of England without any election by or Commission from the people with the true grounds thereof 2ly That the judicial power Judicature and Jugdements in Parliament belong wholly and soly to the King and House of Lords not to the Commons House and that in all criminal civil or ecclesiastical causes whatsoever proper for Parliaments to decide both in the Cases of Commoners and Clergy men as well as Peers who are onely triable both in and out of Parliaments by their Peers here plentifully evinced In debating these two points I have briefly proved the Antiquity of our Lords and Nobles sitting â—oting in all Parliamentary Great Councils both under our British Saxon Danish Norman and English Kings before any Knights Citizens or Burgesses were admitted into our Councils or Parliaments which having more particularly demonstrated by undeniable presidents in my Historical Collection of all the antient Great Councils and Parliaments of England in my Antiquity triumphing over Novelty p. 9 10.55 to 85. and in my 1 2 3. parts of an Historical Seasonable Vindication and Collection of the fundamental Rights Privileges Laws c. of all English Freemen printed 1655. 1656. 1657. wherein all the Great Councils and Parliamentary assemblies from Brute to William the Conquerer are Chronologically collected and epitomized I shall referr the Reader thereunto for full satisfaction of the Antiquity of our Parliamentary Councils and the Lords constant sitting voting judging in them 2ly Because many of our late Historians Antiquaries Lawyers and others derive our Parliament as now constituted and the calling of Knights Citizens and Burgesses to them from the Parliamentary Council held at Salisbury in the 16. year of King Henry the 1. or at least from King Henry the 2. his reign which the forged Imposture stiled Modus tenendi Parliamentum and Sir Edward Cook seduced by it would advance as high as Edward the Confessor as if there had been Knights Citizens and Burgesses usually summoned to all Parliaments in his reign and ever since I have herein given you an account out of our antientest and best Historians of all the Parliaments and Proceedings in them both under King Henry the 1. 2. and most others under their immediate Successors infallibly proving there were no Knights Citizens and Burgesses in the Parliaments held under either of them and that their first summons to Parliaments for ought appears was but in 49 H. 3. not before since which they have been usually summoned but yet in a various manner 3ly I have evidenced by many memorable Histories Presidents Records in all ages the most whereof were never mentioned by any who have formerly written of Parliaments that the Judicature in our Parliaments resides solely in the King and House Lords not only in all Criminal cases of Lords Peers Commons and in all Civil and ecclesiastical businesses Appeals and Writs of Error there descided but likewise in all cases of Elections breach or allowance of privilege of Parliament and misdemeanours relating to the House of Commons themselves their Speakers Members and menial Servants To which I shall only add That the late King in his printed Answer to the 19. Propositions of both Houses June 1642. thus declares That the LORDS being trusted with a Iudicatory power are an excellent Screen and Bank between the Prince and People to assist each against any incroachments of the other and by just judgements to preserve that Law which ought to be the Rule betwéen every one of the thrée 4ly I have herein for the benefit of all Students Professors of the Law and others who take all Sir Edward Cooks Opinions Records for undoubted Oracles without examination and swallow down all his mistakes discovered many of his gross Errors oversights misrecitals and pervertings of Records in matters relating to our Parliaments evidenced his much magnified Modus tenendi Parliamentum to be a meer late Imposture full of mistakes concerning the Antiquity and Judicature of the Commons House and refuted Sir Edward Cooks mistaken Law as in other points so in this That the Kings general writ of summons to any Knight or Esquire to the House of Lords by the name of Knight or Esquire without any special clause of creating him a Baron or Lord in the Writ doth neither ennoble himself nor his heirs nor make them Lords and Barons though they sit in the Lords House as he asserts it doth unless they held by Barony of the King before and were Barons by their Tenure the general writs of summons stiling them only Knights and Esquires as before not Lords or Barons and having no clause in them that will amount to the creation of a Lord much less of a Baron which Title or word Baron is not mentioned in the Writ nor doth it affix their Lordship or Barony to any particular place as all Writs and Patents that create men Lords or Barons use to do For the further clearing of this point you may observe that the writs of summons in the Clause Rolls do sometimes stile the persons summoned Barons thus all or most of the writs of summons from 25. E. 3. to 1 E. 4. are directed Willielmo Baroni de Graystocke Chivaler Radulpho Johanni Radulpho Baroni de Graystocke Sometimes the writs stile them Lords as Johanni Talbot Domino de Furnival in 4 H. 5 c. In Ann 25 27 28 29 31 33 38 H. 6. and 2 E. 4. the writs are Henrico Peircy DOMINO de Poymiger DOMINO de Poynings DOMINO de FERRARIIS de Groby Thomae DOMINO de Roos Richardo Woodvil Militi DOMINO de Rivers Roberto Hungerford Mil DOMINO de Mollings Willielmo Beuchamp DOMINO de Sto Amando Jacobo de Fynes DOMINO de Say et Seal Edwardo Gray Mil. DOMINO de Groby H. DOMINO de Poynings Johanni Sturton Mil. DOMINO de Sturton Johanni DOMINO de Clinton Edoardo Nevil DOMINO de Burgaveny Willielmo Bourchier Mil. DOMINO de Fitzwarren Henrico Bromflet DOMINO de VESSEY Thomae Grey DOMINO de Richmond Tho. Percie Mil. DOMINO de Egremont Ricardo Wells DOMINO de Willoughby Mil Richardo Fynes DOMINO de Dacre Though in most antient and later writs the word Dominus is omitted and the name of the Barony only used Somtimes there is a special clause of Creation in the writ it self as in Clause 27 H. 6. m. 26. dorso Henrico Bromfleet Mil creaâ—ing him the heirs males of his body lawfully begotten Barons of Vessey These writs which thus stile thâ— Barons Lords create them such by special clauses as patents doe will make those Knights and Esquires Lords or Barons who were none before but a General writ which terms them only Knights or Esquires and gives them neither the Title of Lords or Barons nor creates them such cannot make themselves or their posterity Lords or Barons unless they held by Barony and then they are Barons only by Tenure not Writ This is clear as I conceive by the
House nor any Speaker of their Houâ—e that we find in History or Record till 51 E. 3. Therefore doubtlesse they had no judicial power or jurisdiction 4ly When they became a House and had a Speaker they could neither chuse their Speaker in any Parliament without a command to and license first granted them by the King Lord Chancellor or the person implyed by the King to shew the causes of summoning the Parliament who gave them a command to elect their Speaker and then to present him to the King and Lords for their approbation of him at the time prescribed them who had then power to allow or disallow their Speaker and to order them to elect another then or afterwards incase of unfitness sickness imprisonment or any other just ground or excuse as our Parl. Rolls and others attest If then the Commons can neither elect their own Speakers nor approve nor remove them but by the Kings and Lords approbation who may discharge them upon just grounds and order rhem to elect others in their places and that against their wills as in the case of Thorpe hereafter cited Then certainly the judicature in all other cases as well as this of their very Speakers and Members too resided still in the King and Lords and was not communicated to the Commons House 5ly The Commons House inability to administer an Oath to any person in any case which the Lords alone have power to doe in Parliament 6ly Their Petitions Articles of complaint and Impeachments in all Parliaments delivered and sent up to the Lords against Delinquents in Criminal causes as well of Commons as Peers Clergy men as secular persons and their praying the Lord to judge and give sentence against them 7ly Their prosecuting and giving in evidence against all sorts of Deliquents at the Lords Bar as accusers 8ly Their standing always in such cases and that bare headed in the Lords House as Prosecutors Informers Grand-Jurymen whiles the Lords alone fit and that covered and only give pronounce the iudgement and that in the Comons absence for the most part not presence 9ly Their having no voice or share at all in the hearing examining debating reversing erronious Judgements in other Courts upon Writs of Error brought in Parliament but the Lords alone 10ly The Kings Judges not sitting amongst them but only in the House of Peers to authorize and assist them in their judgements are all infallible arguments and clear irrefragable demonstrations that the Judicatory or judicial power of Parliaments was never communicated to the Commons House upon their first admittance into Parliament nor since but remained intirely fully in the King and Lords alone as it did before That this is so in truth I have the express acknowledgement and confession of the whole House of Commons themselves long since in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 79. remaining on record to all Posterity with the Kings and Lords concurrent resolution both from the time of the Commons first admission and for all succeeding ages The Commons in this Parliament November 3. made their Protestation in the same manner they had done in the beginning of the Parliament and more over shewed to the King Come les Ioggementz du Parlement apperteignent soulement au Roy et Seignieur et nient as Communes c. That the Judgements of Parliament appertained only to the King and to the Lords and not unto the Commons And thereupon they praâ—ed the King out of his special grace to shew unto them the said Iudgements and the cause of them that so no Record migâ—t be made in Pâ—rliamenâ— against the said Commons which are or shall be parties to any judgement given or hereafter to be given in Parliament without that privity Whereunto the Archbishop of Canterbury gave them this answer by the Kings commandment That the Commons themselves are Petitioners and demanders Et que le Roy et les seigniours de tout temps ont eues et averont de droit les juggement in Parliament en manere come mesmes les Communes sont monstrez and that the King and Lords from all times have had for times past and shall have for time to come of right the Iudgements in Parliament in manner as the Commons themselves have shewed Saving that in Statutes to be made â—or in Grants and Subsidies or in such things as are to be doâ—e for the common profit of the REALM the KING will have especially their advice and assent By this memorable Record in Parliament it is apparent by the Commons own confession First That the Judgments in Parliament even in cases of Commoners themselves and Members of the Commons House as well as Peers appertain only to the King and to the Lords in the Affirmative Secondly That they appertain not to the Commons in the Negative Thirdly A Confession both of the Commons King and Lords That they have from all times in all ages before that Parliament appertained to the King and Lords and that of right not by usurpation or connivence Fourthly An express order and resolution that the King and Lord shall alwayes kéep and hold this their Right of Iudicature in all times to come without admitting the Commons to share therein upon this their Petition as not fit to be granted them Fifthly That if the Commons should be admitted at any time to be parties or privies to the Judgements in Parliaments as they then desired it would be meerly out of the Kings special Grace Sixthly That the special reasons ends of the Kings summoning the Commons to Parliaments at the first and ever since were only these especially 1. to have their advice in Statutes to be made 2. in Grants or Subsidies 3. in such things as are to be done for the common profit of the Realm not to give them the least share right or interest in the Judicature or Judgements of Parliament as it is the supremest Court of Justice The Judicial Power and the Judgements in Parliament being never transferred in part or whole by the King and Lords to the Commons House but intirely reserved to themselves as before their admission inâ—o our Parliaments as I have proved it follows inevitably from thence 1. That all Judgements given by the Commons House alone or by any of their Committees of Sequestrations Examinations plundered Ministers c. without the Lords are meerly void and null in Law being Coram non judice and may be justly questioned and vacated by the Lords upon appeal or complaint as Nullities 2. That the House of Commons have no more right or power to judge or vote down the Lords House or question or null their Judgements upon appeals to the Commons from them as Lilburn and Overton pretend they may than the Grand or Petty Jury have to Vote down the Judges and Justices of Assize or Sessions from the Bench or to reverse or repeal their Judgements and Orders Or the Common Council of London to
4. n. 19 20 21. upon these and other Petitions of forcible disseisins and for imprisoning the Abbot of Meniham in Devonshire THE KING LORDS adjudged that this Sir Philip Courtney should be bound to his good behaviour and committed to the Tower for his contempt From which records it is evident First that Members of the Commons house may be complained and petitioned against for misdemeanors and put to answer before the King and Lords in Parliament and there fined and judged not before the Commons house and that this was the antient way of proceeding Secondly that the Commons cannot suspend or discharge any of their fellow-Commoners or Knights from sitting in Parliament but only the King and Lords in full Parliament in whom the power of Judicature rests much less then can they expell or eject any of their Members by their own authority without the King and Lords concurrent consents No more than one Justice of peace Committee-man or Militia-man can un-Justice or â—move another since Par in parem non habet Imperium neither in civil military ecclesiastical nor domestical affaiâ— Thirdly that the power of restoring readmitting aâ—ended Member of the Commons house belongs not to the Commons themselves but to the King and Lords to whom the Commons in this case addressed themselves by petition for Courtneys readmission after his submission of the complaints against him to the arbitrement of those Members to whom the King and Lords referred the same In the Parliament of 17 Rich. 2. num 23. It was accorded and resolved by the King and Lords at the Complaint petition request of the Commons that Roger Swinerton who was endited of the death of one of their companions Iohn de Ipstones Knight of the said Parliament for the County of Stafford slain in coming towards the said Parliament by the said Roger should not be delivered out of prison wherein he was detained for this cause by bail mainprise or any other manner until he had made answer thereunto and should be delivered by the Law The Commons alone by their own power having no authority to make such an order even for the murther of one of their own Members without the King and Lords who made this ordinance at their request I find this objected against King Richard the 2. in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 37. That he frequently sent his Mandates to Sherifs to return certain persons named only by himself and not freely chosen by the people to be knights of Shires thereby to effect his own ends and oppress the people with Subsidies But yet I find not in all his reign any one Knight thus unduly returned questioned by the Commons or suspended the House much less ejected by them or by the King and Lords upon the Commons complaint thereof unto them A clear evidence they had then no such power to eject their Members for being unduly elected returned as how they use In the Parliament of 20 R. 2. n. 14 15 16 17. The King being highly offended with the Commons for receiving Haxyes Bill said that the Commons thereby had committed an offence against him his dignity and liberty the which he willed THE LORDS to declare the next day to the Commons Who thereupon delivering up the Bill came fort with before the King shewing themselves very sorrowfull declaring to him that they meant no harm and submitting themselves to the King herein most humbly craved his pardon Whereupon the Chancellor by the Kings commandment declared That the King held them excused and the King by mouth declared how many wayes they were bound unto him Lo here the whole House of Commons submit themselves to the King in the House of Lords as Judges of them and their misdemeanors in Parliament and crave pardon for offending him In the Parliament of 2 H. 4. n. 45 46. The Commons house petitioning the King that the Act for his moderation of the Statute against Provisions might be examined for as much as the time was recorded otherwise than was agreed by them The King granted thereunto by protestation that the same should be no example where after Examination by the Bishops and Lords they affirmed the same to be duly entred which the King also remembred Whereupon the COMMONS the same day for this their misinformation came into the Lords House and knéeling before the King beseeched the King to pardon them if happily they through ignorance had or should offend him which the King granted Here the Bishops and Lords are Judges of the Commons misinformation misentry of an Act and the King of their Offence against him in Parliament by this misinformation which he pardons them upon their humble submission and no doubt might have punished them for it by the Lords assent and advice had he pleased So farr are they from being Judges in Parliament that themselves may there be judged if they therein offend as all their Speakers usual protestations and petitions to the King when presented evidence That the Commons may have liberty of speech and that if any Members in the House of Commons in communication and reasoning should speak more largely than of duty they ought to doe that all such offences may be pardoned which the King may punish if there be cause unâ—eâ—â—â— he pardon it of record upon the Speakers Protestation before hand Sir Edward Cook himself as well as the Parliament Rolls and experience informs us of these particulars touching the Speakers of the Commons House in Parliament their chiefest Member 1. That though the Commons are to chuse their own Speaker and that by the kings special command and license to them in every Parliament since they had one not with due â— who likewise prescribes them the time when to present him yet the use is as in the Conge de eslâ—yer of a Bishop that the king doth name a discreet and learned man to them whom the Commons do eâ—ect pro formâ— only because he cannot be appointed for them without their election being their mouth and â—usted by them 2ly That after the Commons choice the King may refuse him 3ly That after he is chosen he must be presented to the king by the Commons in the Lordâ— House for his approbation and confirmation in that plaâ—s the Commons sending up some of their Members to acquaint the Lords Spiritual and Temporal that according to the Kings command they had chosen such a one their Speaker and are ready to present him at the â—me appointed 4ly That where he is thus presented he is in disable himself for so weighty a service and to make sutâ— to the King to be discharged and a more sufficient man chosen in his place To which I shall adde that upon this excuse the king may discharge him if he please and command the Commons to elect another as King Henry the â— did discharge Sir John Popham when presented Speaker to him by the Commons in the Parliament
of 26 H. 6. n. â— upon his excuse Whereupon William Tresham was elected in his place presented to and approved by the King n. 7. 5ly That when he is elected and approved yet in case of sickness and infirmity he may be removed and another chosen and presented in his place and that upon the Commons special Petition to the king in his behalf out of his meer Grace to discharge him and accept of another Thus in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 62 63 64. Sir John Cheyney Knight after his election and approbation was discharged and Sir John Dorew Knight elected presented and admitmitted by the Kings license to be Speaker in his room So in the Parliament of 1 H. 5. n. n. 7 9 10.11 Will. Sturton Esquire after he was chosen and allowed Speaker was removed for grievous sickness and John Doreward chosen in his place At the Parliament holden 15 H. 6. n. 10 27. Sir John Tirril knight was chosen and allowed yet removed for grievous sickness and William Beerell chosen in his place and that by the Kings special license and approbation to whom all those new Speakers were again presented by the Commons for his royal assent thereto 6ly That if he be altered by his Majesty by assent of the Council Lords as the entry is in the Parliament Rolls then he maketh a protestation or Petition to the king which consisteth of three parts 1. That the Commons in this Parliament may have freedom of speech as of right and custom they have used and all their antient and just Privileges and Liberties allowed them which the King usually granted with this caution That he hoped or doubted not That the Members would not speak any unfitting words or abuse this freedom and privilege for abuse whereof some have been committed Prisoners to the Tower by our Kings and Queens command 2ly That if he shall commit any Error in any thing he shall deliver in the name of the Commons no fault may be imputed to the Commons and that he may resort again to them for declaration of his good intent and that his Error may be pardoned 3ly That as often as necessity for his Majesties service and the good of the Common-wealth shall require he may by direction of the House of Commons have access to his Majesty If then the King hath the sole power and jurisdiction thus to nominate approve confirm disallow refuse discharge and remove the very Speakers of the Commons House themselves and not the Commons but by and with his special license grace and royal assent yea to grant them freedom of speech and their usual Privileges and liberties every Parliament upon their Petition and to pardon theirs and their Speakers Errors and that sitting in the Lords House with their assents then doubtlesse the king and Lords alone are the sole Judges of the Speakers and all other Members of the Commons House and have the sole power to judge of their undue elections retorns misdemeanors breaches of Privileges and all other matters concerning their Membership not the Commons And if they can neither constitute elect nor remove their own Speaker for sickness or any other cause without the kings privity and consent declared in the House of Lords much lesse can they suspend seclude or eject any Member out of the House when chosen and returned by the Freeholders Citizens or Burgesses as their Attorny or Trustee in equal power with themselves without the Kings or Lords consents for any pretext of unfitness or undue election And if the king as Sir Edward Cook grants and these presidents prove may discharge the Speaker from his Office for grievous sickness and inability to discharge it I mak no question but he may likewise upon the like Petition of the Commons or Speaker discharge him of his attendance in the House or any other Member for the self same reason and grant a Writ to elect another able and fitting person in his place according to the opinion of 38 H. 8. Brooks Parliament 7. and Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts f. 16. approved by the whole House of Commons and accordingly practised in 38 H. 8. against Sir Edward Cooks bare opinion without reason to the contrary In the Parliament holden at Westminster 5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 38. Thomas Thorp his Case Item because that the Writ of Summons of Parliament returned by the Sherif of Roteland was not sufficiently nor duly returned as the Commons conceived the said Commons prayed our Lord the King and the Lords in Parliament that this matter might be duly examined in Parliament and that in case therâ— shall be default found in this matter that such a punishment might be inflicted which might become exemplary to others to offend again in the like manner Whereupon 〈◊〉 said Lord the King in full Parliament commanded the Lords in Parliament to examine the said matter and to do therein as to them should seem best in their discretions And thereupon the said Lords caused to come before them in Parliament as well the said Sherifs at William Oneby who was returned by the said Sherif for one of the Knights of the said County and Thomas Thorp who was elected in full Countie to be one of the Knights of the said Shire for the said Parliament and not returned by the said Sherif And the said parties being duly examined and their reasons well considered in the said Parliament it was agreed by the said Lords that because the said Sherif had not made a sufficienâ— return of the said Writ that he shall amend the said return and that he shall return the said Thomas for one of the said Knights as he was elected in the said County for the Parliament and moreover that the said Sherif for this default shall be discharged of his Office any committed Prisoner to the Fleeâ— and that he should make sins and ransome at the Kings pleasures â—oâ— here the Lords in Parliament at the Commons request and by the Kings command examine and give judgement in case of an undue election and retorn even without the Commons In this same Parliament Richard Cheddar Esquire a menial servant and attendant on Sir Thomas Brook chosen one of the Knights to serve in Parliament for the County of Somerset was horribly beaten wounded blemished and maimed by one John Savage Whereupon the Commons complained thereof to the King and Lords petitioning them for redress both in his particular case for the present and all others of that nature for the future that they might make fine at the Kings 〈◊〉 and render double damages to the party maimed whether Members of theirs Servants Whereupon it was ordained and established by the King and Lords that for as 〈…〉 deed was done within the time of the said Parliament that Proclamation be made where it was done that the said John appear and yield himself in the Kings Bench within a quarter of a year after the Proclamation
made and if he do not he shall be attainted of the said deed and pay to the party grieved his double damages to be taxed by the Judges of the said Bench for the time being or by Enquest if need be and also he shall make fine and ransom at the kings will which was accordingly executed as appears by 8 H. 4. f. 13 14. And moreover it is accorded in the same Parliament that likewise it be done in time to come in case like By which Petition and Act it is most apparent 1. That the King and Lords have the sole power of judging and punishing the breaches of Privilege of Parliament by batteries wounding or imprisonment and that both in the cases of Knights Citizens and Burgesses and of their menial seruants in such and the like cases 2ly That this Act gives the Commons no power at all to punish any man for breach of privilege in like case but only prescribes a certain remedy for time to come by imprisonment action double damages fine and ransom at the kings pleasure in the Kings Bench not Commons House or Parliament who are not fit to be troubled with such particular cases of privileges which would interrupt the more publike affairs Hence THE KING willing to provide for the ease and tranquillity of them that came to his Parliaments and Councils by his commandment hath ordained and established upon the Commons Petition by the Statute of 11 H. 6. c. 13. That the self same remedy proceeding damages and punishment shall be had in the Kings Bench not Commons House or Parliament as was prescribed in 5 H. 4. c. 6. against any person that shall doe any assault or affray to any Lord Spiritual or Temporal Knight of the Shire Citizen or Burgesse coming to the Kings Parliament or Council by his command How then the Commons can judge or determine such violation of privileges now against these Statutes and presidents and create themselves Judges of them transcends both my Law and reason In the Parliament of 7 H. 4. as I find in a special note though not in the Parliament Roll Sir John Tibetot the Speaker prayed que plest le Roy Seigniors That it would please THE KING AND LORDS that Robert Clifford companion of Richard Chiderough chosen knights for the County of Kent might appear for them both and doe all in both their names as if both of them were present in Parliament which the king and Lords assented to In the Parliaments of 8 H. 4. n. 83. 139. and of 11 H. 4. n. 54. Upon Petitions and complaints of the Commons to the king and Lords there were two Statutes made to prevent the abuses and false retorns of Sherifs touching the Elections of knights of Shires to inflict penalties on them by a Law which formerly were arbitrary at the kings and Lords discretion 7 H. 4. c. 15. and 11 H. 4. c. 1. The penalty inflicted by these Acts on the Sherif for a false return contrary to these Acts is only 100 l. fine to the king and such undue retorns are from thenceforth to be examined and tryed not by the Commons alone by information without Oath as now but by the Justices assigned to take assizes and that by Enquest and due examination upon trial before the said Justices which is likewise afterwards ratified by the Statutes of 6 H. 6. c. 4. 8 H. 6. c. 7. 32 H. 6. c. 15. wherof if the Sherif be found guilty he shall forfeit 100 l. to the king and the knights of Counties unduly returned shall lose their wages of the Parliament of old time accustoned not be turned out by a Committee of Privileges and others chosen in their places by the Commons Order as now And the Statutes of 1 H. 5. c 1. 6 H. 6. c. 4. 8 H. 6. c. 7. 12 H. 6. c. 2. 32 H. 6.15 touching elections of knights Citizens and Burgesses made since the former do not alter this Law nor give the House of Commons the least power or authority to judge or determin the legality or illegality of any elections but leave this to the King and Lords to redress as at first before their making and give the knights duly chosen but not returned 100 l. damages against the Sherif and Citizens and Burgesses 40 l. against Mayors and Baylifs who make false returns by way of action of Debt in the kings Courts at Westminster where the parties must sue for relief or in the Starchamber before the Kings Lords and Council as in Bronkers case Trin. 1. Eliz. not in the Commons house as these Statutes and presidents in our Law-books Dyer f. 113.168 Plowden f. 118. to 131. Old Book of Eniries f. 446 447. resolve How then the Commons are now becom sole Judges of all false returns and elections and that per legem et consuetudinem Parliamenti against all these Acts and presidents let Sir Edward Cooke and others resolve me and the intelligent when they are able not by the objected late arbitrary presidents which are of no value but by antient usage and Law of our Parliaments and solid reason which cannot be produced for to justifie these late Innovations and extravagances It is most true that in the cases of undue elections and breaches of privilege of the Commons house Members or Servants the King and Lords were antiently sole Judges not the Commons in any one case and that upon the Commons own Petitions as the premises evidence and I shall fully manifest by these ensuing punctual presidents In the Parliament of 8 H. 6. n. 39. The Commons petitioned the King for a Law to be made to prevent the manifold tumults uproars at and disorders in the election of knights of the shire by the vulgar rabble and meaner sort of people of small or no estate most busie and tumultuous in them having then a voice that the King by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal would seclude all from having voices at such elections for the future but freeholders who held 40 s. freehold by the year above all reprisals more than 40 l. a year now or upwards Which the King and Lords assented to and the Statute of 8 H. 6. c. 7. was hereupon made agreeable to this petition with that of 10 H. 6 c. 2. by like Petition in pursuance of it In this very Parliament of 8 H. 6. rot parl n. 57. One William Lake servant to William Mildred a Burgess of London was taken in execution for a Debt and committed Prisoner to the Fleet contrary to the privilege of the Commons house whereupon the Commons petitioned the King that by the advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal at the special request of the Commons he might be enlarged which the King and Lords assenting unto gave order for his release and authorized the Chancellor to appoint certain Commissioners to take him again in Execution after the Parliament ended The Commons not then claiming the least power
or jurisdiction to enlarge him or to fine or imprison those who took him in Execution as of late times they have done And in this Parliament upon the petition and supplication of the Prelates and Clergy n. 32. the King by the assent and advice of the Lords enacted the Statute of 8 H. 6. c. 1. That the Clergy and their Attendants called to the Convocation by the Kings writ should have and enjoy for ever hereafter the same liberty and immunity in going coming and tarrying as the Great men and Commonalty of England called or to be called to the Kings Parliaments have used and enjoyed they complaining to the king that they and their servants coming to the Convocation were oftentimes and commonly arrested molested and inquieted Which they had no power to redress but only the King and Lords upon their complaints thereof In the Parliament of 18 H. 6. n. 13. It was shewed to the King and the Lords Spiritual Temporal that Gilbert Hore Sherif of the County of Cambridge upon the kings writ directed to him to chuse 2. knights for that shire had made no return of any knights for that County for certain reasons therein expressed Whereupon the King by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal not the Commons house alone as now nor yet joyntly with them ordered that a New writ for electing 2. knights for that County should be directed to him and that he should make proclamation that no person should come to the election with arms or arrayed in warlike manner in disturbance of the said election and breach of the kings peace A memorable president of the Kings and Lords Jurisdiction even in point of elections In the Parliament of 23 H. 6. n. 41. The Commons petitioned the king that by the advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and at their special request it might be enacted that every Member of the Lords and Commons house who should have any assault or affray made upon him being at the Parliament or going to or coming from thence might have the like remedy at Sir Thomas Parr knight had given him in this Parliament to wit upon petition of the Commons in his behalf to the King and Lords being the same as was enacted in Chedders case 11 H. 6. c. 11. before Whereunto the king answered The Statutes therefore made shall be observed In the Parliament of 31 H. 6. rot parl n. 25 26 27 28. we have this memorable famous case touching privilege of Parliament in their very Speakers own case resolved by the Lords Thomas Thorp chief Baron was chosen Speaker of the Parliament after his election and before the Parliament which was prorogued sat he was arrested and taken in execution at the sute of the Duke of York whereupon some of the Commons were sent up by the House to the king and Lords spiritual and temporal sitting in Parliament desiring that they might enjoy all their ancient and accustomed privileges in being free from arrests and propounded the case of Thomas Thorp their Speaker to them desiring his inlargement whereupon the said Lords spiritual aad temporal not intending to hurt or impeach the privilege of the Commons but equally after the course of Law to administer Justice and to have knowledge what the Law will weigh in that behalf declared to the Justices the premises and asked of them whether the said Thomas ought to be delivered from prison by force and vertue of the said privilege of Parliament or not To the which question the chief Justices in the name of all the Justices aforesaid communication and mature deliberation had among them answered and said That they ought not to answer that question for it hath not been used aforetime that the Justices should in any wise determine the privilege of this high Court of Parliament for it is so high and mighty in his nature that it may make that Law which is not and that that is Law it may make no Law and the determination and knowledge of their privilege belongeth to the Lords of the Parliament and not to the Justices But as for declaration of proceedings in the lower Courts in such cases as writs of Supersedoas of Privilege of Parliament be brought and delivered the said chief Justice said that there be many and divers Supersedeas of privileges of Parliament brought into the Courts but there is no general Supersedeas brought to furcease all Processes for if there should be it should seem that this high Court of Parliament that ministreth all Justice and equity should let the process of the common Laws and so it should put the party plainant without remedy for so much as actions at Common Law be not determined in this high Court of Parliament And if any person that is a Member of this high Court of Parliament be arrested in such cases as be not for Treason or Felony or surety of the Peace or for condemnation before the Parliament it is used that all such persons should be released of all such arrests and make an Attorney so that they may have the freedom and Liberty freely to attend upon the Parliament After which answer and Declaration it was throughly agréed assented and concluded by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal that the said Thomas according to the Law should remain still in prison for the causes abovesaid the privilege of the Parliament or that the same Sir Thomas was Speaker of the Parliament notwithstanding And that the premises should be opened and declared to them that were comen for the Commons of this land and they should be charged and commanded in the kings name that they with all goodly hast and speed proceed to the election of another Speaker The which premiâ—es for as much as they were matters of Law by the commandement of the Lords were opened and declared to the Commons by the mouth of Walter Moyle one of the kings Sergeants at Law in the presence of the Bishop of Ely accompanyed with other Lords in notable number and there it was commanded and charged to the said Commons by the said Bishop of Ely in the kings name that they should proceed to the election of another Speaker with all goodly hast and speed so that the matters for which the king called this his Parliament might be proceeded in and this Parliament take good and effectual conclusion and end Whereupon the Commons accordingly elected Thomas Charlton knight for their Speaker the next day and acquainted the Lords therewith and desired the kings approbation of their choice which was accorded unto by the king by assent of the Lords Lo here 1. the Lords Spiritual and Temporal are the sole Judges of the privilege of the very Speaker of the House of Commons who is here adjudged to remain in execution notwithstanding their petition for his enlargement 2ly The whole House of Commons could not then send for nor yet enlarge their own Speaker when imprisoned
London by a Proces out of the Kings Bench at the sute of one White for the sum of two hundred marks or thereabouts wherein he was late afore condemned as a surety for the debt of one Welden of Salisbury which arrest being signified to Sir Thomas Moile knight then Speaker of the Parliament and to the knights and Burgesses there order was taken that the Serjeant of the Parliament called S. I. should forthwith repair to the Counter in Bredstreet whither the said Ferrers was carried there to demand delivery of the Prisoner Therupon the Serjeant as he had in charge went to the Counter and declared to the Clerks there what he had in commandment but they and other Officers of the City were so far from obeying the said commandment as after many stout words they forcibly resisted the said Serjeant whereof ensued a fray within the Counter Gates between the said Ferrers and the said Officers not without hurt of either part so that the said Serjeant was driven to defend himself with his mace of arms and had the Crown thereof broken by bearing off a stroke and his man stroken down During this brawl the Sherifs of London called Rowland Hill and H. Suckley came thither to whom the Serjeant complained of this injury and required of them the delivery of the said Burgesse as afore but they bearing with their Officers made little account either of his complaint or of his message rejecting the same contemptuously with much proud language so as the Serjeant was forced to return without the Prisoner and finding the Speaker and all the knights and Burgesses set in their places declared unto them the whole cause as it fell out who took the same in so ill part that they altogether of whom there were not a few as well of the Kings privy Counsel as also of his privy Chamber would sit no longer without their Burgess but rose up wholly and repaired to the Vpper House where the whole case was declared by the mouth of the Speaker before Sir T. Audeley knight then Lord Chancellor of England and all the Lords and Judges there assembled who judging the contempt to be very great referred the punishment thereof to the order of the Common house They returning to their places again upon new debate of the Case took order that their Serjeant should eftsoon repair to the Sherifs of London and require delivery of the said Burgess without any writ â— warrant had for the same but only as afore Albeit the Lord Chancellor offered there to grant a Writ which they of the Common House refused being of a clear opinion that all commandements and other acts proceeding from the neather House were to be done and executed by their Serjeant without Writ only by shew of his Mace which was his warrant But before the Serjeants return into London the Sherifs having intelligence how hainously the matter was taken became somewhat more mild so as upon the said second demand they delivered the Prisoner without any denial But the Serjeant having then further in commandment from those of the neather House charged the said Sherifs to appear personally on the morrow by 8 of the clock before the Speaker in the neather House and to bring thither the Clerks of the Counter and such other of their Officers as were parties to the said affray and in like manner to take into his custody the said White which wittingly procured the said arrest in contempt of the privilege of the Parliament which commandment being done by the said Serjeant accordingly on the morrow the two Sherifs with one of the Clerks of the Counter which was the chief occasion of the said affray together with the said White appeared in the Common House where the Speaker charging them with their contempt and misdemeanor aforesaid they were compelled to make immediate answer without being admitted to any counsell Albeit Sir Ro. Cholmley then Recorder of L. and other the Counsel of the City then present offered to speak in the cause which were all put to silence and none suffered to speak but the parties themselves whereupon in the conclusion the said Sherifs and the same White were committed to the Tower of London and the said Clerk which was the occasion of the fray to a place there called Little Base and the Officers of L. which did the arrest called Tailer with 4 Officers more to Newgate where they remained from the 28 until the 30 of March and then they were delivered not without humble sute made by the Mayor of L. and other their friends And forasmuch as the said Ferrers being in execution upon â— condemnation of debt and set aâ— large by privilege of Parliament was not by Law â—o be brought again into execution and so the party without remedy for his debt as well against him as his principal debtor after long â—ebate of the same by the space of 9 or 10 days together at last they resolved upon an Act of Parliament to be made and to revive the execution of the said debt against the said Welden which was principal debtor and to discharge the said Ferrers But before this came to passe the Commons House was divided upon the question but in conclusion the Act passed for the said Ferrers who won by 14 voices The King being then advertised of all this proceeding called immediately before him the Lord Chancellor of England and his Judges with the Speaker of the Parliament and other the gravest persons of the neather House to whom he declared his opinion to this effect First commending their wisdom in maintaining the privileges of the House which he would not have to be infringed in any point alleged that he being head of the Parliament and attending in his own person upon the business thereof ought in reason to have privilege for him and all his Servants attending there upon him So that if the said Ferrers had been no Burgesse but only his servant that in respect thereof he was to have the privilege as well as any other For I understand quoth he that you not only for your own persons but also for your necessary servants even to your Cooks and Horse-keepers enjoy the said privilege insomuch as my Lord Chancellor here present hath informed us that he being Speaker of the Parliament the Cook of the Temple was arrested in L. and in execution upon a Statute of the staple And forasmuch as the said Cook during the Parliament served the Speaker in that office he was taken out of execution by the privilege of the Parliament and further we be informed by our Judges that wee at no time stand so highly in our estate Royal as in the time of Parliament wherein we as Head and you as Members are conjoyned and knit together into one body politick so as whatsoever offence or injury during that time is offered to the meanest Member of the House is to be judged as done against our person and the whole Court of
Hall was moved to repair to the Lord Keeper and make such Oath which he did and then had a Writ of privilege In the Parliament of 23 Eliz. 21 Jan. Saturday Mr. Paul Wentworth moved for a publike Fast and for a Sermon every morning at 7. a clock before the House sate The House upon debate were divided about the Fast 115. were for and 100. against it It was thereupon ordered That as many of the House as conveniently could should on Sunday fortnight after assemble and meet together in the Temple Church there to hear preaching and joyn together in prayer with humiliation and fasting for the assistance of Gods spirit in all their consultations during this Parliament and for the preservation of the Queens Majesty and her Realm and the Preachers to be appointed by the privy Council that were of the House that they may be discreet not medling with Innovation or unquietness This Order being made by the Commons alone without the Lords and Queens privities assents the Queen being informed thereof sent a Message to the House by Master Vice-chamberlain a Member of it That her Highness had great admiration of the rashness of this House in committing such an apparent contempt of her express command not to meddle with her person the State or Church-government as to put in execution such an Innovation without her privity or pleasure first known Thereupon the Vice-chamberlain moved the House to make humble submission to her Majesty acknowledging the said offence and contempt craving the remission of the same with a full purpose to forbear the committing of the like hereafter Upon which by consent of the WHOLE HOUSE Mr. Vice-chamberlain carried this their submission to her Majesty as being the Judge and punisher of their misdemeanors even in the House it self though caried by majority of Voices In the Parliament of 28 Eliz. the Commons questioning the chusing and returning of the knights of the Shire for Norfolk the Queen said She was sorry the Commons medled therewith being a thing impertinent for that House to deal withall it belonging only to the Office of the Lord Chancellor from whom the Writs issue and to whom they are returned In the Parliament of 35 Eliz. Mr. Peter Wentworth and Sir Henry Bromley delivered a petition to the Lord Keeper desiring the Lords of the Vpper House to be suppliants with them of the Lower House unto her Majesty for intayling the succession of the Crown whereof a Bill was ready drawn by them The Queen being highly displeased therewith as contrary to her former strict command charged the LORDS of her COUNCIL to call the parties before them which they did and after Speech with them commanded them to forbear the Parliament and not to go out of their lodgings after which Mr. Wentworth was committed by them to the Tower Sir Henry Bromley with Mr. Richard Stevens and Mr. Welch to whom Sir Henry had imparted the matter were committed to the Fleet sitting the Parliament And when Mr. Wrâ—th moved in the House that they might be humble suters to her Majesty that she would be pleased to set at liberty those Members of the House that were restrained It was answered by all the Privy Counsellors there present That her Majesty committed him for causes best known to her self and to press her Highness with this sute would but hinder them whose good as foughtâ— That the House must not call the Queen to account for what she doth of her royal Authority That the causes for which they are restrained may be high and dangerous That her Majesty liketh no such questions neither doth it become the House to search into these matters In the same Parliament M. Morrice Attorny of the Court of Wards by a Serjeant at Arms was taken out of the Commons House Febr. 28. and committed to prison by the Queens command for delivering in a Bill against the abuses of the Bishops on Tuesday Febr. 27. against which many Members spake that it should not be read The Queen hearing of it sent for Sir Edward Cooke then Speaker the same day giving him in command with her own mouth to signifie to the House her dislike of the said Bill preferred by Mr. Morrice and charging him upon his Allegiance if any such Bill he exhibited not to read it Adding It is in me and my power to call Parliaments it is in my power to end and determine them it is in my power to assent or dissent to any thing done in Parliament Lo here several Members of the Commons House imprisoned by the Queens command by the Lords of her Council for disobeying her express commands in her Speech in medling in matters of State and Ecclesiastical affaires which she had forbidden them to do So farr was the Commons house then from being the Judges or sole Judges of their own Members privileges speeches or actions in the House it self even in this good Queens late reign of blessed memory In the same Parliament of 35 Eliz. when Sir Edward 〈◊〉 was Speaker of the Commons House there fell out a question in the Commons House about the Amendment of a mistake in the 〈◊〉 of the Burgess of Southwark and after long debate it was resolved that the House could not amend it but the Lâ— Keeper in Chancery â—here the return was of record if he thought it amendable by Law and that Master Speaker should wait upon the Lord Keeper about it which he did who advised with the Judges concerning it as appears by the Journal In the same Parliament Thomas Fitz-Herbert of Staffordshire was elected a Burgess of Parliament and two hours after before the Indenture returned the Sherif took him prisoner upon a Capias Utlagatum Whereupon he petitioned the House that he might have a Writ of Privilege and be enlarged After many dayes debate and Arguments of this case in the House by sundry Lawyers and Sir Edward Cooke then Speaker it was agreed That no Writ of Privilege could in this case be returned into the House of Commons being but a Member of Parliament and no Court of Record but only into the Chancery or House of Peers And that this being a point of Law it was meet the Judges should be advised with and determine it not the House And at last he was outed of his privilege by the Houses resolution These forecited presidents in all ages will sufficiently prove the late objected presidents for the Commons sole Judicial Authority and Jurisdiction in cases of Privilege and Elections and the suspending ejecting fining secluding imprisoning their own Members and such who violate their privileges or make false returns to be a meer late Groundless Innovation if not Usurpation upon the King House of Peers and Chancellors of England no ways grounded on the Law and custom of Parliaments as Sir Edward Cooke mistakes but point-blank against them both and that the Statutes concerning Elections and attendance or absence of Knights and Burgesses as 5 R.
