy replyed Sir If you do neither confess nor deny the Charge how shall we proceed The Deputy called on the Lord Moore and said What shall we say to this business My Lord saith the Lord Moore what I can say is under my Hand That a little time after a Letter was read from the King whereby His Majesty was pleased to give direction to proceed in a Martial Court for Reparation and Honour of the Lord Deputy on the Complaint and Information given to the King That my Lord Mountnorris instantly fell on his Knees expressing a great deal of Grief and Sorrow and in truth Passion and had not much to say for himself and soon after was bid to withdraw and being withdrawn my Lord Deputy said That as he had complained to the King so he would expect that Honour from the Board That his Cause should be taken into consideration and such Redress given as was fit He demanded Justice according to the Articles insisted on And having declared it there was a silence amongst us for some time That he was the first that brake that silence and in as humble manner and terms as he could light upon did humbly desire my Lord Deputy to give him leave to ask whether he would give leave to wave either of those Articles but my Lord said he would demand Justice on both That this being so there was some Interlocution of discourse among the Council and in truth he thinks that he was one of the first that said that these Articles and the words cannot bear so good a construction but that there may be some danger of a breach upon these Articles Being asked whether the words were not represented to the Council of War in a Paper written and the Testimony given in pursuance of that Paper He Answered That as he remembers my Lord Moore having made a return to my Lord Deputy My Lord What I can say your Lordship hath under my hand he thinks my Lord Deputy said My Lord if you deny it I have it under your hand to shew And thereupon as he remembers the Clerk of the Council standing by had direction to draw up some Interrogatories which my Lord Moore did acknowledge and Sir Robert Loftus too did affirm that they were spoken by my Lord Mountnorris as much as was mentioned in the Paper Being asked how many Companies of the Army were then in Town how many in a Company and whether they were exercised in a more than ordinary Training and how many Companies the Army consists of He Answered That he thinks the Horse-Troops were 40 or 50 at the most some my Lords own The Foot-Companies were 50. And of those Companies there were he takes it two Horse-Troops besides my Lord 's own Troop and four Foot-Companies they were called up to guard and attend our Occasions in Parliament and they did their Duties as Souldiers every day as indeed my Lord of Strafford was careful of well exercising the Army as any General he ever saw and there are forty Companies of the old standing Army Being asked on my Lord of Straffords Motion Whether my Lord of Strafford did not declare he would not give Judgment in the Cause but Appeal to them as a Suitor for Reparation He Answered That my Lord of Strafford held them to the Point of the Articles demanding Justice on the Articles that he said sometimes he would depend on our Judgment in it and yet he would hold us to the Point of the Articles And further that if there were not a necessity of his being there he would have withdrawn too But my Lord would not give the Council a latitude to proceed according to the King's Letter for Reparation but he held them to the Point of the Articles Being asked on my Lord of Strafford's Motion Whether he did not tell my Lord Mountnorris when he went out of the Room that he would not speak a word till he came into the Room again and whether he did not do it accordingly and whether he sate bare all the while as a Party and not as a Judge In answer he desired leave to offer to their Lordships that he acquainted their Lordships before that as soon as my Lord Mountnorris was withdrawn my Lord did declare what he the Lord Renula had formerly said But after the Council fell into debate of it he spake not a word nor gave any interruption And he cannot positively say that he sate bare all the while Being asked Whether this was not in the time of full Peace and whether any Rebels or Enemies were in the Kingdom He Answered Certainly it was a time of very full and happy Peace To prove that in discourse concerning this Sentence my Lord said afterwards He would not lose the Honour or Share of it The Earl of Cork being asked to that purpose Answered That all he can remember is that the Sentence was publickly read in the Star-Chamber and my Lord said He would not lose his Share in the Honour of it but he cannot remember the day Lord Viscount Dillon asked to that purpose Answered That he happened to be in the Star-Chamber that day by my Lord of Strafford's Command and carried the Sword that day That the reading of the Sentence he remembers not but the words he heard That the Sentence given against my Lord Mountnorris by the Council of War was a noble and just Sentence and for his part he would not lose his share of the Honour of it The Commons proceeded to that part of the Charge which concerns the execution of another man by Martial Law William Castigatt sworn being asked several questions touching that part particularly Whether he knew one executed by Martial Law and by whom c. He Answered Yes his name was Thomas Denewitt and it was last Summer was two years that he was on the Green when he was
to the destruction of the Law he flies to the Kings Prerogative for shelter That to mention the Kings Prerogative in the face of the Peers of the Realm and in presence of all the Commons when he is charged with an Exorbitant proceeding to the Subversion of the Laws is but to cast a Scandal upon the Kings Prerogative and to make it have a worse relish whereas the Law supports the Kings Prerogative and the Subject supports it When his Answer is charged not to be according to Truth he casts a Gloss upon it from the easiness of his being mistaken whereas when he is able to justifie it he glories in it as that whereto he must stand or fall That the Letters Patents which my Lord of Strafford produces rise in Judgment against him for the King hath trusted him ad custodiendas leges Regni and therefore if he hath broken through them he hath broken his Trust. He says It is strange the exceeding of Jurisdiction should be laid to his charge as Treason He is charged with the Subverting of the Law and that 's more than the Exceeding of a Power He read the Instructions to warrant his Act and by these the Commons desire to be judged whether they do not in the Negative say there shall be no such Proceeding before the Deputy and yet he will imply there have been proceedings to the contrary which we cannot see He justifies his Proceedings by former Deputies and hath produced Henry Dillon who hath seen several Proceedings in Sir Henry Bagnalls time and others where Orders have been made by the Deputy alone but the Orders themselves are not brought whereas if they were looked on and consideration had what results out of them their Lordships would not have suffered them to be read without Attestation that they were true Copies But now whether they be entred or no or what other Proceedings there were the Witness doth not know and therefore they are no Evidence nor in truth ought to be offered And the Witness being asked what the Orders were he says one was a Reference and whether Witnesses were examined he says he doth not know He produces my Lord Dillon and we offer to be adjudged by him for he says He knew not any Deputy before my Lord of Strafford that hath intermeddled with matters of Land except in Plantation and Church Causes and this Order is charged to be made by him alone He pretends this is a Court and a Prerogative of the Sword We know not whether my Lord of Strafford intends to keep it by force but whereas he produceth a Commission for giving Oath to the Clerk of the Council this Commission needed not if it were a Court for the Court it self would give an Oath and whereas he mentions it to be in the nature of the Court of Requests we would gladly know whether there be not Authority in the Judge to give an Oath He produces several Orders in my Lord of Faulkland's time The first is expresly for Plantation Lands and there was no determination in Equity or otherwise The second Order he produced in my Lord Faulkland's time was a meer Green-cloth Case and nothing to this purpose The third Order produced was in a business recommended from England to my Lord of Faulkland and such Causes as are out of the Instructions excepted The Order in the Lord of Corke's time was but an Order of Reference to the Archbishop and a Reference is no Determination a private person may do as much So that we observe nothing hath been offered to prove that a Deputy alone hath determined matter of Possession and in this we rest with confidence That none ever did before himself and shall therefore desire the Examination of some Privy-Counsellors He produced a Letter from His Majesty to proceed in such Causes But if by Law it ought not to be then a Letter and Authority derived thereby is void and warrants not Proceeding in the Subject the Letter was as just as might be being obtained on his Information to whose Government and Trust His Majesty had committed the Kingdom and if he mis-inform he must Answer it And the Letter is written with caution giving Authority to proceed in matter of Equity as former Deputies had done and if it be not proved that his Predecessors had used such Proceedings where is his Authority He says he hath proceeded according to the direction of the Kings Letter that is he never determined Title of Land but in Equity and when such Causes have come to him he hath referred them to Law which we are forced to disprove that by offering it under his own hand that whereas a Nobleman of the Realm my Lord of Baltinglas had mortgaged to Sir Robert Parkhurst for 3000 l. Land of a 1000 l. year when Sir Robert had Title at Law and might as Mortgagor have entred after the day past Sir Robert prefers a Petition to my Lord of Strafford himself and he without the Council determines the Possession and takes it from the Mortgagee and afterwards he purchases the Lands himself and letts them for 680 and odd pounds a year For my Lord Mountnorris his Imprisonment the Manager said That when his distressed Lady the Mother of Twelve Children Petitioned His Majesty declaring the great Distress her Husband suffered by the Tyrannical Power exercised over them His Majesty like a Gracious Prince referred it to the consideration of the Deputy That on submission he should deliver him out of Prison But when the poor Lady presented it with Tears in her Eyes and cast her self at his Feet though there was a Reference from His Majesty yet he that would at another time shelter himself under the Kings Prerogative refuses to give so much Respect as to entertain it and when the eldest Son came refused to accept it Another of the Managers added That whereas there is a restriction in the Kings Letter That the Earl of Strafford should not meddle with any thing in other Courts they would shew that after two Decrees in a Court my Lord hath on a Petition Decreed quite contrary and it was no Beggars Cause but a Knights and 5000 l. value That to the Kings Letter they will give all Reverence But if my Lord of Strafford had found such a constant practice to be proved he needed no Letter to set up the Jurisdiction that was in him before That this Letter under the Signet can give no Countenance against an Act of Parliament which Orders That the Deputy shall not meddle with Causes but remit them to their proper Courts and no other Exposition can be given of the saving of the Kings Prerogative but only a reservation of His Liberty to Sue in any Courts And for him to seek by mis-information to procure a Letter from His Majesty for a Power not warrantable by Law he conceives it an Abuse of His Majesty and that makes his fault the greater and he instanced in the Marquess of Dublin who for procuring
Decree and he conceives the major part of the Table did so too he is very confident of it and he doth the rather believe it because he never knew the contrary practise at that Board in any Case besides he knows the Clerk of the Council is a very faithful and careful Servant being a sworn Officer and it is the duty of his Place to draw up Orders according to the major part of the Voices and that no member of the Board took Exception at the signing of this Order that he knows For the matter of Imprisoning the Lady my Lord of Strafford offered That he hopes it 's no great offence for the Deputy of Ireland to say as much to a Subject that 's bound to perform the Order of the Board and doth not I ought not under favour favour le ts in that Case for if Obedience be not had it is to no purpose Orders should be made For the words concerning Fining of her I offer to your Lordships Confideration that one that gives Testimony thereof is Mr. Hoy who is a party interessed and to whom the benefit will accrue of whatsoever shall be recovered and that your Lordships may remember what a ready story he told and wronged his memory to desire to speak out of his Notes for I never heard one speak more readily and conceive he is not in this particular so intire a Witness to convince me That the other Witness is Mr. Hybbots himself a weak old man that hath not Judgment sufficient but says forward and backward and may be taken any way Therefore his Testimony is not so strong and binding That suppose I had said the words they cannot make a Treason Fining in cases of Contempts being usual in Chancery here to enforce men to conform to Decrees However I stand not charged with it and when it comes in its proper place and time I trust I shall make a fair and just Answer in it The last thing in the Charge is the conveying of the Lands to Sir Robert Meredith and others to my use which I deny in my Answer and under favour deny it still For the Witnesses offered I except against Mr. Hoy as I must under favour as often as I mention it That the words spoken by Sir Robert Meredith is only his saying and offered here as a Report and when Sir Robert speaks for himself I believe he will say another thing That the Testimony of Mr. Fitzgarrett is but what Sir Philip Percival said and when Sir Philip comes to be examined himself I trust Your Lordships will find it otherwise I having never spoke to Sir Philip in all my life touching the business When my Lady Hybbotts complains of the Injustice of the Decree before Your Lordships I hope I shall clear it in its proper place but in the mean time it is no part of my Charge and I dare say they would not offer such a thing in Charge to my Lord Keeper or my Lord Chief Justice or if they should offer it they know they should have a rebuke for Lawyers must keep within the limits of the Charge and therefore in this particular I may reserve my self without prejudice in Your Lordships Opinions till it comes to its proper place where I hope I shall justifie my Carriage to be Honest and Faithful according to the Trust reposed in me His Lordship having finished his Defence the Manager began his Reply thereunto in substance as followeth That he shall not need to labour much in making a Replication little being answered to the Charge which he recited and opened That his Lordships Proceedings have in this matter been contrary to Law they must rest on their Lordships memory the Act of Parliament cited before the Instructions and the Proclamation the Exercise of a Jurisdiction on the Estate of a Lady without the least colour of Jurisdiction whereas if there had been any it would have been heard of That his Lordship answers nothing to his sending for the party Petitioning bidding him go on with the Suit and Prophesying that he might have 500 l. more That perhaps it is not material whether the Order were just or unjust and my Lord of Strafford will answer only to the Jurisdiction But we observe that yesterday he made a great flourish to the justness of a Decree let the Jurisdiction be what it will and when he cannot justifie that then he declines it That my Lord his Pulse is still beating that this is no Treason yet it is an Article to prove and conduce to the General Charge of subverting the Laws and though he pretends that these Circumstances of purchasing the Lands to his own use and speaking to the party to proceed and his Threats are not to the purpose yet under favour these and his saying when he perceived a great part to Vote against him though not the major part as he says that he could have kept it in his own hands do come home to the point That he hath exercised an Arbitrary Power specially when it is for his own benefit His pretence that this Cause was heard before the Lords of the Council and therein differs from that of my Lord Mountnorris is no answer at all for the Lords of the Council have nothing to do in matters of Freehold or Inheritance when it concerns not Plantation or the Church or is specially recommended That they concur with my Lord Primates Examination that the Clerk of the Council should draw up Orders according to the major part of the Votes but what he hath done in this case they know not and how far a Deputy might prevail with the Clerk of the Council they submit And there is an express proof of one of the Counsellors that there was 11. or 12. against the Order and nine for it And whereas it is said he is but a single Witness my Lord of Corke says though he remembers not which way the major voice went yet he remembers very well my Lord Deputy exprest those words concerning the making of a Party which shews that something was done that did not agree with his will And another Witness says that Sir William Parsons told him that the major Vote was against the Order And whereas my Lord Strafford pretends that the Privy-Counsellor that told Mr. Hoy there were more Voices for his Mother than against her must be my Lord Mountnorris That is denied and we desire Mr. Hoy may in that point explain himself He hath called Sir Philip Maynwaring and others that would have testified the truth to his advantage but not one of them expresses any thing to their knowledge but as they believe it because by the Duty of his place the Clerk of the Council ought to have drawn it up according to the Votes The Threats to Imprison and Fine the Lady and the kind of Threats are proved by two Witnesses with this addition by one That he would crack her Estate which shew a great fervency in my Lord
should not extend to a Subject This is to take a power above Law and make himself equal to Sovereignty to say that he should not be comprehended more than the King himself He says he did not lead the Soldiers but only gave a Warrant and therefore this should not be Treason but though he leads them not the Commander is an Actor and to give Warrant for Treason is Treason He says this is a Statute-Law in Ireland and not examinable before their Lordships here Mr. Palmer alledged that he would do my Lord right that he submitted to their Lordships Judgements and craved leave to give answer to that point and said The Laws of Ireland are devised from the Crown of England the King being seized of it in the right of his Crown of England and as a parcel of this Crown The power they have to make Laws there is derivative from the Crown of England and they did thankfully accept them from the first Conqueror Since that they had power to make Acts of Parliament but that is subordinate the Laws there are the Laws of England applyed to that place As any particular custom of a place not the general Law of the Land is the Law of that place by a general custom and yet may be judged out of the precincts of that custom so the Laws of Ireland are the Laws of that Kingdom yet may be judged by this Supream Court out of the limits of Ireland Though in an inferior Court when a thing questioned in Ireland is brought by Writ of Error they judge according to the Laws of Ireland not of England And my Lord hath prayed and werequire that he may be judged according to the Laws of Ireland So this Law of 18 H. 6. may be judged by their Lordships though it be a Law in Ireland But my Lord urges that this Law is repealed and for that he gave reasons on many Acts of Parliament First a Statute made 8 Edw. 4. That is made to a particular purpose reciting one particular Statute and repealing that and then by a general clause ratifying and introducing all the Statutes of England into Ireland This being but on a particular occasion with such a general Clause will not be applyable however it will be the Answer to that that follows It is a general Clause to introduce the Laws of England and shall not have that reflexion to repeal any Law of force in Ireland This introducing of our Laws thither shall not work to repeal their Laws but make a consistance of both Laws so far as they may stand together On that Mr. Palmer said he would not enlarge himself it being not matter of Fact and it was not expected that matter of Law would have been insisted on and therefore he leaves it to those that shall hereafter give their Lordships satisfaction in point of Law That which my Lord called a Judgement in Parliament 11 Eliz. recites that it was in time of desolation of Justice That the Captains had brought oppressions on the people It was in a time when though the Irish had been victi long before yet they were not brought perfectly under subjection of the Laws of England there then remained Rebellions and Tumults It was in time of Hostility and War And that Statute gives but an Implication neither that Captains should not Assess without the Deputies Warrant And it follows not that therefore he hath authority to do it But howsoever the thing be this was for defence of the people to make resistance against Rebels But the thing in charge was in time of peace and full government of the Law and so that Statute will give no justification at all My Lord of Strafford concluded that there was no Treasonable Intent in this and therefore it should be no Treason on the Statute of the 25 Edw. 3. My Lord recited the words of the Statute Not to be only the levying of the War but adhering to the Kings enemies but these glosses are not to be confounded but severed The adhering to the Kings enemies is one offence within that Statute Levying of War another so that if there be no Adherence yet if there be Levying of War it will be Treason And this levying of War it was on the Kings People perhaps there was no intent upon the Kings Sacred Person yet if it be against the Kings People such a levying of War is Treason ordinary Cases of Felony are to be against the Kings Crown and Dignity though it be the Homicide of a mean Subject it is against the Kings Crown and Dignity because it is against the protection and safety of that man that is the Kings Subject and so the levying of War on the Kings People by laying Soldiers in this hostile manner being against the protection by which they are governed against the safety by which the King is to defend them It is a War against the King his Crown and Dignity This is the Answer to the Defence And Mr. Palmer concluded That he conceived the Charge of the House of Commons in matter of Fact was fully maintained and for matter of Law if there remained any scruple a farther Argument and stronger Reasons should be offered hereafter And so a Recess being granted for a day upon the Humble Request of my Lord of Strafford the House was Adjourned and Saturday following was appointed for the next meeting THE Sixteenth Article The Charge 16. THat the Earl of Strafford the Two and twentieth of February in the 7 th year of His Majesties Reign intending to oppress the said Subjects of Ireland did make a proposition and obtained from His Majesty an allowance thereof that no complaint of injustice or oppreision done in Ireland should be received in England against any unless it appeared that the party made first his address to him the said Earl and the said Earl having by such usurped Tyrannical and exorbitant power expressed in the former Articles destroyed and oppressed the Peers and other Subjects of that Kingdom of Ireland in their Lives Consciences Land Liberties and Estates the said Earl to the intent the better to maintain and strengthen his said power and to bring the people into a disaffection of His Majesty as aforesaid did use His Majesties Name in the execution of the said power And to prevent the Subjects of that Realm of all means of complaints to His Majesty and of redress against him and his Agents did issue a Proclamation bearing date the 17 th day of September in the Eleventh year of His Majesties Reign thereby commanding all the Nobility Undertakers and others who held Estates and Offices in the said Kingdom except such as were employed in His Majesties service or attending in England by His special command to make their personal Residence in the said Kingdom of Ireland and not to depart thence without Licence of himself And the said Earl hath since issued other Proclamations to the same purpose by means whereof the Subjects of
him in his protection and would never forsake him and whatsoever he should loose in this world he would make it up to him in another world And for this purpose Mr. Riley was produced who being questioned whether he was imployed in suing out a Commission for examining of witnesses in Ireland in a Cause concerning my Lord of Esmond and Sir Peirce Crosby Mr. Riley Answered That he was imployed as Clarke in the Cause where Mr. Attorney was Plaintiff by Relation of my Lord Lieutenant against my Lord of Esmond and Sir Peirce Crosby and when that Cause came to Commission they for the Defendant brought Commissioners names and did joyn in that Bond but he cannot remember the time Being asked on Mr. Maynards motion whether Sir Pierce Crosby or my Lord of Esmond fued it out He Answered he could not directly say but the Clerk for the Defendants could Mr. Ralton being asked to the same point He Answered that he remembers that about this time 1638 or 1639. Commissions were sued out in the business between my Lord Lieutenant and my Lord of Esmond and Sir Pierce Crosby and that he was very confident that my Lord of Esmond had the benefit of examining Witnesses My Lord of Strafford observed that these Gentlemen stirred up those things to beget an ill opinion of him but in short answered they were not in his Charge And further That he conceived my Lord of Esmond was stayed on a complaint of Sir Walsingham Cokes concerning a practice of his to the endangering of Sir Walsingham's life And that he was stayed upon that account to be examined and if he the Lord Strafford was not mistaken my Lord Esmond was after examination left at liberty But these things he said were rather aggravations of his Charge than within the Charge and therefore he humbly conceived that in these cases their Lordships would allow him liberty and hoped the Gentlemen will likewise allow it that so he might satisfie them their Lordships and all the world that he hath carried himself justly and fairly in all these particulars Also assuring himself that these Gentlemen were willing he should give the best answer to all these things he could And so he would and that with all respect and reverence to them in the world The next Case is my Lord Roches and his Lordship conceives that my Lord Roche himself gives a fair answer for he was informed against him in the Starchamber and my Lord of Strafford said indeed he remembred there was such an occasion for it as he was willing to forget it for that noble Gentlemans Cause and that the complaint was of so high a nature against my Lord Roche as he was not willing to press it to his prejudice nor ever did but where there was great reason and when he should come to answer for it for he imagines it is not expected he should answer it finally now being not within his Charge Heaven should justifie him and shew that he had reason to stay him at that time The next is Dermond Mac-Cartyes and the Cause of his stay appears to be That he would go abroad for his Breeding Now if he and such other should go to Doway and S t Omer he thinks their Lordships and the House of Commons would have blamed him more for giving him and such persons leave then faulted him for restraining them And had he alleadged That he intended to go over to Complain of that Decree he would not have hindred him and to that purpose he hath Witnesses that he never stayed any Man that pretended he would complain of him The Decree was made by a Letter from His Majesty on a notable fraud of Mac-Carty the Father in the Case of Sir Iames Craig and he that Swears in it is Solicitor in the Cause and so not altogether so competent a Witness But these are all on the by and come rather to prove an Intention then that which is pressed on him as a thing to which he is properly and finally to Answer The next is concerning the Sentence of Mr. Parry in which business my Lord humbly offered That no Testimony is yet produced other than the Testimony of the Party himself Now if the Judge may be Convinced and Condemned on the single Testimony of the Party grieved he knows no man would willingly sit in Judgment on these Termes and out of this single VVitness being qualified with the attribute of the party grieved Must he be Condemned that was one of the Judges But as they have Proved nothing Judicially that can weigh with their Lordships it will be fit for him to justifie himself for this Sentence so far as comes to his share for all the whole Board consented to it And therefore he besought their Lordships to give him the honor To offer the Sentence given against Mr. Parry wherein their Lordships would see the Reason that it was not for departing without Licence but for great and foul neglects and contempts to the Board Mr. Gibson Attesting it to be a true Copy the Decree of the Deputy and Council was Read being in substance WHereas Henry Parry one of them who attended the Lord Chancellor as his Lordships Register-keeper or Clerk for private Iudicatures and Keeper of the Books of these Private Proceedings was Commanded to attend the Board to be Examined And whereas in Contempt thereof he not onely neglected to attend accordingly but departed this Kingdom which being represented to His Majesty it pleased His Majesty to require his return hither to attend this Board To which end a Bond was taken for his Appearance here the next Council-day after the 12th of Aug. and whereas he was present himself at this Board 9th October 1638 but offered no Petition as if he disdained so far to humble himself to this Authority whereupon it ebing made known to him That it became him in the Duty he owed to the dignity of this Board to come by Petition as all other Men but he forbearing to exhibit his Petition till he was called by us the Deputiee to do it and then when he exhibited it he therein misrecited his Offence alleadging it to be for his repairing to England without Licence Licence whereas his Offence was The disobeying the Orders of this Board Secondly He laid a Tax on William Ralton Esq Alleadging That on pretence of Direction from Secretary Cooke he took his Bond for Appearance here whereas he knew it was not by any feigned direction but by appointment of Secretary Cooke by His Majesties Direction Thirdly In stead of humbling himself he desired Cancelling of his Bond and Dismission from attendance and the rather because he conceived he had not in any degree transgressed the Proclamation cautelously alledging that to be his Offence which was not laid to his Charge And for as much as his first Offence in Estoyning himself to shun the guilt whereof he was convinced and after his bold and insolent behaviour at
Opinion though he seems to Argue against it Is any thing more familiar than for a Man to seem to be of an Opinion to gain a Reason to confirm that Opinion which he is of and contrary to that he seems to defend by this means to get the strength of other Mens Reasons to confirm his own by Again Is any thing more familiar in private Discourse between Man and Man than when one is so far on that side the Line for the other to go as far himself that he may meet the first Man in the midst If a man meet with one that is as far below as himself is above and shall seem to maintain further than his Reason and Belief carries him to bring the other to moderation Shall this be charged on him as a Treason If words spoken to Friends in familiar Discourse spoken in ones Chamber spoken at ones Table spoken in ones Sick-Bed spoken perhaps to gain better Reason to give himself more clear light and judgment by reasoning If these things shall be brought against a man as Treason this under favour takes away the Comfort of all Humane Society By this means we shall be debarred of Speaking the Principal Joy and Comfort of Society with wise and good Men to become wiser and better our lives If these things be strained to take away Life and Honor and all that is desirable it will be a silent World a City will become an Hermitage and Sheep will be found amongst a Crowd and Press of People and no Man shall dare to impart his Solitary Thoughts or Opinion to his Friend and Neighbor but thereby be debarred from consulting with wiser Men then himself whereby he may understand the Law wherewith he ought to be governed But these be but words all the while and if he shall shew that words of a higher nature shall by the Judgment of an English Parliament be thought not to be Treason Why should he think or imagine or fear that their Lordships will make these indiscreet and idle Expressions of his reach so high as his Head and take the Comfort of his Life and Children from him No Statute makes Words Treason and if the Fundamental Law the Common Law of the Land had made them Treason surely the Parliament would never have set a Mulct upon them This Statute is 1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. as followeth BE it Enacted by the Authority aforesaid if any person or persons do compass and imagine by open Preaching express words or saying to depose or deprive the King His Heirs or Successors from His or their Royal Estate or Title or openly publish or say by express words or saying That any other person or persons other then the King His Heirs or Successors of right ought to be c. These be words of higher nature than those charged upon himself and yet the first offence is made but loss of Goods and Imprisonment for the second loss of Lands Goods and Imprisonment the third time is only made Treason He added That their Lordships will never think these words being flym-flam that pass in a negligent manner betwixt Man and Man shall ever be brought to be Treason And whereas 25 E. 3. hath these words When a Man doth Compass or Imagine the death of our Lord the King The very words are mentioned in 1 E. 6. When a man doth compass or imagine by open Preaching c. to Depose the King And the first Statute provides That if a Man shall compass the Death of the King and be not thereof attainted by open Deed it is not Treason And the Statute of H. 4. and 1 Mar. concurr with this and shew That the intent of these was to take away the danger the Subject might incurr if bare words should be brought against him as Treason And it hath been the Wisdom of their Lordships noble Ancestors and this State that they have alwayes endeavoured to conclude the danger that may fall on the Subject by Treason that it might be limited and bounded and that it might be so understood as to be avoided and he hopes we shall never be so improvident as to sharpen this two-edged Sword against our selves and the faces of our Posterity and to let the Lion loose to tear us all in pieces for if way be given to Arbitrary Treason and to the Wits of Men to work upon it to prejudice or question Life it would be very dangerous And he believes That in this Hall there would be Actions of Treason that would fly as familiarly up and down as Actions of Trespass and therefore since by the goodness of our King and the wisdom of our Ancestors we have been thus provided for why we should entangle our selves into the straights they could not endure but endeavoured by all means to free themselves from the dangers that familiarly follow them he cannot see To the First Part of the 23 d Article concerning the last Parliament the Gentlemen have reserved themselves till to morrow and therefore he shall not need to speak to that and so there will remain nothing for him to Answer but the last part of the Act with the next Charge concerning words spoken at the Council-Board or at the Committee for Scotch Affairs viz. That His Majesty having tried the Affections of His People He was loose and absolved from all Rules of Government and was to do every thing that Power would admit and that His Majesty had tried all wayes and was refused and should be acquitted both before God and Man and that he had an Army in Ireland which he might employ to reduce this Kingdom to Obedience Concerning this particular he says he remembers not anything but what Mr. Treasurer is pleased to speak of And whereas Mr. Treasurer as concerning that part said He loves to speak the truth my Lord of Strafford said He doubts not but he doth for that we should all do he is sure of it But Mr. Treasurer has reversed his Testimony in saying that he will not speak to the very words themselves but to these or words to the like effect and if he be not mistaken and to the best of his remembrance That His Majesty having tryed all wayes and being refused in this extream necessity and for the safety of the Kingdom and People He might do c. And that Your Majesty hath an Army in Ireland which You may employ there he said at first And afterwards which You may employ to this Kingdom And he saith he doth not interpret these words but gives the words clearly and plainly as my Lord of Northumberland hath declared and that it was soon after the Dissolution of the last Parliament to his best remembrance and at the Committee of 8 and he thinks my Lord spake them positively or something to that effect Now whereas he calls in to his aid my Lord of Northumberland under favour my Lord of Northumberland declared no such words but absolutely denies in his Examination that he ever