E. 3. n. 1.10 R. 2.17 R. 2. n. 6.7 8 H. 4. n. 66 67. some of the valiantest wisest discreetest Spiritual and Temporal LORDS were by Petition of the Commons and special Order of the Lords in Parl. placed about these Kings to BE THEIR PRIVY COVNSELLORS to advise counsel them and manage all the Great affairs of the Realm under them so in this Parliament they exhibited this Petition to the like eâ—â—ect Primerement que plese a nostre dit Seigniour le Roy ordeigner et assigner en cest present Parlement les pluis vaillantz sages et discretes Seigniours espirituelx et temporelx de son roialme pur estre de son counseil en eid et supportation del bone et substancial gouvernance et la bien de Roy et de Roialme et que les ditz Seigniours de counseill et les Justices de Roi soient overtement jurez eny cest present parlement de eux bien et loialment en lour counseill et faitz acquiter pur le bien de Roy et de Royalm en toutz pointz saunz favour pur affection ou affinite faire a ascune manere de persone Et que plese nostre dit Seigniour le Roy en presence de toutz les Estates de parlement comander les ditz Seigniours et Justices sur lour foy et ligeance que lui devont qils feront pleyne justice et droit ouelment a chescuny sanz tarians si bonement come ils purront sanz ascun commandement on charge de queconque persone a contrarie Le Roy le voet was the answer which was answered See the like Petitions afterwards in 1 H. 6. n. 26.2 H. 6. n. 15 16.8 H. 6. n. 27 28.11 H. 6. n. 41. I shall conclude with these 2. memorable late presidents In the Parliament of 8 Eliz. upon the death of Thomas Williams Esquire Speaker of the Commons house Richard Onstoe Esquire the Quâ—ens Sollicitor first chosen a Member of the Commons house and after called by Writ to attend the Lordâ— House as an Assistant at the request of the Commons to the Queen and Lords was sent down again to the Commons house without any new election and there chosen and presented by them for their Speaker and allowed of by the Queen and Lords So in the Parliâ—ment of 23 Eliz. upon the Queens making John Bell Esq then Speaker chief Baron of the Exchequer Iohn Popham Esq then Queens Sollicitor called from the Commons house to the Lords as an Assistant by writ at the Commons request to the Queen and Lords was remitted to them again upon his old without any new election and thâ— chosen presented accepted for their Speaker Which 2. late presidents infallibly prove 1. That the King hath an absolute power over any Members of the Commons house upon a just occasion to call them thence by writ to be Assistants to the Lords house or else to create them Peers and call them to be Members of the Lords house as he did Sir Francis Seymore Mr. Arthur Capell and others created Lords the last long Parliament 2ly That the calling of any to the Lords house from the Commons by writ as Assistants only doth not totally disable them to be Members of the Commons house again the self-same or the next Parliament but that upon the Commons Petion and assent of the King and Lords they may be remanded to the Commons house and be Members and Speakers thereof again but not by the Commons votes or order but only by the Kings with the Lords assent who may refuse to remand them if they please A very pregnant argument chat the power of removing judging suspending approving readmitting Members of the Commons house upon Elections or Misdemeanors belongs not of right to the Commons house but to the King and House of Peers as I have formerly evidenced Admitâ—ing then that the Commons have de facto gained exercised this privilege of late years to judge suspend or eject their own Members in such cases without the King and House of Peers yet having most grosly abused it of late to the ruine subversion of Parliaments I must conclude with the Canonists Privilegium meretur amittere qui abutitur potestate Jer. 6.16 Thus saith the Lord Stand ye in the wayes and see and ask for the old pathes where is the good way and walk therein and ye shall find rest for your souls But they said We will not walk therein Prov. 24.21 22. My son fear thou the Lord and the King and meddle not with those who are given to change For their Calamity shall rise suddenly and who knoweth the ruine of them both Jer. 21.3 4. c. 17.25 27. Thus saith the Lord Execute ye judgement and deliver the spoiled out of the hands of the Oppressor and do no wrong do no violence to the stranger the fatherless nor the widdow neither shed innocent bloud in this place For if ye do this thing indeed then shall there enter into the Gates of this House KINGS PRINCES sitting upon the Throne of David riding in chariots and on horses they and their PRINCES the men of Iudah and the inhabitants of Ierusalem and this City shall remain for ever But if you will not hearken unto me c. then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof and it shall devour the PALACES of Ierusalem and it shall not be quenched FINIS An Omission in pag. 30 l. 7. RAnulph de Glanvil Chief Justice under King Henry the 2. In his Tractatus de Legibus et Consuetudinibus Regni Angliae written in the 33 year of his reign hath this memorable passage relating to the Parliamentary Councils in that age l. 2. c. 7. Est autem magna Assisa REGALE QVODDAM BENEFICIUM CLEMENTIA PRINCIPIS DE CONSILIO PROCERUM POPVLIS INDVLTUM to wit in a Parliamentary Council of the King and Lords without any Commons quo vitae hominum et status integritati tam salubriter consulitur ut in jure quod quis de libero soli tenemento possidet retinendo duellâ— casum declinare possunt homines ambiguum c. Ex aequitate autem maxiâ— prodita est LEGALIS ISTA INSTITUTIO Jus enim quod post multas longas dilationes vix evincitur per duellum per beneficium ISTIUS CONSTITUTIONIS commodius et acceleratius expeditur By which it is evident that the Grand Assize was no original Processe or Trial at the Common Law but a legal institution and beneficial constitution proceeding from the Grace of the Prince and indulged to the People BY THE COUNSEL OF THE LORDS assembled together in a Parliamentary Council which Lib. 2. c. 9. Glanvil stiles Recordum per Assisam DE CONSILIO REGNI inde factum for the speedier and better recovery of their freeholds without endangering their lives by a Duel to recover them which was fuller of delays but less certain and more unjust than a recovery by verdict in this new
A Plea for the LORDS AND HOUSE of PEERS OR A full necessary seasonable enlarged Vindication of the just antient hereditary Right of the Earls Lords Peers and Barons of this Realm to sit vote judge in all the PARLIAMENTS of ENGLAND Wherein their Right of Session and Sole Power of Judicature without the Commons House in Criminal Civil Ecclesiastical causes as well of Commons as Peers Yea in cases of Elections Breach of Privilege misdemeanors of the Commons themselves are irrefragably evidenced by solid reasons punctual Authorities memorable Presidents out of Histories and Records in all ages most of them not extant in any Writers of our Parliaments Whose Errors are here rectified the Seditious Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets Libels of Lilbourn Overton and other Levellers against the Lords House and Right of judging Commoners fully refuted and larger Discoveries made of the Proceedings Iudgements of the Lords in Parliament in Criminal Civil causes Elections Breaches of Privilege of their Gallantry in gaining maintaining preserving the Great Charters Laws Liberties Properties of the Nation and oppugning all Regal Papal Vsurpations Exactions Oppressions illegal Ayds Taxes required or imposed and of the Commons first summons to and just Power in Parliaments than in any former Publications whatsoever By William Prynne Esquire a Bencher of Lincolnes Inne Prov. 22.28 Remove not the antient Land-mark which thy Fathers have set LONDON Printed for Henry Brome at the sign of the Gun in Ivie Lane and Edward Thomas at the Adam and Eve in Little Britain 1659. To all the truly Honourable Heroick Lords and Peers of the Realm of England who are real Patriots of Religion their Countries Fundamental Liberties Properties Great Charters Laws against all arbitrary Tyranny Encroachments illegal unnecessary Taxes and Oppressions Right Honourable THough true Nobility alwayes founded in vertue and real piety needs no other tutelar Deity or Apologie but it self amongst those ingenious Spirits who are able to discern or estimate its worth yet the iniquity of our degenerated Age and the frenzie of the intoxicated ignorant vulgar is such that it now requires the assistance of the ablest Advocates to plead its cause and vindicate the just Rights Privileges of the House of Peers against the licentious Quills Tongues of lawlesse sordid Sectaries and Mechanick Levellers who having got the Sword and reines into their hands plant all their batteries and force against them crying out like those Babylonian Levellers of old against the House of Lords Rase it Rase it even to the foundation thereof and lay it for ever â—ver with the very dust beholding all true Honor worth and Nobleness shining forth in your Honors heroick Spirits with a malignant aspect because they despair of ever enjoying the least spark therof in themselves and prosecuting you with a deadly hatred because better greater than ever they have hopes to be unless they can through Treachery and violence make themselves the onely Grandees by debasing your highest Dignity to the lowest Peasantry and making the meanest Commoners your Compears This dangerous seditious Design hath ingaged me the unablest of many out of my great affection to Royalty and real Nobility and a deep sence of the present kid tottering condition of our Kingdom Parliament the very pillars and foundations whereof are now not only shaken but almost quite subverted voluntarily without any Fee at all to become your Honors Advocate to plead your Cause and vindicate your undoubted hereditary right of sitting voting judging in our Parliaments of which they strenuously endeavour to plunder both your Lordships and your posterities and to publish these subitane Collections to the world now enlarged with many pertinent Additions to still the madness of the seduced vulgar whom Ignoramus Lilburn Overton Walwin and their Confederates have laboured to mutinie against your Parliamentary Jurisdiction treading upon Princes as upon mortar and as the Potter treadeth the clay in their illiterate seditious Pamphlets whose Arguments Pretences Presidents Objections Allegations I have here refuted by Scripture Histories Antiquities and Parliament-Rolls the ignorance whereof joyned with their malice is the principal occasion of their error in this kind And truly were all our Parliament Rolls Pleas Iournals faithfully transcribed and published in print to the eyes of the world as most of our Statutes are by authority of both Houses of Parliament a work as worthy their undertaking and as beneficial for the publike as any I can recommend unto their care it would not only preserve them from imbezelling and the hazards of fire and warr to which they are now subject but likewise eternally silence refute the Sectaries Levellers ignorant false Allegations against your Honors Parliamentary Jurisdiction and Judicatur resolve clear all or most doubts that can arise concerning the tower jurisdiction privileges of both or either Houses keep both of them within their due bounds the exceeding whereof is dangerous grievous to the people except in cases of absolute real present urgent not pretended necessity for the saving of a Kingdom whiles that necessity continues and no longer chalk oâ—â— the â—miâ—ent regular way of proceeding in all kinds of Parliamentary affairs whatsoever whether of warr or peace Trade or Government Privileges or Taxes and in all civil or criminal causes and all matters whatsoever concerning King or Subject Natives or Foreiners over-rule reconcile most of the present differences between the King and Parliament House and House Members and Members clear many doubts rectifie some gross mistakes in our printed Statutes Law-Books and ordinary Historians add much light lustre ornament to our English Annals the Common Statute Laws and make all Lawyers all Members of both Houses far more able than now they are to manage and carry on all businesses in Parliament when they shall upon every occasion almost have former presidents ready at hand to direct them there being now very few Members in either House Lords Lawyers or others well read or versed in antient Parliament Rollâ— Pleas Iournals or Histories relating to them the ignorance whereof is a great Remora to their proceedings yea oft times a cause of dangerous incroachments of new Iurisdictions over the Subjects persons estates not usual in former Parliaments of some great mistakes and deviations from the antient methodical Rules and Tracts of parliament now almost quite forgotten and laid aside by new unexperienced ignorant Parliament Members who think they may do what they please to the publike prejudice injury of posterity and subversion of our Fundamental Laws Rights Liberties in the highest degree by new erected arbitrary Committees exercising an absolute tyrannical power over the Persons Liberties Estates Freeholds both of Lords themselves and all English Freemen Your Lordships helping hand to the speedy furthering of such a necessary publike work and your industrious magnanimous unanimous imitation of the memorable heroick presidents of your Noble progenitors in gaining regaining enlarging confirming perpetuating to posterity the successive Grand Charters of our Liberties when
is the power of binding the whole Nation by making altering or abolishing Laws without the Kings or Lords concurrent assents to whom they now absolutely deny any Negative voice making the Commons a compleat Independent Parliament of themselves therefore present all their Petitions add esses to them alone without any acknowledgment or notice of the House of Peers to whom they deny any right or title to sit or vote in Parliament unless they will first divest themselves of their Peerage and Barons right of Session and submit to stand for the next Knights and Burgesses place in the House of Common that shall fall void where if they may have any voice or influence the meanest Cobler Tinker Weaver Waterman shall be elected a Knight or Burgess sooner than the best and greatest Peer and every John of Leyden preferred before King or Prince Charls himself Sic Sceptra ligonibus aequant Which Petitions and Pamphlets of theirs have so puffed so bladdered up many Novices and raw Parliament-men in the Commons House unacquainted with the original Constitution bounds proceedings Laws Customs of the Parliaments of England that they begin to act vote dispose of the Army Navy c. without yea against the Lords not expecting their concurrence contrary to all former proceedings of Parliament the Lords just Privileges and their own Solemn League Covenant to maintain them which may prove very destructive to both Houses the Parliament King Kingdom oppressive to their Representatives the people who generally dislike it if not timely redressed and breed such a deadly feud between the Houses as may soon ruine them both and the Kingdom to boot The end of these Anabaptists Levellers Lilburnians being only to destroy the Parliament by setting both Houses at variance they inveighing as bitterly against the power proceedings Ordinances Votes Members undue Elections unequal Constitution of the House of Commons as they do against the Lords Hereupon they have most earnestly pressed in their Pamphlets their late Remonstrances Engagements from their Confederates and Agitators in the Army a speedy period and dissolution of this Parliament a new modelling and more equal distribution of the Members in the very House of Commons for the future c. All which Petitions Papers Remonstrances Pamphlets of theirs tending to the utter subversion of Parliaments the fundamental Laws Government of the Kingdom yea to an introduction of arbitrary popular Polarchy and Tyranny are rather to be ranked among and more agreeable to Jack Cades or the Earl of Straffords and Canterburies Treasons which they exceed by many degrees than to be slighted or countenanced as they are the keeping up the honour of our Peers the rights Privileges of both Houses within their just bounds without interfeiring or incroachment upon one another or invading the peoples Liberties being the only probable means of their of our preservation settlement security Upon which consideration I shall here endeavour as briefly yet fully as I may to vindicate the undoubted Right of the Lords or Peers of this Realm to sit vote in Parliament notwithstanding they are not elected by the people and to make good their right power of Judicature as well of Commoners as Peers against all the cavils of Jesuited Anabaptistical Levellers Lilburnians Sectaries Agitators whom I hope so farr to silence and stop their mouths if not convince their judgements that they shall never be able to reply hereunto SECTION 1. Proving the Lords antient undoubted Right to sit and vote in all English Parliaments with the Grounds thereof though not elected by the People THe sum of all these Levellers object against the Lords right of sitting voting judging in Parliament is this That they sit there only by Patent by the Kings will Tenure or descent not by the Peoples free Election alone as the Knights Citizens and Burgesses doe That the people never intrusted nor invested them with any power but the King That they represent themselves only not the Commons and are the Sons only of Conquest of Usurpation brought in by the Conquerour not of Choice and Election 1. To this I answer first That our Lords Dukes Earls Barons Nobles yea Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors too who held by Barony â—ate antiently in all our General National Councels and Parliamentary Assemblies many hundred of years before the Conquest both in the Britons and Saxons reigns by right of their Peerage and Tenures as now they doe as I have unanswerably proved in My Historical Collection of the antient Parliaments and Great Councils of England My Antiquity triumphing over Novelty p. 56. to 80. And in my 1 2 and 3. Parts of A Seasonable and Legal Vindication and Chronological Collection of the good old Fundamental Laws c. of all English Freemen Which is likewise attested by Modus tenendi Parliamentum Sir Edward Cook Vowel others and all our Historians Therefore this is a gross mistake That they are the Sons of Conquest introduced by the Conquerour The rather because in all Empires Kingdoms in the world though free and never conquered their Princes Dukes Nobles Lords and great Officers have ever sate in all their Parliaments Senates and General Councels of State by reason of their Honors and places only without any popular Elections as is clear by these Texts of Scripture 1 Chron. 23.1 2. c. 28.1 2. c. c. 29.1.6.24 2 Chron. 1 2 3. c. 5.3 4. c. c. 23.2 3.20 21. c. 30.2 3 6 12. c. 34.29 30. c. 35.7 8. Neh. 9.38 c. 10. Esther 1.13 to 22. Dan. 3.2 3. 2 Chro. 29.30 c. 32.3 Ezra 9.1 c. 10.8 1 Sam. 5.8 c. 29.3 to 10. Psa 68.27 Prov. 8.15.16 Isa 19.11 12 13. Jer. 17.25 c. 26.11.16 c. 36.12.14 c. 37.14 15. c. 38.4.25.27 Dan. 6.1 6 7 8. Jonah 3.7 Psa 2.2 Isa 1.23.26 compared together and by all Historians and Polititians testimonies 2. Secondly that they sit there only by the Kings Patent is false For first many Peers Nobles have been created in and by Parliament at the Commons earnest Petitions by Patents confirmed in Parliament of which there are many Presidents Secondly though the Kings Writ or Patent create others of them Peers Barons without the peoples consent yet the Laws and Statutes of the Realm made by the Commons consents and approved by the people allow the King this power yea authorize enjoyn all Lords Barons to sit in Parliament when thus creaned if there be no just exceptions taken to them by the Houses therefore though they are created Lords and sit in Parliament by the Kings Patents or Writs onely by way of instrument or conveyance yet originally they are made Lords and sit there only by the Laws and Statutes of the Realm to which all the people have consented of which more hereafter Thirdly all antient and new Cities Burroughs who send Citizens or Burgesses to Parliament and Counties who send Knights to Parliament were originally created and invested with this power to elect
13.1 2 3 c. commands Every Soul to be subject to the higher powers not only for fear but conscience sake upon this ground For there is no Power but of God the powers that are are ordained or ordered of God and they are the Ministers of God to men for good Hence God and Christ are stiled The only Potentate THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS The Prince of the Kings of the Earth 1 Tim. 6.15 Rev. 1.5 c. 17.14 c. 19.16 because they only by meer original right dispose of all Kings Lords Potentates kingdoms Upon which reason the Apostle concludes That all created things in heaven and in earth whether they be Powers or Principalities or Dominions or Powers are created BY AND FOR CHRIST that in all things he might have the preheminence might and dominion being exalted far above all Principalities and Powers Col. 1.16 17 18. Eph. 1.20 21. By what divine natural inherent just right or Title then the Commons or Vulgar people of our own or other Realms can challenge to themselves the sole power of electing setting up and pulling down their Kings Princes Lords Judges kingdoms Principalities Powers Dominions at their arbitrarie pleasures of setting up pulling down or electing their Supreme or subordinate Governors Magistrates and all Peers of Parliament at their wills of disposing kingdoms Powers Lordships to whomsoever they please as these Bedlam Objectors plead they may without contradicting all these Sacred Texts and intruding upon these royal incommunicable Preheminences Prerogatives of God and Christ let all popular pretenders to or advocates for such a power in the people and Commons of the Realm resolve me and all others when they are able against all these Texts oppugning this their claim and interest 9. Ninthly I answer that a particular explicit actual choice and election by the people of any to be Kings Magistrates Judges Ministers Peers or Members of Parliament is neither necessarie nor convenient to make them just and lawfull except onely when the Laws of God of Nature of Nations or the kingdom expresly require it but onely a general implicit or tacit consent especially when the antient Laws of the Land continuing still in full force and the custom of the Kingdom time out of mind requires no such ceremonie of the peoples particular election or call in which case the peoples dissent is of no validitie til that Law and custom be repealed by the general consent of the King Lords and Commons in Parliament Now the antient Laws Statutes and Customs of the Kingdom enable all Lords who are Peers and Barons of the Realm to sit in Parliament when ever summoned to it by the Kings Writ without any election of the people and if the Laws and Customs of the Realm were that the King himself might call two Knights Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament such as himself should nominate in his Writ out of every County City and Borough without the Freeholders Citizens and Burgesses election of them by a common agreement and consent to such a Law and usage made by their Ancestors and submitted and consented to for some ages without repeal this Law and Custom were sufficient to make such Knights Citizens and Burgesses lawfull Members of Patliament obliging their posterity whiles unrepealed as well as their Warranties Obligations Statutes Feofments Morgages Oaths and alienations of their Lands as the Objectors must acknowledge therefore they must of necessity grant their present sitting voting and judging too in Parliament to be lawfull because thus warranted by the Laws and Customs of the Realm 10. If all Power in Government all right of sitting judging and making Laws or Ordinances in Parliament be founded upon the immediate free election of all those that are to be Governed and if it be of necessity that all who are to be subject and obey ought to be represented by those who have power in Government the Sum of Lilburns Overtons and the Levellers reasons against the Lords Jurisdiction then it will of necessity follow If this be good Divinitie and Law that the Laws of God Moses and Christ himself should not bind the Jews or Christians because made without their common consents or any to represent them Then the Laws Decrees of the Medes and Persians made by their Kings alone or by them and their Princes without any representative of their People as is evident by Esth 1.13 to the end ch 3.8 to 15. ch 8.8 9 c. c. 9.32 ch 10.1 Ezr. 1.1 c. ch 4.6 to 24. ch 5.13.17 c. 6.1 to 15. c. 7.11 to 27. Jonah 3.6 7 8. Dan. 6 7 8 9. were meer nullities and not binding to the commonalty Then the Laws of David his Captains and Princes concerning the Levites Priests Temple c. 1 Sam. 30.2.45 2 Chron. c. 22. to ch 29. with all our own antient Britâ—sh and Saxon Laws made by our Kings and Nobles alone without any Knights Citizens or Burgesses elected by or representing the people as were all our Laws and Acts before Henry the 3d his reign both before and after the Conquest as we usually call it though many of them yet in force and vigor With all antient Lawes made by Kings alone being the only Law-makers in all Nations at first as Justine and others attest and Ezr. 7.26 Esth 3.8 Isay 33.22 intimate whence they are stiled the Kings Laws c. should be meer Nullities by this Doctrine because not made by the Peoples previous consents and representatives Yea then the Orders Votes Ordinances and Laws made or consented to by the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in Parliam ought not to bind any Ministers Women Children Infants Servants Strangers Freeholders Citizens Burgesses Artificers or others who cannot well properly be represented but by persons of their own sex degrees trade calling so each sex trade in each county Corporation of Engl. should send Members of their own to Parliament to represent them but only such Freeholders and Burgesses who had voices in and gave free consent to their Elections not any who have no voices by Law or dissented from those elected and returned Yea then it will necessarily follow that those Counties Cities and Boroughs whose Members have been injuriously impeached suspended driven away or thrust out of the House of Commons by the Objectors and the Armies practise violence contrary to all former presidents are absolutely free exempted from and not bound by any Votes or Ordinances made or taxes imposed by the Commons House because they have no Members to represent them residing in Parliament and that those Counties and Boroughs whose Knights and Burgesses are dead or absent are no wayes obliged by any Votes Ordinances or Grants in Parliament And then how few in the Kingdom will or ought to yield obedience to any the Acts Ordinances or Votes of this present Parliament or to any Mayors Sheriffs Aldermen or Heads of Houses made by their Votes and Authority usually made by election
heretofore or to any Judges Justices Governours Generals Captains or other Militarie Officers made by their Commissions or appointment without the generality of the peoples Votes or consent especially when above half or three full parts of the Members were absent or driven from both Houses by the Objectors violence and menaces These Answers premised which have cut off the head of the Objectors Goliah and chief Argument against the Lords sitting in Parliament I shall now proceed to the proof of the Lords undeniable Right and Authority to sit Vote and give Judgement in our Parliaments though not actually elected nor sent to them by the people as Knights and Burgesses are 1. It is evident by the Histories Records of most antient and modern Kingdoms and Republikes in the world that their Princes Nobles Peers and great Officers of State have by their Original Fundamental Laws and Institutions by right of their very Nobility Peerage and great Offices without any particular election of the people a just right and title to sit consult Vote enact Laws and give Judgement in all their General Assemblies of State Parliaments Diets Councels as might be manifested by particular instances in the Kingdoms Republikes Parliaments Diets and General Assemblies of the Jews Aegyptians Grecians Romans Persians Ethiopians Germans French Goths Vandals Hungarians Bohemians Polonians Russians Swedes Scythians Tartars Moors Indians Spaniards Portugals Danes Saxons Scots Irish and many others Hence Dionysius Halicarnasseus Antiquitatum Romanorum l. 2. Sect. 2. affirms That both hereditary and elective Kings even in the antientest times CONSILIUM HABEBANT QUOD EX OPTIMATIbVS CONSTABAT had a Council which consisted of Nobles and Great men as Homer and the most antient Poets attest Neque ut nostro seculo Regum priscorum dominatus erat nimium sui juris neque ab unius sententia pendebat Now to deny the like privilege to our English Peers and Nobles which all Nobles Peers in all other Kingdoms Nations Republikes antiently have enjoyed and yet doe constantly enjoy without exceptions or dispute is a gross injury injustice over-sight yea a great dishonour both to our Nobility and Nation Secondly By and in the very primitive constitution of our English Parliaments for many hundred years together there were no Knights nor Burgesses at all but only the King and his Nobles after which when elected Knights gestes were first sent to Parliament about 49 H. 3. it was granted by the Kings grace and unanimously agreed by the kingdoms peoples general consents that our Parliaments should alwayes be constituted and made up not of Knights and Burgesses only elected only by Freeholders Burgesses not by the generality of the vulgar people who would now claim usurp this right of Election but likewise of the King the Supreme Member by whose writs the Parliaments were and ought to be alwayes summoned and of the Lords Peers Barons ecclesiastical civil and great Officers of the Realm who ought of right to sit vote make Laws and give Judgement in Parliament by vertue of their Peerage Baronies Offices without any election of the people the Commons themselves being no Parliament judicatorie or Law-givers alone without the King and Lords as Modus tenendi Parliamentorum Sir Ed. Cook in his 4. Institutes ch 1. Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour part 2. ch 5. Vowell Cambden Sir Thomas Smith Cowell Minshaw Crompton with others who have written of our English Parliaments assert and all our Parliament Rolls Statutes Law-books resolve without whose threefold concurrent assents there is or can be no legal Act nor Ordinance of Parliament made since the Commons admission to vote in Parliament and assent to Bills which was but of later times out of the Kings frâ—e Grace Thirdly This right of theirs is confirmed by prescription and custom from the very first beginning of Parliaments in this kingdom till this present there being no president to be found in History or Record of any one Parliament held in this Island since it was a kingdom without the King personally or representatively present by a Protector Custos Regni Commissioners as he ought to be or without Lords and Peers antiently stiled Aldermen Heretockes Senators Wisemen Princes Dukes Earls Counts Nobles Great men c. by our Historians who make mention of their constant resorting to sitting voting judging in our General Assemblies and Parliamentary Councils under these Titles without the peoples Election for many hundreds of years before the Conquerors time in the antientest Parliamentary Councils we read of under the Britons and Saxons witness Beda Ingulphus Geoffry Monmouth Huntingdon Matthew Westminster Florentius Wigorniensis Malmsbury Hector Boetius Speed and others in their Histories Antiquitates Ecclesiae Britannicae Spelmanni Concilia Tom 1. Mr. Lambard his Archaion Sir Edward Cook in his Preface to the 9. Report and fourth Institut c. 1. M. Seldens Titles of Honor part 2. c. 5. which I have largely manifested in my Truth triumphing over Falshood Antiquity over Novelty p. 56. to 90. My Historical Collection of the antient Great Councils Parliaments c there being little if any express or direct mention at all of any Knights of Shires Citizens or Burgesses in any of our Parliamentarie Councils before the Conquest or in the Conquerors time nor yet in the reigns of King William Rufus Henry the 1. Stephen Henry 2. Richard 1. King John or first part of the reign of Henry the 3d the first direct Writ of Summons for any Knights Burgesses or Commons to our Parliaments now extant being that of Clause 49 H. 3. m. 10 11. dorso before which no evident testimony can be produced for their sitting or voting in any great Councils or Parliaments as Members but onely out of the Spurious pretended antient though in truth late ridiculous Treatise stiled Modus tenendi Parliamentum on which Sir Edward Cook and others most rely And whereas some conclude that even in the antient Saxon Great Councils the Commons were usually present as Members being comprehended under the Titles of Sapientes Seniores populi Aeldermanni c. which in the dialect of those times signifie rather Lords and Great Men than Commons or Burgesses as all accord or at least wise under these phrases praesentibus omnibus Ordinibus illius Gentis cum viris quibusdam Militaribus rather Soldiers than knights of which we find mention in the Council of Bechenceld Ann. 697. or omnium Sapientum Seniorum POPULORUM totius Regni coupled with these pre-eminent Titles of Omnium Aldermannorum Principum Procerum Comitum who met together in a General Council under Ine Anno 713. Or cujuscunque Ordinis viros in the Council of Clovesho An. 800. which expressions are now and then mentioned in some antient Councils and Parliaments though rarely yet these are rather conjectural or probable than direct or punctual proofs of what they assert whenas the Lords Title to sit and vote in them is most direct and infallible And
Peers made this memorable Petition and Remonstrance of their Privileges to the King The humble Remonstrance and Petition of the Peers MAy it please your Majestie we the Peers of this Realm now assembled in Parliament finding the Earl of Arundel absent from his place amongst us his presence was therefore called for But thereupon a message was delivered us from your Majestie by the Lord Keeper That the Earl of Arundel was restrained for a misdemeanor which was personal to your Majesty and lay in the proper knowledge of your Majesty and had no relation to matter of Parliament This Message occasioned us to inquire into the Acts of our Ancestors and what in like cases they had done that so we might not erre in a dutifull respect to your Majesty and yet preserve our right and privileges of Parliament And after diligent search made both of all Stories Statutes and Records that might inform us in this case we find iâ— to be an undoubted Right and constant Privilege of Parliament That no Lord of Parliament sitting in Parliament or within the usual time of Privilege of Parliament is to be imprisoned or restrained without sentence or order of the House unlesse it be â—or Treason or Felony or for refusing to give surety for the Peace And to satisfie our selves the better we have heard all that could be aleged by your Majesties learned Counsel at Law that might any way infringe or weaken this claim of the Peers and to all that can be shewed or alleged so full satisfaction hath been given as that all the Peers in Parliament upon the question made of this Privilege have una voce consented that this is the undoubted right of the Peers and hath been inviolably enjoyed by them Wherefore we your Majesties loyal Subjects and humble Servants the whole body of the Peers in Parliament assembled most humbly beseech your Majesty that the Earl of Arundel a Member of this Body may presently be admitted by your gracious favour to come sit and serve your Majesty and the Commonwealth in the great affairs of this Parliament And we shall pray c. Upon which Remonstrance and Petition the King refusing to inlarge him thereupon the Lords to maintain their Privilege adjourned themselves on the 25 and 26 of May without doing any thing and upon the Kings refusal to release him they adjourned from May 26 till June 2. refusing to sit and so the Parliament dissolved in discontent his imprisonment in this case being a breach of privilege contrary to Magna Charta In this very Parliament the Lord Digby Earl of Bristol being omitted out of the summons of Parliament upon complaint to the Lords House was by order admitted to set therein as his Birthright from which he might not be debarred for want of Summons which ought to have been sent unto him ex debito Iustitiae as Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 1. The Act for ttriennial Parliaments and King John great Charter resolve And not long after the beginning of this Parliament upon the Kings accusation and impeachment of the Lord Kimbolton and the five Members of the Commons House both Houses adjourned and sate not as Houses till they had received satisfaction and restitution of those Members as the Journals of both Houses manifest it being an high breach of their Privileges contrary to the Great Charter If then the Kings bare not summoning of some Pears to Parliament who ought to sit there by their right of Perage or impeaching or imprisoning any Peer unjustly to disable them to sit personally in Parl. be a breach of Privilege of the fundamental Laws of the Realm and Magna Charta it self confirmed in above 40 successive Parliaments then the Lords right to sit vote and judge in Parliament is as firm and indisputable as Magna Charta can make it and consented to confirmed by all the Commons people and Parliaments of England that ever consented to Magna Charta though they be not eligible every Parliament by the Freeholders people as Knights and Burgesses ought to be and to deny this birthright and privilege of theits is to deny Magna Charta it self and this present Parliaments Declarations proceedings in the case of the Lord Kimbolton a Member of the House of Peers Fifthly The Treatise intituled The manner of holding Parliaments in England in Edward the Confessors time befose the Conquest rehearsed afterwards before William the Conquerour by the discreet men of the Kingdom and by himself approved and used in his time and in the times of his successors Kings of England if the Title be true and the Treatise so antient as Sir Edward Cook others now take it to be When as its mention of the Bishop of Carlisles usual place in Parliaments which Bishoprick was not founded till the year of our Lord 1132. or 1134. as Matthew Paris Matthew Westminster Roger Hoveden Godwin and others attest in the later end of Henry the first his reign Its menâ—ion of the Mayors of London other Cities and writs usually directed to them to elect two Citizens to serve in Parliament whereas London it self had no Mayor before the year 1208. being the 9. year of King John nor other Cities Mayors til divers years after nor can any Writs for electing Knights of Shires Citizens or Burgesses to serve in Parliament which it oft times writes of be produced before 49 H. 3. nor any Writs to levy their expences or wages for their Service in Parliaments which it recites be produced before the reign of King Edward the 1. Nor was the name of Parliament which it mentions and writes of so much as used by any Author before the later end of King Henry the 3. his reign after whose reign this Modus was certainly compiled towards the end of K. Richard the 2. or after as other passages in it evidence beyond all contradiction This magnified Treatise be it genuine or spurious determines thus of the Kings and Lords rights to be personally present in all Parliaments The King is bound by all means possible to be present at the Parliament unless he be detained or let there from by bodily sickness and then he may keep his Chamber yet so that he lye not without the Manour or Town where the Parliament is held and then he ought to send for twelve persons of the greatest and best of them that are summoned to the Parliament that is two Bishops two EARLS two BARONS two Knights of the Shire two Burgesses and two Citizens to look upon his person to testifie and witness his estate and in their presence he ought to make a Commission and give Authority to the Archbishop of the Place the Steward of England and Chief Justice that they joyntly and severally should begin the Parliament and continue the same in his name express mention being made in that Commission of the cause of his absence thence which ought to suffice and admonish the OTHER NOBLES
the Commons may sit alone as Cyphers but not as a Parliament or Council to vote impose or act any thing that is binding to the people since regularly they neither are nor ever yet were in any age no more a Parliament in any case without the King and Lords then the King and Lords alone are now a Parliament though antiently they were so of themselves without the Commons or the trunk of a man a perfect man without head or shoulders If 3. be joyntly impowred or commissioned to do any act by Commission Deed or Warrant any one or two of them can doe nothing without the third If many be in Commission of the Peace Sewers or the like three of the Quorum joyntly to act therein joyntly if any one of the three be absent or dead all the rest can doe nothing because their authority is joynt not single In Parliament it self if either house appoint a Committee of 3 5 or 7. to examine act or execute any thing if but one of this number be absent or put out the rest can doe nothing that is legal or valid even by course of Parliament neither can either House sit and vote as a House unlesse there be so many Members present as by the Law and custom of Parliament will make up an House as every mans experience can inform him If these Levellers then will absolutely cut off or exclude the King or Lords from the Parliament they absolutely null and dissolve it and the Act for continuing this Parliament cannot make nor continue the Commons alone together as a Parliament no more than the Lords or King alone without the Commons the King or either house alone being no Parliament but both conjoyned and enlivened with the Kings personal or representative presence The cutting off the head alone or of the head and shoulders altogether destroys and kills the body Politick and Parliament as well as the body natural If the King dies or resigns his Crown or be deposed the Parliament thereby is actually dissolved as it was resolved in the Parl. of 1 H. 4. n 1 2 3. 1 H. 5. n. 26. 4 E. 4.44 and Cooks 4 Institutes p. 46. The last Parliament of 21 Jac. dissolved by his death So if the Lords or Commons dissolve and leave their House without any adjournment or if the King by his Writ dismisse or dissolve either of the Houses the Parliament is thereby dissolved as the forecited Presidents and the latter clause of the writ for the election of Knights and Burgesses manifests And a new kind of Parliament consisting only of Commoners when the old one only within the Act for continuing this Parliament made up both of King Lords and Commons is dissolved neither will nor can be supported or warranted by the Letter or intention of this Law or any other Law custom or right whatsoever Ninthly All the Petitions of the Commons in all antient modern Parliaments to the King Peers for their redresse of grievances recorded in our antient Parliamentary Rolls The usual Prologue to most of our antient printed Statutes in the Statutes at large in Poulton The King at the request of the Commons of or by the assent of the Prelates Dukes Earls Barons and other great men there assembled hath ordained these things or Acts underwritten all Acts of Parliament now extant usually running in this form The King with the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament hath ordained And be it enacted by the Kings moct excellent Majesty the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in this present Parliament assembled The famous Petition of Right 3 Car. so much insisted on beginning thus Humbly shew unto our Soveraign Lord the King the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament assembled thus answered by the King Let right be done as is desired The Act for continuing this Parliament made by the King and Lords as well as by the Commons who never intended to exclude themselves out of this Parliament by that Act or that it should continue if either of them were quite dismembred from it with all Acts and Ordinances since Yea the very Protestation and Solemn League and Covenant taken by the Commons Lords and prescribed by them to all others throughout the three kingdoms which couple the Lords and Commons always together neither of them alone being able to make any binding Act nor Ordinance to the Subjects unlesse they both concurr and have the Kings royal assent thereto no more than one Member alone of the House can make a House and ranck the Lords always before the Commons and the King before them both so firmly hold forth establish the Lords and Kings undoubted Rights to sit and Vote in Parliament and decry this new invented Monopoly of a sole Parliament of Commons without King or Lords and that absolute Sovereign Power these Lilburnists new Lights have spied out and set up for them in Utopia that impudency it self would blush to vent such mad absurd irrational Frenzies and Paradoxes as these crack brain'd persons dare to publish and they may with as much truth and reason argue that one man is three that the Leggs and trunk of a man are a perfect man without head neck arms and shoulders or that the Leggs Ribs Bowels of the Body are and ought to be placed above the head neck shoulders as that the House of Commons are or ought to be an entire Parliament the sole Legislative Power the only Supreme Authority paramount both King and Lords who must not now have so much as a Negative voice to deny or contradict any of the Commons Votes or Ordinances though never so rash unjust dishonourable prejudicial or dangerous to the whole Kingdom as these new Dogmatists affirm Tenthly The Commons themselves in their joynt Declaration and Resolution with the Lords this Parliament concerning his Majesties late Proclamation 9 August 1642. printed by their special order declare and stile his House of Péers to be the Hereditary Counsellors of the Kingdom The like they declare in their Declaration of 16 January 1642. Mr. John Pym in his Speech at Guildhall in London 14 January 1642. made and printed by the Commons special order asserted That the Lords have an Hereditary interest in making Laws in this Kingdom The Commons House in their Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdom 15 December 1641. affirm That the Peers are the Kings Great Council That the King summoned the Great Council of Péers to meet at York the 24. of September and there declared a Parliament to begin the 3. of November following In which Parliament when the Lords and Commons met they add But what can we the Commons doe without the conjunction of the House of Lords and what conjunction can we expect there when the Bishops and Recusant Lords are so numerous and prevâ—lent thereby confessing that without the Lords concurrence who are the Great Council of the Realm the