heard my Lord of Strafford mention the reducing of England by an Irish Army It is true my Lord of Northumberland goes thus far That he hath heard him say something whereby he might conceive there was intended some Course of raising Moneys by extraordinary wayes And that my Lord of Strafford confesses is very true for if it were by borrowing 3 or 400000 l. it is an extraordinary way the Kings Revenue could not serve these occasions there must be other wayes and Loan was one and that fair and honourable and just So then as to this Testimony the Defendant offers to their Lordships that he hath examined my Lord of Northumberland and he knows no such thing He hath examined my Lord Marquiss of Hamilton and his Lordship is pleased to say He remembers no such thing at the Committee of 8. He desired my Lord Treasurer might be Examined to the same Words The L. Treasurer being Asked Whether ever he heard my Lord of Strafford in any private Council or Debate with the King tell him the said words He Answered That he never heard my Lord speak those words of the Irish Army nor any thing like it and he repeated That he never heard his Lordship speak it in the manner proposed nor any thing like it Being Asked on Mr. Maynards motion Whether he ever heard my Lord of Strafford say The King was loose and Absolved from all Government He Answered That he desired time to consider of that He remembers not any such thing but he reserves himself for that Being Asked on the like motion Whether he heard my Lord of Strafford say any thing to that purpose That the Parliament had deserted or forsaken the King He Answered That he remembers not that he heard any such thing Lord Cottington being Asked on my Lord of Straffords motion Whether he heard my Lord of Strafford say such words That the King had an Army in Ireland and he might employ them to reduce this Kingdom He Answered That he hath heard the Question heretofore and is very confident he did never hear him say it in his hearing and that he hath a great deal of Reason to be confident of it Being Asked on Mr. Maynards Motion Whether he heard my Lord of Strafford say That the King was Absolved or Loose from all Rules of Government or words to that effect He Answered That as he takes it he hath been Asked to that Question too and he thinks he never heard the words for it was as he thinks a very absurd Proposition and he should not have heard it with patience Being Asked on the like motion Whether he heard him say The Parliament had forsaken or denyed or deserted the King or words to that effect He Answered That for saying The Parliament had not provided for the King The Parliament was ended and had not provided for the King and That the Parliament had not provided or left the King without Money It is very probable he did say it and he thinks he did so for it was the truth Being Asked Whether he said The Parliament had denyed the King He Answered That what his words were It is a hard matter for him to say That he said The Parliament had denyed or left the King he will not Swear Being Asked on like motion Whether he perswaded the King that he was to be supplyed in extraordinary wayes He Answered That he cannot Swear that neither Where Mr. Maynard observed That my Lord of Strafford himself granted and yet that 's forgotten To which my Lord Cottington Answered That if the Gentlemen would have heard him out he should have given good satisfaction He hath been Examined Whether my Lord of Strafford used these words Extraordinary wayes and he cannot say he did but he hath heard him say The King ought to seek out all due and legal wayes and to employ His Power and Authority and Prerogative Castè Candidè he remembers these words very well For close of his Defence to these words That His Majesty had an Army in Ireland to reduce this Kingdom witnessed by Mr. Treasurer My Lord of Strafford said Mens memories are weak and the best may be mistaken or misremember and may think one man says that which another man says or that a man says that which in truth he did not say as it is in this Case Their Lordships have had all the light that is possible for him the Defendant to give them My Lord of Northumberland being examined on oath sayes he remembers not the words My Lord Marquis Hamilton remembers them not My Lord Treasurer of England remembers neither that nor any thing like it My Lord Cottington remembers no such thing and is well assured he never heard him say any such thing Here are all that are left of the Committee save my Lord of Canterbury and him the Defendant cannot examine otherwise he would Secretary Windebank is a little too far off to be heard at this time and if their Lordships could ask him whether the Defendant ever spake the words on the faith of a Christian and a Gentleman he will take his oath he doth not think nor believe he ever spake them but believes as constantly as possible can be that he never spake them He would be loath to swear he did not it being so long since But when his words shall more particularly and specially be remembred by another man than by himself he must commend that memory that observed what he said so perfectly as to be able to give a better account of them than himself the party that spake the words or any man in the company besides My Lord further insisted That this concerns him very nearly for it would be a grievous charge that is on him by this means though not in the intendment of the Gentleman that urges it who he hopes wishes him well if he should be thought to be an overthrower of the Liberties of the Subject by a foreign Army However it is a single Testimony and no more and that single Testimony without any prejudice to the Testimony cannot rise in Judgement against him Nay he cannot be Indicted nor Arraigned of High Treason for it by the Statutes of 1 E. 6. Ca. 12. the last Proviso of it in these words BE it Enacted by the Authority aforesaid That no Person or Persons after the First day of February next coming shall be Indicted Arraigned Condemned or Convicted of any offence of Treason Petty-Treason or Misprision of Treason or any words before specified after the First day of February for which the said Offender or Speaker shall suffer any pain of Death Imprisonment Loss Forfeiture of Goods Lands or Tenements unless the said Offender or Speaker be accused by two sufficient and lawful Witnesses orshall willingly without violence confess the same And if their Lordships will give leave to consider the first part of the words being fairly and indifferently interpreted and with
By my Faith I fear and doubt very much these Fears and Doubts might Accuse me and Condemn me of Treason more then once a Year But my Lords his Fears and Doubts he may keep to himself I hope they shall not be brought any way to the prejudice of me I am I thank God both confident and knowing there is no such thing The next is the Testimony of Mr. Treasurer Vane and the Words Mr. Treasurer doth Witness against me in that particular are as I conceive these that I should say to His Majesty in an Argument concerning an Offensive or Defensive War with Scotland Your Majesty hath tryed all wayes and are refused and in this extream necessity for the safety of the Kingdom and Your People You may imploy the Irish Army to reduce this Kingdom My Lords To this I say that under favour Mr. Treasurer was in this methoughts a little Dubious he was something doubtful for at the first he told your Lordships he would deal plainly and clearly with you that he knew before whom he spoke and then my Lords it was but to the best of his Remembrance that these and these words were spoken At the last my Lords being put to it more he was pleased to say that these were positively the words or something to that effect So my Lords here is but a dubious and uncertain Witness under favour and these Professions of his speaking clearly and plainly and of his Consideration before whom he was which are something unusual Clauses to Men that come to Swear upon Oath make me conceive him something Dubious in this point Secondly My Lords he is a Single Witness and not onely so but under favour disavowed by all the rest that were present at the Council my Lord of Northumberland remembred no such thing my Lord Marquiss of Hamilton remembred no such thing my Lord Treasurer remembred no such thing my Lord Cottington is very well assured he said no such thing for if he had he should have taken offence at it himself which he never did My Lords in the Third place He is pleased to mention That it was in a Debate Whether an Offensive or Defensive War and that then I should say The King had an Army in Ireland c. My Lords It falls out in time to be as I conceive to be about the 5 th of May last not many dayes sooner or later the Army of Ireland was not raised till Iune following So it seems I should tell the King a great untruth that he had an Army in Ireland which he might imploy for His Service before that Army was raised for it is a notorious thing and any of that Country knows that the Army was not raised till the Fifteenth of Iune as I remember Lastly In farther taking away of this Testimony I have proved it by a great many Witnesses beyond all exception that there was never any such intendment of the bringing this Army into England nay that the Design was quite otherwise and this hath been apparently cleared before your Lordships By the Testimony of my Lord of Northumberland Marquess of Hamilton Sir Thomas Lucas and Mr. Slingsby And might have been further justify'd by the Testimony of my Lord of Ormond President of Munster and Sir Iohn Burlace Master of the Ordnance in Ireland if they had been here to have been produced So that all these laid together the strong and clear proof on my part the producing of a single Witness which by the Proviso of 1 Edw. 6. cannot rise in Judgment against any man for High-Treason I trust all these laid together I shall appear to your Lordships clear and free from these two points whereupon they enforce me to be within the compass of Treason by the Statute alleadged The Third Treason that is laid to my Charge is upon the 27 th Article where Four Musquettiers being sent to Egton by Sergeant Major Yawerth to call for their Eight pence a day is prest upon me as a Levying of War upon the King and His People and to be High-Treason upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. These be wonderful Wars if we have no greater Wars then such as four men are able to raise by the Grace of God we shall not sleep very unquietly But How do they prove this to be done by me they produce to your Lordships the VVarrant of Sir William Pennyman but had no VVarrant at all of mine to shew Sir William Pennyman doth not alledge any VVarrant of mine to that purpose he speaks of a General VVarrant wherein I and the Deputy-Lieutenants joyne for the paying of the Fortnights pay as they call it and that is very true but that I should give VVarrant to Levy by Soldiers no such thing is proved no such thing is shewed no such thing is alleadged by Sir William Pennyman that best knew it and should do it in his own Justification if there were such a thing but on the other side I must humbly beseech your Lordships to mind you what a clear and full proofe I made thereof to you till you were weary though I think I could have continued it a year longer if need had been that there was nothing done by me in the Levying of the first Months pay or the second Fortnights pay but with full consent of the Country nothing being of Constraint nothing being of force put upon them The Second point was a VVarrant shewed to your Lordships or at least pretended from Sir Edward Osborne the Vice-President wherein he charges them to obey and persue the substance and direction of his VVarrant on pain of Death and this must likewise be laid to me My Lords I confess I have faults enough more then a good many though I trust neither so crying nor grievous as some would pretend them to be but Faults I have more then too many I need not take nor add to my self other Mens but whether this be a Fault or no I cannot undertake to Judge But certainly I am in no Fault for I was at when this VVarrant issued from Mr. Vice-President and I dare say he is a Gentleman so worthy and noble and so great a Lover of Truth that let him be examined upon Oath if he shall not absolutely clear me from Privity or Direction of it I so much rely on him that I will be thought Guilty before your Lordships for this Charge Now my Lords having gone over all that first part which I thought fit to apply my self to and that is Statute-Treason There is no Statute-Treasons in the whole Charge nor colour or pretence thereof save onely that of Newcastle which was waved In these my Lords I hope I am clear before your Lordships and sure I am they give me little disquiet for in good faith I am clear in my own poor Judgment Then comes in the second Condition of Treason in the charge and that is Constructive-Treason and it is laid down in the first Article of the General Charge For my
no greater measure God be praised than these are My Lords these being the words that passed from me in Ireland there are other words that are charged upon me to have been spoken in England but if your Lordships will give me leave though perhaps in no very good method I shall not fail to touch first or last the words in every Article The next Article then that I am charged withal for words is the second Article and these are the words that I should say concerning the Finger and the Loins My Lords I may alledge much new matter but I will observe your Lordships Order punctually by the Grace of God for what I may say in that case if it might be admitted I keep it to my self but the truth is they that do prove the words to be thus That I would make the little finger of the Law heavier than the Kings Loins they do not tell you the occasion of the Speech or what went before or what after for my Lords if they had told the occasion which methinks they should as well have remembred as the words it would plainly and clearly have appeared to your Lordships that Sir William Pennymans Testimony was most true for the occasion was such that to have said those words had been to have spoken against that to which I intended the discourse but speaking them as I said it makes very strong for that purpose to which I directed them which was to appease the Countrey and quiet the Discontents for having been double charged with the Knight-money and therefore it was not properly threatening them further to have provoked them My Lords you have Sir Will. Pennymans testimony that it was so and my profession who under favour will not speak an untruth to save my life I protest before God that I say I verily believe or else I will never speak it indeed and there it is they have proved it to have been said one way we another way we give the occasion of our Speech and disavow theirs and so we must leave it and howsoever these words so spoken can never be drawn as I humbly conceive as premises to prove their conclusions that therefore I am guilty of High Treason they have made me guilty of a foolish Word and that I confess and if they please I will confess it all the day long for I have been foolish all the days of my life and I hope hereafter I shall look unto my ways that I offend not with my Tongue for if I cannot rule it abroad I will rule it within doors else I will never stirr abroad but bound it so to my own business and affairs that I trust I shall give no offence The next Article that chargeth me with words is the 22 Article and these be words spoke in England The first part of them which concerns the bringing in of the Irish Army I have spoken to already but in the conclusion there are other words and shortly the said Earl of Strafford returned to England and to sundry persons declared his opinion to be That His Majesty should first try the Parliament here and if that did not supply him according to his occasions he might then use his Prerogative as he pleased to levy what he needed and that he should be acquitted both of God and Man if he took some other courses to supply himself though it were against the will of his Subjects My Lords as unto this I conceive the Charge is not proved by any Witness that hath been here produced against me and in truth my Lords I must needs say this under favour if it be an error in my Judgement I must humbly crave your Lordships pardon through the whole Cause I have not seen a weaker proof and if I had had time to have gotten my Witnesses out of Ireland I hope that should be proved and so clearly as nothing could be proved more but I must stand or fall to what I have proved and so I do my Lords the proof they offer for this as I conceive is the Testimony of my Lord Primate and his Testimony is That in some discourse betwixt us two touching Levying upon the Subject in case of imminent necessity he found me of opinion that the King might use his Prerogative as he pleased My Lords this is under favour a single Testimony it is of a discourse between him and me and there is not any other that witnesses any thing concerning it so that under favour My Lords I conceive this will not be sufficient to bring me any ways in danger of Treason being but a single Testimony and my Lords it is to be thought and to be believed and it were a great offence for any man to think otherwise that in this case any thing can please the King he is so Gracious and Good but what shall be Just and Lawful and then there is no doubt but so far as with Justice and Lawfulness he may use his Prerogative in case of imminent danger when ordinary means will not be admitted At most he saith it was but an opinion and opinions may make an Heretick but they shall not I trust make a Traitor The next is the Testimony of my Lord Conway and the words that his Lordship testifies are these That in case the King would not be otherwise supplyed by Subsidies he might seek means to help himself though it were against the will of his Subjects Truly my Lords if I should acknowledge these words I do not see how they can be any way Capital in my case but this again is but a single Testimony and there is no other that says it but himself and if there be a good sense given to them certainly the words may very well bear it for I think it is a very natural motion for any man to preserve himself though it be to the disliking of another and why a King should not do it as well as a Subject it is such a prerogative of Kings as I never yet heard of for I thought though they had been Gods on earth yet they are men and have affections as men and should preserve themselves being not only accountable for themselves to God Almighty but also for their Subjects whose Good and Benefit is wrapt up and involved in theirs and therefore the King ought more to regard his own preservation than the Common-wealth The Third is That Mr. Treasurer says that to his best remembrance I did say That if the Parliament should not succeed I would be ready to assist His Majesty any other way God forbid this should be any offence for to say so either in him or me for I will swear if it please you that he said so as well as I therefore God forbid it should endanger either of us both for my Lords to say I will serve the King any other way it is no other than what became a good and faithful servant to do always provided the way be good and lawful
but only the Estimate of a Merchant and how far your Lordships will be guided by the Estimate of a Merchant I known not but I have had Trial of some of them and their Estimates never hold for they have alwayes told me I shall gain much and when I came to the point I gained nothing and if Sir George Ratcliffe should be Sworn to the Point he should say confidently that we are Fourscore and six thousand out of Purse and when he came out of Ireland but Fourscore thousand pounds received and this is the Profit Estimated by the great Merchants at a Hundred and Forty thousand pounds a year But at the worst it is but a Monopoly and a Monopoly of the best condition because it was begun by a Parliament I have seen many Monopolies question'd in Parliament and many overthrown in Parliament but I never heard a Monopoly charged for a Treason My Lords The next is the 13th Article and that is concerning the Flax business For that my Lords if I had thought it any way concerning me I could have cleared it in a very great measure But I had no private Interest in the business much less of private profit but onely an endeavour and desire to bring in the Trade of Linnen-Cloth to that Kingdom which would be much advantage to both Kingdoms and no prejudice to this Kingdom which a Woollen Trade would have been if set up these And the Prolcamation when it was found not so well liking to the People was called in of our own accord before it was question'd and so laid aside and given over For any matter of private Benefit you have no Witness but Crokay a Fellow brought out of Prison Here is but a single Witness and a sorry one a Fellow who by misbehaving and misusing the trust committed to him was turned out and upon the turning of him out the Proclamation was absolutely called in and now he comes to be a Witness being himself the onely offended in the Cause But I beseech your Lordships to think I have not lived with so mean a heart in the World that I should look to gain Four Nobles more or less upon a Cart Load of Flax It is very well known my thoughts have carryed me free enough from gaining so poor and petty a matter as that is I know nothing in the World of it no more than the man in the Moon but when it comes to be heard your Lordships will find me extreame pure in that for I thank God I have clear hands I assure you The 14th is waved by them concerning an Unlawful Oath given to Masters and Officers of Ships and it might very well be waved for I conceive it to be Warranted by the Law Sure I am it is both the Practice of England and Ireland and hath alwayes and at all times been practised and used and is onely for the preventing of Fraud and Deceipt in Merchants by not paying the Kings Duties and Customes The 15th is Answered already I hope The 16th doth Charge upon me certain Propositions I made before I went into Ireland And in good Faith my Lords you may see how short-sighted men may be to their own Actions for I did very well believe I should never have reaped any thing from those Propositions but Thanks I am sure they were well received then when they were offered to His Majesty and the Council and I must truely Confess I never thought they should be objected against me as a Fault My Lords The Proposition was That no Man should be allowed to Complain of Injustice or Oppression in Ireland unless he first addressed himself to the Deputy My Lords there was no Original Intent but onely to prevent Clamours and Unjust Vexations of the Kings Ministers there that after men had received Judgment of the Kings Courts they might not presently come and by Clamours call over a Chief Justice or a Chancellor or President to Answer here and be at charge of five or six hundred pounds unless they acquaint the Deputy with it that they might be righted in the place and this is Charged against me as a great Crime Truely my Lords I shall Confess and Amend any thing and trust other Judgments rather than mine own but I see not how this can Charge me as intending to subvert the Laws of the Land but rather to preserve them The other concernes a Proclamation That none shall depart the Kingdom without License My Lords for that I have shewed that no man out of that Kingdom can come without License but upon very great Penalties I have shewed likewise it was the desire of their own Agents some 15 or 16 years since That there might be such a Restraint and none might come over without License I have shewed you likewise the Instructions to my Lord of Faulkland by which he was Commanded in persuance of that Desire that none should come over without his License I have shewed the express Command of His Majesty to me to have it so I have shewed you likewise the Reasons of State why it should be so to prevent that practice and Intelligence which might otherwise arise betwixt them of that Nation serving under Tir-Connell and O Neale and likewise to prevent the going over and transplanting the Prime Nobility and Gentry to Seminaries and other such places there to be brought up and therefore in reason of State it is a Restraint and ought so to be But having these grounds of Law Warrant Practice Former Instruction and all Why this should be brought to me in particular Charge to Convince me of endeavouring the Subversion of the Laws I must submit to your Lordships My Lords There is in the latter part of this another Charge concerning the Sentenceing of one Parry who was Sentenced as I conceive very Justly and I have no more to answer for in that Sentence then any of the rest having but a single Voice and that I should answer for all I confess is something hard But there is no manner of Testimony in the World in this save the Testimony of Parry himself Now if Parry the Man offended his Testimony shall be taken against the Judge I know no Man can be safe and other Testimony is not offered and therefore I trust that that will easily fall off of it self The 17th is likewise waved and is in Truth of no great Consequence one way or other and therefore I shall give no other Answer to it It was well waved and had been as well left out having no great matter in it The 18th is likewise waved but it is that which sticks very heavy upon me and wherein I find my self as much afflicted as in any one part of the Charge For my Lords here I am Charged up and down to endeavour to draw upon my self a Dependance of the Papists in both Kingdomes of Ireland and England and that I have during the time of my Government restored diverse Mass-Houses in Dublin and elsewhere
never so many years could not Merit nor Deserve from Him the Hundred part of what I had from His Favour My Lords Mr. Treasurer Vane sayes I was in the Argument for an Offensive and he for a Defensive War for a War both of us And I beseech your Lordships How should it be more Treasonable for me to be for an Offensive then for him to be for a Defensive War for a War there must be and the difference was not great and for a Counsellor to deliver his Opinion and have that turned upon him as Capital to sweep from the World himself and his Posterity is a very hard Case to say no more of it The next Article is the 21 th wherein I am Charged to be an Enemy to Parliaments a Breaker of Parliaments and did by that means sow ill Affections betwixt the King and His People My Lords This is more fully Charged in a Subsequent Article then this for this is but onely for breaking of the last Parliament that I should advise it to be called with an intent to break it which is very unlikely for that nothing in the World could be of so happy effect to me as the success of that Meeting and yet I must destroy and disadvantage my self in that then which nothing could be of more advantage then the success of that Parliament The 22 th Article is Answered already and the 23 th likewise In the 24 th Article comes in that of the Parliament more fully and there I am Charged Falsly and Treacherously and Malitiously to have declared before His Majesties Privy-Council That the Parliament of England had forsaken the King and given Him the Advantage to Supply Himself otherwayes and having so Malitiously Slandered the said House of Commons that I did with the Advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lord Finch Publish a False and Trayterous Book called His Majesties Declaration of the Causes of Dissolving the last Parliament c. This goes very heavy upon me in the World that I should be a breaker of Parliaments a Counsellor against Parliaments My Lords there is nothing proved of it and I hope I shall be cleared by your Lordships and these noble Gentlemen and all the World that I had no such thing in my heart For the Point of the Declaration I was at that time Sick in my Bed and could do nothing in it and therefore I trust I shall be acquitted as to that As to the Breaking of the Parliament or any ill-will to Parliaments I have ever honour'd them and far be it from me to wish that they may not be frequent for the good of the King and Kingdom but as oft as you shall have it urged and prest against me that I should be an endeavourer to Subvert the Fundamental Laws of the Land in this kind I beseech your Lordships call to mind what hath been proved that at all Publick Debates at Council and Privately apart I have humbly represented to His Majesty from time to time that Parliaments are the Onely Way to Settle Himself in Quietness in the Kingdom and to acquire Prosperity and Happiness to Himself and His People And when you shall hear them press upon me that I have endeavoured to Subvert the Fundamental Lawes of the Land I beseech your Lordships to call to mind how frequently and servently I have advised the King to call for Parliaments which under God is the great Protection and Defence of the Fundamental Lawes of the Kingdom To the 25th I have Answered already and to the 26th likewise The next is the 27th and for that I can say no more then that your Lordships have heard the Proofes for the Levying of Money it hath been cleared to your Lordships that nothing was done by me but by Consent of the Country with their Unanimous good liking and for their benefit and advantage Being done so and for so good ends as I trust that shall not be enforced against me and it is very strange to me why it should be expected that if two Armies be in the Field one against the other as there was at York that they should be Govern'd with as much quietness as an Atturney walking with his Writs at his Girdle betwixt the Kings Bench and the Common-Pleas For Armies cannot be Govern'd without some Latitude in this kind Inter arma Silent Leges rightly applyed there is truth in that But I did nothing in the Business I did nothing by Compulsion but by the voluntary liking of the Parties themselves and therefore I conceive that shall not be Charged upon me as Treason There remains now the 28th Article and that is the onely Bloody Article if it had been or could be made good that is in the whole Charge for there I am Charged out of ill and wicked purposes and indeed What can be worse than Treason to have Betrayed Newcastle into the power of the Scotch Army and likewise to have betrayed the Kings Army at Newburn to a dishonourable Retreat My Lords if either of these had been true I should have saved your Lordships the labour I would have given Judgment against my self that had been certain But my Lords never was any Man more Innocent therefore they may very well wave it Have I been all this while Charged as an Incendiary and Am I now come in the Conclusion to be charged as a Confederate it is wonderful strange certainly your Articles fight one against another in this for How can I be an Incendiary in one part and a Conspirator with them that Charged me to be an Incendiary in the other part In good Faith I have not been very kindly dealt withal by my Confederates if they be Confederates to Charge me as an Incendiary that did them that Service and Help as to deliver into their hands a Town of such Consequence as that is No my Lords I wish all happiness to the Nation but I can never wish so to it as that they should take one of the Kings Towns in England if I could have helped it My Lords it was lost before I had the Charge of the Army I had nothing to do in the business nor am I to give any Accompt of it nor is any thing proved And as to the Defeate at Newburn you yet fight one Article with another methinks in that too for I am charged to be the Man that delivered up Newcastle and yet all the World knows that nothing could save it from being lost but the taking away from the Scots the Passages at that time So that I should use all means to prevent Men from doing that which I meant to do for them is very strange to me Here is no Probability and certainly little truth in the whole business as concerning my Confederating with the Scots either for the one or the other And so my Lords I am come to the end of these 28 Articles that were for my further Impeachment I have gone over them all and out of
these now there remains that other Second Treason that I should be guilty of endeavouring to Subvert the Fundamental Lawes of the Land in the first of those Seven Articles My Lords That those should now be Treason together that are not Treason in any one part and Accumulatively to come upon me in that kind and where one will not do it of it self yet woven up with others it shall do it Under favour my Lords I do not conceive that there is either Statute-Law or Common-Law that hath declared this endeavouring to Subvert the Fundamental Lawes to be High Treason I say neither Statute-Law nor Common-Law Written that I could hear of and I have been as diligent to enquire of it as I could be And your Lordships will believe I had reason so to do And sure it is a very hard thing I should here be question'd for my Life and Honor upon a Law that is not Extant that Cannot be Shewed There is a Rule that I have read out of my Lord Cook Non apparentibus non existentibus eadem est Ratio Iesu My Lords Where hath this Fire lay'n all this while so many hundred years together that no Smoak should appear till it burst out now to consume me and my Children Hard it is and extream hard in my Opinion that a Punishment should Precede the Promulgation of a Law that I should be Punished by a Law Subsequent to the Act done I most humbly beseech your Lordships take that into Consideration for certainly it were better a great deale to live under no Law but the Will of Man and Conform our selves in Humane Wisdom as well as we could and to Comply with that Will then to live under the Protection of a Law as we think and then a Law should be made to punish us for a Crime precedent to the Law then I conceive no Man living could be safe if that should be admitted My Lords it is hard in another respect that there should be no Tokens set upon this Offence by which we may know it no manner of Token given no Admonition by which we might be aware of it If I pass down the Thames in a Boat and run and Split my self upon an Anchor if there be not a Buoy to give me warning the Party shall give me Damages but if it be Marked out then it is at my own peril Now my Lords Where is the Mark set upon this Crime Where is the Token by which I should discover if it be not Marked if it lie under-Water and not above there is no Humane Providence can prevent the Destruction of a Man Presently and Instantly Let us then lay aside all that is Humane Wisdom let us rely onely upon Divine Revelation for certainly nothing else can preserve us if you will Condemn us before you tell us where the Fault is that we may avoid it My Lords may your Lordships be pleased to have that regard to the Peerage of England as never to suffer your selves to be put upon those Moot-points upon such Constructions and Interpretations and Strictness of Law as these are when the Law is not clear nor known If there must be a Tryal of Wits I do most humbly beseech your Lordships to consider that the Subject may be of something else then of your Lives and your Honors My Lords We find that in the Primitive time on the Sound and Plain Doctrine of the blessed Apostles they brought in their Books of Curious Art and burnt them My Lords it will be likewise under favour as I humbly conceive Wisdom and Providence in your Lordships for your selves and posterities for the whole Kingdom to cast from you into the Fire those Bloody and Misterious Volumes of Constructive and Arbitrary Treasons and to betake your selves to the Plain Letter of the Statute that tells you where the Crime is that so you may avoid it and let us not my Lords be ambitious to be more Learned in those Killing Arts then our Fore-fathers were before us My Lords It is now full Two hundred and forty years since any Man ever was Touch'd to this Height upon this Crime before my self We have lived my Lords happily to our selves at Home we have lived Gloriously Abroad to the World let us be content with that which our Fathers left us and let us not awake those Sleepy Lyons to our own Destruction by Ratling up of a Company of Records that have lay'n for so many Ages by the Wall Forgotten or Neglected My Lords There is this that troubles me extreamly least it should be my Misfortune to all the rest for my other Sins not for my Treasons that my Precedent should be of that Disadvantage as this will be I fear in the Consequence of it upon the Whole KINGDOM My Lords I beseech you therefore that you will be pleased seriously to consider it and let my particular Case be so looked upon as that you do not through me Wound the Interest of the Common-Wealth For howsoever those Gentlemen at the Bar say They Speak for the Common-Wealth and they believe so yet under favour in this particular I believe I Speak for the Common-Wealth too and that the Inconveniencies and Miseries that will follow upon this will be such as it will come within a few years to that which is exprest in the Statute of Henry the Fourth it will be of such a Condition that no Man shall know what to do or what to say Do not my Lords put greater Difficulty upon the Ministers of State then that with Chearfulness they may Serve the King and the State for if you will Examine them by every Grain or every little Weight it will be so heavy that the publick Affaires of the Kingdom will be left waste and no man will meddle with them that hath Wisdom and Honor and Fortune to lose My Lords I have now troubled your Lordships a great deal longer then I should have done were it not for the Interest of those PLEDGES that a Saint in Heaven left me I would be loth my Lords here his Weeping stopt him what I forfeit for my self it is nothing but I confess that my Indiscretion should Forfeit for them it wounds me very deeply You will be pleased to pardon my Infirmity something I should have said but I see I shall not be able and therefore I will leave it And now my Lords for my Self I thank God I have been by his Good Blessing towards me taught That the Afflictions of this present Life are not to be compared with that Eternal Weight of Glory that shall be Revealed for us hereafter And so my Lords even so with all Humility and with all Tranquility of Mind I do submit my self clearly and freely to your Judgments and whether that Righteous Judgment shall be to Life or to Death Te Deum Laudamus Te Dominum Confitemur THE SPEECH OR DECLARATION Of John Pym Esq MY LORDS MAny dayes have been spent in maintenance of the
very vain and defective if they had not a power to secure and preserve themselves The Forfeitures inflicted for Treason by our Law are of Life Honor and Estate even all that can be forfeited and this Prisoner having committed so many Treasons although he should pay all these Forfeitures will be still a Debtor to the Common-wealth nothing can be more equal then that he should perish by the Justice of that Law which he would have Subverted neither will this be a new way of Blood There are Marks enough to trace this Law to the very Original of this Kingdom and if it hath not been put in Execution as he alleadgeth this 240 years it was not for want of Law but that all that time hath not bred a man bold enough to commit such Crimes as these which is a circumstance much aggravating his Offence and making him no whit less liable to punishment because he is the onely Man that in so long a time hath ventured upon such a Treason as this It belongs to the Charge of another to make it appear to your Lordships that the Crimes and Offences proved against the Earl of Strafford are High-Treason by the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme whose Learning and other Abilities are much better for that Service But for the time and manner of performing this we are to resort to the Direction of the House of Commons having in this which is already done dispatched all those Instructions which we have received and concerning further Proceedings for clearing all Questions and Objections in Law your Lordships will hear from the House of Commons in Convenient time THE ARGUMENT Of Mr. LANE The PRINCE'S ATTORNY-GENERAL On the Behalf of the Earl of STRAFFORD In Point of Law MY Lords I shall not at all touch the Matter of Law further than to clear your Judgments of one Statute only viz. 25 E. 3. because when the same was Alleadged by the Lord Strafford in his own Defence that not being Convict of the Letter thereof he could not be Convict of Treason Remember the Salvo of the Statute was much insisted upon by those from the House of Commons as much Conducing to their Ends. My Lords I will first speak of the Statute it self and then of it's Salvo or Provision The Statute is That if any Man shall Intend the Death of the King His Queen their Children kill the Chancellor or Judge upon the Bench Imbase the Kings Coyn or Counterfeit the Broad-Seal c. he shall be Convict and Punisht as a Traytor That the Lord Strafford comes not within the Letter of this Statute is not so much as once alleadged nor indeed it cannot be with any Reason All that can be said is That by Relation or by Argument a Minore ad Majus he may be drawn into it yet that this cannot be I humbly offer these Considerations First This is a Declarative Law and such are not to be taken by way of Consequence Equity or Construction but by the Letter only otherwise they should imply a Contradiction to themselves and be no more Declarative Laws but Lawes of Construction or Constitutive Secondly This is a Penal Law and such if our Grounds