Commons can do nothing at all in Parliament since all Laws Ordinances Taxes Votes that are valid and binding to the people must pass Both Houses and have the Lords as well as Commons assent as they resolve in sundry printed Remâ—nstrances Declarations mentioning Both Houses of Parliament â—nd their concurrence to all things therein concluded and the King likewise in his The Lords and Commons in their Declaration of the 5th of August 1645. to the High and Mighty States General of the United Provinces printed in A Collection of Ordinances of Parliament p. 699 700. complain thus to them of this misinformation of their Ambassadors June 20. 1645. The Lower House hath caused the Chamber where they sit in to be hanged with Tapistry which was heretofore never so It is said it is done that the Lords changing their Chamber shall come and sit in the House of Commons and so to be both together reduced into one body and the better agree by number of Votes When heretofore the Parliament was full then the Lords Chamber did consist of about 126. or more Votes and the Lower House of above 500 Votes and they have alwayes been in several Houses and the one could not conclude anything for a Resolution of the King unless the other House did also consent but now the King is absent and the Vpper House should now be melted into the Lower and in the Common Assembly of about 26 Lords which are now here and some 200 Commoners so the most Votes should rule and Ordain all matters Thus much we are told and that it tends to shun many disputes and hindrances which happen in their resolution every day The Lords remain constant to maintain their Rights and say this is to take away all their Right and prerogative taking away their House and so to bring all the power under the Commons â—o which Misinformation the Commons and Lords too returned this Answer to the States My Lords the Commons are charged with endeavour of altering the fundamentals of Parliament by taking away the House of Péers and melting it into the House of Commons when as there was never any debate in the House of Commons concerning aâ—y such matter nor was the same ever intended or desired by the said House After this the whole House of Commons in their Declaration of the 17 Aprilis 1646. of their true Intentions concerning the antient and fundamental Government of the Kingdom thus positively declared to all the world That our true and real Intentions are and our endeavours shall be to maintain the antient and fundamental Government of the Kingdom By King Lords and Commons that we have only desired that with the consent of the King such powers may be setled in the two Houses without which we can have no assurance but that the like or greater mischiefs which God hath hitherto delivered us from may break out again and engage us in a second and more destructive warr Seeing then the very Commons House themselves in these and sundry other printed Declarations have so fully so frequently declared resolved the Lords antient undoubted Hereditarie right and interest to sit vote and assent unto all Laws Ordinances Proceedings in Parliament as the Great Council and Counsellors of the kingdom and acknowledged this their Privilege and the House of Peers to be a part of the fundamental Constitution and Government of this kingdom which they are resolved to maintain and not to alter and that they never intended nor desired much less endevoured the altering the fundamentals of Government by taking away the House of Lords How any Commoners Levellers or others can now dare to question deny or oppugn this their hereditary fundamental right of Peerage or attempt the actual abolishing of the House of Peers without the highest Impudency Treachery Absurdity and incurring the Crime of a New Gun-powder Treason to blow up the House of Lords afresh which the old Jesuitical Popish Gun-powder Traytors only attempted but could not accomplish transcends my understanding to comprehend 11ly The General Council of the Officers of the Army in their Declaration made at Windsore about January 1647. presented to the Lords House by Sir Hardress Waller asserted The hereditary Legal Right of the Lords and their House in Parliament and the Armies fixed resolution to uphold and maintain them and their Privileges with their swords And if John Lilburns printed Letter to the Speaker July 8 1648. p. 26 27. may be credited Lieutenant General Cromwell himself protested to him and others at the Lord Whartons house and that upon his conscience in the sight of God That the Lords had as true a Right to their Legislative and Iurisdictive power over the Commons as he had to the coat on his back and that he and the Army would support the same How dare then any Levellers or Officers in the Army or elsewhere to question or attempt to abolish this their undoubted right to sit vote and exercise a legislative and Juridical Jurisdiction in Parliament and that over Commons themselves in cases which concern their Peerage and in cases not triable properly elswhere but only in Parliament 12. Twelfthly These very Sectaries and Levellers themselves have acknowledged asserted this Right Power of the Lords all along this Parliament till of late as appears by their several Petitions and Complains to them upon sundry occasions heretofore by their resorting to them for Justice against Strafford Canterbury and others Yea Jo. Lilburn himself till his late quarrel with them not only acknowledged their very power of Judicature but highly applauded their Justice in his own cause Petitioning and suing to them not onely for reversal of the sentence against him in Starchamber but likewise for damages and reparations against his Prosecutors pleading his cause by his Counsel before them as his proper Judges who thereupon by judgement of the House vacated the Decree against him as illegal voted him Damages and passed him an Ordinance for the recovery and levying thereof all which he himself hath published in sundry of his printed Pamphlets wherein he acknowledgeth and extolleth their Justice Take but one passage for all in his Innocency and Truth justified p. 74 75. If I be transmitted up to the Lords I confidently believe I shall get forward out of the former experiences of their Justice there I will instance two particulars First when I was a Prisoner in the Fleet and secondly May the fourth one thousand six hundred forty one The King accused me of High Treason and before the Lords Bar was I brought for my life where although one Littleton servant to the Prince swore point blank against me yet had I free liberty to speak for my self in the open House And upon my desire that Master Andrews also might declare upon his Oath what he knew about my business it was done And his Oath being absolutely contradictory to Master Littletons I was both freed from Littletons malice and the
vestrum consilium impâ—nsurus Scientes quod si per VESTRAM ABSENTIAM CONTIGERIT dicta negotia quid absit ulterius retardari dissimulare non poterimus quin AD VOS EXINDE SICUT CONVENIT GRAVITER CAPIAMUS Teste Rege apud Ebor. 11 Die Decembris Eodem modo mandatum est 17 aliis Episcopis 13 Abbatibus 40 Magnatibus aliis And in another writ of Summons the same year to the same Archbishop of Canterbury there is this Clause inserted against making any Proxie Scientes pro certò quod nisi evidens et manifesta necessitas id exposcat non intendimus Procuratores seu Excusatores pro vobis admittere ea vice propter arduitatem negotiorum praedictorum Which Clause amongst other reasons was then inserted because the Clergy in a Parliament held at Eltham some two years before refused to grant this King an aid for the defence of Ireland by reason of the Archbishops absence from it adjourning their answer to this aid till they all and the Archbâ—shop assâ—mbled together in a future Convocation to be summoned by the Kings writ as the Claus Rol. An. 4 E. 3. m. 3. dorso recordâ— Thus the Bishops and Clergy refused to grant an aid to King Henry the 3. Anno 1232. and likewise another aid to the Pope Anno 1244. because many of the Bishops and Abbots who were summoned to the Parl. then held were not present Adding Tangunt ista Archiepiscopos necnon universos Angliae Praelatos cum ergo Archiepiscopi Episcopi alii Ecclesiarum Praelati sint Absentes in eorum praejuditiis respondere nec possumus nec debemus Ouia â—id â—cere praesumeâ—emus in prejuditium omnium Absentium fieret Praelatorum All excellenâ— Presidents both for the Lords and Commons in all succeeding ages not to vote or act any thing or grant any aids or Subsidies upon any occasion menace or intreaty whiles their Members who ought to be personally present are absent much more when forcibly secured or secluded by internal confederacy or external armed violence or the whole House of Peers sequestred or suppresâ—ed by factious seditious Levellers who now design their total and final extirpation out of their future New-modelled Parliaments Having thus impregnably evinced the Lords undoubted right to sit and vote in Parliament though they be not elective by the peoples voices as Knights and Burgesses are I shall next discover unto our illiterate Ignoramusses who oppose their right the justice good grounds and reasons of our Ancestors why they instituted the Lords to sit and vote in Parliament by right of their very Nobility and Peerage which will abundantly satisfie rational men and much confirm their right First the Nobles and Great Officers in all Kingdoms and in our Kingdom too in respect of their education birth experience imployments in military State-affairs have always been generally reputed the wisest most experienced Common wealths men best able to advise Counsel the King and kingdom in all matters of Government Peace or War as our Historians Antiquaries Polâ—tians Records acknowledge and attest whence they were antiently stiled Aeldermen Wisemen Magnates Optimates Sapientes Sapientissimi et Clarissimi viri Conspicui Clarique Viri Primates Nobiles c. in our Historians and Records our Parliaments in that respect being frequently stiled in antient times Concilium SAPIENTUM upon which Grounds our Kings Lords and Commons too when ever they recommended Councellors of State to the King in Parliament made choice of Lords and other Peers for for their Privy Councellors as most wise able discreet Therefore it was thought fit just and equal the King should ever summon them to the Parliament by his Writ without any election of the people for their own inherent wisdom excellency valour learning worth the Original cause of advancing enobling them at first as is expressed in their Patents and evident by these Scripture Texts Esth 1.13 14. Isay 19.11 12 13. Jer. 5.5 c. 10.7 c. 51.57 Dan. 2.48 c. 6.1 2 3. Gen. 41.39.40 Psal 105.21 22. compared together This ground of calling the Nobles to the Parliament is intimated in the very words of the summons Et ibidem VOBISCUM Colloquium habere tractare de arduis urgentibus Regni Ecclesiae Anglicanae negotiis VESTRUMQUE CONSILIUM IMPENSURI c. Et hoc nullatenus omittatis which clause recited in the Commons writs of election likewise implies them to be men of most wisdom and experience able to counsel and advise the King in all hit weighty arduous affairs both of the Kingdom and Church whence by Hereditary antient right they are THE KINGS GREAT COUNCEL and so acknowledged by the Commons themselves this last Parliament I could give many instances wherein the Commons in Parliament have extraordinarily applauded the Lords and Peers for their great wisdom and specially desired their wholsom Counsel as persons of greater wisdom and experience than themselves but for brevity sake I shall cite only these ensuing Records In the Parliament of 21 Edw 3. rot Parl. n. 4 5. Wil. de Thorp in the presence of the King Prelates Earls Barons and Commons declared that the Parliament was called for two causes The first concerning the wars which the King had undertaken by the consent of the Lords and Commons against his Enemies of France The second how the Peace of England may be kept Whereupon the King would the Commons should consult together and that within four days they should give answer to the King and his Counsel what they think therein On the fourth day the Commons declare That they are not able to counsel any thing touching the point of War wherefore they desire in that behalf to be excused And that the King will thereof advise with his Nobles and Council and what shall be so amongst them determined they the Commons will thereto assent confirm and establish By which it is evident the Commons then reputed the Nobles more wise and able to advise the King in matters of war than themselves who confessed their inability therein and therefore submitted to assent to whatever the Nobles and Councel should therein advise Him 28 Edw. 3. n. 55 58. The Commons submit the whole businesse of the Treaty of peace with France to the order of the King and of his Nobles And 36 Edw. 3. n. 6. The LORDS only advise the king touching Truce or War with Scotland In the first Parliament of 15 Edw. 3. n. 11. the Commons having delivered in divers Articles concerning the redress of grievances and publike affairs to the King prayed that unto the Wednesday ensuing their Articles may be committed to the Bishops Barons other wise men there named by them to be amended which the king grauted whereas the Lords exhibited their Articles apart to the king and the Bishops their Articles apart in this Parliament and protested that they ought not to answer but in open Parliament by and with their
Peers without joyning with the Commons num 6 7 18 c 26 27 35 37. which course they held in most following Parliaments In the Parliaments of 47 E. 3. numero 15. 50 E. 3. n. 8. 51 E. 3. n. 18. 1 R. 2. n. 14. 2 R. 2. n. 23. 5 R. 2. n. 14. 6 R. 2. n. 14. Parl. 2. n. 8. 7 R. 2. n. 9.19 4 H. 4. n. 10.11 The Commons Petition the King for certain Lords to be sent to them as a Commiâ—tee to assist and advise them in the matters propounded to them by the King and his Chancellor wherein their advise was required as being more able to advise and counsel them than any of their own Members In the Parliament of 6 R. 2. Par. 2. n. 7. The Commons being demanded their advice touching the war with Flanders and the Kings going thither in person with an Army answered That this consultation did properly belong to the King and Lords yet it being their pleasures to charge the Commons to deliver their conceits therein they thereupon did it with this Protestation that what they spake was not by way of COUNSEL but to shew their advice Whereto was answered for the King That there was but lâ—ttle difference between Counsel and Advice In the Parliament of 7 R. 2. n. 16 17. The Commons being charged to deliver their Opinions touching Peace with France For answer to Peace said That it beseemed them not to intermeddle with their Counsel therein And therefore referred the whole order thereof to the King and his Counsel of Lords Whereupon the Commons being urged to declare whether they desired Peace or Warr for one they must chuse Answered an honourable Peace for the King but for that in the Articles were conteined many terms of the Civil Law which they understood not and for that they understood the Articles were The King should hold Guienne of the French by Homage and Service they knew not what to say only they hope that the King meant not to hold Calice and other Countries gotten by the sword of the French In the Parliament of 17 R. 2. n. 17. The Commons being demanded their opinions concerning Peace with France declared by their Speaker That the same passed their capacity and therefore they referred themselves to the King Lords Council And the rather for that the Lords and Council affirmed that those woâ—ds Homage Soveraignty and Resort conteined in the Indenture of Peace should be modâ—rated c. In the Pâ—rliament of 20 R. 2. n. 9. The Commons excuse themselves touching the Embassadors and Embassie sent to France for peace referring the same to the Kings own pleasare and the Lords I shall conclude with one President more most suitable to the present deplorable condition of our State and worthy imitation In the Parliament of 5 Hen. 4. Rot. Parl. num 9 10. The Commons having presented to the King in Parliament divers grievances in the ill-managing of his Revenues the decay of his Castles Houses and Parks the great povertie and pressures of his Subjects and danger of the Enemies thereupon they most intirely and cordially prayed the King to consider the eminent perils of all parts of the Realm by reason of the Enemies and Rebels of which they had news from day to day and that as the case then stood if such mischiefs were not speedily and graciously remedied and reformed in this Parliament it might fall out upon sodain arrival of Enemies or by some other means this Parliament must of necessity be departed from by all and dissolved so as the Lords and Commons should never re-assemble again to redress the said Mischiefs and others which God defend And therefore that it would please the King considering the high Wisdoms and Discretions of the Lords and that they had knowledge of many Perils and Matters which could not be so clearly known to the King that he would now in this present Parliament charge all his Lords Spiritual and Temporal upon the faith they principally owe to God and the faith Homage and Allegiance which they owe to our Lord the King himself for the aid and salvation of themselves and of all the Realm that the said Lords would counsel and shew him their advice and wholesom counsel in this behalf severally and intirely without dissimulation or adulation having regard to the great mischiefs and necessity aforesaid And thereupon our Lord the King most graciously with his own mouth in full Parliament charged and commanded as well the Lords as the said Commons that they should doe their diligence and shew unto him their good and wholesom Counsels in this behalf for the aid of him and all his Realm And after the said Commons in the same Parliament made request to the said Lordt that seeing the King had given them such a charge and command and that in so high a manner of Record that they would do their diligence well and loyally to pursue the same without any courtesie made between them in any manner as they would answer before the most High and before our Lord the King and to all the realm in time to come and that the Commons themselves thereupon would do the like on their party Which if both Lords and Commons would now cordially and sincerely promise and engage to do without self-ends or inâ—ests we might see our Church and Kingdom speedily setled in a peaceable and happy condition In brief the Lords alone in the very Writs for chusing Knights and Burgesses are stiled The Common Council of the Kingdom and the Knights Citizens and Burgesses are called to effect and assent to that which they and the King by their common advice shall Ordain and 5 Rich. 2. Parl. 2. n. 3. 6 R. 2. n. 8 9 11 26. and Parl. 2 R. 2. n. 7.9 they are called THE GREAT COUNCIL OF LORDS by reason of their extraordinary wisdom and abilities And so are they expresly stiled by the whole House of Commons themselves in their first printed Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdom 15 Decemb. 1641. Exact Collection p. 13. Therefore most fit to sit counsel advise voâ—e and judge in Parliament Secondly The Lords and great Officers of the Realm as such were ever reputed persons of greatest Valour Courage Power in regard of their great interests Estates worth many whole Boroughs of which divers of them are sole Lords their allies and retainers and so best able to withstand redress all publike grievances exactions encroachments of the King his Officers and others upon their own and the peoples Liberties Laws Great Charters in defence whereof they have in antient times been alwaies most ready active to spend not only their estates but bloud and lives too wherewith they have redeemed preserved those Laws Liberties Great Charters concerning their Freedoms we now enjoy and contend for And in this regard our Ancestors in point of wisdom policy reason right thought meet that ex congruo et condigno et debito Justitiae they
Barons being no such Knights Citizens or Burgesses as the writ enjoyns them to elect and return 3. By all the Statutes for electing Knights Citizens and Burgesses recorded in Rastall Tit. Parliament the Lords being not within their words or intention 4. By the Great Charter of King John and express Statutes of 5 R. 2. Stat. 2. c. 4.31 H. 8. c. 10. Rot. Par. n. 10. which disable them to sit amongst the Commons but only in the Lords house among their Peers 5. By the very words of the Patents of their Creation which authorize and prescribe all Dukes Earls Viconts Barons in direct terms Quod in omnibus tenerentur tractentur et reputentur ut Duces Comites Barones quod haeredes sui masculi et eorum quilibet habeat teneat possideat sedem locum et vocem in Parliamentis publilicis Comitiis et Consiliis nostris Haeredum et Successorum nostrorum infra Regnum nostrum Angliae inter alios Duces Comites et Barones not amongst the Knights Citizens and Burgesses ut Duces Comites et Barones Parliamentorum Publicorum Comitiorum et Consiliorum not as Knights Citizens or Burgesses 6. By Sir Edward Cooks 4 Institutes p. 46 47. and Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 736 737. who resolve That a Baron or Lord of Parliament is not eligible to be a Knight Citizen or Burgess of the House of Commons as was resolved in the case of Thomas Camoyes who was not only a Baronet but also a Baron and Lord of Parliament The Lord Camoyes being elected by the Freeholders of the County of Surrey for one of the Knights of the Shire to serve in Parliament for them Anno 7 R. 2. thereupon the King by advice of Council declared his election to be null and void in Law and commanded a new election of some other fit person to be made in his place by this memorable Writ extant on record Rex Vicecomiti Surriae salutem Quia ut accepimus tu Thomam Camoyes Chivaler qui Baronettus est sicut quamplures antecessorum suorum extiterunt ad essendum unum Militum venientium ad proximum Parliamentum nostrum pro Communitate Comitatus praedicti de assensu ejusdem Comitatus eligisti Nos advertentes quod hujusmodi Baronetti ante haec tempora in Milites Comitatus ratione alicujus Parliamenti elegi minime consueverunt ipsum de officio Militis ad dictum Parliamentum pro communitate Comitatus praedicti venturi exonerari volumus Et ideo tibi praecipimus quod quendam aâ—ium Misi em idoneum et discretum gladio cinctum in loco ipsius Thomae elegi et eum ad diem et locum Parliamenti praedicti venire facias cum plena et sufficienti potestate ad consentiendum hiis quae in Parliamento praedicto sicut juxta renorem prioris Brevis nostri tibi pro electione hujusmodi militum directi et nomen ejus Nobis Sciri facias Teste Rege apud Westmonasterium octavo die Octobris 7ly Both Houses of Parliament in their Remonstrance of Nov. 2. 1642. declare and publish in print to all the World This to be so clear and fundamental a privilege of Parliament That no Member of either House of Parliament is to be taken away or detained from the service of the House whereof he is a Member until such time as that House hath satisfaction concerning the cause and the cause be heard in Parliament first and dismissed from it That the whole freedom of Parlament dependeth upon it For who seeth not that by this means under false pretences of crimes and accusations such or so many Members of both or either Houses of Parliament may be taken out of it at any time by any persons to serve a turn and to make a MAJOR PART of whom they will at pleasure So as the freedom of Parliament dependeth in a great part on this privilege yea without it the whole Body of the Parliament will be destroyed by depriving it of its Members by degrees some at one time and others at another time as both Houses further remonstrate in their Declaration of October 23. 1642. Which as it infallibly demonstrates that the Lords House or Members cannot be taken away or taken from them against their wils without the destruction subversion of the whole Parliament of which they are chief Members the Judicial power of Parliaments residing principally in that House if not wholly So it likewise clearly resolves that no Peer or Member of the Lords House can be elected a Member of the Commons house For if the election of the Freeholders Citizens or Burgesses of any County City or Borough of a Duke Earl Lord or Baron of the Realm to be a Knight Citizen or Burgess in Parliament should be valid in Law to make them legal actual Members of the Commons house it would then lie in their powers to un-Peer un-Lord and degrade any Nobleman yea all the Earls Peers Lords Barons of the Realm and their Posterity at their pleasures to reduce them and the whole House of Peers into the Commons inferiour house and so quite dissolve the Lords House in high affront dishonor of the Lords and their House and of the Kings Soveraign royal Authority the fountain of all Honor and that without any legal trial or Judgment by their Peers or just cause of degradation on their parts against the express words and meaning of Magna Charta c. 29. And if any Lords upon such Elections should so far degenerate debase or degrade themselves as to accept thereof and ignobly sit and vote as Members of the Commons House both they and their posteritieâ— for such an ignoble act meritoriously deserved to be for ever degraded from their Nobility and secluded from all future sitting in the Lords House as Peers becoming thereby the very shame scorn scandal of Nobility fit only to be ranked with the basest Peasants to whom these Levellers would now equallize them Yea it would be now no less than wilfull perjury in any Freeholders Citizens Burgesses to elect them Knights or Burgesses and in themselves to accept of such Elections when chosen and in the whole House of Peers and Commons too once to permit allow approve or connive at such elections after their late Protestation Vow and Solemn League and Covenant to maintain to their power the Rights Privileges of Parliament and both Houses of Parliament whereof this is an unquestionable Right and Privilege That no Member of the Lords House should be elected a Knight Citizen Burgess or brought down from thence to sit only as a Commoner in the Commons House so long as he continues a Peer or Member of the Lords House a distinct House from and superior to the Commons House in all ages as its Title of the Lower House and their standing alwayes bare before the Lords with other evidences demonstrate nor any Knight Citizen or Burgess a true real Member of the House of Peers
unless a Peer by birth or creation those who are called to it only by general or special Writs not being formerly for life or inheritance Peers Nobles or holding by Barony of the King being only Assistants to the Lords as the Judges and others usually are not Members having votes It is the opinion of Sir Edward Cook in his Institutes on Littleton That if the King call any Layman to the Vpper house of Parliament generally by his Writ which he there recites that this alone doth create him a Baron and Lord of Parliament in fee simple without the word heirs and ennoble both himself and his heirs after him so as to make them hereditary Barons And this is the received opinion of most Grandees of the Law relying only upon his bare Ipse dixit though sometimes mistaken in his Judgement and frequently in his Records and Presidents whereon hee grounds his Opinion although he cites no president nor record at all to make good his Assertion in this case But under the favour of this Great Oracle of Law I conceive this Opinion of his to be no Law at all but a meer mistake for these ensuing reasons 1. Because there is not one word or syllable in this general Writ of Summons that gives him either the Name Title Honor or Dignity of a Lord or Baron of the Realm Therefore it cannot in Law or reason create him such a one If he were a Knight an Esquire a Master or Gentleman or Judge when the Writ was directed to him it gives him only that Title and summons him only by it without stiling him a Lord Baron Earl Viscount or Peer of the Realm at all Therefore it cannot ennoble nor create him one much less ennoble his posterity and give him an hereditary Barony without the word heirs since the Writ is only personal directed to himself alone 2. Because the Kings end and intention in summoning him to Parliament by this Writ is not to ennoble and create him a Lord Peer or Baron much less to ennoble his Posterity after him but only to consult and treat with him and the Prelates Lords and Nobles of the Realm concerning the affairs there propounded As this clause of the Writ demonstrates which only must ennoble him and his heirs if any to come to the Parliament at such a day and place that so the King may VOBISCUM with him not his heirs cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus dicti regni nostri colloquâ—um habere tractatum Which word VOBISCVM being distinguished from cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus Regni can not possibly create him a Lord or Baron no more than a Prelate of the Realm the rather because the word Baro is not in the Writ Neither can the following clause create him one Viz. dictis die loco personaliter intersitis Nobiscum cum Praelatis Magnatibus Baronibus supradictis super dictis Negotiis tractaturis vestrumque Consilium impensuris because it neither gives him the name nor stile of a Lord or Nobleman much less of a Baron no more than of a Prelate and summons him not to be a Lord Earl Prelate or Baron of the Realm but to be personally present with them which he may be though a private person and no Lord and to treat and give his advice with them concerning the businesses there propounded the only end for which he is summoned not to be their fellow Peer Lord or Baron So that it is against all sence and reason to aver that such a general Writ as this can create himself much less his Posterity Lords or Barons of the Realm in perpetuity It is a rule in Law and oft resolved That the Kings grant shall not inure to two intents nor pass or give two things at once especially when one of them only is expressed the other not Therefore this writ of the King shall not-doe it to create the party summoned a Baron meerly by implication which is not expressed and to summon him to conferr treat and give his advice in Parliament which is the only thing intended and clearly expressed 3ly The Writ summons him only to that particular Parliament then to be held at one certain day and place not to any other much less to all future Parliaments to be held Therefore it cannot create him and his heirs hereditary Barons and Members of the Lords House no more than the Writ for electing Knights Citizens and Burgesses for that particular Parliament makes them and their posterity Knights Citizens and Burgesses of Parliament for perpetuity It being both contrary to the words and intention of the Writ to make him much less his heirs Members of all succeeding Parliaments to which they must still be summoned by New Writs 4ly No Lord or Baron is or can be legally created but of some particular place Town City or the like whereof he is stiled Earl Lord or Baron But the general writ of summons gives him no such particular stile or title of dignity confined to such a certain place Therefore it cannot create him either a Lord or Baron or if it doth it must be sine titulo which were absurd 5ly No Duke Earl when created Viscount Lord or Baron is or can be created a Peer of the Realm by the Kings Letters Patents for life in tayl or see simple without expresse words in the Patent creating him such a one for life or him and the heirs males of his body or his heirs in general Dukes Marquesses Viscounts Earls Lords or Barons of such a particular place as all their Patents whereof you have sundry Presidents in Mr. Seldens Titles of honour lib. 2. ch 5. throughout and our books of Heraldry plentifully manifest And in all late Patents of creation since 20 H. 8. of any Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts or Barons there is a special clause inserted enabling them and their heirs males and every of them to have hold and possess a seat and place in the Parliam of us our heirs and Successors within the Realm of England among other Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts Lords and Barons of the Realm as a Duke Marquesse Earl Viscount Lord or Baron as Mr. Selden and their Patents inform us and I have formerly touched p. 49. If then the king by his Letters Patents cannot create men Nobles and Peers of Parliament for life in tail or see simple without these special and particular clauses then by the self same reason he cannot create them such by his writ unlesse it hath such special words and clauses in it and not by the general writ of summons forementioned wherein there is not one clause or syllable tending to such a particular personal or hereditary creation The rather because Sir Edward Cook himself confesseth that the Creation by Letters Patents is the surer though by writ be the antienter way for he and his posterity may sufficiently be created and made Noble by Letters Patents though he to whom they
against Sir Michael de la Pool Knight Lord Chancellor of England first before the Commons and afterward before the Lords which was granted Then he accused him BEFORE THE LORDS for bribery and injustice and that he entered into a bond of 10 l. to Iohn Ottard a Clerk to the said Chancellor which he was to give for his good success in the business in part of payment whereof he brought Herring and Sturgeon to Ottard and yet was delayed and could have no justice at the Chancellors hands Upon hearing the cause and examining witnesses upon Oath before THE LORDS the Chancellor was cleared The Chancellor thereupon required reparation for so great a slander the Lords being then troubled with other weighty matters let the Fishmonger to Bail and referred the matter to be ordered by the Judges who upon hearing the whole matter condemned Cavendish in three thousand marks for his slanderous complaint against the said Chancellor and adjudged him to prison till he had paid the same to the Chancellor and made fine and ransom to the King also which the Lords confirmed In the Parliament of 8 R. 2. n. 12. Walter Sybell of London was arrested and brought into the Parliament before the Lords at the sute of Robert de Veer Earl of Oxford for slandering him to the Duke of Lancaster and other Nobles for maintenance Walter denied not but that he said that certain there named recovered against him the said Walter and that by maintenance of the said Earl as he thought The Earl there present protested himself to be innocent and put himself upon the trial Walter thereupon was committed to Prison by the Lords and the next day he submitted himself and desired the Lords to be a mean for him saying he could not accuse him whereupon THE LORDS CONVICTED and FINED HIM FIVE HUNDRED MARKS TO THE SAID EARL for the which and for his fine and ransom to the King he was committed to prison BY THE LORDS A direct case in point By these two last Presidents of the Lords â—ining and imprisoning Cavendish and Syber two Commoners in Parliament for their standers and false accusacions only of two particular Peers and Members of their house it is most apparent the Lords now may most justly not only imprison but likewise fine both Lilburn and Overion for their most scandalous Libels against all the Members just Privileges Judicatory and Authority of the whole House of Peers which they have contemned vilisied oppugned and libelled against in the highest degree and most scurrillously abused reviled in sundry seditious Pamphlets to incite both the Army and whole Commonalty against them In the Parliament of 11 R. 2. the Duke of Glocester and other Lords came to London with great forces to secure themselves and remove the kings ill Counsellors and bring them to judgement whereupon the King for fear securing himself in the Tower of London and refusing to come to them at Westminster contrary to his faithfull promise the day before they sent him this threatning Message nisi venire maturaret juxta condictum quod eligerent alium sibi Regem qui vellet et deberet obtemperare consiliis Dominorum Wherewith being terrified he came unto them the next day Cui dixerunt PROCERES pro honore suo regni commodo oporterâ—â— ut Proditores susurrones adulatores et male fici detractores juratores à suo Palatio et Comitive etiam eliminarentur Whereupon they banished sundry Lords Bishops Clergy-men Knights and Ladies from the Court and imprisoned many other Knights Esquires and Lawyers to answer their offences in Parliament The first man proceeded against in Parliament was the Chief Justice Tresylian whom the Lords presently adjudged to be drawn and hanged The like Iuegement the Lords gave against Sir Nicholas Brambre Knight Sir Iohn Salisbury Sir Iames Burwâ—yes Iohn Beauchamp Iohn Blakes who were all drawn and hanged accordingly as Trayâ—ers one after another and Simon Burly beheaded after them by like judgement notwithstanding the Kings and Earl of Derbies intercessions for him to the Lords After their Execution Robert Belknapâ— John Holâ— Roger Fulthorp and William Burgh Justices were banished by the Lords sentence and their lands and chattels confiscated out of which they allowed them only a small annual pension to sustain their lives After which these Judgments against them were confirmed by Acts of Attainder as you may read in the Statutes at large of 11 R. 2. where their Crimes and Treasons are specified in Cokes 3 Institutes c. 2. p. 22 23. and in Knyghton Holinshed Fabian Speed Trussel with other Historians In the Parliament of 13 R. 2. n. 12. Upon complaint of the Bishop Dean and Chapter of Lincoln against the Mayor and Bayliffs thereof for injustice in keeping them from their rights and rents by reason of the franchises granted them which they abused Writs were sent to the Mayor and Baylifs to appear at a certain day before the Lords and to have full authority from the whole Comonalty to abide their determination therein At which day the Mayor and Bayliffs appearing in proper person for that they brought not full power with them from the said Commonalty they were anâ— goâ— by the Lords to be in contempt and so were the Mayor and Bayliffs of Cambridge for the self same cause this very Parliment n. 14. In the Parliament of 15 R. 2. n. 16. The Prior of Holland in Lancashire complained of a great riot done by Henry Treble John Greenboâ— and sundry others for entring into the Parsonage of Whitwâ—rke in Leicestershire thereupon John de Ellingham Serjeant at Armes by vertue of a Commission to him directed brought the said Treble and Greenbow the principle malefactors into the Parliament before the Lords who upon 〈◊〉 confessed the whole matter and were therefore committed to the Fleaâ— there to remain at the Kings pleasure after which they made a fine in the Chancery agreed with the Prior and found sureties for the Good behaviour whereupon they were dismissed The same Parliament n. 19. Sir Will. Bryan was by the King with the assent of the Lords committed prisoner to the lower during the Kings will and pleasure for purchasing a Bull from Rome to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to excommunicate all such who had broken up his house and taken away divers Letters Privileges and Charters which Bull was adjudged prejudicial to the King his Councâ—l and in derogation of the Law Num. 20. Thomas Harding was committed to the Fleet by the King and Lords assent there to continue during the Kings pleasure for falsly accusing Sir John and Sir Ralph Sutton as well by mouth as writing of a conspiracy whereof upon hearing they were acquitted And n. 21. John Shadwell of Baghsteed in Sussex was likewise committed to the Fleet by THE LORDS there to remain during the Kings pleasure for misinforming of the Parliament that the Archbishop of Canterbury had excommunicated him and his neighbours wrongfully in his
by their Speaker acknowledge the right of judicature in the case of a Commoner to be only and wholly in the Lords even in a criminal cause and thereupon pray the Lords to give judgement against him upon their Impeachment which they did accordingly in their robes as Judges by the mouth of the Lord Keeper their Speaker In this very Parliament now sitting Decemb. 21. Jan. 14. Febr. 11. 1640. and July 6. 1641. The Commons House by their Members impeached Sir John Bramston Chief Justice of the Kings Bench Sir John Finch Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Sir Humphry Davenport Chief Baron Judge Berkly Judge Crawly Baron Weston and Baron Trever of high Treason and other misdemeanors for that they had trayterously and wickedly endeavoured to subvert the fundamental Laws and established Government of the Realm of England and instead thereof to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical Government against Law which they had declared by trayterous words opinions and judgement in the point of SHIP MONY by their subscriptions and judgement given against them in the case of Mr. Hamden in the Exchequer Chamber Which Impeachments they transmitted to the Lords House praying THE LORDS to put them to answer the premises and upon their examinations and trial to give such judgement upon every of them as is agreeable to Law and Justice To avoid which judgement Sir John Finch fled the Realm and the rest of them made fines and compositions to the publike and were most of them removed from their Judges places After this the Lords themselves as Judges in Parliament passed several judgements and censures against Dr. John Pocklington for his Sunday no Sabbath and other Books and against Dr. Bray for licensing them In October 1643. The Lords fined and imprisoned Clement Walker Esq in the Tower for some scandalous words against the Lord Viscount Say a Member of he House of Peers After that the Lords alone without any Impeachment of the Commons on their privity imprisoned fined and censured one Morrice upon complaint of Sir Adam Littleton after a full hearing at which I was present for forging an Act of Parliament with four or five more of his confederates therein which was most clearly proved by Witnesses upon Oath whereby he would have defrauded Sir Adam of some Lands in Essex And at least one hundred more Commoners have been committed by THE LORDS this Parliament and fined by them for several offences Misdemeanors and Breaches of their Privileges as well as Lilburn and Overton yet none of them ever excepted against or demurred to their Jurisdiction nor did the Commons House ever yet except against them for these their proceedings as injurious or illegal but approved and applauded this their Justice Finally John Lilburn himself in his printed Pamphlet intituled Innocency and Truth justified p. 74 75. relates that on May 4. 1641. himself was accused of High Treason and brought before the Lords Barr for his life where one Littleton swore point-blank against him But he having Liberty given to speak for himself without any demurring to their Jurisdiction because we was a Commoner desired that his Witnesses might be heard to clear him was upon Mr. Andrews Oath acquitted at the Barr of the whole house And thereupon concludes I am resolved to speak well of those who have done me JUSTICE From all these punctual successive presidents impeachments and clear confessions of the Commons House themselves in many former and late Parliam and in this now sitting it is undeniable That the King and Lords joyntly and the Lords severally without the King have an indubitable right of Iudicature without the Commons vested in them not only over Peers themselves but likewise Commoners in all extraordinary criminal cases of Treason Felony Trespass and other Misdemeanors triable only in Parliament which hath been constantly acknowledged practised submitted to in all ages without dispute much more then have they such a just judicial rightfull power in cases of breach of their own privileges of which none are or can be Judges but themselves alone as Sir Edw. Cook resolves they being the supremest Court. And to deny them such a power is to make the Highest Court of Judicature in the Realm inferiour to the Kings Bench and all other Courts of Justice who have power to judge and try the persons causes of Commoners yea to commit and fine them for contempts and breaches of their Privileges as our Law books resolve and every mans experience can testifie The Lords right of Iudicature both over Peers and Commoners in criminal causes being thus fully evicted against the falseâ— ignorant pretences of illiterate Sectaries altogether unacquainted with our Histories and Records of Parliament which they never yet read nor understood there remains nothing but to answer some Authorities Presidents and Objections produced against it These presidents in Sir Edward Cooke Sir Robert Cotton and others are of 3 Sores 1. Such as are produced by them only to prove that the Commons have a Copartnership and joynt Authority with the King and Lords in the power and right of Judicature in our Parliaments 2ly Such as are objected to evidence they have a sole power of Judicature in themselves in some cases without the K. and Lords 3ly Such as are urged to prove they have no right of Judicature in Parliament in the cases of Commoners that are capital or criminal I shall propose and answer them all in order 1. Sir Edward Cook and Sir Robert Cotton produce these presidents to prove That the Commons have a Joint inâ—erest right and share with the King and Lords in the Iudicatory or Judicial power of Parliaments which I shall propound according to their Antiquity The 1. President alleged for it is that of Adomar Bishop of Winchester elect cited by Sir Robert Cotton in his Post-humous Discourse concerning the Power of the Peers Commons in Parliament in point of Iudicature who An. 44 H. 3. as affirms he was then exiled by the Ioint Sentence of the King Lords and COMMONS as appears by the Letter sent to Pope Alexander the 4th Si Dominus Rex et Regni Majores hoc vellent meaning Adomars revocation COMMUNITAS tamen ipsius ingressum jam nullatenus sustineret The Peers subsign this answer with their names and Peter de Moâ—tfort vice totius COMMUNITATIS as Speaker or Proctor of the Commons I answer under the favour of this renowned learned Antiquary that this president is full of gross mistakes For 1. Bishop Adomar was not banished the Realm at all either by King Lords or Commons but fled out of it voluntarily for fear to avoid the Barons who purâ—iâ—ed him with forces as Mat. Paris with others relate which the Nobles and Generality of the Barons in direct terms inform this Pope in another Letter sent together with this objected Maxime cum ipse a regno expuisus non extiterit sed sponte cesserit non ausus exhibitionem justiâ—iae quae
presidents are but few never judicially argued and rather connived at than approved by the King and Lords taken up with other more publike businesses therefore passing sub silentio they can make no Law rule or right as is resolved in Long. 5 E. 4. f. 110. Cooks 4. Reports f. 93 94. Slades case 6 Report f. 75. Druries case 5ly There are many express antient Presidents Statutes Judgements in most former Parliaments to the contrary sundry of them upon the Commons own Petitions and complaints which will over-ballance and controll these few late Presidents warranted by no old Records or Statutes whatsoever but contradicted by the constant practice of former ages To clear which truth beyond contradiction I shall shew you the very Original of the Commons summons to Parliament by the Kings writs out of meer grace not antient right or custom with the several varieties of Writs Statures touching elections of Knights Citizens Burgesses and chief cases resolved in Parliaments touching Elections breaches of Privileges relating to Members or their menial Servants that I finde upon record which will abundantly clear this point and refute these irregular puny presidents The original of our Parliaments as now constituted of King Lords and Commons is by several of our Historians Antiquaries and Writers referred to the 16. or 17. year of King Henry the 1. or at least to Henry the 2. his reign which I have already refuted by a particular list of all the Parliaments under them Yet many of this opinion affirm that the Commons were not constantly summoned to our Parliaments but only the Lords Spiritual and Temporal before the 49. of King Henry the 3. and beginning of Edward the 1. his reign neither had they a Speaker till 51 E. 3. Therefore no power of Judicature over their Members The first Writ I finde extant that savors of summoning Knights to Parliament is that in the 15. year of King Iohn wherein this King sent a Writ to the Sherif of Oxon in these words Rex Vicecomiti Oxon salutem Praecipimus tibi quod omnes Milites Ballivae tuae qui summoniti fuerunt esse apud Oxoniam ad Nos à die Omnium Sanctorum in 15. dies venire facias cum armis suis Corpora vero Baronum sine armis singulariter et IV. DISCRETOS MILITES DE COMITATU TUO illuc venire facias ad Nos ad eundem terminum AD LO QUENDUM NOBISCUN DE NEGOTIIS REGNI NOSTRI Teste meipso apud Witten 11 die Novembris Eodem modo scribitur omnibus Vicecomitibus This is no Writ of Summons to Parliament as some take it but rather to a Military Council as I conceive it For 1. There is no mention of any Bishops Abbots Priors Spiritual Lords Citizens or Burgesses summoned thereto but only of Barons without arms and Knights with arms 2ly Of all knights they had formerly summoned to appear there 3ly Of 4. not 2. discreet Knights out of every County and that not ad Parliamentum nostrum but ad Nos venire facias 4ly They were not to be elected by the people but immediately summoned elected and sent by the Sherifs themselves 5ly They were to come ad loquendum nobiscum not ad faciendum consentiendum hiis c. as the usual Writs of Summons for Knights of Shires are since without any power of Judicature to fine seclude or question one anothers elections or returns as now The very first express writ extant in History or Records that I can meet with upon search for the calling of Knights Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament is in 49 â—3 where the King after the battel of Evesham by his Writs summoned no less than 64 Abbots 36 Priors besides the Bishops and 5. Deans of Cathedrals and the Temporal Earls and Barons only 23. in number the rest being slain in the field or in actual rebellion After their Writs of Summons and name â—ollows this Writ or Note of summons for Knights Citizens and Burgesses and Barons of the Cinqueports Item mandatum est singulis Vicecomitibus per Angliam quod VENIRE not elâ—gi FACIANT duos Milites de Legalioribus Probioribus et discretioribus Militibus singulorum Comitatuum AD REGEM Londoniis in Octabis praedictis in forma supradicta Item in forma praedicta scribitur CIVIBUS Eborum Civâ—bus Lincoln caeteris Burgis Angliae quod mittant in forma praedict DUOS DE DISCRETIORIBUS LEGALIORIBVS PROBIORIBUS TAM CIVIBUS QUAM BURGENSIBUS SUIS Item in forma praedicta mandatuÌ„ est Baronibus et probis hominibus Quinque Portuum prout continetur in brevi inrotulato inferius Here the King 1. limited both the number and quality of the Knights Citizens and Burgesses when first summoned to our Parliaments 2ly He directed particular Writs to all Sherifs to summon not to elect by the choice of the Freeholders two of the legallest honestest discreetest Knights in their Counties which they alone were then to make choice of 3ly He sends particular Writs to some not all Cities and the rest of the Burroughs of England to send two of their discreetest legallest and honestest Citizens and so to the Cinqueports to send such Barons to this Parliament And if they returned any not thus qualified against the form of these Writs no doubt the King himself might refuse seclude them and he with his Lords were the sole Judges of their fitness for that service not they themselves to judge of their own or their fellow Members fitness or incapacity The first seclusion of any Knights Citizens and Burgesses in Parliament and electing others in their places was by the King himself with his Councils advice not by the Commons themselves for wilfull absence Claus 5 â— â— m. 26 dorso where divers Knights of Shires Citizens and Burgesses departing from the Parliament held at London without the Kings special license the King thereupon issued out Writs to the Sherifs of Yorkshire and other Counties to summon all such Knights Citizens and Burgesses within their Bayliwicks to return to the Parliament vel alios ad hoc idoneos loco ipsorum si ad hoc vacare non possunt eligere c. or to cause others who were fit to be elected in their places if they could not attend the Parliament with sufficient authority from the Counties Cities and Boroughs to consent to those things which should be ordained at the next Session of Parliament then prorogued to a certain day Here the King alone by his Writ takes authority to discharge those Knights Citizens and Burgesses who departed from the Parliament without his license and would or could not attend it without the Commons votes or assents and to command the Sherif to elect other sit persons in their places Claus 4 E. 3. m. 13 Dorso The King having issued out writs of Summons to Parliament dated Octob. 23. The 3 of November following he sent writs to all Sherifs to proclaim in all places That he being
Parliament which prerogative of the Court is so great as our learned Counsel informeth us as all Acts and Processes coming out of any other inferiour Courts must for the tiime cease and give place to the highest And touching the party it was a great presumption in him knowing our servant to be one of this House and being warned thereof before would nevertheless prosecute this matter out of time and therefore was well worthy to have lost his debt which I would not wish and thereforefore doe commend your equity that having lost the same by Law have restored him to the same against him who was his debtor and this may be a good example to other not to attempt any thing against the privilege of this Court but to take the time better Whereupon Sir Edward Montague then Lord chief Justice very gravely declared his opinion confirming by divers reasons all that the King had said which was assented unto by all the residue none speaking to the contrary The Act indeed passed not the higher House for the Lords had not time to consider of it by reason of the dissolution of the Parliament From this President I shall observe 1. That this is the first President that the Commons house ever sent their Serjeant to demand a Member imprisoned without first acquainting the King and Lords whereupon the Serjeant was thus resisted affronted 2ly That upon the Serjeants report of this resistance and contempt the Commons house did not undertake to punish it themselves though there were many of the Kings privy Council then of and in it but according to former presidents went and complained thereof in rhe Lords house praying them to redress and punish it 3ly That all the Lords and Judges there assembled judged the contempt to be very great 4ly That thereupon being busied with other weighty publike affairs they by special order referred the examination punishment thereof to the Commons House 5ly That thereupon the Commons by vertue of this special reference from the Lords not by their own inherent authority or Jurisdiction sent for the delinquent parties examined the contempt imprisoned the Sherifs of London and White in the Tower and the under Officers in Newgate 6ly That afterwards they acquainted the King and Lords with their proceedings who approved and commended the same 7ly That they would have confirmed part of their judgement by an Act to discharge Ferrers of the execution and not to revive it after the Parliament which passed but by 14. voices and never passed the Lords house who would not assent thereto All which particulars unanswerably evidence that the judgement and punishment of contempts and breaches of privilege of the Commons house and their Members belong wholly and solely to the Lords not to the Commons house at all unless by special order and reference from the Lords to the House of Commons who are to be informed of their proceedings and censures upon such a reference and to ratifie them by their assents or some Act of Parliament Therefore the conclusion of Crompton from this president and Dyer f. 60. which hath not a syllable to this effect That any Knight Burgess Baron of the 5. Ports or others called to the Parliament of the King shall have privilege of Parliament during the Parliament or Session of it so that he who arrests any of them during that term shall be imprisoned in the Tower by the Nether House of which he is and shall be put to a fine and the Kéeper also if he will not deliver him when the Serjeant at Arms shall come for him by command of the House is but a meâ—r mistake And the late objected Presidents have been grounded only upon his Authority and the mistaking or misapplying of Ferrers case W. Trewynnard a Burgess of Parliament in 35 H. 8. the very next year after this case of Ferrers was taken in execution upon an Exigent grounded on a Capias ad saâ—isfaciendum by the Sherif of Cornwal upon a complaint thereof to the King and Lords in Parliament there issued a Writ of Privilege in the Kings name during the Sessions of Parliament to R. Chamond then Sherif of Cornwal to release him reciting that he was a Burgess and likewise the Custom of the privilege of Parliament whereupon he was released the personal attendance of every Member being so necessary in Parliament that he ought not to be absent for any business because he is a necessary Member and therefore ought to be privileged from arrests Now the Parliament consisting of 3. parts to wiâ— of the King as chief Head the Lords the chief and principal Members of the Body and the Commons the Inferiour Members making up one body of Parliament as Chief Justice Dyer there resolves these inferior Members have no means to relieve themselves when their persons are arrested but by complaint to the Head or Chief and principal Members of this body as in all other Corporations where the Mayor Recorder Aldermen Justices and chief Officers are the only Judges not the Commons to hear and determine all injuries done to any Commoner Pasch 1. 2. Phil. Mariae Rot. 16. B.R. The Attorney General in the Kings and Queens name exhibited an Information against 34. Knights Citizens Burgesses of the Commons House for absenting themselves and departing from the Parliament then held without the Kings and Queens special license contrary to their Prohibition and in manifest contempt of the said King Queen and Parliament and to the great detriment of the state of the Commonwealth of this Realm and the ill example of others The Great Lawyer Edmond Plowden being one pleaded he was present at the Parl. from the very beginning of it to the end and that he departed not from it which he was ready to verify as the Court should direct and prayed judgement to be discharged Edward Harford another of them pleaded a special license to depart whereupon his prosecution was stayed but so that Process â—ill issued against the rest The Commons house therefore iâ— Q. Maries reign were not reâ—ted sole Judges of their own Members in cases of departure from Parliament in contempt to the publike prejudice and ill example of others as now they deem themselves by Sir Edward Cooks new-invented Law and Custom of Parliaments In the Parliament of 18 Eliz. Feb. 22. A report was made to the Commons House by a Committee appointed to consider how Mr. Halls man then a Member and imprisoned against his privilege might be released that the Committee found no President for setting at large by the Mace any person in arrest but only by Writ of Privilege And that by divers presidents and records perused by the Committee every Knights Citizen or Burgess requiring privilege for his Servant hath used to take a Corporal Oâ—th before the Lord Chancellor that the paâ—ty for whom such Writ is prayed came up with him and was his servant at the time of the arrest made Whereupon Mr.
2. c. 4. 7 H. 4. c. 15. 11 H. 4. c. 1. 1 H. 5. c. 1. 6 H. 6. c. 4. 8 H. 6. c. 7. 10 H. 6. c. 2. 11 H. 6. c. 11. 23 H. 6. c. 15. which cite Our Lord the King willeth commandeth and Ordaineth or hath Ordained by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal upon complaint or at the special request of the Commons to shew that they are only Petitioners not Judges nor Ordainers in all or any of them give them not the least title of Jurisdiction in cases of elections or privileges And therefore according to the resolution of all the Judges Hill 2. Jacobi in the case of Penal Statutes Cook 7 Rep. f. 37. That the prosecution of penal Statutes cannot by law be granted to any nor be prosecuted or executed in any other order or manner of proceeding than by the Acts themselves is prescribed and provided the Commons cannot against the Letter and provision of all those Acts be Judges of them in any other manner or order than they prescribe As for their proceedings in the Committee of Privileges touching Elections since they have interposed in them as they have been very irregular illegal in respect all the Witnesses they examin touching them are unsworn and give their testimonies without Oath upon which they Ground their Votes So they are for the most part very partial and for that cause it is usually stiled The Committee of Affections he that can make the most Friends and strongest party being sure to carry the election for the most part both at the Committee and in the House though never so foul as I could instance in many cases of late times and more especially in the case of the Election of Cirencester 1647. too foul to blot my paper with For their suspending secluding ejecting their own Members I have sufficiently manifested its illegality long since in my Ardua Regni being a late dangerous president began within our memories the sad effects and consequences where of we now discern by these dangerous gradations 1. The Commons began to seclude one another upon pretence of undue elections and retornes in Queen Elizabeths reign but not before which they have since continued and that rather to strengthen or weaken a party in the House then to rectifie undue elections and retorns which a good Act would easily do 2ly In the later and last Parliaments of King Charls they began to seclude Projectors though duly elected 3ly They proceeded to suspend and eject such who were royallists and adhered to the late Kings party 4ly They proceeded to imprison and eject those Members whom the Army Offices impeached or disliked as opposite to their designs 5ly The Minority of the House at last by the power of the Army secured secluded expelled the Majority and 50 or 60. near 400 Members and made themselves the Commons House without them 6ly They then proceeded to vote down and seclude both King and House of Lords then voted themselves to be the Parliament of England sole Legislators and supream authority of the Nation without either King or House of Lords or majority of their fellow Members prescribing an Engagement under strictest penalties against K. House of Lords to seclude them from all future Parliaments 7ly Hereupon the Army Officers and Souldiers who made continued them an absolute Parliament and first of all subscribed the Engagement to be true and faithfull to them without King and House of Lords at last by Divine Justice against their very engagements to them secluded suppressed them all as they had done the King Lords and their fellow Members and declared them to be actually dissolved and no longer to be a Parl. or the supreme authority of the Nation 8ly They then proceeded to chuse and nominate a Parliament at Whitehall alone without the peoples election and then one part of them without the rest resigned their new soveraign power and secluded dissolved the residue and turned them out of doors 9ly They then proceeded to a New model of Parliaments wherein they disabled most of the Freeholders Citizens and Burgesses of England to be either Electors or elected Members contrary to their privilege and all former laws for elections appointed those they stiled the Council of State at Whitehall to seclude what Members they pleased though duly chosen according to their new ill-tuned instruments before or without any examination or reason rendred for their seclusion to the secluded Members or their Electors for their new created Parliaments by which means they secluded whom and how many they pleased in all their late conventions And most of those Reipublican Members and some cashiered Army Officers who were most active in securing secluding their fellow Members in December 1648. and in voting down the King and House of Lordspunc who may now justly say as Adoâ—bezâ—eh once did in another case Judg. 1.8 As I have done unto-others so God hath requited me being secluded secured cashiered dissolved and some of them sent prisoners to remote Castles as they secluded and thus imprisoned my self with other their fellow Members without cause and most justly branded in several Pamplets and Declarations for a CORRVPT PARTY carrying on their own ends to perpetuate themselves in their late Parliamentary and supream Authority never answering the ends which God his people and the whole Nation expected from them but exercizing an arbitrary power at Committees and elsewhere over them likely to swallow up the antient Liberties and Properties of the People to increase their vexations c. as they had most unjustly taxed the secluded Members 1648. for A CORRVPT MAJORITY acting contrary to their trusts Which I desire them now seriously to lay to heart and to acknowlege Gods Soveraign Justice therein 10ly Their new Major Generals in their last elections prescribed to all Countries and to most Cities Burroughs by letters lists of names sent to them what persons they must elect secluding those they elected which were not in their lists and caused Sherrifs to return many they nominated though never elected but protested against by those who were to chuse them rather to carry on private interests designs than the private or publike good Laws Liberties Properties Peace Ease of the Nation from importable Taxes Excizes Slaverie and armed guards and to set up private Conventicles Parties instead of free publike English Parliaments duly elected and constituted These the sad effects of this Innovation and Usurpation of the Commons over their own Members by the objected Presidents which by Divine Justice have made all their new modelled Conventions abortive successess yea to end in sudden confusions and unexpected dissolutions ever since Besides from this their late fining imprisoning and judging of their fellow Members in the House they proceeded in the last long Parl. to make almost every Committee of the Commons House a most arbitrary tyrannical Court of Justice independent on the
House it self without any report at all of their proceedings to the House authorizing Committees to secure imprison close imprison cashire banish condemn execute many persons sequester confiscate sell dispose their Inheritances Offices Lands Tenements Benefices real and personal estates to deprive them of their callings professions to search and break up their houses by Soldiers and others without any legal sworn Officers day and night to seize their Letters Papers Horses Arms Plate Money yea debts in other mens hands at pleasure to indemnifie and stay their legal actions sutes Judgements at Law and null their executions at their pleasures yea to commit them till they released all sutes actions Judgements and paid costs and damages to those they justly sued and recovered against to adde affliction to affliction and cruelty oppression to injustice These are the bitter fruits of Commons usurped judicature whereof there are thousands of most sad presidents which may hereafter be objected to prove the sole Power of Judicature to reside of right not in the K. or House of Lords but in the Commons House alone and every of their Committees especially for Examinations Plundered Ministers Sequestrations Indempnity Haberdashers and Goldsmiths Halls Privileges sales of Delinquents the Kings Queens Princes Lands and Estates Excise the Army Navy and the like yea in their new created High Courts of Justice who have acted as absolute arbitrary unlimited lawlesse Courts of justice in the highest degree to the subversion destruction of the antient Liberties Freeholds Properties Great Charters and fundamental Laws of the Nation in general and of thousands of the highest lowest degree of English Freemen in particular with as much ground of reason Warrant from the many late Presidents of this Nature as these here objected to prove a soâ—e right of â—udicature in the Commons House in cases of undue elections retorns misdemeanors privileges relating to their Members and their seruants Which strang exorbitant Presidents and Proceedings if they should be made Patterns for future Parliaments and Committees I shall desire all sober minded men to consider of the dangerous consequences of them thus notably expressed by the late King in his Answer concerning the Ordinance for imposing and levying the 20th part of mens estutes 29 November 1642. After this Ordinance and Declaration t is not in any sober mans power to believe himself worth any thing or that there is such a thing as Law Liberty Property left in England under the jurisdiction of these men and the same power that robs them now of the twentieth part of their estates hath by that but made a claim and entituled it self to the other nineteen whne it shall be thought fit to hasten the general ruine Sure if the minds of all men be not stubbornly prepared for servitude they will look on this Ordinance as the greatest prodigie of Arbitrary power and tyranny that any age hath brought forth in any Kingdom other grievances and the greatest have been conceived intollerable rather by the logick and consequence than by the pressure it self this at once sweeps away all that the wisdom and justice of Parliaments have provided for them Is their property in their estates so carefully looked to by their ancestors and so amply established by Us against any possibility of Invasion from the Crown which makes the meanest Subject as much a Lord of his own as the greatest Peer to be valued or considered here is a twentieth part of every mans estate or so much more as four men will please to call the twentieth part taken away at once and yet a power left to take a twentieth still of that which remains and this to be levied by such circumstances of severity as no Act of Parliament ever consented too Is their liberty which distinguishes subjects from slaves and in which this freeborn Nation hath the advantage of all Christendom dear to them they shall not only be imprisoned in such places of this kingdom a latitude of judgement no Court can challenge to it self in any cases but for so long time as the Committee of the House of Commons for Examination shall appoint and Order the House of Commons it self having never assumed or in the least degree pretended to a power of Judicature having no more authority to administer an Oath the only way to discover and find out the truth of facts than to cut off the heads of any our Subjects and this Committee being so far from being a part of the Parliament that it is destructive to the whole by usurping to it self all the power of King Lords and Commons All who know any thing of Parliament know that a Committee of either House ought not by Law to publish their own results neither are their conclusions of any force without the confirmation of the House which hath the same power of controling them as if the matter had never been debated but that any Committee should be so contracted as this of examination a stile no Committee ever bore before this Parliament as to exclude the Members of the House who are equally trusted by their Country from being present at the Counsels is so monstrous to the privileges of Parliament that it is no more in the power of any man to give up that freedom than of himself to order that from that time the place for which he serves shall never more send a Knight or Burgesse to the Parliament and in truth is no lesse than to alter the whole frame of government to pull up Parliaments by the roots and to commit the lives liberties and estates of all the people of England to the arbitrary power of a few unqualified persons who shall dispose thereof according to their discretion without account to any rule or authority whatsoever Are their friends their wives and children the greatest blessings of peace and comforts of life pretious to them would their penury and imprisonments be lesse grievous by those cordials they shall be divorced from them banished and shall no longer remain within the Cities of London and Westminster the Suburbs and the Counties adjacent and how far those adjacent Counties shall extend no man knows The 3 sort of Presidents and Objections are such as Lilburn and Overton insist on to prove That the King and Lords have no power at all to judge or censure Commoners in our Parliament The only Record they insist on is the Lords own Protestation in 4 E. 3. n. 2. 6. in the case of Sir Simon Bareford which because I have already fully answered p. 323 324 325. and cleared by sundry subsequent presidents and there being no one president in any Parliament since to contradict it I shall wholly pretermit and proceed to their objections which are only two The first and principall objections whereon they most insist and rely is the Statute of Magna Charta chap. 29. That no Free-man shall be imprisoned outlawed exiled or any other may destroyed Nor we shall not passe
these 2. deposed Kings these 2. inferences have been made 1. That the Commons have a joynt interest with the Lords in the Judicature and Jugements in Parliament 2. That the Proceedings against our late condemned beheaded King are justifiable and warranted by them I answer that neiâ—her of these 2. Consequences are proved by them For 1. The Commons themselves in this Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. immediately after King Râ—chards deposition confess That the Judicature and Judgements of Parliament belong only to the King and Lords not to the Commons 2ly The Commons neither in nor out of Parliament are may or ought to be the Judges of the meanest Lord or Peer of the Realm who are to be judged tried by their Peers alone as I have abundantly evidenced in the premises Much less then can they be lawful Judges of their Soveraign Lord and King who is a degree above all the Peers of highest dignity In the Parliament An 1260. Prince Edward as I have proved before would be tried only by 2. Kings because all the rest of the Earls and Barons were not his Peers neither could they be his Judges much less then can Peers or Commons be their Kings Judges Peers to ondemn or try him 3ly Our Law-books resolve That the King hath no Peers in his own Realm and Therefore he can neither be legally tried nor judged by the Peers themselves much less by the Commons in Parliament 4ly The Lawes of Hoel Dha King of Wales about the year 940. Lex 20. resolve Rex non poterit secundum legem in lite stare coram Judice suo agendo vel respondendo per dignitatem naturalem yea all the Lords and Commons of England in the Parliament of Lincoln Anno 29. E. 1. in their forecited Letter to the Pope p. 128. resolve That the Kings of England Ex praeeminentia status suae Regiae dignitatis ex consuetudine cunctis temporibus observata neque responderunt neque respondere debebant coram aliquo Iudice Ecclesiastico vel seculari supâ—r juribus suis in regno c. Much less then may or ought they to be put to answer criminally for their lives or Crowns before any Ecclesiastical or Temporal Judge Peers or Commons House or High Court of COMMONS 5ly The Statutes of 16 R. 2. c. 5. and of 25 H. 8. c. 19.21 thus declare resolve and the Archbishop of Canterbury in the Parliament of 16 R. 2. n. 20. protested against the Popes pretended Supremacy That the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in subjection to no Realm or Person but immediatly subject to God and to none other in all things touching the Regality of the said Crown And the Statutes of 25 H. 8. c. 19 21 22. 26 H. 8 c. 1.3 27 H. 8. c. 15. 28 H. 8. c. 7.10 31 H. 8. c. 10.15 32 H. 8. c. 22.24 26. 33 H. 8. c. 29. 35 H. 8. c. 1.3.17 19. 37 H. 8. c. 17. 1 E. 6. c. 2. 1 Eliz. c. 1. 8 Eliz. c. 1. 3 Jac. c. 3 4. declare and enact The King to be the only Supreme Head Governor upon Earth both of the Church Realm of Engl. both of which recognize no Super or under God but only the King To affirm then that the Lords or Commons in Parliament may lawfully judge depose the King and deprive him of his Crown Regalities Head Life is to contradict repeal all these Statutes since the inferior Members can no more legally judge the Supreme head of the body politick than the head of the body natural or the Courrs in Westminster hall or Hundred Courts judge the High Court of Parliament and condemn repeal their Acts or Judgements 6ly Though Articles were drawn up against these two Kings pro forma yet neither of them was ever required or judicially summoned to make answer to them or heard or brought to trial before the Lords or Commons Barr or any other Tribunal or Court of Justice Whence the Bishop of Carlisle protested against it as most illegal unjust and trayterous Therefore neither the Lords nor Commons could be properly said their Iudges in this case and their Judgement without hearing or trial of them must needs be most erronious as well as Mortimers and the Earl of Arundels forecited 7ly The Lords and Commons resignation of their Homage to these 2. Kings when deposed shew that even then they esteâ—med them their Superiors Lords Homage being the most honourable and humble service that a franktenant may do to his Lord the tenant being ungirt his head uncovered kneeling down on both his knees before his Lord sitting covered and holding up his hands joyntly together between his Lords and the Kings hands when he doth his homage saying I become your man from this day forward of limb and of earthly worship and unto you shall be true and faithfull and bear faith for the tenements I hold of you And when done to any other Lord it is with a Saving the faith I owe unto our Soveraign Lord the King and his Heirs 8ly The Sentences of Deposition against them were given only by the Legislative power not JUDICIAL by way of Bill consented unto in the Parliament house by the Lords and Commons then sent to these Kings to their prisons and there read unto them by Committees and Proxies representing all the Estates in Parliament Therefore the reading of them to these Kings in their prisons was not properly a judgement neither did it constitute them who read it to them their Judges much less create the Commons Judges of these Kings 9ly All the Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons concurred joyntly in this Act of resigning their Homage to these Kings to whom they were all joyntly obliged and in whom they had all a common interest Et quod tangit omnes ab omnibus debet approbari Therefore it is no warrant for the proceedings against our late King without the consents and against the Express Votes of the whole House of Lords and of the Majority of the Commons house 10ly The Lords alone without the Commons gave Judgement for the close and perpetual imprisonment of King Richard the 2. therefore they were his sole and proper Judges by way of Sentence his deposition being by the Legislative not Judicial power 11ly These Kings especially the later of them had no sentence of deposition nor proceedings against them til they had through fear or pusillanimity first resigned their Crowns and kingship as unfit to reign or govern any longer which was made the principal ground of their subsequent declaratory depositions by the Lords and Commons when they had reduced themselves into the condition of private men by their resignations These presidents therefore cannot justifie the late proceedings against an actual lawful hereditary King by a small party of the Commons house alone without the House of Peers or the Majority of their fellow-fellow-Members who never resigned his
though amiable delightfull in themselves and gratefull to all true Philopaters Philologers and learâ—ed Nobles Statesmen Lawyers Scholars in this degenerous age wherein all sorts of Learning and insight in Records or Parliamentary Antiquities are very much decayed will yet be very displeasing to some sorts of ignorant heady extravagant persons who love darkness more than light because their deeds are evil but more especially to the Anabaptistical Levellers Lilburnians innovating Publicans and Republicans much like the Chaldeans of old a bitter and hasty Nation lately marching through the breâ—th of the Land to possesâ— the dwelling places that are not theirs they are terrible and dreadfull their judgement and dignity proceedeth of themselves they are all for violence they scoff at KINGS AND PRINCES ARE A SCORN UNTO THEM as appears by their late Votes Declarations Engagements not only against Kings and Kingship but the whole House of Lords and to â—lliterate self-conceited Lawyers and ignorant Members of the Commons House who deem that House and its Committees if not every Member of it the only Supream Judges and Judicature of the Realm paramount our Kings Lords Laws Liberties Great Charters and all other Courts of Justice having an absolute arbitrary unlimited power to act vote and determine what they please without appeal or consult which this Plea irrefragably disproves as a most gross and dangerous mistake for which they will frown upon it if not â—ate and prosecute me as their Enemy But the Sun must not cease from shining because weak and sore Eyes will be offended with its splendor nor seasonable truths of most publike concernment be concealed smothered in time of greatest need because ignorant erronious sottish â—air-braind Levellers or Innovator will be displeased with and storm against them they being always Sweet and lovely in themselves yea precious to the best of men and will prove victorious in conclusion though clouded suppressed maligned for the preâ—ent yea he who by the publication of such truths rebukes wise ingenuous mens extravagant actions and opinions for the present shall afterwards find more favour with them when they come to know themselves and their mistakes by meditating on the truths revealed to them heâ— he that flattereth them with his lips in their exorbitant actions or erronious opinions I shall therefore recommend this Plea for the Lords and all the truths therein discovered asserted to the omnipotent â—rotection and effectual blessing both of THE LORD OF LORDS and GOD OF TRUTH whose Eyes are upon the TRUTH in this sad age of Errors Falshoods Lies Fraud and desperate Hypocrisie wherein truth is fallen in the Streets and he that dares boldly assert it is reputed mad and maketh himself a prey And shall leave it as a lasting monument to posterity of my Cordial affection to the antient Parliamentary proceedings Lords Peers Laws Liberties Properties Great Charters of the English Nation and my sincere endeavours to plead their cause in the worst of times against all their Antagonists and professed Enemies though never so numerous and formidable albeit to my own private prejudice Whatever the Reader shall find wanting in this Plea relating to the Constitution Summons Proceedings of our antient English Parliaments in general or to the power Judicature Rights privileges transactions of our Kings Lords or House of Com. in Parl. in particular you may read at leisure in my Preface and Tables to An Exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower of London from the reign of King Edward the 2. to Richard the 3. and in the Abridgement it self collected by that famous Antiquarie Sir Robert Cotton lately published which will better instruct the Readers in all Parliamentary affairs than all the slight unsatisfactory Treatises of our Parliaments hitherto published except this Plea which I humbly submit to the friendly Imbrace and impartial Censure of every Judicious Reader especially of my own profession for whom it is most proper whose general ignorance and mistakes in Parliament Antiquities proceedings and matters of the Crown hath brought some disparagement upon the function and led others into dangerous publike Errors which that this Plea may wipe off and rectifie hereafter for the common benefit ease settlement re-establishment of our late dissipated Parliaments and confused distracted Nations shall be the Vote and dayly prayer of Thy unfeigned Friend and his Countries publike unmercenary Servant WILLIAM PRYNNE Lincolns-Inne 6 Decemb. 1657. A Plea for the LORDS AND HOUSE of PEERS OR A short yet full and necessary Vindication of the Judiciary and Legislative Power of the House of Peers and the Hereditary just Right of the Lords and Barons of this Realm to sit vote judge in the high Court of Parliament THe treasonable destructive design of divers dangerous Anabaptists Levellers Agitators in the Army City Countrey and of Lilburn Overton their Champions Ring-leaders in this Seditious Plot to dethrone the King unlord the Lords new-model the House of Commons extirpate Monarchâ— suppress the House of Peers and subvert Parliaments the only obstacles to their pretended Polarchy Anarchy are now so legible in their many late printed Petitions Lâ—bels Pamphlets so visible in their actings and publike proceedings that it rather requires our diligence and expedition to prevent than hesitancy to doubt or dispute them they positively protesting against yea denying both King and Monarchy in their late printed Pamphlets Remonstrances with the Power Judicature of the House of Peers and their undoubted just Hereditary right to vote act or sit in Parliament because they are not elecâ—ed by the people as Knights and Burgesses are asserting That they are no natural issues of our Laws but the Exorbitances and Mushromes of Prerogative the Wenns of just Government the Sons of Conquest and usurpation not of choice and election intruded upon us by power not made by the people from whom ALL POWER PLACE and OFFICE that is just in this Kingdom OUGHT TO ARISE meer arbitrary Tyrants Vsurpers an illegitimate and illegal power and Judicatory who act and Vote in our affairs but as INTRUDERS who ought of right not to judge censure or imprison any Commoner of England even for libelling against them refusing to appear before them reviling and contemning them and their Authority to their faces at their very Barr as Lilburn Overton boast and print they did or breaking any of their undoubted Privileges To accomplish this their design the better they endeavour by their most impudent flattery to ingage the House of Commons against the House of Peers the better to pull them down stiling and proclaming the Commons in their Petitions and Pamphlets The ONLY Supreme legal Judicatory of the Land who ought BY RIGHT to judge the Lords and their proceedings from whom they appeal for right and reparations against the House of Peers affirming That in the Commons House alone resides the formal and legal Supreme Power of England who ONLY are chosen by the People and THEREFORE IN THEM ONLY