hitherto unquestion'd hold good can admit of no Constructions or Inferences for Penalties are to perswade the Keeping of Known Lawes not of Lawes Conjectural Ambiguous and by Consequence which perhaps the most Learned may not in their Disputes question much less the Subject who is not obliged to Interpret the Statute doubt of in the point of Obedience yea rather without any doubt he is rather to obey the Letter of the Statute and conceive and that truly that he is not liable to the Penalty Thirdly We have a Notable Law 13 Eliz. cap. 2. whereby it is declared That the Bringing in of Bulls from Rome to stir up the Subject to Mutiny and Rebellion shall be punished as Treason Now if by Interpretation or by Consequence this Sence might have been thrust upon the Preceding Statutes the making of this had been superfluous yea the Persons then charged with that Crime might have been impeached of Treason even before the making of this Act. Anno 21 Edw. 3. We have a Statute declaring That for a Servant to Kill his Master is an Act of Treason and in the 23 th year of the same King a Process of Treason was framed against a Man for Killing his Father grounded upon the same Argument a Minore ad Majus But it was found and the Sentence is yet in Records that although in the 21 th year of Edward the Third that Argument might have been admitted yet in the 27 th it could not by Reason of the Declarative Law Intervening in the 25 th year and this Case comes very home to the Point in Law My Lords I will not demand What kind of Offence it may be for a Man to Subvert the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom the Crime doubtless is Unnatural and Monstrous and the Punishment must keep the same Proportion only I Presume to Offer these few things to your Lordships Consideration 1. That one or more Acts of Injustice whether Malitiously or Ignorantly done can in no sence of Law be called The Subversion of the Fundamental Laws if so as many Judges perhaps so many Traytors 't is very Incident to Mans Nature to erre nor doth the Lord Strafford plead his Innocency in Oversights but in Treason 2. I do Remember the Case of Iohn de la Pole Duke of Suffolk this Man in the 28 th of Henry the Sixth was Charged by the House of Commons with Articles of Treason and those too very like to these against my Lord Strafford I. That he had given the King bad Advices II. That he had Embased His Coyn. III. That he had Sessed Men of War IV. That he had given out Summary Decrees V. That he had Imposed Taxes VI. That he had Corrupted the Fountain of Justice VII That he had perswaded the King to Unnecessary War and the giving over of Anjou in France And for all these though he was charged with High Treason for wronging the Right of the Subject and Subverting the Fundamental Lawes of the Kingdom yet after a long agitation the Matter was found by the Lords of the Parliament not to Imply Treason but only Felony Add to this another who in the 23 d of Henry the Eighth was Charged for subverting the English Laws and yet no Treason charg'd upon him Add to both the Charge of Richard Larkes Pleaded at the Common-Pleas who was Charged with Treason for Subverting the Law but Convicted onely of Felony By which you may see my Lords what to this time hath been Subverting the Lawes 3. It is very considerable That the Lord Strafford is not charged to have Subverted but onely to have Intended to Subvert the Fundamental Lawes and this I conceive if there were no more might keep him free from that Statute the 25 th of Edward the Third For although as touching the
King His Queen and Children Intention is Treasonable yet in all other things there mentioned there must be Action besides Intention for it is not said If a Man do intend to Kill a Chancellor it shall be Treason but if he doth Kill him and if he doth actually Counterfeit the Broad Seal And although a Man should prepare a Furnace make ready his Stamp melt his Bullion yet if he gives not the Kings Impression upon the Coyn all his Intentions yea his Preparations will not serve to make up a Treason Ye see therefore my Lords that the Body of the Statute cannot stick against the Lord Strafford neither in Letter nor Consequence this is not that must not be All that can be said is That the Fact may be Treason by the Common Law For my part I profess my Ignorance who ever thought the Common Law might declare but never make a Treason it might be presupposed that there is a Statute whereupon to build a Declaration and therefore to say there is no Statute for it it is to say It is no Treason at all the Statute ever makes the Treason and to be declared Treason either by Common Law or by Parliament are but two different wayes of proceedings and must both resolve into one Principle nay and which comes home to the Point in the 21 of Edward the Third To kill a Man employed in the Kings War was Treason and the 23 d to kill the King's Messenger was Treason by Declaration of the Common Law but alwayes by reason of the Statute yet none of these are Treasons but Felonies onely because of the intervening Statute of the 25 th of Edward the Third such hath ever been thought the force of its Letter and Declaration and so I will leave it and a word or two of the Salvo which is this That because all particulars could not be enumerated therefore what the Parliament should declare to be Treasonable in time to come should be punished as a Treason And according to this Reservative in the 8 th year of King Richard the Second one charged before the Kings Bench was afterwards referred to the Parliament and there though the Fact was not contained in the Body of the Statute yet because of the Proviso afore-mentioned it was Adjudged Treason In the 11th year of the same King the Duke of Ireland and Nevill Archbishop of York were Impeached of High-Treason by Gloucester Arundel and Warwick and notwithstanding the Statute were convicted thereof by the Salvo but in the 21 of the same Richard the 2 d the Tide turned and the King had such a Hand with the Parliament that the Sentence was Recalled and those Three Noblemen themselves were Adjudged Traytors again in the 1 of Hen. the Fourth His Successor that Revocation of the 21 Richard the Second was Repealed and the Sentence of the 11th of His Reign Established Such were the tossings too and fro of Treason and all because of that uncertain Proviso Therefore it was that in the same Parliament the 1 Hen. the Fourth a Petition was preferred by the Nobility to have Treason limited within some Statute Because they knew not what to speak or what to do for fear thereof And in Chap. 10. an Act was made upon this Petition That the Salvo should be holden Repealed in all times to come and nothing esteemed Treason but what was Literally contained in the 25th of Edward the Third And therefore it is said in the Records That there was Great Joy at the making of this Act in that the Drawn Sword hanging over every Mans head by this Slender Thread of a Consequence or Illation was removed by that Act. Add to this that in the First of Queen Mary Cap. 1. the same is Repeated That no Man shall be punished in Life or Estate as a Traytor but for the Crime contained in the Statute of 25 Edward the Third without the least mention of the pretended Salvo The Earl of Northumberlands Case comes nigh to the Point he was charged with Treason the 5th of Henry the Fourth and if the Statute of the 1 Henry 4th Chap. 10. whereby this Proviso is Repealed had not intervened no doubt he had been Condemned of Treason but he was onely Convict of Felony and that because he could not be drawn within the Letter of the Statute of the 25th of Edward the Third And I dare confidently say it that since that Act was made the 1 Henry the Fourth Chap. 10. whereby the Proviso is Repealed no Man hath ever been declared a Traytor either by King or Parliament except it were upon that or some other Statute Literally and Declaratively taken These two things I do offer to your Lordships Considerations That the Lord Strafford cannot be Impeached of Treason by the Statute of 25th Edward the Third and that the Salvo contained in the same stands Repealed almost Two hundred years agoe And this is all I conceive to be necessary for that Statute which was Alledged by the Lord Strafford in his Defence for matter of Law The Recorder said He could add nothing to what the former Councel had spoken for matter of Law but if their Lordships would state unto him any further Questions he was ready to give his Resolution according to his best ability Mr. St. JOHN'S ARGUMENT OF LAW CONCERNING The Bill of Attainder April 29th 1641. MY Lords The Knights Citizens and Burgesses of the Commons House of Parliament have passed a Bill for the Attainting of Thomas Earl of Strafford of High-Treason The Bill hath been transmitted from them to your Lordships it concerns not him alone but your Lordships and the Commons too though in different respects It concerns his Lordship the highest that can be in the Penal Part so it doth on the other side as highly concern your Lordships and the Commons in that which ought to be the tendrest the Judicatory within that that Judge not them who Judge him and in that which is most Sacred amonst Men the Publick Justice of the Kingdom The King is to be accounted unto for the loss of the meanest Member much more of one so near the Head The Commons are concerned in their Account for what is done your Lordships in that which is to be done The business therefore of the present Conference is to acquaint your Lordships with those things that satisfy'd the Commons in Passing of this Bill such of them as have come within my capacity and that I can remember I am Commanded from the Commons at this time to present unto your Lordships My Lords in Judgment of greatest Moment there are but two wayes for satisfying those that are to give them either the Lex lata the Law already established or else the use of the same Power for making new Laws whereby the old at first received life In the first consideration of the setled Laws in the degrees of Punishment the Positive Law received by General Consent and for the Common Good is sufficient to satisfie
England If but any one of these Six Considerations hold the Commons conceive that upon the whole matter they had good cause to pass the Bill My Lords For the first of Levying War I shall make bold to read the case to your Lordships before I speak to it It 's thus The Earl did by Warrant under his Hand and Seal give Authority to Robert Savil a Sergeant at Arms and his Deputies to Sesse such numbers of Soldiers Horse and Foot of the Army in Ireland together with an Officer as the Sergeant should think fit upon His Majesties Subjects of Ireland against their Will this Warrant was granted by the Earl to the end to compell the Subjects of Ireland to submit to the unlawful Summons and Orders made by the Earl upon Paper Petitions exhibited to him in case of private interest between party and party this Warrant was executed by Savil and his Deputies by sessing of Soldiers both Horse and Foot upon divers of the Subjects of Ireland against their Wills in warlike manner and at divers times the Soldiers continued upon the parties upon whom they were sessed and wasted their Goods until such time as they had submitted themselves unto those Summons and Orders My Lords This is a Levying War within the Statute of 25th Edw. 3. The words of the Statute are If any man do Levy War against our Lord the King in His Realm this is declared Treason I shall endeavour in this to make clear to your Lordships 1. What shall be a Levying of War in respect of the motive or cause of it 2. What shall be said a Levying of War in respect of the action or thing done 3. And in the third place I shall apply them to the present case It will be granted in this levying of War that Forces may be raised and likewise used in Warlike manner and yet no levying of War within the Statute that is when the Forces are raised and employed upon private ends either of revenge or interest Before this Statute in Edw. the 1. time the Title of a Castle was in difference between the Earls of Hereford and Gloucester for the maintaining of the possession on the one side and gaining of it on the other Forces were raised on either side of many hundred men they marched with Banners displayed one against another In the Parliament in the 20th year of Edward 1. this was adjudged only Trespass and either of the Earls Fined 1000 Marks apiece After the Statute in Hillary Term in the 15th year of Edw. the 3. in the Kings-Bench Rot. 3. Nicholas Huntercome in Warlike manner with 40 men armed amongst other weapons with Guns so antient as appears by that Record they were did much spoil in the Mannor of the Abby of Dorchester in the County of Oxford this was accounted no Treason and so it hath been held by the Judges That if one or more Town-ship upon pretence of saving their Commons do in a forcible and warlike manner throw in inclosures this is only a Riot no Treason The words of the Statute 25 Edw. 3. clear this point that if any man ride Armed openly or secretly with men at Arms against any other to kill and rob or to detain him until he hath made Fine and Ransome for his deliverance this is declared not to be Treason but Felony or Trespass as the Case shall require all the printed Statutes which have it covertly or secret are misprinted for the words in the Parliament Roll as appears in the 17th are Discovertment on Secretement Open or Secretly So that my Lords in this of Levying War the Act is not so much to be considered but as in all other Treasons and Felonies quo animo with what intent and purpose My Lords If the end be considerable in Levying War it may be said that it cannot be a War unless against the King for the words of the Statute are If any man Levy War against the King That these words extend further than to the person of the King appears by the words of the Statute which in the beginning declares it to be Treason to compass and imagine the death of the King and after other Treasons this is to be declared to be Treason to Levy War against the King If Levying of War extend no further than to the Person of the King these words of the Statute are to no purpose for then the first Treason of compassing the Kings death had fully included it before because that he which Levies War against the Person of the King doth necessarily compass his death It 's a War against the King when intended for alteration of the Laws or Government in any part of them or to destroy any of the Great Officers of the Kingdom This is a Levying War against the King 1. Because the King doth protect and maintain the Laws in every part of them and the great Officers to whose care he hath in his own stead delegated the execution of them 2. Because they are the Kings Laws he is the Fountain from whence in their several Channels they are derived to the Subject all our Indictments run thus Trespasses laid to be done Contra pacem Domini Regis the Kings Peace for exorbitant offences though not intended against the King's Person against the King his Crown and Dignity My Lords this construction is made good by divers Authorities of great weight ever since the Statute of 25th of Edw. 3. downwards In R. the 2. time Sir Tho. Talbot conspired the death of the Dukes of Glocester and Lancaster and some other of the Peers for the effecting of it he had caused several People in the County of Chester to be Armed in Warlike manner in Assemblies in the Parliament held in the 17th year of R. 2. N o 20. Sir Thomas Talbot being accused of High Treason for this It 's there declared insomuch as one of them was Lord High Steward of England and the other High Constable that this was done in destruction of the Estates of the Realm and of the Laws of the Kingdom and therefore adjudged Treason and the Judgement sent down into the Kings Bench as appears Easter Term in the 17th year of R. 2. in the Kings Bench Rot. 16th These two Lords had appeared in the 11th of R. 2 in maintainance of the Act of Parliament made in the year before one of them was of the Commissioners appointed by Parliament and one of the Appealors of those who would have overthrown it The Duke of Lancaster likewise was one of the Lords that was to have been Indicted of Treason for endeavouring the maintenance of it and therefore conspiring of their deaths is said to be in destruction of their Laws This there is declared to be Treason that concerned the Person of the King and Common-wealth In that great insurrection of the Villains and meaner People in Richard the II. time they took an Oath Quod Regi Communibus fidelitatem servarent to be true
in the ordinary way of Judicature without Bill for so is the present question For the clearing of this I shall propound two things to your Lordships consideration Whether the Rule for expounding the Irish Statute and Customs be one and the same in England as in Ireland That being admitted whether the Parliament in England have cognizance or jurisdiction of things there done in respect of the place because the Kings Writ runs not there For the First in respect of the place the Parliament here hath cognizance there And Secondly If the Rules for expounding the Irish Statutes and Customs be the same here as there this exception as I humbly conceive must fall away In England there is the Common-Law the Statutes the Acts of Parliament and Customs peculiar to certain places differing from the Common-Law If any question arise concerning either a Custom or an Act of Parliament the Common-Law of England the First the Primitive and the General Law that 's the Rule and Expositor of them and of their several extents it is so here it is so in Ireland the Common-Law of England is the Common-Law of Ireland likewise the same here and there in all the parts of it It was introduced into Ireland by King Iohn and afterwards by King Henry 3. by Act of Parliament held in England as appears by the Patent-Rolls of the 30th year of King Henry 3. the first Membrana the words are Quia pro Communi Utilitate terrae Hiberniae unitate terrarum Regis Rex vult de Communi Concilio Regis Provisum est quod omnes Leges Consuetudines quae in Regno Angliae tenentur in Hibernia teneantur eadem terra eisdem legibus subjaceat per easdem Regatur sicut Dominus Iohannes Rex cum ultimò esset in Hibernia statuit fieri mandavit quia c. Rex vult quòd omnia brevia de Communi Iure quae currunt in Anglia similiter currant in Hibernia sub novo sigillo Regis mandatum est Archiepiscopis c. quod pro pace tranquilitate ejusdem terrae per easdem leges eos regi deduci permittant eas in omnibus sequantur in cujus c. Teste Rege apud Woodstock Decimo nono die Septembris Here is an union of both Kingdoms and that by Act of Parliament and the same Laws to be used here as there in omnibus My Lords That nothing might be left here for an exception that is That in Treasons Felonies and other capital offences concerning Life the Irish Laws are not the same as here therefore it is enacted by a Parliament held in England in the 14th year of Edw 2. it is not in print neither but in the Parliament Book that the Laws concerning Life and Member shall be the same in Ireland as in England And that no exception might yet remain in a Parliament held in England The 5th year of Edw. 3. it is Enacted Quod una eadem Lex fiat tam Hibernicis quam Anglicis This Act is enrolled in the Patent Rolls of the 5th year of Edw. 3. Parl. membr 25. The Irish therefore receiving their Laws from hence they send their Students at Law to the Inns of Court in England where they receive their Degree and of them and of the Common-Lawyers of this Kingdom are the Judges made The Petitions have been many from Ireland to send from hence some Judges more learned in the Laws than those they had there It hath been frequent in cases of difficulty there to send sometimes to the Parliament sometimes to the King by advice from the Judges here to send them resolutions of their doubts Amongst many I 'll cite your Lordships only one because