if that of Ingulphus with other our Historians and some Lawyers be true which Sir Edward Cook and Mr. Selden deny that King Alfred first divided the Realm into Counties as all grant he did into Hundreds and Tithings and erected Hundred Courts wherein Knights of the Shire were alwaies yet are and ought to be elected there could be no Knights of Shires at least if any Citizens or Burgesses to serve in Parliament before this division though there were Earls Dukes Barons before his reign who were present by the Kings summons not peoples elections at our Great Councils or Parliaments as Mr. Selden and Sir Henry Spelman undeniably manifest and I have elsewhere proved at large Their sitting voting judging therefore in Great Councils Parliaments being so antient clear and unquestionable ever since their first beginning til now and the sitting of Knights Citizens Burgesses by the peoples election in our antientest Great Councils Parliaments not so clearly evident by History or Records as theirs we must needs acknowledge subscribe to this their Right and Title or else deny the Knights Citizens Burgesses rights to sit vote in our Great Councils Parliaments rather than theirs who have not so antient nor clear a Title or right as they by many hundreds of years Fourthly This Right and Privilege of theirs is vested legally in them by the very Common Law and Custom of the Realm which binds all men By the unanimous consent of all our Ancestors and all the Commons of England from age to age assembled in Parliament since they sat in any Parliaments who alwaies consented to desired and never opposed the Lords sitting voting power or Judicature in Parliament and by Magna Charta it self signed and ratified by King John wherein it is expresly granted Ad habendum COMMUNE CONCILIVM REGNI de auxiliis assidendis de Scutagiis assidendis submoneri faciemus Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Comites MAJORES BARONES REGNI singulatim per Literas nostras c. And in the Great Charter of King Henry the 3. they are first mentioned and provided for Hereupon King Henry the third not long after Magna Charta was granted and at the same time it was proclamed confirmed with a most solemn Excommunication in the presence of all the Lords and Commons by all the Bishops of England against the infringers thereof summoning a Parliament at London in the year 1255. to aid him in his warrs in Apulia the Earls and Barons absolutely refused to give him any assistance or answer at all for this reason Quod omnes Barones tunc temporis non fuerunt juxta tenorem Magnae Chartae suae vocati ideo sine Paribus suis tunc absentibus nullum voluerunt tunc responsum dare vel Auxilium concedere vel praestare That ALL THE BARONS were not summoned by him to this Parliament as they ought to be according to the tenor of Magna Charta whereupon they departing in discontent and refusing to sit longer the Parliament was first adjourned and at last dissolved And upon this very ground among others the Parliament of 21 R. 2. with all the Acts and proceeding therein were totally repealed and nulled by the Parliament of 1 H. 4. because the Lords who adhered to the King were summoned by him to the Parliament and some of the opposite party imprisoned impeached unsummoned and many of the Knights of the shire were elected only by the Kings nomination and Letters to the Sherifs And the Parliament it self kept by force viris armatis et sagittariis immensis brought out of Cheshire as an extraordinary guard quartered in the Kings Court at Westminster and about Charing Crosse and the Muse of which Grafton and other Historians write thus That they fell into so great pride of the Kings favour that they accounted the King to be as their fellow and they set the Lords at nought yet few or none of them were Gentlemen but taken from the plough and Cart and other Crafts And after these rustical people had a while courted they entred into so great a boldness that they would not let neither within nor without the Court to beat and slay the Kings good Subjects to take from them their victuals and pay for them little or nothing at their pleasure as our free-quarâ—erers do now falling at last to ravish mens wives and daughters And if any man fortuned to complain of them to the King he was soon rid out of the way no man knew how or or by whom so as they did what they listed the King not caring to doe justice upon them but favouring them in their mis-doings confiding in them and their guards against any others of the kingdom which gave the Lieges of his kingdom great matter of commotion and discontent The bringing up of which guard to Westminster to force and overawe the Parliament to effect his designs is one principle Article exhibited against him by the Parliament of 1 H. 4. wherein he was forced to resign his Crown and then deposed I pray God our new armed Guard and Courtiers at Whitehall and the Muse of as mean condition as those fall not by degrees to the self-same exorbitances contempt of the King Lords Parliament and oppression of the people to their general mutining and discontent In the Parliaments of 6 E. 3. N. 1. Parl. 2 N. 5.6 8 9 8 E. 3. N. 5. 15 E. 3. N. 4. 17 E. 3. N. 2. 20 E. 3. N. 5. 21 E. 3. N. 4. 22 E. 3. N. 1. 25 E. 3. N. 1. 29 E. 3. N. 4. 30 E. 3. N. 1. 37 E. 3. N. 1. 42 E. 3. N. 1. 50 E. 3. N. 1. 51 E. 3. N. 3. 1 R. 2. N. 1. 2 R. 2. N. 1. 3 R. 2. N. 1. 4 R. 2. N. 1. 5 R. 2. N. 65. 6 R. 2. N. 6. 7 R. 2. N. 1. 9 R. 2. N. 1. 8 H. 4. N. 54. We find in these Parliament Rolls that these Parliaments have been usualy prorogued adjourned from the days they were summoned to meet and have not saie nor acted at all because sundry of the Lords some Commons were not come but absent by reason of foul weather shortness of warning or other publique imployments all their personal presence in Parliament being reputed necessary and expedient And 20 R. 2. N. 8. The Commons themselves in Parliament required the King to send for such Bishops and Lords who were absent to come to tho Parliament before they would consult upon what the Chancellor propounded to them in the Kings name and behalf to consider of To recite no more antient presidents In the Parliament of 2 Caroll the Earl of Arundel not sitting in the Parliament being after his summons committed by the King to the Tower of London about his Sons mariage May 25. 1626. without the Lords privity and consent whereby their privileges were infringed and the House deprived of one of their Members presence thereupon the House of
be both Judge and Party it behoveth of Right that the King should have COMPANIONS for to hear and determine IN PARLIAMENTS all Writs and Plaints of the Wrongs of the King of the Queen and of their Children and of those especially who otherwise could not have common right concerning their wrongs These Companions are now called Counts after the Latine word Comites For the good Estate of the Realm King Alfred assembled the COUNTS or Earls and ordained by a Perpetual Law that twice a year or oftner they should assemble at London in Parliament to consult of the Government of the people of God c. By which Estate or Parliament many Laws and Ordinances were made which be there recites Bracton l. 1. c. 8. l. 2. c. 16. l. 3. c. 9. in Henry the 3d. his reign and Fleta l. 2. c. 2. p. 66. write thus in Edw. the first his reign in the same words Habet enim Rex cuâ—iaÌ„ suam in concilio suo in Parliamentis suis PRAESENTIBUS Praelatis COMITIBUS BARONIBUS PROCERIBUS aliis viris peritis ubi terminatae sunt dubitationes judiciorum novis injuriis emersis nova constituuntur remedia And l. 17. c. 17. he writes thus Rex in populo regendo superiores habet Videlicet Legem per quam est Rex Curiam suam to wit of Parliament videlicet COMITES BARONES Comites enim à Comitia dicuntur qui cum viderint Regem sine froeno Froenum sibi apponere TENENTVR ne clament subditi Domine Jesu Christe in Chamo froeno maxillas eorum constringe Sir Tho. Smith in his Commonwealth of England l. 2. c. 1. John Vowel and Ralph Holinshed vol. 1. c. 6. p. 173. Mr. Cambden in his Britannia p. 177. John Minshaw in his Dictionary Cowel in his Interpreter Title Parliament Powel in his Attorneys Accademy and others unanimously conclude That the Parliament consisteth of the KING the LORDS SPiRITUAL and TEMPORAL and the Commons which STATES represent the body of all England which make but one Assembly or Court called the Parliament and is of all other the Highest and greatest Authority and hath the most high and absolute power of the Realm And that no Parliament is or can be holden without the King and Lords Mr. Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts affirms particularly of the High Court of Parliament f. 1. c. This Court is the highest Court of England in which the King himself sits in person and comes there at the beginning and end of the Parliament and at any other time when he pleaseth ordering the Parliament To this Court come all the Lords of Parliament as well Spiritual as temporal and are severally summoned by the Kings writ at a certain day and place assigned The Chancellor of England and other great Officers or Judges are there likewise present together with the Knights Citizens and Burgesses who all ought to be personally present or else to be amerced and otherwise punished if they come not being summoned unles good cause be shewed or in case they depart without the Houses or Kings special license after their appearance before the Sessions ended And he resolves That the King Lords and Commons doe all joyntly make up the Parliament and that no Law nor Act of Parliament can be made to bind the subject without all their concurrent assents Sir Edward Cook not only in his Epistle before his ninth Report and Institutes on Littleton p. 109 110. But likewise in his 4. Institutes published by Order of the Commons themselves this present Parliament c. 1. p. 1 2. c. writes thus of the high and Honourable Court of Parliament This Court consisteth OF THE KINGS MAJESTIE sitting there as in his royal politick capacity and of the three Estates of the Realm viz. Of the Lords Spiritual Archbishops and Bishops being in number 24. who sit there in respect of their Counties or Baronies parcel of their Bishopricks which they hold also in their politick capacity and every one of these when the Parliament is to be holden ought ex debito Justitiae to have a writ of summons The LORDS TEMPORAL Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts and Barons who sit there by reason of their dignities which they hold by descent or creation And likewise EVERY ONE OF THESE being of full age OUGHT TO HAVE a writ of summons EX DEBITO JUSTITIAE The third Estate are the Commons of the Realm whereof there be Knights of Shires or Counties Citizens of Cities and Burgesses of Boroughs All which are respectively elected by the Shires or Counties Cities and Boroughs by force of the Kings writ ex debito Justitiae and none of them ought to be omitted and these represent all the Commons of the whole Realm and trusted for them and are in number at this time 403. He adds And it is observed that when there is best appearance there is the best successe in Parliament At the Parliament holden in the 7. year of H. 5. holden before the Duke of Bedford Guardian of England of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal there appeared but 30. in all at which Parliament there was but one Act of Parliament passed and that of no great weight In An. 50 E. 3. all the Lords appeared in person and not one by Proxy at which Parliament as appeareth by the Parliament Roll so many excellent things were sped and done that it was called Bonum Parliamentum And the King and these three estates are the great Corporation or body of the kingdom and doe sit in two Houses and of this Court of Parliament the King is Caput Principium Finis The Parl. cannot begin but by the Royal presence of the King either in person or representation by a Gardian of England or Commissioners both of them appointed under the great Seal of England c. And 42 E. 3. Rot. Parl. num 7. It is declared by the Lords and Commons in full Parliament upon demand made of them on the behalf of the King That they could not assent to any thing in Parliament that tended to the disinherison of the King and his Crown whereunto they were sworn And p. 35. he hath this special observation That it is observed by antient Parliament men out of Records that Parliaments have not succeeded well in five cases First when the King hath been in difference with his Lords with his Commons Secondly When any of the great Lords were at variance between themselves Thirdly When there was no good correspondence between the Lords and Commons Fourthly When there was no unity between the Commons themselves in all which our present Parliament is now most unhappy and so like to miscarry and succeed very ill Fifthly When there was no preparation for the Parliament before it began every of which he manifests by particular instances From all these and sundry other Authorities it is most evident and transparent That both the King himself and Lords ought of
right duty to be personally present in Parl. and ever have been so as well as the Commons and neither of them to be excluded since they all make up but one Parliament that no Lords Commons ought to depart from it without special leave under pain of amercement and other penalties That no binding Law can be passed without their joynt consents And that the Commons alone are no more a Parliament of themselves without the King and Lords than the Common Councel of London are an intire City or Corporation without the L. Mayor and Aldermen or the Covent without the Abbot the Chapter without the Dean or the legs or belly a perfect man without the head neck and heart Sixthly The antient and constant form of endorsing Bills in Parliament began in the Commons house in all Parliaments since the House of Commons unanswerably demonstrates the Commons of Englands acknowledgement of the Lords right to sit vote assent or dis-assent to Bills in Parliament viz. Soit Bayle a Seigneurs let it be delivered or sent up to the Lords Yea the Commons constant sending up of their own Members with Messages to the Lords their receiving Messages from them and entertaining frequent conferences with them in matters wherein their opinions differ in which conferences the Lords usually adhere to their dissents unlesse the Commons give them satisfaction and convince them and the Lords oft times convince the Commons so far as to consent to their alterations of Bills Ordinances Votes and to lay them quite aside is an unquestionable argument of their Right to sit and vote in Parliament and of their Negative voice too All which would prove but a meer absurdity superfluity if the Commons in all ages and now too were not convinced that the Lords had as good right to sit and vote in Parliament and a Negative dissenting voice as well as they never once questioned nor doubted till within this year or two by some seditious disciples of Lilburns and Overtons tutoring who endeavoured to evade their justice on them Seventhly This just right of the Lords is expresly and notably confirmed by all the Commons of England in the Parliament of 31 H. 8. c. 10. concerning the placing and sitting of the Lords and great Officers of State in the Parliament House made by the Commons consent it being in vain to make such a Law continuing still till this very day both in force and use if they had no lawfull right to sit and vote in Parliament because they are not elective as Knights and Burgesses are And likewise by the Statute of 39 H. 6. c. 1. made at the Commons own Petition to repeal the Parliament held at Coventry the year before and all procedings of it by practice of some seditious persons of purpose to destroy some of the great Nobles faithfull and lawfull Lords and Estates meerly out of malice and greedy and unsatiable covetousness to possesse themselves of their Lands possessions offices and goods whereby many great injuries Enormities and Inconveniences well nigh to the ruine decay and universal subversion of the kingdom ensued The very design of our Lilburnists Sectaries and Levellers now out of particular malice and covetousness to share the Lords and all rich Commoners lands and estates between them being poor indigent covetous people for the most part scarce forty of them worth one groat at least before these times and wars 8ly This apparent Right of theirs is undeniably ratified acknowledged by the very words of the Kings writs in all ages by which the Lords themselves are summoned to the Parliament running in this form Carolus c. Charissimo consaguineo suo Edwardo Com. Oxon. salutem Quia de advisamento consensu consilii nostri pro quibusdam arduis et urgentibus negotiis Nos statum et defensionem Regni nostri Angliae Ecclesiae Angli canae concernentibus quoddam Parliamentum nostrum apud Civitatem nostram Westmonasterium 12 die Novemb. prox futuro tenere ordinavimus et ibidem vobiscum cum Praelatis Magnatibus et Proceribus dicti regni nostri colloquium havere ettractare Vobis sub fide ligeantiis quibus nobis teneamur firmiter injungendo Mandamus quod consideratis dictorum negotiorum arduitate periculis minentibus cessante excusatione quacunque dictis die et loco personaliter inter sitis Nobiscum ac cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus praedictis super dictis negotiis tractaturus vestrumque consilium impensurus sicut Nos et honorem nostrum ac salvationem et defensionem Regni et Ecclesiae praedictorum expeditionem que dictorum negotiorum diligitis nullatenus omittatis Teste c. Which writs firmly require and command their personal presence counsel and advise in all Parliaments without any excuse and that by the faith and allegiance which they owe to the King and as they doe tender the King and his honour the salvation and defence of the Realm and Church of England and the dispatch of the arduous and urgent businesses which concern them Which is likewise seconded expressed in the very words of all the writs for election of Knights and Burgesses the form and substance whereof are antient and can recive no alteration nor addition but by Act of Parliament as Sir Edward Cook resolves By this Writ the Prelates Great men Nobles of the Realm are summoned to the Parliament there to treat and confer with the King of the arduous and urgent affairs and defence of the King Realm and Church of England as the first Clause of the writ Carolus c. quia c. pro quibusdam arduis et urgentibus negotiis Nos Statum defensionem Regni nostri Angliae Ecclesiae Anglicanae concernent quoddam Parliamentum nostrum c. teneri ordinavimus ibidem cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus dicti Regni nostri colloquium haberet tractare Tibi praecipimus And the Commons are summoned to perform and consent to those things which shall there happen to be ordained by this Common Council of the Kindom c. And if they are thus summoned not to treat amongst themselves as an independent intire Parliament but to confirm and consent to what the King Prelates Great men and Peers the Common Council of the Realm shall ordain about such affairs as they must of necessity admit the King Lords and Peers to be altogether as essential yea more principal eminent Members of Parliament though not elective as the Knights and Burgesses who are but summoned to consent to and perform what shall happen there by their common advise to be ordained or at least to consult and advise with them as their inferiours not to over-rule them as their superiours and the only Supream power authority in the Kingdom So if they will totally exclude either King or Lords from the Parliament who are distinct principal and essential Members of it as well as the Commons and have always been so reputed until now
Whether they be the genuine offspring of these their Noble Ancestors or natural Freeborn English Peers or Freemen and not rather the degenerate off-spring of Russian Vassals or Turkish Gally-slaves who never knew what English Freedom was as if now born only to the greatest servitude and Bondage that ever mortals voluntarily submitted unto through pusillanimous fear or baseness For alas where is the Nobleman Knight Citizen Burgess Lawyer Gentleman or English Freemen to be found who now dares manfully to claim plead avow defend or contend for the undoubted rights and privileges of his own Peerage or our Parliaments the famous Grand Charters of his own and the Nations Liberty and Freedom either in or out of Parliament after so many old late military and Parliamentary Contests Acts Oathes Excommunications Remonstrances Declarations Protestations Vows Leagues Covenants for their inviolable maintenance and defence in every Article especially those which concern Peerage Liberty Property Freehold Life the Members privileges of our Parliaments and that not only against their Soveraign and Superiors with whom they formerly contested but even against those late or present domineering Army-Officers and Vpstaris who but a few years since were not only their fellow Subjects but their Inferiors in all respects yea their Mercinary Servants Hirelings and Mechanicks of the lowest rank or against the meanest Publicans Officers or Excise-men Governors of our new-moulded Common-wealth who have trampled our Great Charters Laws Liberties properties and Parliaments themselves under feet and not only scorn deride but disgust the very Name and Mention of Magna Charta as offensive to their lawless tyranny and repute the urging of it to controll their arbitrary proceedings encroachments Taxes Excises little less than a capital offence For proof whereof I shall instance in One particulat In August 1650. during my close Imprisonment in Dunster Castle by Mr. Bradshaw and his Whitehall Associates lawless warrant there came an Order from them and the Committee of the Militia of Somersetshire with near 200 pioneers of the County to slight and demolish that Castle to the Ground without giving Mr. George Luttrel then owner thereof the least notice Who thereupon was advised by his Councel to send a Petition to Whitehall to stay the execution The Petition then drawn by his Council being long and imperrinent I did at his Wives request draw up another short one for him to this effect That Dunster Castle was the antient inheritance and chief Seat of his Ancestors and himself of which many Manors were held by Knight Service and Castle-Gard That his Father fortified and held it for the Parliament at his own charge for which he was kept and died a Prisoner under the King That his Vncle who was slain near the Castle and himself were both Colonels for the Parliament serving them gratis without any pay for which the Kings party had sequestred his estate felled his woods seised his rents to the value of ten thousand pounds at least that the Castle was regained from the Kings party principally by his means being his only Mansion house which if now suddenly pulled down he and his family must lye in the Streets and he sustain at least thirty thousand pounds new damage by it instead of a recompence for his former losses and publike unmercenary services which would expose both himself and thē to the obloquy of their malignant Enemies He thereupon humbly prayed that according to Magna Charta he might not be disinherited or disseised of this his Freehold without any hearing or Legal trial by this their Order but that they would suspend or revoke it This petition being sent to London was delivered to a Great Lawyer one of Mr. Bradshaws Associats and a then sitting Member to present who commanded the very name and mention of Magna Charta only to be struck out and the rest of the petition to be new written because the very name of it would give offence or distaste to the COVNCEL at Whitehall as he affirmed Which I then found true by experience my insisting on it in my Letters to them to demand my Liberty being so offensive that they would neither answer nor read my Letters but with indignation How others in late and present power have vilified and contemned the Great Charter the petition of Righr and all other Laws in confirmation of it by dissolving the House of Peers making and unmaking new forms of Parliaments at their pleasures condemning beheading Peers and others in new misnamed High Courts of Justice without trials by their Peers imprisoning close imprisoning confining banishing sequestring disinheriting disofficing Nobles Parliament-men and all sorts of Freemen at their pleasures without any lawful cause hearing or legal trial by breaking up and ransacking their houses by armed Soldiers day and night seising their horses arms Letters papers denying to grant them when imprisoned Habeas Corporaes or to return them when granted or bayl them when returned by imposing intollerable uncessant Taxes Excises Imposts payments penalties sequestrations forfeitures Treasons exiles restraints Engagements Disabilities on the people by commanding all Courts of Justice in their new Commonwealth and all Judges and Justices of the same Sherifs Committee-men Attornies Sollicitors and all other persons without any Opposition or dispute whatsoever to conform themselves to their most tyrannical Ordinances touching Taxes Imposts Excises though so much decried condemned by two Parliaments and themselves authorizing their Excisemen and Agents to levy their illegal new kind of Impositions by ex officio Oaths Distresses Fines Forfeitures sequestrations seisures both of their real and personal Estates breaking up of their houses which must stand open to their searches day and night without opposition by imprisonment of their persons by indemnifying all Officers who shall thus illegally abuse them giving them good costs and damages if sued staying all their actions at Law for their just relief and imprisoning all such Lawyers as grand delinquents who shall dare to move for their Liberties or plead their causes which not one dares doe since Mr. Conyes late case And how our New-modelled Parliaments as some stile them instead of complaining against and regulating these tyrannical oppressions Exorbitances Taxes Ordinances Excises and reprehending the Authors of them to their faces have countenanced them by their stupid silence confirmed them by new Edicts yea made it their principal business to burthen our 3. whole Nations with perpetual endless illegal New Taxes Excises Imposts Customs Payments unheard of by our ancestors in any former ages amounting to more thousands millions in one year than King Henry the 3. whom the Barons so much opposed and complained against for Exactions levied upon his Subjects by way of Tax or Ayds in all his 51 years reign yea to null the Great Charter it self with all our fundamental Laws Liberties and the Privileges Essence of Parliaments themselves by secluding disabling what members they please from sitting by depriving the people of their Votes freedom
elect such other persons to represent assent and vote for them in Parliament in whom they most confided Sixthly our Peers in Parliament though they there serve for the good of the whole Kingdom which hath always trusted to them in matters of Counsel Judicature and making Laws yet they represent no persons but themselves only or their families Tenants Friends and Allies which depend upon them and bear their own expences which are so great and chargeable that the Abbot of St. James without Northampton in the Parliament of 12 E. 2. and the Abbot of Leicester in the the 26 of E. 3. being summoned to Parliament petitioned and procured themselves and their successors to be exemped from any future summons to and attendance in the Lords House as Barons of the Realm both because they held no lands of the King by Barony but only in frank almoign and their Predecessors had not formerly or usually been summoned to Parliaments sed vicibus interpolatis only And likewise because it would tend to the great grievance and loss of them and their houses and much impoverish them by reason of the great expence it would bring upon them One Peer and his retinue expending more every Parliament than the wages of 40 or 50 Knights and Burgesses amount to Wherefore there is no shadow of reason why the people should elect them since they doe not represent them nor pay them wages as they doe to their Knights Citizens Burgesses who serve for and represent them Wherefore their Levelling Oppugners may as well argue That our Nobles ought to be elected by the people to their Honors Lands Estates which descend unto them from their Ancestors not from the common people as that they ought to sir in Parliament by the peoples election only to represent themselves in their own right not the people And that the Knights of the Shire ought to be elected to their dignity of Knighthood which the King only confers on them or to their Lands and Freeholds which they enjoy in their own right because they are elected by the Free-holders to sit in Parliament in their right who elected them nor their own alone which Barons doe not 7ly On these grounds the suppressing debasing captivity or slaughter of the Princes Lords and Nobles of a kingdom or Nation is by God himself defined to be an immediate forerunner concomitant cause of the Kingdoms Nations ruine and slavery and a matter of great lamentation Ezech. 19.1.14 c. 17.12 Lam. 1.6 c. 2.2 c. 5.12 Prov. 19.10 c. 30.21.22 Eccl. 10.5 7. Isay 3.4 c. c. 34.11 12 13. c. 40.23 c. 43.28 Jer. 4.9 c. 27.20 c. 29. c. 25.18 19. c. 50.35.41 51 55. c. 52.16 Hos 7.16 Amos 2.15 c. 2.2 3. 2 Kings 24.14 Mich. 3.7 2 Chron. 24.23 Jer. 24.8 9. And the continuing of Kings Princes and Nobles in honour and power in any kingdom and nation are reputed and resolved by God to be the greatest honour happiness defence safety and preservation of that kingdom and people Jer. 17.24 25. c. 22.4 Eccles 10.17 Jer. 30.21 Psal 68.27 28. Prov 8.15 16. Isay 32.1 1. Chron. 23.2 c. c. 28.1 c. c. 29.24 25. Gen. 17.6.16 c. 35.11 2 Sam. 11 12. 1 Chron. 14.2 c. 28.4 5. c. 2 Chron. 2.11 c. 9.8 1 Kings 11.32 36. 2 Chron. 21.6 7. 2 King 8.18 19. 1 Kings 15 45. 2 Chron. 23.3.11.20 21. c. 9.26.27 Numb 24.7 Ezech. 37 22 29. Mich. 2.13 c. 4.8 Therfore they cannot be rejected suppressed by us now without apparent danger ruine and desolation to our kingdom whatever frantick Levellers and others fancy to the contrary who would be more than Kings and Lords themselves over the Nation could they once suppress both King and Lords as they design and endeavour By all which premises it is most apparent That our Lords and Barons sitting voting in Parliament who if you take them poll by poll have in all ages been more able Parliament-men States-men in all respects than the Commons though chosen by the people who alwayes make not choice of the best and wisest men as experience manifests is not only just lawfull in respect of Right and Title but originally instituted upon such grounds of Reason Justice Equity Policy as no rational understanding man can dislike or contradict but must subscribe to as necessary and convenient and so still to be continued supported in this their Right and Honour to moderate the Excesses Encroachments both of King and Commons one upon the other and keep both of them within their just and antient bounds for the kingdoms peace and safety The rather for that the very Act made this Parliament for the preventing of inconveniences happening through the long intermission of Parliaments not only enacts and requires ALL the Lords and Barons of this Realm to meet and sit in every Parliament under a penalty but likewise prescribes an Oath to the Lord Keeper and Commissioners of the Great Seal under severe penalties to send forth Writs of Summons to Parl. TO THEM ALL and in their default enables and enjoyns the Peers of the Realm or any twelve or more of them to issue forth Writs of Summons to Parliament under the Great Seal of England for the electing of Knights Citizens and Burgesses which Act will be meerly void and nugatory if their Votes and Right to sit in Parliament be denyed or the House of Peers reduced to the House of Commons which this very Statute doth distinguish Now whereas our whimsical Lilburnists and Levellers object that the Lords have no right to sit or vote in our Parliaments because they are not elected as Knights and Burgesses by the people under which Notion alone when thus elected they will admit them a place and vote in the Commons house but not otherwise I must inform these Ignoramusses that by the Laws Statutes of our Realm and the custom resolution of our Parliaments the Earls Lords and Barons of the Realm are altogether uncapable of being elected Knights or Burgesses to serve in Parliament and their elections as such meerly void and null in Law to all intents This is most apparent 1. By the very words of the writs of Summons to the Lords whereby they are summoned Nobiscum cum caeteris Praelatis Magnatibus et Proceribus dicti Regni nostri colloquium habere tractare c. vestrumque consilium impensuri c. not to treat conferr and consult with the Knights Citizens and Burgesses 2. By the express words of the Writs for the electing of Knights Citizens and Burgesses which have the same clause and then enjoyn the Sherifs to cause to be elected and returned duos Milites magis idoâ—eos discretos Comitatus praedicti de qualibet Civitate duos Cives de quolibet Burgo duos Burgenses de discretioribus magis sufficientibus c. ad faciendum et consentiendum hiis quae tunc c. Which disables them to elect any Lords or
were first made never sate in Parliament Whereas this writ hath no operation or effect to enoble him or his posterity unless and until he actually sit in Parliament for if he die before he sit or sit not at all neither he nor his issue are Noble This distinction and concession of his contradicts his former opinion That the Writ it self doth not ennoble the person and his heirs for if it did then he and they should be ennobled by it though he died before he â—aâ—e in Parliament because they are thus ennobled by Letters Patents which create them Nobles or Peers and make them actually such though they never sit in Parliament 7ly Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 44 45. thus resolves If the King by his Writ calleth any Knight or Esquire to be a Lord of the Parliament he cannot refuse to serve the King there in communi illo confilio for the good of his Country But if the King had called an Abbot Peer or other regular Prelate by Writ to the Parliament to the Common Council of the Realm if he held not of the King per Baroniam he might refuse to sit in Parliament because quoad secularia he was mortuus in lege and therefore not capable to have a voice or place in Parliament unless he did hold per Baroniam and were to that Common Council called by Writ which made him capable And though such a Prelate regular had been often called by Writ and had de facto had place and voice in Parliament yet if in rei veritate he hold not per Baroniam HE OUGHT TO BE DISCHARGED OF THAT SERVICE AND TO SIT NO MORE For that the Abby of Leicester was founded by Robert Fitz Robert Earl of Leicester albeit the Patronage came to the Crown by the forfeiture of Simon de Mountford Earl of Leicester yet being of a Subjects foundation it could not be holden per Baroniam therefore the Abbot had no capacity to be called to the Parliament and thereupon the King did grant Quod idem Abbas successores sui de veniendo ad Parliamentum Concilia nostra vel haeredum nostrorum quieâ—i sint exonerati in perpetuum But all these Cases abovesaid and others that might be remembred touching this point as little Rivers do flow from the fountain of Modus tenendi Parliamentum where it is said Ad Parliamentum summoneri venire debent ratione tenurae suae omnes singuli Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates Barones Priores alii Majores Cleri qui tenent PER COMITATUM VEL BARONIAM ratione hujusmodi tenurae nulli minores nisi eorum praesentia necessaria utilis reputetur To which purpose he likewise cites the Act of Parliament of 10 H. 2. called the Assize of Clarindon and the Great Charter of King John in the 17 year of his reign here forecited p. 21 30 31. For Modus tenendi Parliamentum here so much magnified I have already p. 20 sufficiently discovered it to be a late forgery and imposture out of the very Treatise it self by undeniable proofs which I wonder Sir Ed. Cook Mr. Agar and other pretended judicious Antiquaries observed nor being so obvious yet though it be an imposture and erronious in other things I shall grant it true in this particular here cited As to the point in controversie had Sir Ed. Cook here thus distinguished in the case of Laymen Knights Esquires as he doth in case of Abbots Priors and Religious persons that if the King had by his Writ called any Laymen Knight ot Esquire to the Lords House of Parliament by his general Writ who held of him in fee or fee tayl per Baroniam and was a Baron by tenure that this had enobled him and his posterity as Barons he could not refuse to serve the King as a Baron in this Common Councel for the good of his Country his opinion might have passed for good Law For such who had lands in fee or fee tayl of the King by an intire Barony being Barons and Peers of the Realm by their very tenures ought of right by the express words of the Statute of Clarindon the Great Charter of King John and by the Common Law and Custom of the Realm to be summoned as Barons by the Kings special writs directed to them to all Parliaments and great Councils of the Realm by vertue of their Tenures as well as Bishops Abbots Peers and other regular Prelates who held by Barony yet the writ in this case doth not make them and their heirs Barons by writ nor give them a right to sit and vote in Parliament but only declare them and their heirs to be Barons and to sit there as Barons by their Tenure not by vertue of the Writ it self But if the King by this general Writ summon any Layman Knight or Esquire to the Lords House who holds not by Barony this doth no more make him a Lord or Baron in perpetuity to him and his heirs nor no more oblige him or his heirs to sit there than Abbots but that they may refuse to serve in Parliam if he were no Peer before being not obliged by any Law to sit and serve therein as a Baron or Member of the House of Peers by the Writ alone which doth not bind an Abbot Prior or regular Prelate or ennoble him and his Successors to be Peers and Barons of the Realm though they hold only by Frankalmoign not by Barony the Tenure By Barony being that alone which obligeth both of them to sit and serve in Parliament unlesse they be created Dukes Earls Viscounts Lords Peers or Barons by Patent or else by a special Wrir wherein the estate and dignity of a Baron is both created and limited as in the Writ that created Sir Henry de Bromflet Baron of Vescey in the 27 year of King Henry the 6 where after the Nullatenus omittatiâ— this Clâ—se is inserted Volumus enim vos haeredes vestros maâ—culos de corpore vestro legitime exeuntes BARONES DE UESCY EXISTERE Teste c. If a Layman who holds not by Barony be created a Duke Earl Baron or other Peer of the Realm for life in tayl or in fee by Letters Patents or an Abbot or Prior who holds not by Barony and his Successors be created Lords of Parliament by a special Patent of the King as Richard Banham Abbot of Tavestoke and his Successors were bâ— King Hen. the 8. to whom the King granâ—ed by special words Ut eorum quilibet qui pro tempore fuerit Abbâ—s sit erit unus de Spiritualâ—bus religiosis DOMINIS PARLIAMENTI NOSTRI haeredum successorum nostrorum gaudendo honoreâ— Privilegio libertaribus ejusdem This obligeth them to appear and serve in Parliament upon every Writ of Summons and they their heirs males and Successors cannot refuse to serve or voluntarily absent themselves without cause or license under pain of being fined
and otherwise punished for their contempt because bound therto by their voluntary acceptance of such a special Patent and dignity But if they be summoned only by a general Writ against their wills being no Lords of Parl. by special Patent or Writ before this doth neither make the one nor other Barons nor ennâ—ble their heirs males or successors nor oblige them to serne nor subject them to any fine for contempt for then the King by his Writ might summon all the Knights Esquires Gentlemen and any other Commoner Freeman Lawyer Clergy man of the Realm to the Lords House as a Member at his pleasure and fine them for a contempt in not appearing and thereby increase that House in infinitum and make it a mungril House of all sorts of degrees and professions of men instead of aâ— House of Lords to its utter subversion against the fundamental constitution and privilege of that House Therefore such Writs of summons must be void and null in Law as well as the Patent to Abbot Banham as Sir Ed. Cook asserts it for that he was neither Baro nor held per Baroniam Now whereas he asserts That Knights and Esquires who hold not by Barony cannot refuse when summoned by Writ to serve the King in Parliament but yet Abbots and other regular Prelates that hold not by Barony may because they are dead in Law as to secular affairs and therefore not capable to have voice in Parliament unless they hold by Barony and were called by Writ This reason of the difference is most absurd and unreasonable For 1. They are both Subjects to the king alike and so both equally obliged to serve and counsel him in Parliament 2ly If their tenures by Barony could make them capable to have place and voice in Parliament though dead in Law quoad secularia then much more the kings and the kingdoms need of their presence counsel and advice in Parliament touching the weighty affairs concerning himself and the defence and preservation of the Realm and Church of England when specially summoned by his writ to Parliament 3ly Though they were dead in some sence only in respect of their natural capacities to the world yet in their politick capacities they were not so but secular still to sue purchase advise c. as well as Laymen in the right of their Houses 4ly Parliaments being always summoned as well to advise of Ecclesiastical things touching the Church as of temporal things concerning the Realm of England their being dead to the world quoad secularia could no more enable them to refuse to serve in Parliament then Laymen quoad Ecclesiastica negotia therein treated of which concerned the Church and Laymen according to the doctrine in Popish times might as well refuse to serve in Parliament when summoned because they were no Ecclesiastical or religious persons who were properly to consult of the affairs of the Church of England as religious persons be exempted from and refuse to serve therein because dead to the world quoad secularia negotia concerning the King and Realm of England there debated and consulted of 4ly The true and only ground then why such Abbots Priors and all other Clergy men who held not by Barony might refuse to serve in the Lords House of Parliament when summoned by Writ was this that they held not of the King by Barony and upon this ground alone the Abbot of St. James without Northampton summoned to Parliament by Writ Anno 12 Ed. 2. upon his Proctors appearance and Petitions for him in Parliament recorded at large by Mr. Selden out of the Leger-book of the Abby worthy perusal being most full in point was discharged from his attendance his name struck out of the Roll and Register of the Chancery by the Chancellor and his Council as not one of the list of those who ought to be summoned for this very reason because NON TE NET PER BARONIAM nec de Rege in capite sed tantum in puram perpetuam Eleemosynam nec ipse Abbas nec Predecessores sui unquam in Cancellaria irrotulari fuerunt except only in 49 H. 3. m. 10. Schedula voluntarie nec ad Parliamentum citati hucusque VNDE PETIT habuit remedium And upon the self same reason the Abbot of Leicester and his successors were by special Patent in 26 E. 3. de veniendo ad Parliam Consilia nostra et haeredâ—m nostrorum de caetero quieti sint et exempti in perpetuum hough this Abbots predecessors had formerly been summoned to and sate in Parliaments interpolatis vicibus but noâ— continuè because idem Abbas aliquas terras senteâ—ementa de Nobis per Baroniam seis aâ—o modo non tenet per quod ad Parliamenta seu Consilia nostra venire teneatur The King reciting this as the only ground of his exemption and thereupon Nolentes Abbatâ—m indebite sic vexari granted him and his successors this Patent of Exemption upon which his name was cancelled in the Clause Roll of 25 E. 3. part 1. m. 5. dorso and this written in the margin against it Abbas Leicestriae cancellatur quia habet cartam Regis quod non compellatur venire ad Parliamentum And that of Dors Claus 11 E. 3. par 2. m. 11. 13 E. 3. par 2. m. 28. 1. cited by Mr. Selden Sir Edw. Coke in his Margin mentioned in a Bill in Parliament Que toutes les religioses que teignont per Barony sayent tenus de venier au Parlament is also direct iâ— point That those who hold not by Barony are not bound to serve in Parl. be they Religious persons or Lay persons who are not Peers or Lords of Parliament upon general writs of summons such Summons of them being AN UNDUE VEXATION OF THEM as King Edward stiles it in his Patent unless they voluntarily appear upon such a Summons as this Patent informs us those who were summoned in 49 H. 3. all did This reason therefore exempting all Abbots Peers and religious persons from service and attendance in the Lords House in Parliaments though summoned thereto by writ must necessarily exempt all Knights and Laymen from it there being the self same ground justice equity for it in both yea the selfsame unjustice vexation mischief to both and by consequence the selfsame Law And if this be Law as these Presidents Judgements Records expresly resolve it to be beyond contradiction Then it inevitably follows that the General writ of Summons to Parliament alone doth neither create the persons summoned to it nor their heirs or successors Barons Lords or Peers of the Realm unless they hold by Barony no although they sit once or twice in Parliaments by vertue of them or interpolatis vicibus but not continue as the Abbots of Leicester did for then they could not allege or plead their not holding Lands of the King in Barony or any other tenure binding them to sit and serve in Parliament
And if so then questionless such who hold not by an intire Barony and are not Majores Barones by Patent or Inheritance now cannot be created such by a meer general writ of summons neither can the King by his general writ create or make them such against this antient Law and usage ever since And the Earls Lords and Great honorary Barons who excluded all such from sitting in Parliament with them as Barons and their Peers then may much more exclude and refuse to admit such into their house or to sit with them if summoned now because their dignity honor power would suffer much diminution thereby and the King might by writ at any time call so many to their House as might overtop overâ—ote and alter their very Constitution as an House of Peers I shall close up this point of the Lords sole right to sit in Parliament with one or two memorable presidents In the 7. year of King Edward 2. as Walsingham stories in quindena Paschae per Regis brevia citatae sunt generaliter omnes Parliamentales personae pro Parliamento teuendo Londoniis Sed multis Proceribus praetendentes impedimenti causas nihil hâ—c vice factum suâ—t So Anno 1316. King Edward in the 9th year of his reign celebravit Concilium apud Clarindon sed Magnates noluerunt interesse Whereupon nothing was there effected The Lords presence being held then so necessary that by reason of the absence of divers of them upon some real or pretended impediments though all legally summoned by the Kings writs nothing was done or concluded by those who met who held themselves no compleat or legal Parliament without them Whereas in the Parliament of 5 E. 2. some of the Judges and Assistants departing from the Lords and divers Knights Citizens and Burgesses from the Commons house without license yet the Lords continuing all together and making Ordinances for regulating the Kings house and Revenues the Parliament still continued and these special writs were sent to recall the Judges and Lords Assistants quod redeant exinde et sine licentia nostra speciali durante Parliamento praedicto non recedatis Et hoc sicut indignationem nostram vitare volueritis nullo modo omittaris Teste Rege apud Haddely 12 Septemb. PER CONSILIUM And this general writ was sent to the Sheriff of Yorkeshire and all other Sheriffs of England to summon all the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in their several Counties to return thither or else to elect other fit persons in their places Praecipimus tibi firmiter injungentes quod illos Milites Cives Burgenses de Balliva tua quos nuper ad praesens Parliamentum nostrum apud London inchoatum de mandato nostro venire fecisti et qui ab eodem Parliamento certis de causis recesserunt quod redeant exinde c. vel alios ad hoc idoneos loco ipsorum SI AD HOC VACARE NON POSSUNT usque ad Westmonasterium ad dictum Parliamentum quod ibidem duximus continuandum c. proxime futur ad ultimum cum sufficienti potestate Comitatus tui Civitatum Burgorum praedictororum ad consentiendum hiis quae tunc ibidem contigerint ordinari c. Teste Rege apud London xi die Octobris This Parliament being thus continued Claus 5 E. 2. m. 25. Special license was granted to some LORDS to goe home who made Proxies to other Lords to supply their places by these words Deputamus in loco nostro in Parliamento and this in the Writ of Prorogation This I hope will suffice to convince all Levellers and Gainsayers of the LORDS undoubted antient Hereditary just Right and Title to sit vote in all ENGLISH PARLIAMENTS though not elected by the people SECTION II. Wherein the Lords House sole Right of Judicature in Parliament without the Commons is fully cleared by Presidents Histories Records in all ages and undeniable Reasons and that both in Criminal Civil Ecclesiastical Causes of all sorts as well in cases of Commoners and Clergymen as Temporal Peers persons of the highest degree proper for Parliament IT is the General confession resolution assertion both of Lawyers Law-books the Parliament and Statute of 31 H. 8. c. 10. and all who have written of our Parliaments That the Parliament of England is the antientest honourablest highest Court and Supremest Judicature in the Realm to whose Judicature all other Courts Persons Subjects of the Realm are subject accountable for all Injuries Oppressions Crimes Wrongs Corruptions Errors Abuses Grievances Misdemeanors Treasons Contempts Frauds false Judgments and matters of publike or privat concernment not properly triable remediable or punishable in other inferior Courts of Justice and that Court to whom all Appeals concerning Misproceedings Errors or Injustice in other Courts or places ought to be made and from whose Injustice and Sentence there is no appeal but only to another Parliament as in the case of General Councils as Divines assert there is no appeal but to another general Council in Ecclesiastical affairs concerning the Universal Church or matters of Faith This being an unquestionable Principle and Truth the sole Question will be in what House or Persons in Parliament this Supreme Judicatory or judicial power resides Whether in the King alonâ— or Lords alone or King and Lords jointly or in the House of Commons alone never made a question â—il now by Lilburn and Overton or in the King and House of Peers not separate from but joyntly with the Commons House And for my part I conceive it resides wholly and solely in the King and House of Lords not in the House of Commons which hath no part nor share therein singly considered in it self nor yet joyntly with the King and Lords but only in some special cases and proceedings as when and where the King and Lords voluntarily require their concurrence or where the judgement and proceedings in Parliament are by way of Bill or Act of Parliament or when a judgement passed or confirmed by Bill or Act to which the Commons consent was requisite is to be altered or reversed but in no cases else that I can find To make this ouâ— beyond contradiction it must be necessarily granted by all and cannot be gainsaid or disproved by any that this Supreme power of Judicature hath been vested in our Great Councils and Parliaments even from their beginning and original institution it being the antientest as well as highest and honourablest of all other Courts That it had this Soveraign Jurisdiction vested in and exercised by it both under our British Saxon Danish and Norman Kings I have elsewhere evidenced and shall anon make good by undeniable presidents Now the Great Parliamentary Councils under them consisted only of the King the Ecclesiastical and Temporal Lords Earls Barons Nobles without any Commons House or Knights of Shires Citizens or Burgesses elected by the people as I have already touched and manifested more fully in other Treatises yea
the Attainders repealed by Bill afterwards In the Parliament of 25 H. 8. c. 12. Elizabeth Barkin Richard Master Edward Barkin and sundry others were attainted and condemned of High Treason John Fisher Bishop of Rochester Thomas Gold and others of misprission of High Treason by Act of Parliament In the Parliament of 28 H. 8. c. 7. Queen Anne George Lord Rochford Sir Henry Norris Sir Francis Weston William Breerton Esquire and Mark Sutton were convicted and attainted of High Treason and their lands forfeited by Bill In the Parliament of 32 H. 8. Thomas Lord Cornwell was convicted and attainted of High Treason by Bill against Law and the great Charter without ever being called to answer or any legal hearing for the Treasons therein expressed according â—o his own intentions to have thus proceeded against others without legal tryal In the Parliament of 33 H. 8. c. 21. Queen Katherine Jane Lady Rochford were convicted and attainted of High Treason by Bill to which Act the king was enabled to give his royal assent by Letters Patents signed by him under his hand with his great Seal notified and published in the HIGHER HOUSE to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons there assembled without comming to the House in person to give his royal assent thereto In the Parliament of 2 3. Ed. 6. ch 17. Sir william Sharington Knight being indicted and attainted of High Treason for forging and coyning of mony called Testons his attainder was confirmed by Act of Parliament and his lands forfeited And ch 18 Sir Thomas Seymor Lord Seymor of Sudley and high Admiral of England for his trayterous aspiring to the Crown of this Realm and to be King of the same and for compassing and imagining by open Act to deprive the King of his royal estate and title of his Realms and for compassing and imagining the death of his Noblemen and most trayterously to take away and destroy all things which should have sounded to the let or impediment of this his most trayterous and ambitious enterprise as the Act recites and for other his misdemeanors innumerable untruths falshoods deceiptfull practises outrages against the King oppression manifest extortion upon the Subjects of the Realm was adjudged and attainted of high Treason by Bill and to sustain such pain of death and other forfeitures aes in cases of High Treason have been used being a Member so unnaturul unkind and corrupt and such a heynous offender of his Majesty and his Laws that he cannot nor may not conveniently be suffered to remain in the body of the Commonwealth but to the extreme danger of the Kings Highness being the head and of all the good Members of the same and of too pernicious and dangerous example that such a person so bound to his Majesty by sundry great benefits and so forgetfull of them and so cruelly and urgently continuing in his false and treacherous intents and purposes against his Highness and the whole estate of his Realm should remain among us In the Parliament of 1 Mariae ch 1. the Attainder of Queen Katherine is reversed by Bill and ch 16. the Attainders of John Duke of Northumberland Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury William Marquess of Northampton John Earl of Warwick Sir Ambrose Dudley with other Knights and Gentlemen formerly convicted and attainted of Treason according to the Law of the Realm for their detestable and abominable Treasons in proclaiming and setting up Queen Jane to the peril and great danger of the person of Queen Mary and to the utter loss disherison and destruction of the Realm of England if God in his infinite goodness had not in due time revealed their trayterous intents as the Act recites at the Petition and with the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament were confirmed and ratified by a special Act. In the Parliament of 29 Eliz. c. 1. the Attainders of Thomas Lord Paget Sir Francis Englefield and sundry other Knights and Gentlemen who were lawfully indicted convicted and attainted of many unnatural detestable and abominable Treasons to the fearfull peril and danger of the destruction of the Queens Majesties person and of the Realm were confirmed by a special Act and ch 3. there is another Act to avoid fraudulent assurances made in certain cases by Traytors In the Parliament of 3 Jacobi ch 2. Sir Everâ—rd Digby Robert Winter Guy Fawkes Robert Catesâ—y and all the rest of the Gunpowder Traytors who undertook the execution of the most barbarous execrable and abominable Treason that could ever enter into the hearts of most wicked men by blowing up the Lords House of Parliament with the King Queen Prince Lords Spiritual and Temporal Judges Knights Citizens and Burgesses of Parliament therein assembled were attainted of High Treason and their former attainders and convictions confirmed by a special Act And in this very last Parliament the Earl of Strafford Lord Deputy of Ireland and William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury after judgement of high Treason upon their several impeachments and trials given against them by the Lords in their House were likewise attainted of Treason and their judgements ratified by a special Bill and Ordinance to which the Commons assented as well as the Lords their assents to Attainders by way of Act or Bill being so necessary that if the King in Parliament Wills that such a man shall be attainted of Treason and lose his lands and the Lords assent and nothing is spoken of the Commons in the Bill this is no Act nor good Attainder in Law and the petson shall be restored by the opinion of all the Judges 4 H. 7. f. 18. Broke Parliam 42. Fitz. 3.7 H. 7.14 11 H. 7.27 Broke Parliam 107. Plowden 79.32 H. 6.18 As the Commons in our English Parliaments have assented to all these and some other Bills and Acts of Attainder cited in Sir Edward Cooks 4 Institutes ch 1 2. and Mr. St. Johns Argument at Law concerning the Bill of Attainder of High Treason of Thomas Earl of Strafford printed by Order of the Commons House 1641. So I find that the Commons in Ireland have done the like in the Parliaments held in Ireland as the Printed Statutes of Ireland 28 H. 8. c. 1. for the Attainder of the Earl of Kildare and others of High Treason 11 Eliz. ch 1. for the Attainder of Shan O Neyle and others of High Treason of 13 Eliz ch 6. 7. for the Attainders of Fiâ—zgerald and others of High Treason Of 27 Eliz. ch 1. for the Attainders of Iames Eustace and others of High Treason of 28 Eliz. ch 8. 9. for the Attainders of the Earl of Desmond John Brown and others and of 11 Jacobi ch 4. for the Attainders of the Earl of Tyrone and others of High Treason for their several rebellions insurrections wars against their Soveraigns and other Treasons mentioned in these respective Acts abundantly evidence But yet the Commons assents to all these Bills
of Attainders in cases of high Treason did not institute them Judges of these persons nor give them any share in the judicial right and power of Parliaments 1. Because most of these persons thus attainted by Bill were Queens Dukes Earls Lords Barons and Peers of the Realm who were triable to be judged only by their Peers none else by the Common Law of England Magna Charta c. 29. and sundry other Acts not by the Commons who are not their Peers 2ly Because most of these parties thus attainted by those Bills were first attainted tried judged condemned in Parliament by the Lords alone as their proper Judges upon the complaints or impeachments of the Lords Appellants or of the Commons themselves or else before some other Judges upon indictments and legal tryals and those Acts did only confirm and ratifie their precedent attainders recited in them 3ly Because in many of these Acts the Commons did only petition that their Attainders might be ratified by Bill and the King and Lords assents thereto which was done at their request as Petioners not Judges 4ly Because their Judgements and Attainders passed formerly by the Lords and Judges were good in Law though thus ratified afterwards by Bill for the greater terror certainty and satisfaction and these Bills did pass no new Judgements and Attainders upon the parties but only ratifie the old and in cases where there was no precedent Attainder they attaint them only by vertue of their Legislative power without any indictment tryal or hearing of the parties themselves as Judges of them some of them being dead when attainted taking all the charges in the Bills pro confesso and notoriously true and proved such by some other precedent legal convictions and evidences 2ly There is a formal proper Judgement given in our Parliaments both in criminal and civil causes upon complaints Articles Petitions Impeachments Inditements Informations Writs Appeals Reports References and that either against or concerning Peers themselves or against or concerning Commoners and other Laicks or Clergy-men And in all such cases proceedings the King and Lords alone have a proper judiciary power or right of Judicature without the Commons vested in and executed by them which I shall abundantly evidence and make good by sundry memorable Presidents out of our Histories and Records in all ages not vulgarly known and for the most part never yet remembred by any who have wriâ—ten of our Parliaments and the proceedings in them whose Treatises are very slight unsatisfactory and in many things of this nature erronious I shall begin first with presidents concerning Ecclesiastical Temporal Lords alone proceeded against impeached judged censured in our Parliaments for sundry criminal causes Offences Treasons wherin the House of Commons can challenge no share or voice in the Judicature especially in the case of Temporal Lords who are such in their own right and sit in Parliament ratione Nobilitatis but the Lords alone and that by the express Letter and Resolution of the Great Chariers of King John and of King Henry 3. and Ed. 1. c. 14.29.15 E. 3. c. 2 3 4. and roâ— Parl. n. 6.8.11 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 6 7.5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 12.28 H. 6. ror Parl. n. 51 52 53. 20 H. 6. c. 9.26 H. 8. c. 13.28 H. 8. c. 7.18.31 H. 8. c. 12.32 H. 8. c. 4.33 H. 8. c. 12 20 23.35 H. 8. c. 2.1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. 1 Mar. c. 6.1 2 Phil. Mar. c. 3.4 5 Phil. Mar. c. 4.1 Eliz. c. 1.5.5 Eliz. c. 11.13 Eliz. c. 1.14 Eliz. c. 1 2 3. 18 El. c. 1.23 El. c. 1 2.27 El. c. 2.3 E. 3.19 Fit Corone 16â— 1 H. 4.1.10 E. 4.6 Brooke Trial 142. Stamford l. 3. c. 1. f. 152.33 H. 8. Brookâ— Trial 142.34 H. 8. Bro Corone 172.13 H. 8.11 Br. Treasons 29.38 H. 8. Br. Treasons 2.33 Dyer 99.107.208.360 Cook 6 Rep. f. 52.9 Rep. f. 30.87 and Cooks 2 Instit f. 28 29 48 49 50. and his 3 Instit c. 1. 2. p. 27 28 29.30 31. All which declare enact resolve That the Peers of this Realm shall not be tried or proceeded against but only by the lawfull judgement and verdict of their Peers The Lords and Barons of Parliaments trial by Peers alone of their own rank being so essential that they cannot waive nor put themselves upon the trial of the Country by 12. ordinary Freeholders as was resolved in the Lord Dacres case Pa. 26 H. 8. Cooks 3 Institutes f. 30. much less then can they waive their Peerage it self and sit as Commoners in the Commons house as I have formerly proved The first president I meet with in our Histories of this nature is in the reign of Cassibelan the British King who having repulsed Julius Caesar upon his first landing in this Island and forced him to return into France Edictum fecit ut omnes Proceres Britanniae convenirent to the City of â—roynovant now London where Evelin nephew to Androgens Duke of Troynovant slaying Heralgas nephew to Cassibelan upon a sudden quarrel as they were playing together Cassibelan thereupon commanded Evelin to be brought before him talem sententiam quam Proceres regni judicarent subire which Androgeus opposing â—aying sese suam Curiam habere in illa diffiniri debere quicquid aliquis in homines suos clamaret thereupon Cassibelan threatned to waste his Country with fire and sword if he refused to deliver up his Nephew to justice to undergo the sentencâ— quam Proceres dictarent which he accordingly executed for refusing to put his Nephew upon the Trial and Judgement of the Nobles for this murder The next president I find is that of Wilfrid Archbishop of York who for refusing to divide his Bishoprick into two Bishopricks more and for endeavouring to perswade Queen Emburga to become a Nun and desert her husband Egfrid King of Northumberland was through that Queens malice and prosecution in two several Parliamentary Councils Anno 678. 692. twice deprived of his Archbishoprick and banished the Realm by King Egfrid Theodor Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest oâ— the Bishops and Nobles of the Realm assembled in these Councils and at last restored to his Archbishoprick again in another Council An. 705. by King Osred his will and consent About the year of our Lord 924. Elfred a Nobleman who opposed Aethelstans title and election to the Crown though in vain intended to seise upon him at Winchester and put out his eyes but his Treason being discovered he was apprehended and sent to Rome to purge himself thereof by Oath where he abjuring the fact before the Altar of St. Peter in the presence of Pope John the 10th fell down suddenly to the ground as dead and being thereupon carried away thence to the English School he there expired within 3 dayes after The Pope acquainting the King therewith and craving his advice what to do with him and whether he should have Christian burial the King thereupon
ill counsellors about him neglecting hating banishing his own Nobles and natural Subjects as Traytors without any just cause or legal trial and subverting confounding their Lawes Liberties Justice c. 2ly To manifest the proceedings impeachments in these Parliaments against the Earls and Nobles refusing to appear at these Parliaments upon the Kings these successive Writs of Summons his outlawing them of high Treason and spoiling burning seising their houses Lands thereupon being adjudged by the Lords in Parliament to be illegal and afterwards reversed as unjust and against the Law Claus 18. H. 3. m. 19. 3ly To manifest that the Lords in Parliament would not act any thing in the absence of these eminent Lords refusing to appear 4ly To evidence the Sentence and Justice of the King and Lords against these ill Counsellors Aliens and Traytors to the Publique whom they caused to be removed from the King Court Kingdom put from their publike Trusts and Offices called to an account publikely arraigned before the King himself and his Justices by whom they were imprisoned their lands confiscated and better Counsellors of State and Judges put into their places Anno 1240. Accusatus est graviter Comes Cantiae Hubertus de Burgo CORAM REGE ET CURIA TOTA London ubi post multâ—s disceptationes ut iraâ—undia Regis quae immoderate nimis conâ—â—â— ipsum excanduerat quiesceret ADJUDICAâ—UM EST ut quatuor Castra sua Charissima scilicet Blancum Castrum Grosmunt Scenefrithz Haetfeild Domino Regiâ— resignaret ut caetera sibi cum Regis benevolentia in pace remanerent Anno 1258. The Nobles complained in Parliamnnt of the Kings advancing his half Brothers who were aliens swaying all things and impoverishing the Realm and of their intollerable pride insolency and injuries and the Earl of Leicester particularly complained to the Parliament of William de Valentia non tamâ—n Regi sed universitati praecordialiter est conquestus exigens instanter sibi justitiam adhiberi The same year the Great men and Nobles of the Land Videntes Regnum undique desolatum tum exactionibus tallagiis tam Curiae Romanae quam Regis quam etiam alienigenarum praecipue Pictavensium elatione praesumptuosa fivore regio in regno nimium in sublimi provecta tantas in Anglia Dominationes sibi usurpantium magisteria â—ost Pentecosten apud Oxon. COLLOQUIUM GENERALE CELEBRAVERUNT being summoned to this Parliament by the Kings Writ super hiis necnon status regni meliorationâ— efficaciter exquisite tractaturi Quo non sine armis equis electissimis muniti venerunt ut si Rex alienigenae suiâ— provisionibus statutis sponte contemnerent assentire vigore opposito cogerentur aut ipsi alienigeni universaliter sine morae regnum Angliae poenitus evacuarent Quas quidem provisiones Oxon. stat necnon ET MAGNAM CHARTAM TAM DE LIBERTATIBUS ET DE FORESTA tandem Domino Rege ad suorum PROCERUM observantiam statutorum inclinato per queÌ„dam de suis militibus tactis sacrosanctis jurameÌ„tum praestante 24 prudentium virorum Nationis Anglicanae quos ad Regni gubernationem sub eodem duxerint inter se eligendos consilio se commendavit considerationâ— His igitur pâ—ractis fidelitatem Regi regni ET AD CONSIDERATIONEM SUORUM PARIUM STARE omnes quotquot in regno commorare vellent fecerunt jurare The Nobles in this Parliament required that all the Poictovines might surrender up all the Castles they held in England into the Kings hands Whereupon they peremptorily swore by the passion and wounds of Christ that they would never doe it whiles they breathed Whereupon the Earl of Leicester said to William of Vairencia the most insolent of them all That he should either surrender up the Castles he held of the Kings without delay VEL CAPUT AMITTERET on he should lose his head Similiter ALII COMITES ET BARONES DICEBANT etiam constructissime assertione consistentes The Poictovines being very much terrified with these words not knowing what to doe and fearing to fly to any Castle lest they should there be besieged and soon taken or starved by the Lords fled secretly and speedily from the Parliament to Winchester not sparing their horses sides and setting spies upon hills and Towers to observe whether the Barons pursued them who hearing of their flight commanding all their followers to arm themselves and dissolving the Parliament without adjourning it to any certain day pursued them to Winchester where the King and Nobles holding another PARLIAMENT the Poictovines JUDIDIUM EXPECTARE NOLENTES nec ausi exhibitionem JUSTITIAE quae singulis secundum juramentum REGIS PROCERUM debebatur expestare being the sole judges of them in Parliam for their exorbitant offences they presently fled out of the Realm beyond the Sea to avoid their sentence Hereupon Significatum est literatorie ad multos etiam quos praedicti Pictavienses impudentur offenderant ut â—nerelam super hoc reponeâ—res ostenderent Maguatibus Regni daâ—a sibi a dictis Regis fratribus illata eas querelas dilucidantes constanter moras sequerentur ut sibi omnia secundum quod jus dictaret restituerentur Sed quia instabat tempus messium considerantes simultatem et instantes labores forte inutiles sequi renuerunt donec majorem cernerent opportunitatem The Lords in Parliament being willing to award them damages and reparations against the Kings own Brothers in Law upon complaint and clear proof of the injuries and damages they sustained by them Anno 1260. There falling out a great difference between King Henry the 3. and Prince Edward his Son Simon Earl of Leicester and other Nobles thereupon Convocato in praesentia Regis apud sanctum Paulum BARONAGIO habitoque prius tractatâ— de Eadwardo super injuriis Regi ut dicebatur illatis paratus est idem Eadwardus se omnium objectorum probare immunem et ad duorum Regum scil Patris sui et Avunculi provisionem in emendatione facienda se dare tractabilem dicens Omnes alios Barones et Comites sibi de jure non esse Pares nec suas in eum exercere discussiones Unde dâ—cuâ—a hinc inde veritate omniumque relatorum falsitate probata pacificato Regi concordatus est filius multiplicatis de jure inimicorum confusionibus Concordato itaque Eadwardo Regi et Reginae et aliis amicis mox querela subsequitur de Comite Leicestriae Simoâ—e super pluribus injuriis tam citra mare quam ultra contra Regem ut dicebatur perpetratis Praefixo igitur die ad respondendum se de objectis expurgandum idem Comes ad dictum diem licet breviorem paratus est quantotiens petitis satisfacere et ad discutiendam super oppositis veritatem omnium transmarinorum quam cismarinorum arbitrio obtemperare exceptis quinque tantum minutis tam suae quam Eadwardi discordiae seminatoribus Qâ—o audito Comes Gloverniae cum
Clergy being thus put out of the Kings Protection and thereby disabled to sue or sit in Parliament were secluded the Parliament house the King holding the Parliament with the Temporal Lords and Commons alone and making valid good Acts and Ordinances therein in this case without the Clergy as Bishop Jewel M. Crompton Dr. Bilson and others affirm which Dr. Standish averred he might lawfully doe before the Kings Council and a Committee of Lords and Commons in the Parliament of 7 H. 8. Keilwayes Reports f. 184. b. Sir Edward Cooke being of the selfâ—ame opinion in his 4 Institutes p. 25. citing other Presidents of this kind to prove that Acts may be made without the Bishops as 15 E. 2. Exilium Hugonis le Dispenser 3 Rich. 2. c. 3.7 Rich. 2. c. 12.11 R. 2. n. 9 10 11. 21 R. 2. n. 9 10. 1 H. 5. c. 7.6 H. 6. n. 27. Peter de Gaverston a deâ— oiâ— lascivious person for his misdemeanours and corrupting Prince Edward with whom he was educated from his infancy in the year 1306 in a Parliament then held by King Edw. the 1. assensu Communi Procerum fuerat exilio penpetuo condemnâ—tus This King was no sooner deaâ— and the Crown descending to King Edward the 2. but he presently recalled Gaverston from his exile against the will of the Lords made him Earl of Cornwall and gave him the Isle of Man An. 1307. the very first year of his reign He being more high in the Kings favoâ—r more glorious in his apparel and insolent in his behaviour than any other thereupon Anno 1309. Regni Proceres et Nobiliores videnâ—es se contemni Petrum de Gaveâ—on cunctis anteferri accessâ—runt ad Regem humiliter rogantes ut Baronum suorum vellet consiliis tractare Regni negotia quibus a pericuâ— sibi imminentibus non solum cautior sed tâ—tior esse possit Quorum votis facie tenus Rex annuitâ— Parliamentum Londini instituâ—t fiori ad quod omnes qui interesse debebant mark it venire mandavit The Parliament there assembling Anno 1310. Decreto Parliamenti ad Baronum instantiam Petrus deâ— Gaverâ—on in Hyberniam Exilio relegatur No sooner was the Parliament ended but the King caused special writs to be written and sealed in his own presence for recalling Gaverston from his exile and restoring him to his Lands which writs he took into his own hands for a time and then sent them to the Sheriffs with special command to see them duly executed under grievous penalties In these Writs he recites that Mounsieur Piers de Gaverston Earl of Cornwal was of late exiled out of ouâ— Realm against the Laws and Vsages of the said Realm which he was bound to keep and maintain by the Oath he took at his Coronation For which cause he did out of that common right and justice which was due to all his Subjects recall and restore him without the Lords against their wills as the writs in the Clause Rolls inform us Thomas of Walsingham thus relates the manner of it and ill consequence thereof to Gaverstons ruine in these words Soluto Parliamento cunctis gaudenter ad sua disced nâ—ibus rex remansit tristis cogitans disquirens cum privato suo concilio qualiter posset ipsum ab exilio revocare Suggestumque fuit 〈◊〉 qâ—od si sororeiâ— Comitis Gloverniae qui pro â—unc 〈◊〉 jâ—venis â—oâ—i 〈◊〉 sub tuâ— Regis praeâ—aâ—o Pet◠〈…〉 coâ—ugeâ— posset ipsum intrepide revocare 〈◊〉 hiâ—s audicis cum omni festinatione missis nuneilâ—â—â—cersivit eâ—m inter ipsum sororem Comicis fecit celebrati nuptiae licet multum Gomiâ—i displicerent Eâ—iâ—de Petrus superbiens plus solito regni nobiles vilipendit subsannabat Proceres mediocresque despexir Et quia Rex permiserat sibi facultaâ—em pene facienâ—i quâ—e vellet quantum ad ea quae respiciebant personam regiam caepit sicut prius thesaurum regis colligere negotiatoribus ultra mariniâ— accommo lare non ad usus quidem regios sed suos proprios Qui in tantum expilavit regem ut non haberet unde solveret expensas solitas domus suae Regina vero tantum rebus necessariis arctabâ—tur ut regi Franciae patri suo lachrymabiliter quereretur honore debito se privatam Barones igitur considerantes quod eorum tollerantia Petro malignandi praestabat auâ—atiam domino regi denunciaverunt assensu communi ut vel dictum Petrum a sua propelleret comitiva articulosque provisos effectui manciparet vel ipsâ— certe in eum tanquam perjurum insurgerent Durus videbatur hic sermo regi quia Petro carere nescivit sed plus periculi cernebat emergere si petitionibus Proceâ—um non obâ—emperaret Petrus igitur abjurat regnum regis plus â—ermissione quam beneplacito addita a Baronibus conditions quod si de caetero posset in veniri in Anglia vel aliqua terra regi subiecta caperetur et velut hostis publicâ—s damnaretur Igitur sub praemura conditione daâ—o sibi conductu Angliae regnum Iâ—gons desernit Franciam est ingressus Quo adito Rex Francorum jussit suis ut eum caperent si quo modo possent diligenteâ— cusâ—odirent nâ— direâ— in Angliam Proceres sicut prius turbaret filtâ—m Petrus de â—is praemonitus fugit in Flandâ—iam ibi quaeâ—iturus requiem nec invenit Tandem cum suis consortibus aâ—ienigenis redivit in Angliam de amicitra confisus Comitis Gloverniae cujus sororem duxerat in uxorem Parum ante festum natalis domini regis se presentavit obâ—utibus qui prae gaudio sui adventus juramenta pacta promissa negligens tanquam coeleste munus hilariter suscepit eum secum detinuit cum familia sua tota Anno 1311. post natale rumore vulgato de Petri reversione regni Magnates plebei conturbati sunt Qui necessitate ducti elegerunt sibi Thomam de Lancastria in ducem et defensorem ut periculis consulerent malis futuris Nobiliores vero regni de communis deâ—reti sententia miserunt honorabiles domino regi nuncios exorantes ut vel dictum Petrum eis traderet vel ut ordinatum fuerat ipsum regnum evacuare juberet Rex vero sinistro ductus consilio Baronum supplicationes parvipendens ab Eboraco recessit ad Novum Castrum Magnates proinde sub omni celeritate ad Novum Castrum iter arripuere Quod cum Rex audisset quasi proscriptus aut exul fugit cum dicto Petro Tynemutham et inde Scardeburgiam ubi habebatur castrum regale ubi praecepit Castellanis ut custodiam Petri susciperent castellum victualibus instaurarent rege se alias transferente nec opem ferre valente quin caperetur reduceretur usque ad villam de Dadington Ubi Comes Warwici Guido de bello campo fecit eum decollari tanquam legum regni subversorem publicum proditorem
the said Thomas and Roger as aforesaid but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said John late Earl of Sarum were a good just and legal Declaration and Iudgement Per quod consideratum suit in praesenti Parliamento per praedictos Dominos tunc ibidem existentes de assensu diâ— Domini nostri Regis quod praefatus nunc Comes Sarum nihil capiat per petitionem aut prosecutionem suam praedictam Et ulterius tam Domini spirituales quam temporales supradicti judicium et Declarationem pradicta versus dictum Joannem quondam Comitem Sarum ut praemittitur habita sive reddita de assensu ipsius Domini Regis affirmarunt fore et esse bona justa et legalia et ea pro hujusmodi ex abundanti decreverunt et adjudicarunt tuuc ibidem This is all that is mentioned in that Parliament Roll concerning this businesse Sir Edw. Cook who hath an excellent faculty above all others I have yet met with in mistaking mis-reciting and perversing Records and Law-books too oft times which he had no leisure to peruse which I desire all Lawyers and others to take notice of who deem all he writes to be Oracle lest they be seduced by him in his 4 Institutes p. 23. affirms with confidence That in this Rot. Parl. 2. H. 5. n. 13. Error was assigned to reverse this judgement that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the COMMONS citing it to prove that the COMMONS have a power of judicature together with the LORDS But under his favour I can assure ye Reader 1. That there is no such error at all either mentioned or intended in this Record nor any one syllable tending to that purpose 2ly The Petition mentions no error at all in this judgement but only remembers two presidents of judgement formerly reversed the first in the case of Thomas Earl of Lancaster in 15 E. 2. which judgement was given against him at Pomfret Castle which was afterwards reversed as Sir Edward Cooke himself informs us in his 3 Institutes c. 7. p. 52 53. in Pas 39 E. 3. Coram rege rot 92. for this only reason Qua contra Chartam de libertatibus cum dictus Thomas fuit unus PARIVM MAGNATUM Regni non imprisonetur c. nec dictus Rex super eum ibit nec super eum mittet nisi per legale judicium PARIUM SUORVM c. tamen tempore pacis absque juramento seu responsione seu legale judicio PARIUM SUORUM c. adjudicatus est morti The other was the judgement given against Roger Mortymer in the Parliament of 4 E. 3. reversed for the like reason in the Parliament of 28 E. 3. n. 10 11 12. forecited being condemned and executed by the Lords without any arraignment hearing trial or answer against the Great Charter Now these two Presidents are pointblank against this pretended error alleged by Sir Edward Cook That the Lords gave judgement without the assent of the Commons and it had been very improper for them to allege the reversal of them for want of a legal tryal by their Peers to prove that the Commons who are no Peers should have assented to the Earl of Salisburies judgement and because they did it not it was Error and reversible These presidents therefore might have minded him of his gross mistake 3ly The King and Lords upon consideration declared and adjudged these two cases and judgements upon perusal of them not to be like the case of the Earl of Salisbury who being slain in rebellion and actual war against the king could not be personally arraigned and condemned as the other two might and ought to have been and therefore the judgement given against him in this case by the King and Lords in Parliament who were his Peers was a good just and legal judgement and no ways against the great Charter 4ly The Commons themselves in the Parliament o 13 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 19. acknowledged this judgement to be good without their assents by their Petition to the Kâ—ng that John Lumly whose Father was attainted of Treason by it together with the Earl of Salisbury might be restored to blood and lands by Act of Parliament and the Kings grace notwithstanding this judgement of Treason against them Which the King by assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal consented unto 5 ly In the Parliament of 3 E. 4. n. 31 32. this judgement was made void and repealed out of the Kings Grace by a special act of Parliament and the heir restored but the judgement not reversed for any Error 6ly Had there been any such Error assigned as is alleged yet the King and Lords upon solemn debate and deliberation over-ruled and adjudged it to be no Error at all as he pretends it and thereupon abated the Petition and adjudged the Judgement and Declaration given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent in 2 H. 4. without the Commons Petition or assent to be GOOD JUST AND LEGAL reconfirming it a new on Record as such Therfore it was a gross oversight in him to assign and print it as an Error and a President of the Commons House or both Houses power of judicatures together when as it is a most undeniable double Parliamentary resolution of the Kings and Lords sole right of judicature of their declaring and judging in Parliament what is Treason and what not within the Statute of 25 E. 1. without the Commons assent or privity and an unanswerable refutation of his sole opinion to the contrary in his 3 Institutes c. 2. p. 22. which he opposeth against not only these two Parliamentary resolutions but likewise against 5 H. 4. n. 11 12.15 and 17 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 20. there quoted by him By this you may judge how little credit is to be given to Sir Edwards quotations and authority in matters concerning Parliamentary Judgements and Records In the Parliament of 28 H. 6. rot Parl. n. 14. to 53. The Commons generally accusing William de la Pool Duke of Suffolk to the King and Lords he thereupon required of the king that he might be specially accused and heard to answer to that which many men reported of him to be an untrue man making therewith a protestation of his manifold good services in the wars and as a Privy Counsellor for sundry years and so asking God mercy as he had been true to the King and his Realm required his purgation The 26 of January the Commons required that for this his Confession he might be committed to ward The Lords and Judges upon consultation thought there was no good cause for that unlesse some special matter were objected against him The 28 day of January the Speaker declared that the said Duke as it was said had sold the Realm to the French who had prepared to come hither and for his own defence had furnished Wallingford Castle with all warlike necessaries upon whose request the said Duke was then