it is in a case of Treason upon an Irish Statute and therefore full to this point By a Statute there made the fifth year of Edw. 4. there is a provision made for such as upon suggestions are committed to prison for Treason that the party committed if he can procure 24 Compurgators shall be bailed and let out of prison Two Citizens of Dublin were by a Grand Jury presented to have committed Treason they desired benefit of this Statute that they might be let out of prison upon tender of their Compurgators The words of the Statute of the 5th year of Edw. 4th in Ireland being obscure the Judges there being not satisfied what to do sent the case over to the Queen desired the opinion of the Judges here which was done accordingly The Judges here sent over their opinion which I have out of the Book of Justice Anderson one of the Judges consulted withal The Judges delivered their opinion upon an Irish Statute in case of Treason If it be objected That in this Case the Judges here did not judge upon the party their opinions were only ad informandam Conscientiam of the Judges in Ireland that the Judgement belonged to the Judges there My Lords with submission this and the other Authorities prove that for which they were cited that is that no absurdity no failure of Justice would ensue if this great Judicatory should judge of Treason so made by an Irish Statute The Common-Law rules of judging upon an Irish Statute the Pleas of the Crown for things of life and death are the same here and there this is all that yet hath been offered For the Second point That England hath no power of Judicature for things done in Ireland My Lords the constant practice of all ages proves the contrary Writs of Error in Pleas of the Crown as well as in Civil Causes have in all Kings Reigns been brought here even in the inferior Courts of Westminster-Hall upon Judgment given in the Courts of Ireland the practice is so frequent and so well known as that I shall cite none of them to your Lordships no president will I believe be produced to your Lordships that ever the Case was remanded back again into Ireland because the question arose upon an Irish Statute or Custom Object But it will be said that Writs of Error are only upon failure of justice in Ireland and that suits cannot originally be commenced here for things done in Ireland because the Kings Writ runs not in Ireland Answ. This might be a good Plea in the Kings-Bench and inferior Courts at Westminster-Hall the question is Whether it be so in Parliament The Kings Writ runs not within the County-Palatine of Chester and Durham nor within the Five Ports neither did it in Wales before the Union of Henry the 8th's time after the Laws of England were brought into Wales in King Edw. the 1. time Suits were not originally commenced at Westminster-Hall for things done in them yet this never excluded the Parliament-suits for Life Lands and Goods within these jurisdictions are determinable in Parliament as well as in any other parts of the Realm Ireland as appears by the Statute of the Thirtieth year of Henry 3. before-mentioned is united to the Crown of England By
the Statute of the Eight and twentieth year of Hen. 6th in Ireland it is declared in these words That Ireland is the proper Dominion of England and united to the Crown of England which Crown of England is of it self and by it self wholly and entirely endowed with all Power and Authority sufficient to yield to the Subjects of the same full and plenary remedy in all Debates and Suits whatsoever By the Statute of the Three and twentieth year of Henry the 8th the first Chapter when the Kings of England first assumed the Title of King of Ireland it is there Enacted that Ireland still is to be held as a Crown annexed and united to the Crown of England So that by the same reason from this that the Kings Writs run not in Ireland it might as well be held that the Parliament cannot originally hold Plea of things done within the County-Palatine of Chester and Durham nor within the Five Ports and Wales Ireland is a part of the Realm of England as appears by those Statutes as well as any of them This is made good by constant practice in all the Parliament Rolls from the first to the last there are Receivers and Tryers of Petitions appointed for Ireland for the Irish to come so far with their Petitions for Justice and the Parliament not to have cognizance when from time to time they had in the beginning of the Parliament appointed Receivers and Tryers of them is a thing not to be presumed An Appeal in Ireland brought by William Lord Vesey against Iohn Fitz-Thomas for Treasonable words there spoken before any Judgment given in Case there was removed into the Parliament in England and there the Defendant acquitted as appears in the Parliament Pleas of the Two and twentieth year of Edw. 1. The Suits for Lands Offices and Goods originally begun here are many and if question grew upon matter in fact a Jury usually ordered to try it and the Verdict returned into the Parliament as in the Case of one Ballyben in the Parliament of the Five and thirtieth year of Edward the 1. If a doubt arose upon a matter tryable by Record a Writ went to the Officers in whose custody the Record remained to certifie the Record as was in the Case of Robert Bagott the same Parliament of the Five and thirtieth year of Edward the 1. where the Writ went to the Treasurer and Barons of the Exchequer Sometimes they gave Judgement here in Parliament and commanded the Judges there in Ireland to do execution as in the great Case of Partition between the Copartners of the Earl Marshal in the Parliament of the Three and thirtieth of Edward the 1. where the Writ was awarded to the Treasurer of Ireland My Lords The Laws of Ireland were introduced by the Parliament of England as appears by Three Acts of the Parliament before cited It is of higher Jurisdiction Dare Leges then to judge by them The Parliaments of England do bind in Ireland if Ireland be particularly mentioned as is resolved in the Book-Case of the First year of Henry the Seventh Cook 's Seventh Report Calvin's Case and by the Judges in Trinity-Term in the Three and thirtieth year of Queen Elizabeth The Statute of the Eighth year of Edward the 4th the first Chapter in Ireland recites That it was doubted amongst the Judges whether all the English Statutes though not naming Ireland were in force there if named no doubt From King Henry the 3. his time downwards to the Eighth year of Queen Elizabeth by which Statute it is made Felony to carry Sheep from Ireland beyond Seas in almost all these Kings Reigns there be Statutes made concerning Ireland The exercising of the Legislative Power there over their Lives and Estates is higher than of the Judicial in question Until the 29th year of Edward the 3. erroneous Judgements given in Ireland were determinable no where but in England no not in the Parliament of Ireland as it appears in the close Rolls in the Tower in the 29th year of Edw. the 3. Memb. 12. Power to examine and reverse erroneous Judgments in the Parliaments of Ireland is granted from hence Writs of Error lye in the Parliament here upon erroneous Judgements after that time given in the Parliaments of Ireland as appears in the Parliament Rolls of the Eighth year of Henry the 6th No. 70. in the Case of the Prior of Lenthan It is true the Case is not determined there for it 's the last thing that came into the Parliament and could not be determined for want of time but no exception at all is taken to the Jurisdiction The Acts of Parliament made in Ireland have been confirmed in the Parliaments of England as appears by the close Rolls in the Tower in the Two and fortieth year of Edw. the 3. Memb. 20. Dorso where the Parliament in Ireland for the preservation of the Countrey from Irish who had almost destroyed it made an Act That all the Land-Owners that were English should reside upon their Lands or else they were to be forfeited this was here confirmed In the Parliament of the Fourth year of Henry the 5th Chap. 6. Acts of Parliament in Ireland are confirmed and some priviledges of the Peers in the Parliaments there are regulated Power to repeal Irish Statutes Power to confirm them cannot be by the Parliament here if it hath not cognizance of their Parliaments unless it be said that the Parliament may do it knows not what Garnsey and Iersey are under the Kings subjection but are not parcels of the Crown of England but of the Duchy of Normandy they are not governed by the Laws of England as Ireland is and yet Parliaments in England have usually held Plea of and determined all Causes concerning Lands or Goods In the Parliament in the 33 Edw. 1. there be Placita de Insula Iersey And so in the Parliament 14 Edw. 2. and so for Normandy and Gascoigne and always as long as any part of France was in subjection to the Crown of England there were at the beginning of the Parliaments Receivers and Tryers of Petitions for those parts appointed I believe your Lordships will have no Case shewed of any Plea to the jurisdiction of the Parliaments of England in any things done in any parts wheresoever in subjection to the Crown of England The last thing I shall offer to your Lordships is the Case of 19 Eliz. in my Lord Dyer 306. and Judge Crompton's Book of the jurisdiction of Courts fol. 23. The opinion of both these Books is That an Irish Peer is not Tryable here it 's true a Scotch or French Nobleman is tryable here as a common person the Law takes no notice of their Nobility because those Countreys are not governed by the Laws of England but Ireland being governed by the same Laws the Peers there are Tryable according to the Law of England only per pares By the same reason the Earl of Strafford not being a Peer of Ireland is
not tryable by the Peers of Ireland so that if he be not tryable here he is tryable no where My Lords In case there be a Treason and a Traitor within the Statute and that he be not tryable here for it in the ordinary way of Judicature if that jurisdiction fail this by way of Bill doth not Attainders of Treason in Parliament are as legal as usual by Act of Parliament as by Judgement I have now done with the Statutes 25 Edw. 3. and 18 Hen. 6. My Lord of Strafford hath offended against both the Kingdoms and is guilty of High Treason by the Laws of both My Lords In the fifth place I am come to the Treasons at the Common-Law the endeavouring to subvert the fundamental Laws and Government of the Kingdom and to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government In this I shall not at all labour to prove That the endeavouring by Words Counsels and Actions to subvert the Laws is Treason at the Common-Law if there be any Common-Law Treasons at all left nothing is Treason if this be not to make a Kingdom no Kingdom take the Polity and Government away Englands but a piece of Earth wherein so many men have their Commorancy and abode without ranks or distinction of men without property in any thing further than possession no Law to punish the Murthering or robbing one another That of 33 Hen. 8. of introducing the Imperial Law sticks not with your Lordships it was in case of an Appeal to Rome these Appeals in Cases of Marriages and other causes counted Ecclesiastical had been frequent had in most Kings Reigns been tolerated some in times of Popery put a conscience upon them the Statutes had limited the penalty to a Praemunire only neither was that a total subversion only an Appeal from the Ecclesiastical Court here in a single Cause to the Court of Rome and if Treason or not that Case proves not a Treason may be punished as a Felony a Felony as a Trespass if His Majesty so please The greater includes the less in the Case of Praemunire in the Irish Reports that which is there declared to be Treason was proceeded upon only as a Praemunire The things most considerable in this is Whether the Treasons at Common-Law are taken away by the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. which is to speak against both the direct words and scope of that Statute In it there 's this clause That because many other like Cases of Treason might fall out which are not there declared therefore it is enacted That if any such Case come before the Iudges they shall not proceed to Iudgment till the Case be declared in Parliament whether it ought to be adjudged Treason or not These words and the whole scope of that Statute shews that it was not the meaning to take away any Treasons that were so before but only to regulate the jurisdiction and manner of Tryal Those that were single and certain Acts as conspiring the Kings death Levying War Counterfeiting the Money or Great Seal Killing a Judge these are left to the ordinary Courts of Justice The others not depending upon single Acts but upon constructions and necessary inferences they thought it not fit to give the inferior Courts so great a latitude here as too dangerous to the Subject those they restrained to the Parliament This Statute was the great security of the Subjects made with such wisdom as all the succeeding Ages have approved it it hath often passed through the Furnace but like Gold hath left little or nothing The Statute of the First H. 4. cap. 10. is in these words Whereas in the Parliament held the 21 year of Richard the 2. divers pains of Treason were ordained insomuch that no man did know how to behave himself to do say or speak It is accorded that in no time to come any Treason be adjudged otherwise than it was ordained by the Statute of 25th of Edw. 3. It hath been said To what end is this Statute made if it takes not away the Common-Law Treasons remaining after the Statute of the 25th of Edw. 3 Therebe two main things which this Statute doth First it takes away for the future all the Treasons made by any Statute since 25 Edw. 3. to the 1 H. 4. even to that time for in respect that by another Act in that Parliament the Statute of 21 Rich. 2. was repealed it will not be denyed but that this Statute repeals more Treasons than these of the 21 R. 2. It repeals all Statute-Treasons but those in 25 Edw. 3. Secondly It not only takes away the Statute-Treasons but likewise the declared Treasons in Parliament after the 25th of Edw. 3. as to the future after Declaration in Parliament the inferior Courts might judge these Treasons for the Declaration of a Treason in Parliament after it was made was sent to the inferior Courts that toties quotîes the like Case fell out they might proceed therein the Subject for the future was secured against these so that this Statute was of great use But by the very words of it I shall refer all Treasons to the provision of 25 Edw. 3. it leaves that entire and upon the old bottom The Statute of 1 Queen M. cap. 1. saith That no offences made Treason by any Act of Parliament shall thenceforth be taken or adjudged to be Treason but only such as be declared and expressed to be Treason by the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. Concerning Treason or the Declaration of Treason and no others And further provides That no pains of death penalties or forfeiture in any wise shall ensue for committing any Treason other than such as be in the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. ordained and provided any Act of Parliament or any Declaration or matter to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding By the first of this Statute only offences made Treason by Act of Parliament are taken away the Common-Law-Treasons are no ways touched the words And no others refer still to offences made Treason by Act of Parliament they restrain not to the Treasons only particularly mentioned in the Statute in the 25th Edw. 3. but leave that Statute entire to the Common-Law-Treason as appears by the words immediately foregoing By the Second Part for the peins and forfeitures of Treasons if it intend only the punishment of Treason or if it intend both Treason and Punishment yet all is referred to the Provision and Ordinance of 25 Edw. 3. any Act of Parliament or other Declaration or thing notwithstanding It saith not other then such Penalties or Treasons as are expressed and declared in the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. that might perhaps have restrained it to those that are particularly mentioned no it refers all Treasons to the general Ordination and Provision of that Statute wherein the Common Law Treasons are expresly kept on foot If it be Asked What good this Statute doth if it take not away the Common Law Treasons 1. It takes away all the Treasons made
by Act of Parliament not only since the first of Hen. 4. which were many but all before 1 Hen. 4. even until the 25 E. 3. by express words 2. By express words it takes away all declared Treasons if any such had been in Parliament Those for the future are likewise taken away so that whereas it might have been doubted whether the Statute of the 1 H. 4. took away any Treasons but those of the 22 d and 23 d years of R. 2. This clears it both for Treasons made by Parliament or declared in Parliament even to the time of making the Statute This is of great use of great security to the Subject so that as to what shall be Treason and what not the Statute of 25 E. 3. remains entire and so by consequence the Treasons at the Common Law Only my Lords it may be doubted whether the manner of the Parliamentary proceedings be not altered by the Statute of 1 H. 4. Chap. 17. and more fully in the Parliament Roll Number 144 that is whether since that Statute the Parliamentary power of Declaration of Treasons whereby the inferiour Courts Receive Jurisdiction be not taken away and restrained only to Bill that so it might operate no further then to that particular contained in the Bill that so the Parliamentary Declarations for after-times should be kept within the Parliament it self and be extended no further Since 1 H. 4. we have not found any such Declarations made but all Attainders of Treason have been by Bill If this be so yet the Common-Law Treasons still remaining there is one and the same ground of reason and equity since the 1 H. 4. for passing a Bill of Treason as was before for declaring of it without Bill Herein the Legislative power is not used against my Lord of Strafford in the Bill it s only the jurisdiction of the Parliament But my Lords because that either through my mistaking of the true grounds and reasons of the Commons or my not pressing them with apt agreements and presidents of former times or that perchance your Lordships from some other Reasons and Authorities more swaying with your Lorpships Judgments then these from them may possibly be of a contrary or dubious opinion concerning these Treasons either upon the Statutes of 25 E. 3. 