committed to the Tower of London The 7 day of February the Commons by William Trussel their Speaker brought up and presented to the King and Lords in the Lords House a Bill against the said Duke containing an impeachment of several High Treasons committed by him against the King requiring of the Lords all their Articles therein to be enacted with prosecution therein The 9. of March they exhibited new articles of complaint against the Duke comprising sundry misdemeanors against the king and other persons which they require might be enrolled and that the Duke might answer to them The 9. of March the Duke was brought by the kings writ from the Tower into the Parliament Chamber before the King and Lords where the Articles were rehearsed to him who desired Copies of them which was granted And he for more ready answer was committed to certain Esquires to be kept in the Tower within the kings palace The 14 of March the Duke appeared before the K. Lords where on his knees he denied as untrue the 8 Articles of Treason and the same offered to prove as the King shall appoint The Chief Justice thereupon by the kings command asked this Question of the Lords what advise they would give the King what is to do further in this matter which advise was deferred till Monday then next following whereon nothing was done in that matter On Tuesday the 17 of March the king sent for all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal then being in Town being 24 in all into his Inner Chamber within his Palace of Westminster where when they were all assembled he then sent for the Duke thither who coming into the Kings presence kneeled down and continued kneeling till the Chancellor of England had delivered the kings command to him and demanded of him what he said to the Commons Articles not having put himself upon his Peerage Whereupon the Duke denied all the Articles touching the kings Person and state of the Realm as false and scandalous And so not departing from his said Answers submitted himself to the kings Rule and Governance without putting himself upon his Peerage Where thus the Chancellor told him That as touching the great and horrible crimes contained in the first Bill the king holdeth him neither declared nor charged And as touching the second Bill containing misprisions which are not criminal the king by force of his submission by his own advice and not reporting him to the advice of the Lords nor by way of judgement for he is not in place of judgement putteth you to his Rule and Governance that before the first of May next coming he should absent himself out of the kingdom of England and all other his Dominions in France or elsewhere and that he nor no man for him should shew or wait any malice nor hate to any person of what degree soever of the Commons in the Parliament in no manner of wise for any thing done to him in this Parliament or elsewhere And forthwith Viscount Beaumont in behalf of the said LORDS both spiritual and Temporal and by their advice assent and desire said and declared to the Kings Highness That this that so was decreed and done by his Excellency concerning the person of the said Duke proceeded not by their advice and Counsels but was done by the Kings own demeanoir and rule Wherefore they besought the King that this their saying might be enacted in the Parliament Roll for their more declaration hereafter with this protestation that it should not be nor turn in prejudice nor derogation of them their heirs ne of their successors in time coming but that they may have and enjoy their liberty as they or any of their Ancestors and Predecessors had and enjoyed before this time This is the sum of this large Record which makes nothing to the purpose for which Sir Edward Cook cites it in his 4 Institutes p. 25. That it is ERROR when both Houses joyn not in the Judgement For first here is nothing but an impeachment only by the Commons of a Peer who ought to be tryed judged only by his Peers not by Commoners Secondly there was no judgement given in Parliament in this case but only a private Award made by the King out of the Parliament House in his own Chamber in presence of the Lords Thirdly the Lords entred a special protestation against it as not made by their advice or consent Fourthly they enter a special claim in the Parliament Roll for the preservation of their Right and Freedom of Peerage for hereafter both of being tried and judged only by their Peers in Parliament and so an express resolution that the Peers in Parliament are and ought to be Judges especially of Peers not the Commons These Records of these cited at large lest Sir Edward Cooks brief quotation and mis-recital of them should deceive the credulous or ignorant Readers In the Parliament of 31 H. 6. rot Parl. n. 28. Thomas Earl of Devonshire was accused of Treason tried for and acquitted thereof by his Peers before Humfrey Duke of Buckingham Steward of England for the time being And for that the Duke of York thought the loyalty of the said Earl to be touched thereupon the said Earl protesting his Loyalty referred himself to further Trial as a Knight should doe upon which declaration THE LORDS in Parliament acquitted him as a loyal Subject Edward Duke of York with the Earls of March Warwick Salisbury Rutland John Lord Clinton and others were impeached and attainted by Judgement of the Lords in Parliament of High Treason for raising forces and levying war against King Henry the 6. and afterwards attainted by Bill in the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 7. to 26. In the Paâ—liamenr of 1 E. 4. n. 17. to 71. The Duke of Exeter Viscount Beamont the Earls of Pembroke Wilts and Devonshire the Lords Nevil Roos Gray Dacre Hungerford and others were first attainted and condemned of High Treason by THE LORDS and after by Bill for levying warr against King Edward the fourth The Duke of Somerset and others in the Parliament of 4 E. 4. n. 28. to 39. and John Vere Earl of Oxford with others in the Parliament of 14 E. 4. n. 34. to 41. were in the same manner for the same offence attainted of High Treason and their Lands forfeited To pretermit all other Attainders of this Nature in cases of High Treason in the reigns of Henry the 8. Edward the 6. Queen Mary Queen Elizabeth and King James both in our English and Irish Parliaments formerly touched p. 196 197 198 199. In the Parliaments of 18 21 Jacobi Sir Francis Bacon Viscount St. Alban Lord Chancellor of England and the Earl of Middlesex Lord Treasurer of England were impeached accused convicted of Bribery Corruption and other misdemeanors removed from their places fined Middlesex 50000 l. imprisoned made uncapable of any Office and thus censured by Iudgement of the Lords house as the Journals of those Parliaments
inform us In the Parliament of 2. Caroli the Duke of Buckingham impeached the Earl of Bristol and the Earl of Bristol impeached this Duke before the Lords in sundry Articles for divers misdemeanours touching the Spanish match King Prince to seduce him in his religion praying judgment of the Lords thereupon against each other In the Parliament of 3. Caroli the Duke of Buckingham was accused and Impeached by the Commons before the Lords for sundry high Misdemeanors and the Parliament thereupon dissolved to prevent his censure In this very Parliament of King Charls now sitting Thomas Earl of Strafford was accused and impeached by the House of Commons of High Treason and other misdemeanors comprised in sundry Articles which they transmitted â—o the House of Lords desiring that he might be put to answer them and such proceedings examination trial and judgement thereupon had and given against him by the Lords as is agreeable to Law and Justice Hereupon he was openly tried in Westminster Hall before the House of Lords there sitting as his Judges where the House of Commons prosecuted and gave in Evidence against him sundry dayes and in conclusion demanded the Lords to give Iudgement against him in the Iudicial way After which they proceeded against him by way of Bill not to decline their Lordships Iustice in a Iudicial way but to husband time by preventing some doubts and as the speediest and soonest way Upon the passing of which Bill he was beheaded and executed as a Traytor On the 26 of February 1640. William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury was accused and impeached of High Treason by the House of Commons of 14. Articles then transmitted by them to the House of Lord The first whereof was this That he had trayterously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental Laws and Government of the Realm and instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government against Law And the last of them this That he had laboured to subvert the rights of Parliament and the ancient Course of Parliamentary proceeding which the New-modellers of our Parliaments more guilty hereof by many degrees than he may do well to consider Upon which they prayed from the Lords such proceedings examination trial and Iudgement against him as is agreeable to Law and Justice Upon these Articles he was brought to a publike Trial in the Lords House the 12. of March 1643. and after 17. whole dayes spent in his meer Trial and proof of the Charge against him and his defence thereto morning and evening and several other dayes spent in the hearing of him and his Council and the Commons Reply touching his Charge and the matters of Law whether the Charge prâ— against him amounted to High Treason the Lords upon most mature deliberation voted him Guilty of all the Articles and matters of fact charged against him and also of High Treason and thereupon passed an Ordinance for his Attainder by vertue whereof he was beheaded as a Traytor on Tower-Hill January 10. 1644. To these I might add the seveeal Articles of Impeachment transmitted by the House of Commons this Parliament to the Lords against Matthew Wren Bishop of Norwich the 20. of July 1641. against William Pierce Bishop of Bath and Wells and against the Bishops of Winchester Coventry and Litchfield Glocester Chichester Exeter St. Asaph Hereford Ely Bangor Bristol Rochester Peterborough and Landaffe August 4. 1641. requiring such proceedings from the Lords against them as to Law and Justice shall appertain All which are a superabundant impregnable Evidence of the Lords inherent Judicial power and right of Judicature in our English Parliaments even by the Commons House own Impeachments and acknowledgements against the Levellers pretences to the contrary By all these forecited presidents it is most apparent 1. That the King and Lords in our Parliaments in all ages both before and since the Commons admission to sit and vote in Parliaments have been the sole Judges of Ecclesiastical Peers and Lords in all criminal cases without the Commons 2ly That the Lords and Peers of the Realm except only in case of appealâ— both in and out of Parliament are triable only by their Peers And therefore the Trial condemnation and execution of any of them by Marshal Law or now misnamed High Courts of Justice by Commoners and others who are not their Peers is most illegal unjust and nought else but murther as the Parliaments of 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 45. of 1 E. 4. rot Parl. n. 18. resolve and as it was adjudged in the case of Thomas Earl of Lancaster Paâ—ch 39 E. 3. Coram Rege Rot. 92. Wiâ— Cooks 3. Institutes p. 52 53. Secondly The next and main question now conâ—roverted will be Whether the King House of Peers have any lawfull or sole power of Judicature in and over the persons of the Commons of England as well as over Peers in criminal causes misdemeanours offences or breaches of their Parliamentary privileges so farr as to fine imprison censure judge or condemn them in any kind without the House of Commons concurrent vote or judicature This the ignorant sottish Levellers Sectaries seduced by their blind guides John Lilburn and Overton peremptorily deny the contrary whereof I shall here infallibly make good to their perpetual shame and refutation by unanswerable Reasons and presidents in all ages 1. I have already manifested That the Parliament being the supremest Court of Judicature in the Realm must consequently have a lawfull Jurisdiction over all persons and members of the Realm whether Spiritual or Temporal Lords or Commons in all criminal and civil Causes proper for Parliaments to judge or punish That this power of judicature was originally and primitively vested in the King and Lords alone before there were any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons summoned to our Parliaments as is evident by the antient writers Glanvil Bracton Fleta Horn the Parliament of Clarindon Anno. 1164. and other forecited authorities and never transferred by them to the House of Commons upon or after their admission into our Parliaments but remaining intirely in the King and Lords as at first as the whole House of Commons acknowledge upon record 1 H. 4. rot parl n. 79. Therefore they may lawfully exercise this their judicial power and jurisdiction over the Commoners of England in all such causes now and hereafter and that of right as this record resolves they may do in positive terms 2ly Our Histories Law-books and Records agree that in ancient times our Earls who were called Comites or Counts from the word County had the chief Government and Rule of most of the Counties of this Realm under our King and that they and the Barons were the proper Judges of the Common people both in criminal and civil Causes in the Tourns County-Courts even by vertue of their Dignities and Offices as our Sheriffs are now in which Courts they did instruct the people in the Laws of the Land and administer Justice
to them in all ordinary Civil and criminal causes For prooâ— whereof you may peruse at leisure M. Seldens Titles of Honour Part 2. c 5. Sect. 5. Sir Edw. Cooks Institutes on Magna Charta c. 35. His 4. Institutes c. 53. the Laws of King Edgar and Edward there cited Spelmanni Glossarium Tit. Comites Mr. Lambards Archaion f. 135. Horns Mirrour of Justices c. 1. Sect. 2 3. If then they were Judges of the Commons and people in every County by reason of their Honours Dignities even in antientest times in ordinary Causes there is great right and reason too they should be their Judges also in all their extraordinary causes as well criminal as civil even in Parliament 3ly The Lords Peers and great Officers of State in respect of their education learning experience in all proceedings of Justice and Law are more able fit to be Iudges of Commons in Parliament than ordinary Citizens and Burgesses especially if chosen out of the Cities and Boroughs themselves for which they serve as antiently they were and still ought to be by the Statutes of 1 H. 5. c. 1. 32 H. 6. c. 15. and by the very purports of the writs for their election at this very day de qualibet Civitate Com. praedict DVOS CIVES de quolibet Burgo DUOS BVRGENSES who have better knowledg skill in Merchandise and their several Trades than in matters of Judicature or Law Therefore the Right of Judicature was thought meet even after the Commons admission to our Parliaments to be still lodged and vested in the House of Peers as before who are the ablest and fittest of the two rather than in the Commons House 4ly Since the division of the Houses one from another if ever they sate together which cannot be proved the House of Peers are dis-ingaged and indifferent parties between the King and Commons and so fittest of all to he Judges between them as the Mirrour of Justices c. 1. resolves so it hath been stil furnished with the ablest Temporal and Spiritual persons for their Assistants in judgement and advice to wit with all the Judges of the Realm Barons of the Exchequer of the Coyâ— the Kings learned Counsel the Masters of the Chancery who are Civilians or Lawyers the Master of the Rolls the Principal Secretaries of State with other eminent persons for parts and learning and the Procuratores Gleri all which are called by Writ to assist and give their attendance in the upper House of Parliament where they have no voices but are to give their counsel and advice only to the Lords when they require their assistance especially in cases of Law and Judicature For proof whereof you may consult the Statutes of 31 H. 8. c. 10. The Register of Writs f. 261. Fitz. Nat. Brev. f. 229. a. b. M. Seldens Titles of Honor part 2. c. 5. Sir Edw. Cooks 4 Instit p. 4 5 6 44 45 46. and the Parliament Rolls and Authorities there cited by them seconded by our present experience Now the House of Peers being thus assisted with the advice of all the Judges of England the Kings learned Counsel and others ablest to advise them in all Criminal Civil or Ecclesiastical matters cases that come before them were in this regard thought fittest by our Ancestors and the Commons themselves who have no such assistants to have the principal and sole power of Judicature in all civil and criminal causes as well of Commoners as Peers that are proper for the Parliaments Judicature by way of censure or redress 5ly There can be no judgement given in any of the Kings Courts in Criminal causes but where the King is personally or representatively present sitting upon the Tribunal and where the proceedings are Coram Rege And therefore in the end of most antient Parliament Rolls we find the Title of Placita Coronae CORAM DOMINO REGE IN PARLIAMENTO SUO c. as in 4 E. 3. 21 R. 2. 1 H. 4. and other Parliaments Now as the Kings person is represented Judgements given Justice executed in all Criminal and Civil cases in the Kings Bench Eyres Goal Deliveries Oyers and Terminers and all his other Courts by his Judges and Justices in his absence So is it represented in our Parl. in the Lords house by his Commissioners and the Lords and Judgements given Justice executed by them in al criminal civil causes and no ways by the Commons who neither sit nor judge in the House of Peers Therefore the House of Peers only noâ— the Commons are the true and proper judicatoâ—y where the King the supream judge fits usually in Person and alwayes in representation in his absence 6ly There can be no legal trial or Judgement given in Parliament in Criminal causes or others without examination of witnesses upon Oath as in all other Courts of justice But the House of Peers alone have power to give and examine witnesses upon Oath and the whole House of Commons no such power but to take Informations without Oath which neither they nor their Committees can administer unless by special Order and Commission from the King or Lords Therefore the power of judicature in Parliament even in Commoners cases is inherent only in the House of Peers and not in the Commons House 7ly It is a rule both of Law and justice that no man can be an informer prosecutor and judge too of the persons prosecuted informed against it being contrary to all grounds of justice therefore he ought to complain and petition to others for Justice But the Commons in all ancient Parliaments and in this present have been informers and prosecutors in nature of a Grand Inquest to which some compare them being summoned from all parts of the kingdom to present publike Grievances and Delinquents to the King and Peers for their redress and thereupon have alwayes petitioned complained to the King and Lords for Iustice against all other Delinquents and offenders in Parliament not judged them themselves witness their many impeachments accusations complaints sent up and prosecuted by them in former Parliaments and this to the Lords not only against Peers but Commoners of which there are hundreds of presidents this very Parliament Therefore the House of Lords hath the proper right of judicatory vested in them even in Cases of Commoners not the Commons who are rather Informers Prosecutors and Grand Jury men to inform impeach than Judges to hear censure determine and give judgement as is resolved in 1 H. 4. n. 79. 8ly Those who are proper Judges in any Court of Justice whiles the cause is judging sit in their Robes and that covered on the Bench not stand bare at the bar sweat and examine the witnesses in the cause not produce them or manage the evidence and when the cause is fully heard argue and debate the businesse between themselves and then give the definitive sentence But in all cases that are to be tried and judged in Parl. the
Lords only sit upon the Bench and that covered and in their Parliamentary Robes the badges of Judicature but the Commons stand and that bare at the Bar without any robes at all the Lords only swear examine the witnesses and judge of their testimony the Commons only produce the witnesses presse and manage the evidence and when the buâ—nesse is fully heard the Lords only debate the cause among themselves and give the final Sentence Judgement without the Commons though sometimes in their presence and that both in cases of Commoners and Peers Therefore the Lords and House of Peers are sole Judges in Parliament not the Commons 9ly The Commons themselves in all ages since admitted into our Parliaments have always presented their Petitions in Parliament to the King and Lords alone for redress of all Grievances wrongs misdemeanours abuses whatsoever publike or private criminal or civil ecclesiastical marine or military And the Lords House alone have in all antient Parlaments appointed particular persons of their House to receive al Petitions Triers of them to hear and answer them by their advice and the kings assent when necessary which Triers of Petitions had power given to call the Lord Chancellor Treasurer Chamberlain Judges kings Servants and others to this assistance prescribing where when their Petitions should be presented examined redressed at all our Parliament Rolls aâ—est and Sir Edward Cook himself relates There being few or no Petitions at all presented by any to the Commons before â—â— H. 7. c. 19. 4 H. 7. c. 6. These Petitions then presented to them and all ever since with all in this present Parliament being only to this end that they upon the examination of the truth matters complaints grievances mentioned in them might transmit and represent them in the name of the Commons House to the Lords House for to give full redress relief and judgement on them to the Petitioners not for the Commons themselves to judge finally determine them or give relief upon them without the Lords as all the transmissions of private and publike Petitions by the Commons to the Lords heretofore and in this Parliment in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Mr. Walker my self and of Lilburns own Petition against his censure attest Therefore the Judicature of our Parliaments must wholy rest and intirely reside in the Lords House as well in all Criminal as civil cases both of Commoners and Lords 10ly The surest badge and highest evidence of the right and exercise of Juridical and Judicial Authority in Parliament is the examination affirmation control repeal nulling adjudging and finall determining all Errors in Judgements Decrees Proceedings all Misprisions Abuses Corruptions grievances whatsoever of Judges Justices in all other Courts of Justice Civil Ecclesiastical Marine or military Now the Lords-alone in Parliament upon Wtits of Error Appeals Complaints Petitions c examine confirm repeal null redresse and finally determine all Errors misprisions in Judgements Decrees Proceedings and all Abuses Corruptions Grievances whatsoever in all other Courts of Justice whether Civil as the Kings Bench Chancery Exchequer Chamber Common Pleas Exchequer Court of Wards Courts of Requests Stanneries c. or Ecclesiastical as the High Commission Archbishops Consistories the Convocation and the Admiralty Court Marshal Council Table Star-chamber and in former Parliaments as is evident by sundry presidents in former ages and in this present Parliament of King CHARLS in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Lilburn himself Mr. Grafton Alderman Chambers Mr. Rolls Sir Rob Howard Alderman Langham and Limry Mr. Johns and le Gay with sundry others But more especially in cases of Writs of Error brought in Parliament by Peers or Commoners upon any Erronious judgements touching their real or personal estates lives limbs liberties persons upon Indictments or Attainders In all which writs the King and Lords only are sole judges without the Commoners and the returns of the proceedings upon such Writs are only before the Lords in the Vpper House secundum legem et consuetudinem Parliaments So Sir Edward Cook himself expresly resolves in direct terms in his 4 Institutes p. 21 22 23. And 22 E. 3.3 Fitz Error 8 Br. 3.1 H. 7.20 21 22. Br. Error 137. Old Book of Entries p. 302.16 E. 3. Fitz. Brev. 651.21 E. 3.46 Br. Error 65.29 E. 3.24.39 Ass 18.42 Ass 22.7 H. 6.28 8 H. 5. Fitz. Error 88.19 H. 6.12.35 H. 6.19.37 H. 6.16.11 H. 4.65.9 E. 4.3.2 R. 3.22.37 H. 8.14 15 25. Dyer f. 62.196 201 315 375. intimate as much This is most clear by the Writs of Error Judgements and Proceedings on them in the Parliament House before and by the Lords alone mentioned in the Parliament Rolls themselves as 14 E. 1. roâ— Parl. 1.4 E. 3. n. 13 14.21 E. 3. n. 65 66.28 E. 3. n. 8. to 14.50 E. 3. n. 38.1 R. 2. n. 28 29 105.2 R. 2. n. 31 32 33 37 38. Parl. 2. and Parl. 1. n. 21. to 27.3 R. 2. n. 19.20 21 22.6 R. 2. n. 17.7 R. 2. n. 20 21.8 R. 2. n. 13 14 15 16.13 R. 2. n. 16 17 15 R. 2. n. 22 23 24.16 R. 2. n. 17 18.17 R. 2. n. 17.19 â—8 R. 2. n. 11 12 13.20 R. 2. n. â—6 21 R. 2. n. 25 55. to 66 71.1 H. 4. n. 91 92.2 H. 4. n. 38 39 40.4 H. 4. n. 26.5 H. 4. n. 40.6 H. 4. n. 31.1 H. 5. n. 19.2 H. 5. n. 13 14.3 H. 5. n. 19. with sundry Writs of Error in succeeding Parliaments and this now sitting adjudged determined by the King and Lords alone without the privity or interposition of the Commons A truth so clear that Lilburn himself in his Argument against the Lords jurisdiction confesseth iâ— If then the Lords House be the soâ—e Judges in all Writs of Error and Appeals from all other Courts of Justice concerning the Lands Tenements Goods Estates Liberties Members Lines Attainders of all English Freeholders and Commoners whatsoever notwithstanding the Statute of Magna Charta ch 29. No Freeman shall be â—aken or imprisoned c. neither will we pass upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers c. the grand and principal objection against the Lords Judicature in Cases of Commoners then by the self same reason they are their lawfull Judges and may regally proceed against them in all other criminal or Civil causes especially in cases of breach of their own Privileges wherein they are the sole and only Judges since no other Court can judge of nor yet punish them as Sir Ed. Cook resolves being properly triable only in Paâ—liament as contempt against all other Courts are punishable and triable by themselves alone the present cases of Lilburne and Overton Now that they are and alwayes have been so de facto unless by way of Bill of Attainder or in such extraordinary cases when their concurrence hath been desired even in criminal cases misdemeanors and offences of Commons as well as Peers I
dominum nostrum jam elapso irae tempore haec innotuisse Praeterea si aliquid â—iolentiae ipsi Henrico intuleritis ecce Episcopus Londinonsis qui spiritualem et alii amici ejus militares qui vindictam exercebunt materialem et sic in magna parte cessavit Extunc igitur procurante efficaciter Comite Richardo et Episcopâ— memorato mitius actum est cum eo Dictum enim est domino Regi secretius quod mirum est quod aliquis ei curat servire cum eis post ministerium etiam mortem nititur inferre Promissa igitur quadam pecuniae summa a mortis discrimine recessit liberatus After which he paying to the King 2000 marks for a fine and being reconciled to the King ad Curiam est reversus immemor laqueorum quos evaserat Here we have 1. A corrupt Judge accused of bribery by others and by the King of rebellion and sedition and that before the Lords in Parliament 2ly A Proclamation for all that were grieved to complain against him 3ly A rash unjust sentence given against him by the King himself for any man that would to kill him with impunity 4ly the Lords opposition and contradiction of this sentence and its execution as unjust and dangerous 5ly A remission of his sentence by the Lords mediation and a fine imposed and paid to the King for his offences In the 49 year of King Henry the 3. at the Parliament held at Winchester divers Commoners as well as Lords were attainted and condemned of High Treason for levying war against the King their persons imprisoned their lands and goods confiscated and the liberties of the City of London forfeited by judgement of the Lords Anno â—290 King Edward the 1. held a Parliament at London at which time Rex auditis multorum queremoniâ—â— fere Justiciarios omnes de falsitate deprehensos a suo Officio deposuit puniens eos juxta demerita grâ—vi mâ—a by the advice of his Lords in Parliament It appears by the Clause Roll of 5 E. 2. m. 22. dorso and Rot. Finium 5 E. 2. m. 11. in Schedula that in a Parliament held at Stamford 3 E. 2. the Commons of England exhibited sundry Articles of complaint to the King Amongst others that they were not used as they ought to be by THE GREAT CHARTER in taking Prises and Purveyances without mony c. That the King by his Ministers took ijs of every Tun of wine and ijs a cloth from Merchants aliens and 3 d. pur aver de poys to the damage of his people and hinderance of trade which new Impositions being against Law the King promised to redress for the future and to content himself with the Prises and Customs antiently due They likewise complained of the abuses oppressions and extravagances of Purveyors Constables of Castles and Escheators and abuses of Protections and Pardons granted by the King to Murderers and other Malefactors to their incouragement whereto redress was promised In their 6. Article they complained That the Knights Citizens and Burgesses of Parliament came up with divers Petitions for matters not remediable at the Common Law and could not finde to whom to deliver them Whereunto was answered The King willed that in his Parliaments for time to come certain persons should be appointed to receive Petitions and that they should be delivered TO HIS COUNCIL as was used in the time of his Father and examined and answered by him with their advice Whence we find in all our Parliament Rolls ever since in the beginning of every Parliament certain persons nominated by the King and Lords being Members or Assistants of the Lords house to receive the several Petitions of England Ireland Scotland Gascoigne Iersey Gernsey Alderney and other Isles and other persons of the LORDS House appointed to trie examin and answer them in the Kings name and behalf as he by their advice shall think meet and sundry Petitions of Grievances of all kinds presented to them and answered accordingly by the King and Lords in every Parliament as well by the whole house of Commons as by particular Counties Cities Corporations and private Persons a most clear Evidence that the King and Lords are the sole Judges of all criminal and civil causes and Grievances of the Commons in Parliament since they thus constantly petition them for redress and that the Commoners are only Petitioners not Judges as the Parliament roll of 1 H. 4. n. 79. resolves in direct terms Claus 8 E. 2. m. 7. dors The Chaplains of the House of Converts exhibited a Petition in Parliament against Adam de Osgodby the Keeper thereof for putting them out of their lodgings and placing his Clerks therein they being founded by King H. 3. to pray and sing Masses for his and his ancestors Souls and not to lodge the Clerks of the Chancery Upon consideration of the Petition by the Lords and Councel in Parliament it was referred to the Chancellor to examin and determine tanquam principali Custodi omnium Hospitalium et Domorum de eleemosyna Domini Regis fundatorum ut ipfe inde faceret quod de jure esset faciendum He sends a Commission to the House to inquire the truth of the complaint and finds the Complaint unjust and that the Keeper of the House was falsly charged and that especially by William de Okelines being one of the Chaplins Whereupon consideratum est per Cancellarium quod Willielmus idem nihil haberet de contentis in petitione sua praedicta sed quod committeretur ad custodiam suam pro falsâ— querela sua castigandus juxta discretionem dicti custodis Pasch 8 E. 2. Norfolk The Archdeacon of Norfolk was accused for citing the Countess of Warren being the Kings Neece and divorced from her husband to the damage of the King 2000 l. and it was adjudged by the Lords in Parliament against the Archdeacon quod nec citatio nec summonitio fieri debet versus eot qui sunt de sanguine Regis quia illis Major reverentia debita est and therefore he was fined About the year 1316. when the Northumberland Soldiers like some in this age raised against the Scots de tyronâ—bus facti sunt Tyranni de defensoribus destructores de propugnatoribus proditores c. one John Tanner said openly that he was heir of England Therefore at Northampton before the King and Lords he was proved false and hanged and drawn See more of him in Fabians Chronicle part 7. Anno 1314. p. 169. who relates that he reported he was son to King Edward the 1. but was stoln out of his cradle by a false nurse and Edward who was anothers son laid in the cradle for him and that he had a Fiend in form of a Câ—t whom he served 3. years which assured him he should be King of England In the Parliament of 18. E. 1. the Prior of Trinity in London and Bago de Clare were attached brought into the Parliament there
fined a 1000 l. to Edmond Earl of Cornwal and 2000 marks to the Abbot of Westminster and committed to the Tower of London by JUDGEMENT of the King Earls Barons and Iustices in full Parliament for citing and attaching the said Earl of Cornwal in Westminster hall to appear before the Archbishop sitting the Parliament whereof he was a Peer against his Privilege and the privilege of Sanctuary granted to the Abbot of Westminst and remained prisoners there till they put in Sureties and paid the 1000 l. fine to the Earl notwithstanding their plea of ignorance of these their Privileges In the Parliament of 4 E. 3. n. 2 3 4 5 6. Sir Simon Bereford knight John Mautravers Boso de Bayons John Deverall Thomas de Gournay and William of Ocle confederates with Roger Mortimer Earl of March in all his Treasons and misdoings for which he was then impeached and condemned and guilty of the murders of King Edward the 2. after his deposition in Berkley Castle and of the Earl of Kent his Brother were attainted and condemned of High Treason by the Lords Barons Péers in Parliament as Iudges of Parliament though they were Commoners and not their Péers whom they were not at all obliged to judge as Péers adjudging them by the Kings assent as Traytors and Enemies of the King and his Realm to be drawn and hanged Whereupon Sir Simon being in Custody was executed by the Marshal and Proclamation made by the Kings writs by the Lords order to apprehend the others with promise of great rewards to those who should apprehend them that they might be executed and if they could not take them alive to bring in their heads for which thty should receive the reward of 500 l. from the King It is true indeed that after these Judgements given the Lords the same Parliament entred this special Protestation in the Parliament Roll n. 6. against being forced to give Judgement in such cases against those who were not their Peers which Sir Edward Cook stiles an Act of Parliament though it be no such thing but a voluntary Protestation of the Lords with the Kings assent It is assented and agreed by our Lord the King and all the Great men in full Parliament that albeit the said Péers as Iudges of Parliament took upon them in the presence of our Lord the King to make and render the said Judgements by assent of the King upon some of those who were not at all their Peers and that by reason of the murder of our Leige Lord and destruction of him who was so near of the bloud royal and son of a King that thereby the PEERS which now are o◠the Péers which shall be in time to come shall not be bound or charged to render Iudgements upon others who are not their Péers nor yet to doe it but upon the Péers of the Land but that they shall from henceforth be for ever acquitted thereof And that the said Iudgements now rendered shall not be drawn into example nor consequence for time to come whereby the said Peers may be charged hereafter to adjudge others than their Peers against the Law of the Land if such another case should happen which God defend From this Protestation of the Lords which Lilburn principally insists on he and some others conclude that the Peers in Parliament have no right at all to imprison fine judge or pass sentence of death against any Commoner for any offence no not for breach of their own Privileges but only the Commons To which Objection I answer First that this is no Act of Parliam as Sir E. Cook mistakes but a bare Protestation of the Lords alone assented to by the King without the Commons assent which no wayes impeacheth the Lords right of judicature Secondly that neither the House of Commons nor the Commoners then attainted of Treason and adjudged to death by the Lords ever demurred or excepted against their Jurisdiction as Lilburn and Overton doe but acknowledged and submitted to it Thirdly That in this very Protestation the Lords profess and justifie their right of BEING JVDGES in Parliament without admitting or acknowledging any Joynt or sole right of Judicature with them in the Commons Fourthly That this Protestation was meerly voluntary not in derogation but preservation of their own Honour Right Peerage and the Parliaments privileges too The substance of it is no more than this That the Lords should not be constrained against their wills by the Kings command and in his presence to give judgement of death in ordinary cases of Treason or Felony in the high Court of Parliament or elsewhere out of it against such who were no Peers who in such cases by the Law might and ought to be tried in the Kings Courts at Westminster or before the Iustices of Oyer and Terminer by a Iury of their equals but only in cases which could not well be tried elsewhere and were proper for their Judgement in Parliament they fearing that by this president in Parliament they might be sworn and impannelled on Juries in cases of Treason committed by Commoners against the Great Charter c. 29. and the Privilege of their Peerage which exempted them being sworn or put into Juries as Fitz. Nat. brev f. 165.48 E. 3. f. 30. Exemption 6.48 Ass 6.27 H. 8. f. 22. b. This is the whole summ and sence of their protestation To argue therefore from hence That they cannot pass sentence or judgement against any Commoners in any case proper for their Judicature in Parliament because they protested only against being COMPELLED to give Iudgement against such as were no Peers in cases triable elsewhere and not proper for their tribunal as the Objectors hence conclude is quite to mistake their meaning end to speak rather non-sence than reason or Law Fifthly This Protestation was made only against the Lords giving sentence in Felony and Treason and that in the Kings own presence in Parliam who usually pronounced the judgment himself or by some other with the Lords assent did not charge the Lords to pronounce it as here not against sentencing fining imprisoning any Commoner for rayling and libelling against their Persons Jurisdiction and procedings or refusing to answer and contemning their Authority to their faces at the barr or appealing from their Judicature in case of breach of Privilege of which themselves alone and no others are or can be Judges the cases of Lilburn and Overton whose commitments are warranted by hundreds of Presidents in this and former Parliaments Therefore for them to apply this Protestation to their cases with which it hath no Analogy is a manifestation of their injudiciousness and folly rather than a justification of their Libellous Invectives against the Lords injustice Sixthly The Lords gave judgement against all these persons by the Kings command in their absence without any Indictment hearing Trial witnesses heard or examined against them face to face or due process or Law against the Great Charter
spiritual Cour◠for a temporal cause belonging to the Crown and Common Law which was adjudged by the Lords upon examination to be untrue To passe by the accusation of Sir Philip Courtney of divers hainous matters oppressions dissensions before the King and Lords in the Parliament of 16 R. 2. n. 6.13 14. of which more anon In the Parliament of 17 R. 2. n. 20 21. John Duke of Lancastre Steward and Thomas Duke of Gloucester Constable of England complained to the King that Sir Thomas Talbot Knight with other his adherents conspired the deaths of the said Dukes in divers parts of Cheshire as the same was confessed and well known and prayed That the Parliament might judge of the fault Whereupon the King and the Lords in Parliament without the Commons adjudged the said fact to be open and High Treason And thereupon they awarded two Writs to the Sherifs of Yorks and of Derby to take the body of the said Sir Thomas retornable in the Kings Bench in the month of Easter next ensuing And open Proclamation was made in Westminster Hall That upon the Sherifs retorn and at the next coming in of the said Sir Thomas he should be convicted of Treason and incurr the loss and pain of the same and that all such who should receive him after the Proclamation should receive the like losse and pain In the Parliament of 20 R. 2. n. 15 16 23. Sir Thomas Haxey Clark was by the King Lords in Parl. adjudged to die as a Traytor and to forfeit all his Lands Goods Chattels Offices and Livings for exhibiting to the House of Commons a scandalous Bill against the King and his Court for moderating the outragious expences of his Court by Bishops and Ladies c. Upon the Bishops intercession the King spared his life and delivered him into the custody of the Archbishop to remain as his Prisoner In the Parliament of 21 R. 2. n. 19 20. Pl. Parl. n. 2. to 15. The Lords Appellants appealed Sir Tho Mortimer Knight of High Treason for raising war against the King accroaching royal power and purposing to surrender his homage and allegiance and depose the King Who flying into the parts of Ireland thereupon the Lords in Parliament assigned him a certain day to come and render himself to the Law or else to be adjudged and proceeded against as a Traytor and Proclamation thereof was made accordingly in England and Ireland to render himself within 3 months And that after that time all his Abettors and Aiders should be reputed for and forfeit as Traytors He not coming at the day The Duke of Lancaster Steward of England by assent of the Lords in Parliament adjudged him a Traytor and that he should forfeit all his Lands in fee and see tayl together with all his Goods and Chattels The like Judgement in like manner was in the same Parliament given against Sir John Cobham Knight for the like Treason Placit Coronaen 16. On the 22 day of March 22 R. 2. n. 27. The King by assent of the Lords adjudged Sir Robert Plesington Knight then dead a Traytor for levying war against him with the Duke of Glocester at Harrengary for which he should lose all his Lands in fee or fee tayl and all his goods And n. 28. Henry Bowht Clerk for being of Counsel with the Duke of Hereford in his device was adjudged by the King and Lords to die and forfeit as a Traytor after which his life was pardoned and he banished In the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. As the Commons acknowledged that the Iudgements in Parliament had always of right belonged to the King and Lords and not unto the Commons So therein the King and Lords alone without the Commons gave Judgement in sundry cases as Judges in Parliament 1. In Sir Thomas Haxey his case who in his own name presented a Petition in this Parliament a nostre tresedoute seigniour le ROY a LES SEIGNIORS DU PARLIAMENT shewing that in the last Parliament of 21 R. 2. that he delivered a Bill to the Commons of the said Parliament for the honour and profit of the said King and of all the Realm for which Bill at the will of the King he was by the King and Lords adjudged a Traytor and to forfeit all that he had praying that the record of the said Judgement with the dependants thereupon might be vacated and nulled by them in this present Parliament as erronious and that he might be restored to all his degrees farms estate goods chattels ferms pensions lands tenements rents offices advow sons and possessions whatsoever and their appurt and enjoy them to him and his heirs notwithstanding the said Iudgement or any grant made of them by the King The Commons House exhibited a Petition likewise on his behalf to the like effect adding that this judgement given against him for delivering this Bill to the Commons in Parliament was eneontre droit et la course quel avoit estre use devant in Parlement en anientesment des Customs de◠le◠Communes Upon which Petitions Nostre Seignior le ROY de Induis assent des touz les Seigniors esperituelz et temporelz ad ordinez et adjudges que le dit juggement renus vers le dit Thomas in Parlement soit de tout casses revorses repellez et adnullez et tenus pur nul force n'effect et que le dit Thomas soit restitut a ses nom et fame c. nient obstant mesme le juggement 2ly In the case of Judge Rickhill 1 H· 4. n. 92. On the 18 of November the Commons prayed the King that Sir William Rickhill late Just of the Common Bench arrested for a Confession he had taken of the Duke of Gloucester at Calice might be brought to answer for it devant les Seigniors du Parlement whereupon he was brought into Parliament before the Kings presence and all the Lords spiritual and temporal and Commons assembled in Parliament where Sir Walter Clapton Chief Justice of the Kings Bench by the kings command examined the said Sir William how and by what warrant he went to Calice to the said Duke of Glocester and upon what message Who answered that king Richard sent him a special Writ into Kent there recited verbatim commanding him by the faith and allegiance whereby he was obliged to him and under pain of forfeiting all he had to goe unto Caleys And that at Dover he received a Commission from the said king by the hand of the Earl Marshal to confer with the Duke of Glocester and to hear whatsoever he would say or declare unto him and to certifie the king thereof in proper person wherever he should be fully and distinctly under his Seal Whereupon he went thither and took the said Dukes Examination in writing according to the purport of the said Commission a Copy whereof the Duke himself received c Upon the hearing of his answer and defence