18 H. 6. or at the Common-Law My Lords If all these five should faile they have therefore given me further in Command to declare to your Lordships some of their Reasons why they conceive that in this case the meer Legislative Power may be exercised Their reasons are taken from these three grounds 1. From the nature and quality of the Offence 2. From the Frame and Constitution of the Parliament wherein this Law is made 3. From Practices and Usages of former times The horridness of the Offence in endeavouring the overthrowing the Lawes and present Government hath been fully opened to your Lordships heretofore The Parliament is the Representation of the whole Kingdom wherein the King as Head your Lordships as the most Noble and the Commons the other Members are knit together into one Body Politick This dissolves the Arteries and Ligaments that hold the Body together the Lawes He that takes away the Lawes takes not away the Allegiance of one Subject alone but of the whole Kingdom It was made Treason by the Statute of 13. Eliz. for Her time to affirm that the Lawes of the Realm do not bind the Descent of the Crown no Law no Descent at all No Lawes no Peerage no Rankes or Degrees of men the same Condition to all It 's Treason to kill a Judge upon the Bench this kills not Iudicem sed Iudicium He that borrowed Apelles and gave Bond to return again Apelles the Painter sent him home after he had cut off his Right Hand his Bond was broken Apelles was sent but not the Painter There are Twelve Men but no Law there 's never a Judge amongst them It 's Felony to Imbezle any one of the Judicial Records of the Kingdom this at once Sweeps them all away and from all It 's Treason to Counterfeit a Twenty shillings piece here 's a Counterfeiting of the Law we can call neither the Counterfeit nor True Coyn our own It 's Treason to Counterfeit the Great-Seal for an Acre of Land no property hereby is left to any Land at all nothing Treason now either against King or Kingdom no Law to punish it My Lords If the Question were Asked at Westminster-Hall Whether this were a Crime punishable in Star-Chamber or in the Kings-Bench by Fine or Imprisonment they would say it went higher If whether Felony they would say that 's for an Offence only against the Life or Goods of some one or few persons It would I believe be answered by the Judges as it was by the Chief Justice Thurning in 21 R. 2. that though he could not Judge the Case Treason there before him yet if he were a Peer in Parliament he would so Adjudge it My Lords if it be too big for those Courts we hope it 's in the right way here 2. The second Consideration is from the Frame and Constitution of the Parliament the Parliament is the great Body Politick it comprehends all from the King to the Beggar if so My Lords as the Natural so this Body it hath power over it self and every one of the Members for the preservation of the whole It 's both the Physitian and the Patient If the Body be distempered it hath power to open a Vein to let out the corrupt blood for curing it self if one Member be Poysoned or Gangred it hath power to cut it off for the preservation of the rest But my Lords it hath often been inculcated that Law-makers should imitate the Supreme Law-giver who commonly warnes before he strikes The Law was promulged before the Judgment of death for gathering the Sticks No Law no Transgression My Lords To this rule of Law is Frustra legis auxilium invocat qui in legem committit from the Lex talionis he that would not have had others to have a Law Why should he have any himself Why should not that be done to him that himself would have done to others It 's true we give Law to Hares and Deers because they be Beasts of Chase It was never accounted either cruelty or foul play to knock Foxes and Wolves on the head as they can be found because these be Beasts of Prey The Warrener sets Traps for Polcats and other Vermine for preservation of the Warren Further my Lords most dangerous Diseases if not taken in time they kill Errors in great things as War and Marriage they allow no time for repentance it would have been too late to make a Law when there had been no Law My Lords for further Answer to this Objection he hath offended against a Law a Law within the endeavouring to subvert the Lawes and Polity of the State wherein he lived which had so long and with such
faithfulness protected his Ancestry Himself and his whole Family It was not Malum quia prohibitum it was Malum in se against the Dictates of the dullest Conscience against the Light of Nature they not having a Law were a Law to themselves Besides this he knew a Law without that the Parliament in Cases of this Nature had Potestatem vitae necis Nay he well knew that he offended the Promulged and Ordinary Rules of Law Crimes against Law have been Proved have been Confessed so that the Question is not De culpa sed de poena What degree of Punishment those Faults deserve We must differ from him in Opinion That twenty Felonies cannot make a Treason if it be meant of equallity in the use of the Legislative Power for he that deserves death for one of these Felonies alone deserves a Death more Painful and more Ignominious for all together Every Felony is punished with loss of Life Lands and Goods a Felony may be aggravated with those Circumstances as that the Parliament with good reason may add to the Circumstances of Punishment as was done in the Case of Iohn Hall in the Parliament of the 1 H. 4. who for a Barbarous Murder committed upon the Duke of Glocester Stifling him between two Feather-Beds at Calice was Adjudged to be Hanged Drawn and Quartered Batteries by Law are only punishable by Fine and single Damages to the Party Wounded In the Parliament held in 1 H. 4. Cap. 6. one Savage committed a Battery upon one Chedder Servant to Sir Iohn Brooke a Knight of the Parliament for Somersetshire It 's there Enacted that he shall pay double Damages and stand Convicted if he render not himself by such a time The manner of proceedings quickned and the penalty doubled the Circumstances were considered it concerned the Common-Wealth it was a Battery with Breach of Priviledge of Parliament This made a perpetual Act no warning to the first Offender and in the Kings Bench as appears by the Book-Case of 9 H. 4. the first leaf Double Damages were recovered My Lords in this of the Bill the Offence is High and General against the King and the Common-wealth against all and the best of all If every Felony be loss of Life Lands and Goods What is Misuser of the Legislative Power by Addition of Ignominy in the Death and Disposal of the Lands to the Crown the Publick Patrimony of the Kingdom But it was hoped that your Lordships had no more skill in the Art of killing Men then your worthy Ancestors My Lords this Appeal from your selves to your Ancestors we do admit of although we do not admit of that from your Lordships to the Peers of Ireland He hath appealed to them your Lordships will be pleased to hear what Judgment they have already given in the case that is the several Attainders of Treason in Parliament after the Statute of 25 E. 3. for Treasons not mentioned nor within that Statute and those upon the first Offenders without warning given By the Statute of 25 E. 3. it 's Treason to levy War against the King Gomines and Weston afterwards in Parliament in the 1 R. 2. n. 38 39 adjudged Traytors for surrendring two several Castles in France only out of fear without any Compliance with the Enemy this not within the Statute of 25th E. 3. My Lords In the 3 d of Rich. 2d. Iohn Imperiall that came into England upon Letters of Safe Conduct as an Agent for the State of Genoa sitting in the evening before his door in Breadstreet as the words of the Records are Paulo ante ignitegium Iohn Kirkby and another Citizen coming that way Casually Kirkby troad upon his Toe it being twilight this grew to a Quarrel and the Ambassador was slain Kirkby was Indicted of High-Treason the Indictment finds all this and that it was only done se defendendo and without malice The Judges it being out of the Statute 25 E. 3. could not proceed the Parliament declared it Treason and Judgment afterwards of High-Treason there 's nothing can bring this within the Statute of 25 E. 3. but it concerns the Honor of the Nation that the Publick Faith should be strictly kept It might endanger the Traffique of the Kingdom they made not a Law first they made the first man an Example this is in the Parliament-Roll 3 R. 2. Number 18. and Hillary Terme 3 R. 2. Rot. 31. in the Kings-Bench where Judgment is given against him In 11 R. 2. Tresilian and some others attainted of Treason for delivering Opinions in the Subversion of the Law and some others for plotting the like My Lords the Case hath upon another occasion been opened to your Lordships only this is observable that in the Parliament of the first year of Henry the Third where all Treasons are again reduced to the Statute of 25 E. 3. These Attainders were by a particular Act confirmed and made good that the memory thereof might be transmitted to succeeding Ages they stand good unto this day the offences there as here were the endeavouring the Subversion of the Laws My Lords after the 1 H. 4. Sir Iohn Mortimer being committed to the Tower upon suspition of Treason brake Prison and made his escape This no way within any Statute or any former Judgment at Common-Law for this that is for breaking the Prison only and no other cause in the Parliament held the second year of Henry the Sixth he was attainted of High-Treason by Bill My Lords Poysoning is only Murder yet one Richard Cooke having put Poyson into a Pot of Pottage in the Kitchin of the Bishop of Rochester whereof two persons dyed he 's Attainted of Treason and it was Enacted that he should be Boyled to Death by the Statute of 22 H. 8. c. 9. By the Statute of the 25 H. 8. Elizabeth Barton the Holy Maid of Kent for pretending Revelations from God That God was highly displeased with the King for being Divorced from the Lady Katherine and that in case he persisted in the Separation and should Marry another that he would not continue King not above one Moneth after because this tended to the depriving of the lawful Succession to the Crown she is Attainted of Treason My Lords all these Attainders for ought I know are in force at this day The Statutes of the First year of Henry the 4 th and the First of Queen Mary although they were willing to make the Statute of 25 E. 3. the Rule to the Inferiour Courts yet they left the Attainders in Parliament precedent to themselves untoucht wherein the Legislative power had been exercised There 's nothing in them whence it can be gathered but that they intended to leave it as free for the future My Lords In all these Attainders there were Crimes and Offences against the Law they thought it not unjust Circumstances considered to heighten and add to the degrees of punishment and that upon the first Offender My Lords we receive as just the other Lawes
the Subject but then he goes into Ireland and as his authority increases so he ampliates his design and no sooner is he there but the third Article is laid to his charge That when the City and Recorder of Dublin the principal City of Ireland presented the Mayor upon a solemn Speech and Discourse concerning the Laws and Liberties as your Lordships know that is the subject matter of a Speech at such presentments as when the Lord Mayor of London is presented to the King I beseech your Lordship observe the words he then used They were a conquered Nation and that we lay not to his charge but they were to be governed as the King pleases their Charters were nothing worth and bind but during the Kings pleasure I am to seek if I were to express an Arbitrary Power and Tyrannical Government how to express it in finer words and more significant terms than these That the people shall be governed at the Kings Will that their Charters the sinews and ligatures of their Liberties Lands and Estates should be nothing worth and bind no longer than the Kings pleasure especially being spoken upon such an occasion and the words proved by two or three Witnesses of credit and quality From thence we descend to Articles that shew the execution of his purpose There are three things a man enjoys by the protection of the Law that is his Life his Liberty and his Estate And now my Lords observe how he invades and exercises a Tyrannical Jurisdiction and Arbitrary Government over them all three I shall begin with the fifth Article that is concerning my Lord Mountnorris and Denwit My Lord Mountnorris a Peer of that Realm was sentenced to death by procurement of my Lord of Strafford who howsoeve he pretends himself not to be a Judge in the cause yet how far he was an Abettor and Procurer and Countenancer and drawer on of that Sentence your Lordships very well remember he was sentenced to death without Law for speaking words at a private Table God knows of no manner of consequence in the world concerning the treading upon my Lord of Strafford ' s Toe the Sentence procured seven months after the words spoken and contrary to Law and himself being put in mind of it my Lord Mountnorris desiring to have the benefit of the Law and yet he refusing it And then it was in time of Peace when all the Courts of Justice were open and to sentence a man to death of that quality my Lord of Strafford himself being present an author a drawer on of it makes it very hainous Your Lordships remember this Article was fully proved and though he pretends His Authority by a Letter from His Majesty I shall in due time give a full answer to that so that it shall rise up in judgement against him to aggravate his offence and that in a great measure Here he exercises a Power over Life his excuse was That he procured a Pardon from my Lord Mountnorris but the Power was exercised and the Tyranny appeared to be the more He would first sentence him to death and then rejoyce in his Power that he might say There remains no more but my command to the Provost Marshal to do execution To exercise a power over his life and to abuse him afterwards is very high but no thanks to him that the sentence of death was not executed it was the Grace and Goodness of His Majesty that would not suffer my Lord Mountnorris a person of that Eminence to be put to death against Law But the other was hanged and as appears against Law and though my Lord pretends the party was burnt in the hand yet that was not proved nor material and for him to do this in time of Peace when the Courts of Justice were open it argues a desire in his Breast to arrogate a Power above Law And in truth I may not omit some observations that my Lord made this day He hopes His Majesty would be pleased to grant him a Pardon I perceive he harboured in this thoughts that he might hang the Kings Subjects when he would and then get a Pardon of course for it The Lord bless me from his jurisdiction My Lords give me leave to goe back again here is Power over the Lives and Liberties of the Subject but he exercised likewise a Tyrannical Power over his Estate Your Lordships may be pleased to remember the fourth Article where he judges my Lord of Cork's Estate in neither Church-land nor Plantation-land and therefore had no pretence of a Jurisdiction for it is a Lay Fee divolved by Act of Parliament to the Crown yet he deprives him of his possession which he had continued for Twenty nine years upon a Paper-Petition without rules of Law And whereas my Lord of Cork went about to redeem himself the Law being every man's inheritance and that which he ought to enjoy he tels him He will lay him by the heels if he withdraw not his Process and so when he hath judged him against an express Act of Parliament and Instructions and bound up a great Peer of the Realm he will not suffer him to redeem that wrong without a threat of laying him by the heels and he will not have Law nor Lawyers question his Orders and would have them all know an Act of State should be equal to an Act of Parliament which are words of that nature that higher cannot be spoken to declare an intention to proceed in an Arbitrary way The next was in my Lord Mountnorris his Case and Rolstone And here I must touch my Lord with misrepetition Rolstone preferred a Petition to my Lord Deputy my Lord Deputy himself judges his Estate and deprived him of his possession though he cannot produce so much as one example or precedent though if he had it would not have warranted an illegal action but he cannot produce a precedent that ever any Deputy did determine concerning a mans private Estate and if he hath affirmed it he proved it not some Petitions have been preferred to him but what they be non constat But though never any knew the Deputy alone to determine matters of Land yet he did it To the Seventh Article we produce no Evidence but my Lord of Strafford cannot be content with that but he must take upon him to make defence for that which is not insisted upon as a charge but since he will do so I refer it to the Book in print where he determines the Inheritance of a Nobleman in that Kingdom that is my Lord Dillon by a Case falsly drawn and contrary to his consent and though he deprives him not of his possession yet he causes the Land to be measured out and it is a danger that hangs over his head to this day And had we not known that we had matter enough against my Lord of Strafford this should have risen in judgement against him but I had not mentioned it now if he had not mentioned it
himself The Eighth Article contains several charges as that of my Lord Chancellor How he imprisoned him upon a Iudgement before himself and the Council how he inforced the Seal from him when he had no authority nay though it were excepted by his Patent that he should no way dispose of it but he looked not to Authority further than might make way to his Will Another concerns the prime Earl of that Kingdom my Lord of Kildare whom he imprisoned and kept close prisoner contrary to the Kings express command for his deliverance and in his answer my Lord acknowledges it but sayes That that command was obtained from the King upon a mis-information These things I would not have mentioned if he had passed them over but since he gives them in give me 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 believe little to my Lords advantage But your Lordships I think do 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 Lord Deputy and Council for the very Estate your Lordships remember how this came in judgment 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 himself that was willing to accept the Money not to decline the way that he was in by Petition Five hundred pound more will do him no hurt to carry into England with him and yet without examination of a Witness 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 Prophecy for the man had five hundred pounds gain above the Contract with my Lady Hibbots But after the Lands were sold for Seven thousand pounds 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 bargain for Three thousand pounds and to gain Four thousand pounds presently this you see proved by Hibbots the party and by Mr. Hoy the Son of the Lady Hibbots So that here is a determination of a Cause before the Council-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 unlawful jurisdiction over the Land and Estates of the Subject I know not what is In his answer to this case he did open it yet whether he mistook or no I know not that he had a Letter from the King but he produces none in evidence and that is another mis-recital I am sorry he should mis-recite and fix it upon the Person of His Sovereign 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 Down and Conner whereby he gives power to him and his Officers to apprehend any of the Kings Subjects that appeared not upon Process out of his Ecclesiastical Courts expresly contrary to Law and your Lordships have heard how miserably the Kings Subjects were used by this Warrant as hath been proved by a Gentleman of Quality Sir Iames Mountgomery And howsoever he pretends it was called in it was three whole years in execution before it was called in and though he pretends his Predecessors did ordinarily grant Warrants of that nature yet he proves no such thing My Lord Primate was examined and he says that Bishop Mountgomery did tell him there was such a Warrant and one Witness more speaks 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 universal and spread over the face of that Kingdom that was under his jurisdiction and that is in the tenth Article which concerns the Customs where he doth impose upon the Kings Subjects a Rate and Tax against Law and enforces them to pay it or else punishes them for it which is expresly an arrogating to himself 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 Majesty so it is likewise an exercise of a Tyrannical Jurisdiction over his Subjects That it is a fraud to His Majesty it plainly appears for the King lost exceedingly by it whereas before the Rent afforded 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 year and likewise the Custom of London-derry Colerane and Knockfergus for which the King had reserved 1700 l. a year besides the moity of the seizures 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 year he and his sharers received 39000 l. and in the last year 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 Customs It is true he says The King hath five eighth parts but it was but within these two years 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 believe we 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 do my Lord of Strafford no injury but I tell you how the proof stands It was a Book of Rates framed before he came to the farm for the Book of Rates was in March and the Date of his Assignment was 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 heels of another and I beseech you observe cui bono the Book of
to Sir William Pennyman in pursuance of which he made his Warrant That it was the assent of the Lords of the great Council that this Money should be levied and taking all together whether it fixes it not upon him to be the Author 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 behalf of the Commons And now give me leave to put your Lordships in mind of some Evidences offered by my Lord Strafford himself in his Answer and in the passages of his Defence for his clearing and justification but tending directly to his condemnation I will enter upon some passages he mentioned to day and often before When he is charged with invading the Estates of the Peers of the kingdom of Ireland and determining them upon Paper Petitions in an Arbitrary way your Lordships have heard him speak it before and repeat it this day That he did it out of compassion for the more expeditious proceeding on behalfe of the poor against these mighty But then my Lords I beseech you compare some other part of his proceedings Your Lordships remember the business of the Flax which concerns the poor wholly and universally and if compassion had been the rule and direction of his actions towards the poor surely this would have been a just cause to have commiserated them in this case but he exercised his power over them and over them wholly and over them universally and therefore it shews it is not his compassion to the poor nor respect to the rich or mighty that will any way restrain or obstruct his ways to his own Will And thefore you may see what truth there is in his answer by comparing one part of the charge with another when the business of the Flax brought that calamity upon the Kings Subjects that thousands of them perished for lack of Bread and dyed in Ditches Secondly Your Lordships have often heard him use a Rhetorical insinuatian wondring that he should be charged with words and they strained so high as to be made Treason to question his Life and Posterity though the words might be spoken unadvisedly or in discourse or by chance Your Lordships remember the Fifth Article touching his proceedings against my Lord Mountnorris where words were spoken in an ordinary discourse at dinner and slight ones God knows of no consequence at all such as another man would scarce have harkened after and yet my Lord extends them to the taking away of my Lord Mountnorris his life gets a sentence of death against him and that against Law with a high hand in such a manner as I think your Lordships have not heard the like and therefore I beseech you compare one part of his Answer with another and see how ready he is to make use of any thing that may excuse himself and yet when he comes to act his power you see his exercise of it You have heard how he magnifies his Zeal for advancing the Kings Benefit and Revenue and his care of his Service and would shelter and protect himself under it to justify an exorbitant action but if your Lordships call to mind the business of the Customs for Tobacco which in truth were the Kings right and due and a great profit was thereby advanced and he trusted to advance it The King must loose of his former Rents in the case of Custom and received a small Rent in the case of Tobacco my Lord himself in the mean time imbursing such vast sums of Money where is then the discharge of his Trust where is his care to advance the Kings Rents to increase his Revenue Compare that part of his Answer with this and see what credit is to be given to his affirmation My Lords throughout the passages of his discourse he insinuates and never more than this day with the Peers of the Realm magnifying them almost to Idolatry and yet my Lords when he was in his Kingdom in Ireland and had power over them what respect shewed he then to the Peers of the Kingdom when he judged some to death trampled upon others in misery committed them to prison and seized on their Estates where then was the Peerage he now magnifies And to shew it was an insinuation for his own advantage you may remember when there was an unlawful Act to be committed that is the levying of Money in the North What regard had he then to the Peers of the Kingdom when he comes to justify and boulster up High Treason it self under the name and authority of the Great Council where most of the Peers of the Realm then were and so by this time I know what credit your Lordships give to his words spoken when he lies under your Mercy and Power but what do I speak of the Peers of the Kingdom and his using of them My Lords he spared not his Sovereign His Majesty in His whole Defence for being charged with offences of a high nature he justifies those offences under the pretence and under the authority of His Majesty our Gracious King and Sovereign even Murther it self in the Case of Denwit and my Lord Mountnorris Treason it self in the Fifteenth Article by a Command in Ireland and in the Seven and twentieth by a pretended authority from His Majesty in the face of His People he justifies my Lord Mountnorris his sentence by a Letter from His Majesty Denwits Sentence by a Commission from His Majesty and he read three or four clauses to that purpose My Lords my Lord of Strafford doth very well know and if he doth not know it I have a Witness to produce against him which I will not examine but refer it to his own Conscience that is The Petition of Right that the Kings Servants are to serve him according to Law and no otherwise he very well knew if an unlawful act be committed especially to a degree of Treason and Murder the Kings Authority and Warrant produced is no justification at all So then my Lords to mention the Kings name to justify an unlawful act in that way can do him no good and his own understanding knows it may do the King harm if we had not so Gracious a King that no such thing can do harm unto But my Lords to produce the Kings Warrant to justify his actions under his Patent and Command what is it else but so far as in him lies in the face of his people to raise a cloud and exhale a vapour To interpose betwixt the King and his Subjects whereby the splendor of his Glory and Justice cannot be discovered to his people My Lords what is it else when the people make complaint against the Ministers that should execute justice of their oppression and slavery and bondage For the Minister when he is questioned to justify this under the Kings Authority what is it I say but as much as in that Minister lies
You are acquitted before God and Men You have an Army in Ireland which You may Imploy here to Reduce this Kingdom or some words to this effect And Sir Henry Vane added That he desires to speak clearly to it It is true My Lord of Strafford said these words You may But by that he the Examinant cannot say it was intended but that the words were spoken and if it were the last hour he is to speak it is the Truth to his best Remembrance Being Asked on the several Motions of my Lord of Clare and my Lord Savil Whether by this Kingdom he meant the Kingdom of England or Scotland and Whether it was meant That he might imploy the Army in England or in Ireland because he said The Army might be there imployed He Answered That he shall as near as he can And because he would have-Truth appear he shall desire That if in this Case any word fall which may be uncouth in the Sence they would resort to his Examinations for there it remains under his Hand and Oath But to his best remembrance he thinks neither then nor there were used But Your Majesty hath an Army in Ireland You may Imploy to reduce this Kingdom But far be it from him the Examinant to Interpret them He tells their Lordships the words and no other Being directed by the Lord Steward to repeat what he had spoken He Answered That he shall plainly and clearly do it These words were spoken as my Lord of Northumberland hath testified at the Committee of Eight for the Scotch Affairs It was an occasion of a Debate Whether an Offensive or a Defensive War with the Kingdom of Scotland That on some Debate then some being of Opinion for a Defensive some for an Offensive War he did say the words related as he conceives That in a Discourse the Earl of Strafford said these words or words to this effect Your Majesty having tryed all wayes and refused in this case of extream necessity and for the Safety of Your Kingdom and People You are loose and absolved from all Rules of Government You are acquitted before God and Men You have an Army in Ireland You may imploy it to reduce this Kingdom Being Asked How long this was after the Parliament was Dissolved He Answered He cannot tell the time but it was suddenly after or within few dayes after the dissolution of the Parliament Being Asked on my Lord of Clares motion Whether these words You have an Army in Ireland did immediately follow these words You are Absolved c. He Answered That to his best remembrance it did interpose and my Lord of Strafford did speak it once or twice And to his best remembrance at first it was agitated to press the Offensive War for there were divers Reasons given as the Kingdom stood then that there should be no Offensive War and he must speak clearly and plainly he the Examinant did move for a Defensive War For the Subjects of England how they stood affected to this War they knew and besides a breach of a Parliament he thought it would but induce an ill effect On these Controversions the words were spoken Here Mr. Whitlock observed That these words were spoken in England on this occasion Of the Kings trying His People c. which cannot be intended any other place but England where the Parliament was broken and where the King had tried his People Being Asked on the motion of the Earl of Southampton Whether he sayes positively my Lord of Strafford did say these words or words to that effect or whether to his best remembrance He Answered That he speaks positively either those words or words to that effect The Earl of Clare desiring further satisfaction to the Question formerly proposed on this Motion Whether he meant by this Kingdom the Kingdom of England or the Kingdom of Scotland The Lord Steward put his Lordship in mind That Sir Henry Vane testifies to the Words not to the Interpretation And Mr. Maynard said The Question is put Whether this Kingdom be this Kingdom And so Mr. Whitlock said They should conclude their Evidence conceiving the last words spoken to be very fully proved and by connexion with those other words proved before he thinks it is very clear and manifest That my Lord of Strafford had a strong Design and Endeavour to subvert and change the Fundamental Laws and Government of England and to bring in an Army upon us to force this Kingdom to submit to an Arbitrary Power That he shall not trouble their Lordships with repitition of words nor with the Application of them for indeed they be above Application and to aggravate them were to allay them they have in themselves more bitterness and horror then he is able to express and so he left them to their Lordships consideration and application expecting my Lord of Straffords Answer to them Only he desired their Lordships in one point to hear what Mr. Treasurer can say further concerning the breach of the last Parliament and what Words and Messages he heard of during the sitting of that Parliament procured by my Lord of Strafford unless their Lordships will reserve that till the rest of the Witnesses come to morrow morning and then they shall be ready to produce all relating to that point together Whereupon liberty was granted for the reserving of them accordingly My Lord of Strafford did hereupon crave of their Lordships leave to recollect his Notes being as he said a little Distracted how to give Answer to these things for diverse Articles are mingled together which will make his Answer not so clear as otherwise he had hoped to have made it but trusts he shall do it still He desires leave to Answer Article by Article and how much horror soever this Gentleman is pleased to say there is in these words he trusts before he goes out of the Room to make it appear that though there may be error of Judgment yet nothing that may give offence when the Antecedents and Consequents are brought together and that he shall give such an account that whether or no their Lordships will clear him as to the Charge of an Indiscreet Man he knows not but as for Treason to the King and His People he shall give clear satisfaction that no such thing was spoken or intended His Lordship desired He might be favoured with the sight of my Lord of Northumberlands Examinations But this Mr Glyn opposed and said His Lordship being to Answer to matter of Fact let him first say how it stands and then prove it To which my Lord of Strafford Answered That in truth they make much more of it then he did for he trusts by the blessing of Almighty God to give the Answer of an honest Man to all Objections he will not say of a discreet Man and once for all he humbly besought their Lordships and so he knows in their Wisdom and Judgment they will to
look what is proved and not to what is enforced on those proofs from these Gentlemen For words pass and may be easily mistaken but their Lordships having regard only to what is Deposed and that they were to guide themselves by that After some Respit my Lord of Strafford began to make his Defence as followeth That it will be very hard for him to know in what order to Answer all the matters objected against him But the best course he can take for his own direction and he trusts it shall not be displeasing to their Lordships will be to go over the Articles as they lie in order and under every Article to give his own Proof and to repeat all the Proofs prest against him for that Article The other day an end was made of the 19 th Article but then likewise the 20 th was entred into so the middle part of that Charge is answered already touching words by him spoken at his last being in Ireland and to that he shall not need farther to Answer But here is in it that he did labour to Perswade Incite and Provoke to an Offensive War against the said Subjects of the Scotch Nation and to have been by his Counsels Actions and Endeavors a Principal Incendiary To prove this they have offered first my Lord Traquairs Depositions and he craved leave to represent to their Lordships How he conceived his testimony was delivered viz. That upon a Relation of his the Lord Traquair made at the Council-Board he gave his Opinion as other their Lordships did and that it was condescended to by the Council-Board That if the Comissioners of Scotland gave not satisfaction that then the King might put himself in a posture of War so that he gave only an Opinion as others did And that is proved as he conceives by my Lord Traquair who among other parts of his Testimony recited sayes That there was no difference in the main amongst the Votes So that by both the Testimonies it plainly appears that his Opinion was no other then the Opinion of the rest And certainly as that Opinion can never be charged on any of the rest of the Lords in any kind whatsoever so he trusts it shall never be charged upon him for he thinks he is in a great safety and security when he hath the concurrence of so many wiser persons then himself in the Opinion he then deliver'd and that is for so much as was spoken at the Council-Board And if it were needful as he conceives it is not to examine the persons that were there it should appear he delivered no Vote at all at that time but the Vote of the Board But it is clear in their own proofs and their Lordships will he hopes justifie him in their Judgments when it comes to Sentence The next thing is the Deposition of my Lord Morton concerning something spoken at York at a Council there called he met before the Assembly of the Great Council of the Peers where he conceives and as he remembers he the Earl of Strafford spake something to this sence That the unreasonable Demands of Subjects in Parliament was a ground for the King to put Himself into a posture of War When this had been resolved by the Council of England he conceives it no great Crime for him to say so For upon the Question put on those Demands it was said That it was fit for the King to put Himself into a Posture of War and into a Condition to reduce them by Force if they could not be brought by fair means to do their Allegiance and Duty to the King There is something more that my Lord Morton sayes That he the Earl of Strafford should say It was a sufficient Cause without hearing their Reasons to Declare a War This he my Lord of Strafford conceives under favour is but a single Testimony And my Lord Morton gives himself the Answer for he sayes the Reasons were not related when he was present and therefore in that my Lord of Strafford conceives there is little matter My Lord Traquair sayes one thing more and that is That the reasons were left to be alledged by the Scotch Commissioners It is true they were so And my Lord Morton sayes that he the Defendant should say It was not matter of Religion that was the business but they struck at the root of Government and were to be punished by force He further adds by way of Defence That if he thought they struck at the root of Government he thinks every man will say he had reason to say it was fit to reduce them by force But he said he should speak further of these things anon when he should represent what Words are in respect of Deeds and what difference there is between what a man Sayes and Does in case of Treason But under favour these two last are no part of his Charge though he answers them for he is not charged with speaking any thing to the King at York the night before the Great Council but only with speaking at the Council-Board on my Lord Traquair's relation and this he conceives is all they bring against him to convince him of the 20 th Article saving only the testimony of my Lord of Northumberland and of Mr. Treasurers And Mr. Treasurer says That it being agitated whether a Defensive or an offensive War were to be undertaken he was for a defensive and my Lord of Strafford for an offensive War He the Deponent cannot conceive how this can conduce to make a Treason If the War was resolved on the Debate whether an offensive or defensive shall not be Treasonable admit it to be as Mr. Treasurer sayes Mr. Treasurer alledged his reason and he the Earl of Strafford alledged his and God forbid it should be Treason in one or any other they both doing their Duties and delivering their Consciences according to their oaths It was resolved as fit to reduce them and whether by an offensive or defensive War being a free Council they were bound to deliver Judgements to a Master that was so wise as to know what was best for his service and so to dispose as he should think fit My Lord of Northumberland sayes That he the Earl of Strafford advised to go on vigorously in an offensive War Admit he did say so it is not Treason it was a free debate many reasons were given and for him to give his reasons one way was as free from Crime or Offence as for them to give their reasons another way They say that as a chief Incendiary of the troubles between His Majesty and the Scotch he seized divers Scotch Ships when he was in Ireland and for this they have only Mr. Barnwels Testimony and all he says is That Sir Robert Loftus told him he had a Warrant to seize the Ships and they did seize them accordingly but by whose Warrant he doth not know But if your Lordships will know by whose Warrant it was he shall give the