Sautre being condemned of Heresie in the Convocation by Archbishop Arundel and the Clergy thereupon by order and advice of the Temporal Lords without the Prelates who must not have their hands in blood though they gave the Sentence that he should be burned or the Commons there issued out a Writ to the Sherifs of London for the burning of Sautre as an Heretick accordingly burnt thereon being the first writ of this Nature issued by the Lords alone in the Kings name before the Statute of Heresie was made and passed in this Parliament In the same Parliament of 2 H. 4. n. 30. The Temporal Lords by assent of the King adjudged and declared Sir Ralph Lumly Knight and others Traytors for levying war in sundry parts to destroy the K. his people and that they should forfeit all their lands in fee goods and chattels though they were slain in the field not arraigned nor indicted by reason thereof In the Parliament of 4 H. 4. n. 19 20 21. Sir Philip Courtney being complained against and convicted of a forcible entry into Lands and for a forcible imprisonment of the Abbot of Mâ—nthaem in Devonshire and two of his Monks was upon hearing and examination adjudged by the King and Lords to be bound to his good behaviour and for his contempt committed to the Tower of London prisoner Anno 1403. Henry Percy the younger confederating with Thomas Percy Earl of Worcester to raise forces â—nd rebel against the King sent Letters to the people of every County propositum quod assumpserant non esse contra suam ligeantiam et fidelit tem quam regi fecerant nec ab aliunde exercitum congregasse nisi pro salvatione personarum suarum reipublicae meliori guvernatione Quia census et Tallagia Regi concessa pro salva regni custodia covertebantur ut dixerunt in usus indebitos et inutiliter consumebantur praeterea querebantur quod propter aemulorum dilationes pessimas rex eis insensus fuerat ut non auderent personaliter venire ad ejus praesentiaem donec Praelati regnique Barones regi supplicassent pro eisdem ut coram Rege permitterentur declarare suam innocentiam per Pares suos legaliter justificari Plures igitur visis his literis collaudabant tantum virorum solertiam extollebant fidem quam erga Rempublicam praetendebant Having raised great forces against the King by this means which the kings forces encountred at Shrewsbury in a pitched battel Henry Percy and sundry of his adherents were there slain in the field and the rest routed For which levying of war in the Parliament of of 5 H. 4. n. 15. the said Henry Percy and his Coâ—federaâ—es were declared and adjudged Traytors by the King and Lords in full Parliament and their Lands goods and chaâ—tels confiscated In the same Parliament n. 18. At the Petition of the Commons The Lords â—enâ—ed and ordered that the Kings Confessor the Abbot of Dore Mr Richard Durham and Crosby of the Chamber should be removed out of the Kings house and Court whereupon 3. of them appearing before the King and Lords in Parliament the King though he excused them yet charged them to depart from his house for that they were hated of the people In the Parliament of 13 H. 4. n. 12 13. The Lord Roos complained against Robert Thirwit one of the Justices of the Kings Bench for withholding from him and his Tenants Common of Pasture and Turbâ—ry in Warbie in Lincolnshire and lying in wait with 500 men for the Lord Roos Thirwit before the King and Lords confessed his fault and submitted himself to their Order who appointed 3. Lords to end the difference who made an award between them that Thirwit shouâ—d confess his fault to the Lord Roos crave his pardon and tender him amends In the Parliament of 5 H. 5. n. 11. Sir John Oldcastle knight being outlawed of Treason in the Kings bench and excommunicated before the Archbishop of Canterbury for Heresie was brought before THE LORDS and having heard his conviction made no answer nor excuse thereto Upon which Record and Process THE LORDS ADJUDGED that he should be taken as a Traytor to the King and Realm carried to the Tower of London from thence drawn through the City to the new Gallows in St. Gyles without Temple-barr and there hanged and burned hanging which was accordingly executed Sir Iohn Mortymer knight being committed to the Tower upon supposition of Treason done against King Henry the 5. in the 1. year of H. 6. brake out of the Tower for which breach he was indicted of Treason being afterwards apprehended he was brought into the Parliament of 2 H. 6. n. 18. and upon the same Indictment then confirmed by assent of Parliament JUDGEMENT was given against him BY THE LORDS that he should be carried to the Tower drawn through London to Tiburn there to be hanged drawn and quartered his head to be set on London-bridge and his four quarters on the four Gates of London In the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 20 2â— 22. Sir William Oldham knight and Thomas Vaughan Esquire were attainted of Treason by the LORDS and in the Parliaments of 1 E. 4. n. 19. to 31. 4 E. 4. n. 28. to 38. â—4 E. 4. n. 34. to 40. sundry Knights Esquires Citizens and Commoners are attainted of Treason by the Lords for levying warr and holding forts against the King then after by Bill whose names are overtedious to reherse which you may peruse at leisure in the Exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower To omit all other presidents of this Nature in the reigns of King H. 7.8 Ed. 6. Qu. Mary and Qu. Elizabeth of Commoners censured in and by the Lords house in Criminal causes upon impeachments complaints petitions which those who please may find recorded in the Journals of the Lords house I shall recite only some few Presidents more of late and present times In the Parliaments of 18. 21 Iacobi Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Iohn Michel upon complaints and impeachments by the Commons for promoting Monopoliâ—s Corruption and other Misdemeanors were fined imprisoned by Judgement of the Lords House and Sir Giles degraded of his knighthood In the Parliament of 3. Carolâ— the Commons impeached Roger Manwaring Dr. of Divinity for preaching and printing Seditious and dangerous Sermons and sent up this Declaration against him to the Lords June 14. 1628. For the more effectual prevention of the apparent ruine and destruction of this kingdom which must necessarily ensue if the good and fundamental Laws and customs therein established should be brought into contempt and violated and that form of government thereby altered by which it hath been so long maintained in peace and happiness And to the honour of our Soveraign Lord the King and for the preservation of his Crown and Dignity the Commons in this present Parliament assembled do by this their Bill shew and
singulis secundum Iuramenta Regis et Procerum debebatur expectare 2. The reason why he thus sled was to avoid the Justice of THE KING LORDS as they in plain terms inform the Pope without any mention of the Commons 3ly This expulsion is said to be in 44 H. 3. or rather in 41. as Mat. Paris and others inform us An. 1458. And that is at least 5. or 8. years before any Commons Knights and Burgesses were summoned to our Parliaments by Sir Robert Cottons Mr. Seldens and others confessions and that by the Writ in 49 H. 3. Rot. Claus m. 10. dorso Therefore if the Commons had any vote in his banishment it was 5. or 8. years before they were admitted into our Parliaments and so a Banishment not in but out of Parliament 4ly This Letter to Pope Alexander begins thus Sanctissimo Patri in Christo Alexandro c. COMMUNITAS COMITUM PROCERUM MAGNATUM ALIORUMQUE REGNI ANGLIAE and it is subscribed joyntly by 6. Earls and 5. Noblemen whereof Petrus de Montfort is the last VICE TOTIUS COMMUNITATIS to wit Communitas Comitum Procerum Magnatum aliorumque Regni Angliae who writ the Letter mentioned in the beginning thereof not of the Commons House contradistinct from the Earls Nobles Great-men and Barons of the Realm praesentibus literis sigilla nostra apposuimus in testimonium praedictorum not by the 10 first Earls and Nobles in behalf of themselves the Earls Lords and great men of the Realm and by Peter de Montford as Speaker or Proctor of the Commons who as Sir Robert Cotton himself acknowledgeth had no Speaker aâ— all in 6 E. 3. An. 1332. being at least 74. years after this Letter nor yet till 51 E. 3. rot Parl. n. 87. for ought appears by History or Record being 119. years after this Letter Wherefore this president consisting of so many mistakes as I have more largely proved in my Preface to Sir Robert Cottons Exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower makes nothing at all for the Commons joynt Right of Judicature with the King and Lord The rather because the Communitas in the objected clause of the Letter is not meant of the Commons in Parliament but the Communitas or Universitas Regni popularis etsi non Nobiles as Mat. Paris stiles them or popular rabble of Commons out of Parliament The 2. president is that of Sir Nicholas Segrave 33 E. 1. rot 33. Cooks 3. Institutes p. 7. 4 Instit p. 23. in the margin Who being charged in Parliament in presence of the King Earls Barons and OTHERS OF THE KINGS COUNCEL not the Commons or Burgesses but the Iudges and Kings learned Councel at Law or his Privy Council who were assistants to the Lords as I conceive which Sir Edward Cook mistaking would have to express the Commons in Parliament then and there present that the King in the wars of Scotland being among his enemies Nicholas Seagrave his leigeman who held of the King by Homage and fealty and served him for his aid in that warr did maliciously move discord and contention without cause with John de Crombewell charging him with many enormous crimes and offered to prove it upon his body To whom the said John answered that he would answer him in the Kings Court c. and thereupon gave him his faith After which Nicholas withdrew himself from the Kings hast and aid leaving the King in danger of his enemies and adjourned the said John to defend himself in the Court of the King of France and prefixed him a certain day and so as much as in him was subjected and submitted the Dominion of the King and kingdom to the subjection of the King of France and to effect this he took his journey towards Dover to passe over into France All which he confessed and submitted himself therein de alto et Basso to the Kings pleasure And hereupon the King willing HABERE AVISAMENTUM to have the advise of the EALS BARONS LORDS magnatum and OTHERS OF HIS COUNCEL enjoyned them upon the Homage fealty and allegiance wherewith they were obliged to him quod ipsi sideliter CONSULERENT that they should faithfully ADVISE HIM what punishment should be inflicted for such a fact thus confessed Qui omnes habito super hoc diligenti tractatu et avisamento c. Who all having had thereupon diâ—igent debate and advise having considered and understood all things contained in the said fact DICUNT not by way of Judgement judicially pronounced but of answer to the Kings question propounded and as their opinion of the cause Said that this fact deserved losse of life members c. So as this offence notes Sir Edward Cooke was then adjudged in Parliament to be High Treason But under his favour First here was no judgement at all given against the party himself but only an opinion and advice touching this case not pending judicially in Parliament by way of Inditement or impeachment but voluntarily proposed by the King in answer to the kings question and so it can be no proof of any actual proper judicature vested in both Houses Secondly For ought appears this question was only propounded to the Earls Lords Barons and the Kings Council that assisted them and so only to the House of Peers not to the Commons and answered resolved only by them aliorum de Concilio suo not expressing nor including the Commons as I apprehend being never so intitled in any Parliament Records for ought I can find That these alii de Concilio were not the Commons as Sir Edward Cook insinuates but the Kings Justices and Judges who attended them is most clear by this passage of Matthew Westminster who lived and writ the story of it at that time in these words Sub illo quoque tempore Nicholaus de Segrave unus de praestantioribus de regno pro tali causa arrestatus fuerat coram rege Alius quidam Johannis de Cromâ—ewell ipsum de proditione arguerat Ille autem in defensionem obtulit se duello Rex propter bella sua noluit ista pati ille vero non licentiatuâ— et contra prohibitionem Regis mare transivit persequens accusatorem ipso Rege adhuc inter hostiles acies constituto Ideirco reputaâ— eum Rex in judicio vitae suae contemptorem nec per ipsum stare quin Rex ab hostibus interiret Et ille in gratiam Regis se submisit Cui Rex justitiam fieri volo in judicio Proinde JUSTITIARII mark it not the Commons TRIDUO SUPER HOC CONSULTANTES responderunt regi hujusmodi hominem reum esse mortis et omnia bona sua mobilia et immobilia regii juris esse Veruntamen propter generositatem sanguinis addiderunt non hunc in regis contemptum Angliam egressum fuisse sed propter iram se de suo criminatore vindicandi Regis autem esse posse facere misericordiam cum eodem Quibus Rex O
diu consultati sed inconsulti Equidem meum est posse et velle conferre gratiam cui voluero miserebor Nec propter vos amplius quam pro cane Quis in gratiam meam se submisit repulsam passus est Veruntamen vestrum judicium in scriptura redigatur et pro lege amodo teneatur Proinde dictus miles ad carcerem ducebatur ne impunitas armareâ— audaciam et rigor caeteris timorem incuteret contemnendi Et post paucos dies elaborantibus multis nobilioâ—ibus regni et ostendentibus se 30 suis paribus cinctis gladiis corpus pro corpore et bona pro bonis una in solidum quoquo die Rex eum vocaverit nec adesset liberatus est et per regem cunctis facultatibus suis restitutus So this Historian which compared with the Record infallibly proves that this resolution was given by the Earls Barons Lords and Judges advice who were the only aliorum de Concilio as assistants to the Lords then in all matters of Law as now they are not the Commons of which there is no mention in the records or this Historian that they were parties to it And this is likewise evident by the case of Margery the Wife of Thomas Weyland an abjured Judge in the Parliament of 19 E. 1. Cooks 1. Institutes f. 133. n. Where the Barons of the Exchequer and Justices of the Kings Courts were called to advise and assist the King and his Council of Lords in Parliament in a difficulty of Law therein to be resolved by their advice And therfore it follows that the LORDS ONLY IN THAT AGE were the Judges even of Commoners cases Thirdly Admit the Commons were included yet it proves only a right of advising and delivering their opinions with the Lords when required by the King not of judging or pronouncing sentence Fourthly Sir Edward Cook citing this president to prove That both Houses together have power of judicature must grant that even in 33 E. 1. there were two distinct Houses of Parliament who upon special occasions as now at conferences c. met and advised together and therefore the division of the Houses was before Edward the third his reign and very probable as antient as the summoning of Knights Citizens and Burgesses to the Parliament which some make as antient as King Henry the first or King Henry the 2. others not before King Henry the third in the 49 year his reign Father to King Edward the first So as this president makes quite against the Levellers and Lilburnians designs and opinions The 3 and 4. Presidents are those of Hugh Audley his Wife Claus 12 E. 2. m. 5. of Gaverston and the two Spencers Exiles 15 E. 2. forecited wherein the Commons gave their assents to the attainders and exiles of Gaverston and the Spencers and to the reversal of them But this I have already proved to be only by way of Bills not judicature by the legislative not judicial power of Parliament and that they were judicially condemned only by the Lords therefore these are nothing to the purpose and against the Objectors The 5. and 6. are the depositions of King Ed. the 2. and Richard the 2. for their mis-government wherin the Commons had a joynt vote and concurrence with the Lords which I shall hereafter answer in the supplement p. 429. to 460. The seventh President is that of Eliz. Burgh Widow in the Parliament of 1 E. 3. rot Parl. n. 11. who complained by Petition to the King that in the reign of King Edward the 2. she was by his Writ commanded to come unto him to Yorke and there by Hugh Spencer the younger and Robert Baldock and William Cliff his instruments inforced by duresse to enter into an Obligation to this effect that if she received any who were contrary to the King or maried any man without the Kings consent or if she gave any lands or tenements which she held in fee or in dower to any man living without the Kings license that for any of these she should forfeit all her Lands Tenements Goods and Chattels to the King as appeared by the transcript of the Bond annexed to her Bill whereupon she prayed Grace and remedy against this duresse and acquittance of our Lord the King from this Obligation Hereupon a Writ was sent to the Clerk of the Privy Seal in whose custody the Obligation was to bring it without delay Coram Concilio nostro in Parliamento ad faciendum inde ulteriut quod per idem Concilium nostrum contige it ordinari which being brought and delivered accordingly the 5 of March and deliberately read in full Parliament and agreeing with the transcript annexed to her Petition in all things Pur ceo que avys est as Archievesques Evesques Counts BARONS auires Grandes et a TOVTELA COMMONALTIE de la terre que lo dit escrit est fait contre ley de la terre enconter tout manere de reason si fuist le dit escrit PER AGARD DEL PARLIAMENT dampne illeoques livera ala dit Elizabeth I answer 1. That this judgement was given only in a civil case touching an Obligation made by duress not in a criminal 2ly That this Petition was directed only to the King and his Council not to the Commons in Parliament and the businesse heard before them 3ly That this being a Common case there being then many Petitions and complaints that Parliament of bonds of this nature the Commons joyning with the King and Lords in this judgement of Parliament in her case was only by way of Bill not in an ordinary way of judgement they exhibiting passing a Bill for that purpose as well as a Petition as is clear by the words of the Roll and by the printed Statute of 1 E. 3. c. 3. That fines sales and gifts of land and recognizances of debt made by force and duress to this Sir Hugh Spencer Robert Baldocke c. or to any of them be defeated And Parl. 2. ch 15. Whereas many of the Realm in the time of the Kings Father that now is by means of his false and evil Counsellors have been excited by divers to bind themselves to come to the K. with force and arms whensoever they should be sent for upon pain of life and limb and to forfeit all that ever they might forfeit by vertue of which writings divers of his land have been often destroyed The King considering that such writings were made to the Kings dishonour sithence that every man is bound to doe to the King as to his Liege Lord all that pertaineth to him without any manner of writing will that from henceforth no such writing be made And that such as be made by the sight of the Chancellor and Treasurer shall be shewed to the King and the K. shall cause all such as be made against right reason to be cancelled So that this main president meerly falls to the ground being
but by Bill The 8th President that may be objected is this Adam de Arleton or Tarlton Bishop of Hereford in a Parliament held at London Anno 1322. was apprehended by the Kings Officers and brought to the Bar to be arraigned for Treason and Rebellion in aiding the Mortimers and others in their wars with men and arms where having nothing to say for himself in defence of the crimes objected and standing mute for a space at last he flatly told the King That he was a Minister and Member of the Church of Christ and a consecrated Bishop though unworthy therefore I neither can nor ought to answer to such high matters without the consent of my Lord Archbishop of Canterbury my direct Judge next after the Pope and of the other Fathers the Bishops my PEERS At which saying the Archbishops and Bishops there present rose up and interceded to the King for their Colleague and when the King would not be intreated they all challenged the Bishop as a Member of the Church exempt from the Kings Justice and all secular judicature The King forced thereunto by their claimors delivered him to the Archbishops custody to answer elsewhere for these crimes Within few days after being apprehended again and brought to answer before the Kings royal Tribunal in the Kings Bench at Westminster for his Treasons the Archbishops of Canterbury York and Dublin hearing of Tarltons arraignment came with their Crosier staves carried before them accompanied with 10 Bishops more and a great company of men entred into the Court and by open violence rescued and took away the Bishop from the Bar before any answer made to his charge chasing away the Kings Officers and proclaiming openly That no man should lay violent hands on this Trayterly Bishop upon pain of excommunication and so departed The King exceedingly incensed at this High affront to Justice and himself commanded an Inquest to be impanelled and a lawfull inquiry to be made of the Treasons committed by the Bishop in his absence being thus rescued from Justice The Jury without fear of the King or any hatred of the Bishop found the Bishop guilty of all the Articles of Treason and Rebellion whereof he was indicted Whereupon the King banished the Bishop seised all his temporalties lands and goods But yet notwithstanding the Bishop by consent of all the Prelates was by strong hand kept in the Archbishops custody till he had reconciled him to the King After which by way of revenge he was a principal instrument of the Kings deposing and murther which having effected in the Parliament of 1 E. 3. 6. this Bishop petitions that the Indictment and Iudgement against him and the proceedings therein might be brought into Parliament and there nulled as erronious which was done accordingly Et quia recitatis et examinatis coram nobis et consilio nosâ—ro recordo et processu praedictis Et etiam coram Praelatis Comitibus Baronibus Magnatibus tota communitate regni nostri praesenti Parliamento nostro praesentibus compertum fuit quod in eisdem recordo et processu errores manifesti intervenerunt per assensum totius Parliamenti adnullatur and so he had restitution I answer that as this rescue of proceeding and judgement against this trayterous Bishop were singular So is this repeal and reversal of it as erronious before and by all the Commons and whole Parliament as well as King Prelates and Nobles and that no doubt at the special instance of this and all the other Bishops highly concerned in this cause Wherefore this one Swallow makes no Summer and proves no judicial authority joyntly with the King and Lords since they never joyned with them before nor since in reversing of any such error upon Judgement in the Kings Bench but only where an erronious Attainder by Bill in one Parliament was reversed by Bill in another The 9th is the Clause of King Edward the thirds Letter to the Pope in the 4th year of his reign already answered p. 274. The 10th is Sir John at Lees case 42 E. 3. n. 20. said to be ADJVDGED by the Lords and COMMONS I answer this Case is somewhat mâ—staken For the Record only mentions That the 21 day of May the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and aid granted on which day all the Lords and sundry of the Commons dined with the King After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee was brought before the King LORDS COMMONS next aforesaid who dined with the King to answer certain objections made against him by William Latymer about the wardship of Robert Latymer that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London where by duresse of Imprisonment he inforced the said William to surrender his estate unto him which done some other Articles were objected against the said Sir John of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himself HE was committed to the Tower of London there to remain til he had made fine and ransom at the Kings pleasure and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly And then the said Lords and Commons departed After which he was brought before the Kings Councel at Westminster which COUNCEL ORDERED the said ward to be reseised into the Kings hands So as this record proves not that this judgment was given in the Parliament house nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn but rather the King and his Councel in the presence of the Lords and Commons after the Parliament ended The 11 12 13. Are the cases of the Lord Latymer Lord Nevil and Richard Lyons forecited Here p. 283 284 350. which are nothing to purpose the Lords alone giving judgement in them without the Commons who did only impeach them and the King removing the Lord Latymer from his Council at their further request So that these 3. cases refute their opinions who object them The 14. is the Case of Weston and Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39. In which the Lords alone gave the Judgement as I have proved p. 332 333 Therefore pointblank against the Objectors The 15. president is that of Iohn Kirby and Iohn Algar two Citizens of London in the Parliament of 3 R. 2. n. 18. who conceiving malice against John Imperial an Ambassador sent hither from the State of Genoa who had procured a Monopoly to furnish England with all such wares as come from the Levant keeping his staple at Southampton killed him in London upon a sudden quarrel picked with him for which they being committed this being a new and difficult case and the Judges being in doubt whether it were Treason or no it was thereupon propounded in Parliament according to the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. like that of 25 E. 3. Parl. 2. of those who are born beyond the Seas 14 E. 3. c. 5. 13 E. 1. c. 24.32 E. 1. rot 17. 22. Claus 46 H. 3. n. 3. Claus 14
E. 2. dors 17. 17 E. 3. n. 24.21 E. 3. n. 60.40 E. 3. n. 14 15.14 E. 3. n. 30 31.1 R. 2. n. 95.1 E. 3. f. 6 7.39 E. 3.21 a. 40 E. 3.34 b. Cook 8 Rep. f. 158.3 Instit p. 6 7.4 Instit p. 67 c. 2 Instit p. 408. West 2. c 24. and Bracton l. 2. c. 16 l. 3. c. 9. Fletae l. 2. c. 6. resolving that all difficult causes are to be declared to and determined in and by Parliaments This case being examined and debated by and between the Lords and Commons was afterwards there declared bâ—fore the King and determined and agreed That this fact and murder is Treason and a crime against the Kings Majesty in which case no privilege of Clergy ought to be allowed to any man Whereupon 7 R. 2. rot 8. Kirby and Algar were attainted of High Treason in the Kings Bench and executed as Traitors Walsingham writes this Parliament was held at Northampton against the consent of most of the Realm but especially against the will of the Londoners that so revenge might be taken upon Kirkeby for this murder they fearing that if the Parliament were held at London the Londoners would not suffer him to be executed without some danger to those who condemned him whereupon he was condemned drawn and executed at Northampton To this I answer first That Kirby and Algar were not impeached arraigned tried or condemned in Parliament for this Treason but in the Kings Bench for if they had the Lords only had judged and given sentence against rhem as in all the premised cases 2ly Their case being new was thought fit to be propounded to the Commons by the Kings direction as well as to the Lords who upon debate agreed it to be Treason 3ly When it had been debated it was declared and finally resolved and agreed before the King in full Parliament and that by Bill and the Legislative not Judicial power as Mr. Sâ— John informs us Therefore it makes nothing for the Commons right and power of Judicature which after all these presidents all the Commons in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. confess to have been alwayes of right in the King and Lords and not in them which sways away all the forecited presidents at once as impertinent and misapplied For the presidents of 21 R. 2. n. 29. 2 H. 5. n. 13 28 H. 6 n. 19. misrecited by Sir E. Cook 4 Instit p. 23. 3 Inst p. 22. they are already answered p. 296 297 299 344. And for those of Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michel Viscount St. Alban and the Earl of Middlesex himself confesseth and I have here cleared p. 303 304. that the notable Iudgements against them were given by the Lords at the prosecution of the Commons who were only their prosecutors not Iudges These are all the Presidents I finde that are objected to give the Commons a share with the King and Lords in the Judicature in our Parliaments which evince it not but clearly disprove it The 2. sort of Presidents insisted on by Sir Ed. Cook are to prove a Judicial Authority in the House of Commons alone without the Lords in cases of their own Members and Servants in matters of elections breach of Privilege or misdemeanors in the Commons house for which they have imprisoned and sometimes fined Serjeants Baylifs Sherifs committed their own Members adjudged their elections void suspended excluded ejected them the house The 1. ease is that of Muncton 2 Aprilis 1 Mariae committed by the Commons to the Tower for striking William Iohnson a Burgess The 2. of Thomas Lucy 8 Eliz. removed out of the House for giving 4 l. to the Mayor of Westbury to be chosen a Burgess and the Maior fined and imprisoned The 3 of Arthur Hall 23. Eliz. who for discovering and publishing the Conferences of the House and writing a Book to the dishonour of the house was committed to prison These matters were examined and adjudged in the House of Commons Secundum legâ—m Consuetudinem Parliamenti and he thereupon committed to the Tower for 6. Moneths fined 500 marks and expelled the House And in that Parliament 18 Martii a fine was assesâ—ed by the House on every Member that was absent without leave To these alleged by Sir Edw. Cooke I shall superadd the ensuing Sir Robert Brandling was committed to the Tower 27 Eliz. for striking Witheâ—ington a Burgess 3 Jacobi one was fined for causing a Members Servant to be arrested though he claimed his privilege 12 Jacobi Locke and More were ordered by the Commons to ride both on one horse with their faces to the horses tail for arresting a Servant of Mr. Whitlocks then a Member against his privilege which was accordingly executed In 2 Caroli Sir George Hastings being elected knight for Leicestershire and he then being arrested his witnesses had their charges given them against the Sherif and he fined In the Parliament of 3. Caroli Sir Thomas Savils case 29. April 1628. Thomson Sherif and Henloe Alderman of York for abuses in the election were ordered to be committed to the Serjeant of the House during the pleasure of the Commons House to acknowledge their offences at the Barr on their knees and pay all due fees and to make a submission in York In 3. Caroli Mr. John Baber was suspended the house about billetting Souldiers In 3. Car. the Commons house committed Mr. Laughton and Mr. Trelawny to the Tower during pleasure and Sir William Wray and Mr. Edward Trelawny to the Serjeant at Arms and ordered them to make a submission acknowledgement of their offences in the House at the Bar and in the County at the Assises they kneeling at the Barr all the while the Speaker pronounced the Judgement against them for writing menacing Letters to Sir John Elliot and Mr. Coriton and to others of the County of Cornwall disturbing their election and contemning the warrant of the House when sent for In this Parliament of 17 Caroli now sitting the Commons house turned out sundry Members who were Projectors and voted out many others for Delinquency ordering New elections in their places without the King or Lord. I answer 1. That all these objected presidents are of very puny date within time of memory therefore unable to create a Law or custom of Parliament or any right of sole Judicature in the Commons House 2ly They were all made by the Commons themselves unfit Judges in their own cases much less over one another being all of equal Authority and so unable to seclude imprison or fine one another no more than one Judge or Justice to fine imprison or uncommission another since Par in parem non habet imperium 3ly They are all against Law because coram non Judice the Commons House having no right or power of Judicature much less of sole Judicature in our Parliaments but only the King and Lords as I have formerly proved by reasons and presidents in all ages 4ly These
informed of divers oppressions and injuries done to sundry people of his Realm by divers of his Officers and Ministers and likewise by some of his Counsellors by reason of his tender age to his damage and dishonour which things he would not suffer and desired to redresse that thereupon any persons which would complain of any oppressions durances and grievances done to them against right and the Laws and Usages of this Realm should repair to Westminster the next Parliament and there shew their plaints to him and such as he should appoint where they should receive convenient speedy remedy Then follows this Clause And because before these times some of the Knights who have come to Parliament for the Commnalties of Counties have been people of covyne and maintainers of false quarrels and have not suffered that good men should declare the grievances of the Common people nor their things which ought to have been redressed in Parliament to the great damage of us and our people We command and charge you that you cause to be chosen by the common assent of the County two of the most loyal or lawfull and most sufficient Knights or Sergeants of the said County who are not at all suspected of any crime nor common maintainers of Parties to be at the said Parliament according to the form of our Writ which you have received And this you may not fail to doe as you will eschew our grievous indignation Here the King by a special Writ takes care to prevent the election of Knights of Shires that were any way guilty of crime or maintenance as in former times had been used and that the loyallesâ— and most sufficient Knights or Esquires in the County should be elected by common consent because when once duly chosen and returned by the Counties as their lawfull Proxies and Attornies and impowred by them as such neither the King nor Lords could justly seclude or eject them much less the Commons House as they have ejected Projectors other Members of late times having no such authority given them by their Writs or retâ—rns but only to assent to such things as by the Common advice of the King Lords and Commons shall be there agreed concerning the King Church and Realm and being all of equal rank and power as Attornie Proctors for the Counties Cities and Burroughs for which they serve can no more discharge or eject one another than one Attorny Proctor Grand Jury-man Juror Justice of Peace Judge Commissioner or Executor discharge or remove another of his Colleagues equally impowred intrusted with them by the parties they represent To omit the summoning of sundry Merchants to attend the Parliament and Council to be advised and treated with upon sundry occasions in the Clause Rolls of 11 12 13 14. and 16 Edw. 3. Claus 26 E. 3. m. 14. dors there is a Parliamentary Council summoned to wit two Knights are by the Writ to be chosen and sent out of every Counry and but one Burgess out of every Burrough Claus 27 E. 3. m. 12. dorso Summonitio Concilii the Writ commands only one Knight to be chosen and sent out of every County but 2 Citizens and Burgesses out of every City and Burrough And the Prologue of the printed Statute of the Staple made therein 27 Ed. 3. recites that there was in it only of every County one Knight for all the County according to the limitation in the Writ Claus 45 E. 3. m. 29. The Parliament having granted a Subsidy to the King payable out of every parish and then departing the King for the better and speedier levying thereof desired the advice of the Commons yet would not put them to the trouble to meet all together And therefore issued out Writs to summon one Knight out of every County and one Citizen and Burgess out of every City Borough that had been of the former Parliament to meet together at Winchester Who meeting accordingly had their expences allowed them Dors 22. Here the King summons only half the Commons House to compleat what the whole had granted without the other moity for their greater ease and saving expences In the Parliament of 46 E. 6. n. 13 14. There was this Ordinance made and read Because that men of Law which pursue divers businesses in the Court of the Kings for particular persons with whom they are of Counsel procure and make divers Petitions to be preferred in Parliament in the name of the Commons which nothing concern them but only those singular persons or those whom they cause to put them in as also Sherifs which are common Officers to the people and ought to reside upon their Office to doe right to every man are named and have been before thâ—se hours retorned Knights of Shires in Parliaments by the same Sherifs It is agreed and assented in this Parliament that from henceforth no man of Law pursuing businesses in the Courts of the King nor Sherif for the time that he is Sherif shall be returned or accepted Knights of Shires and that those who are men of Law and Sherifs now returned to Parliament shall have no wages But THE KING WILL that Knights and SERJEANTS of the best esteem in the Country shall be henceforth returned Knights in Parliament and that they shall be chosen in full County Sir Edward Cook inform us That this Ordinance was made in the Lords house to wit by the King and Lords without the Commons as he insinuates If so then the K. Lords alone in that age had the sole power 1. of disabling secluding unfitting Members as practising Lawyers and Sherifs to be elected knights of Shires for the future 2ly of depriving them of wages though elected for that Parliament before the Ordinance made but not of ejecting them out of the House when duly elected because till now there was no Law or Ordinance against their choice 3ly Of rejecting and refusing to accept such for knights if elected and returned after this Ordinance as the words no accepted chivalers des Countees superadded too ne â—oient returnez imply 4ly By vertue of this Ordiâ—ance all Sherifs of Counties have been not only disabled but prohibited to be elected knights Members of the Commons House by this special Clause inserted into all writs for elections Nolumus autem quod tu vel aliquis alius Vicecomes ALIQUALITER SIT ELECTUS Now the Writ being the sole authority and ground for all elections prescribing the Freeholders to elect 2 of the most discreet fit sufficient persons and precisely inhibiting the election of any Sherifs in any sort either for Knights Citizens or Burgesses by vertue of this Ordinance The elections of such are meerly void and the King and Lords may justly seclude them if eâ—ected and retorned whiles Sherifs 5ly As Sherifs have been secluded by this Clause and Ordinance ever since so in the Parliament of 6 H. 4. All Apprentices and other men at Law were likewise secluded by this
special Clause inserted into the Writs of Summons Nolumus autem quod tu seu aliquis alius Vicecomes regni nostri aut Apprentius aut aliquis alius homo ad Legem aliqualiter sit electus as appears by the Exem â—caâ—ron thereof in the Claus Roll of 5 H. 4. pars 2. m. 4 dorso in the Tower which I have viewed with mine own eyes by sundry transcripts thereof in Manuscripts and by this testimony of Thomas Walsingham who lived in writ the History of that time Direxit ergo Rex Brevia Vicecomit bus ne quosquam pro Comitatibus eligerent quovismodo milites qui in jure Regni vel docti fuissent vel Apprenticii sed tales omnino miâ—teren ur ad hoc nâ—gotium quoâ— constat ignorare cujusque juris methodum factumque est ita Whence he stiles it in his Margin PARLIAMENTUM INDOCTORUM No Lawyer being elected by reason of this Clause grounded on the forecited Ordinance Sir Edward Cook who is not only full of mistakes and mis-recitals of Records but most confident in them citing this passage of Walsingham thus bodly contradicts him But the Historian is deceived for there is no such Clause in these Writs but it was wrought by the Kings Letters by pretext of an Ordinance in the Lords House in 46 E. 3. when as the Writ it self in the Clause Roll concurring which Walsingham ascertains me that Sir Edward himself was deceived not the Historian by whom or upon what mis-information I know not And that he was so in truth we have his own expresse confession and testimony against himself within few leaves after At the Parliament holden at Coventry Anno 6 H. 4. the Parliament was summoned BY WRIT and by coâ—ler of the said Ordinance of Parliament in the Lords House in 46 E. 3. it was forbidden that no Lawyer should be chosen Knight Citizen or Burgess by reason whereof this Parliament was fruitless and never a good Law made thereat and therefore called Indoctum Parliamentum or Lack-latin Parliament And seeing these Writs were against Law ergo this Clause against Lawyers elections was in the Writs themselves Lawyers ever since for the great and good service of the Commonwealth have been eligible And then contradicting himself again in the very next lines he addes And albeit the prohibiting clause had been inserted in the Writ implying it was not yet bâ—iâ—g against Law Lawyers were of right eligible and might have been elected Knights Citizens or Burgesses in that Parliament of 6 H. 4. His reason is because Lawyers being eligible of Common right cannot be disabled by the said Ordinance of Parliament in the Lords House being no Act though Acts and Ordinances of Parl. are both the same in substance vigor as I have elsewhere proved at large against his New false Doctrine to the contrary Wherefore this Ordinance is still obligatory to practising Lawyers whiles they practise as well as to Sherifs whiles they are Sherifs unlesse they give over their practice sitting the Parl. to attend the service of the House which their practice makes them to neglect Clause 8 E. 2. m. 31. The chief Justice and other Officers of Ireland and R. de Burgo Earl of Vlton are sent for by Writ to come to the Parliament of England ad tractanduâ— cum Praelatis et Proceribus de regno nostro praedicto Claus 50 E. 3. part â— m. 23. Pro Hibernis de Hibernia venientibus ad Parliamentum Angilae there is a Writ directed to the Justices and Chancellor of Ireland Quod de Communitate Comitatuum Burgorum terrae praedictae faciatis habere per Breve de magno sigillo nostro hominibus ejusdem terrae nostrae praedictae regnum nostrum Angliae penes Concilium nostrum pro Communitate Comitatuum Burgorum ultimo venientibus videlicet euilibet eorum de Communitate Comitatus pro quo electus fuiâ— sive Civitatis sive Burgi rationabiles expensas suas c. Teste 25 Julii The Parliament ended the 10th of July By which Writ it is apparent That not only the great Officers and some Nobles but likewise knights and Burgesses were sometimes summoned and chosen in Ireland to come to this Parliament of England and had Writs for wages allowed them These varieties of the Kings writs for electing Knights and Burgesses summoning sometimes 4. sometimes 2. sometimes but one Knight out of a County most times 2 Citizens and Burgesses sometimes but one limiting the qualifications of their persons and summoning not only Great Officers and Peers but likewise Knights Citizens and Burgesses out of Ireland and particular persons by name amongst the Commons as in 32 Ed. 3. part 2. m. 32. dorso together with his making of new Burroughs by his Patents and authorizing them to send Burgesses to Parliam when they never sent any before there being now three times as many Burgesses of Parliament as there were in the reigns of King Edward the 1 2 and 3. as appears by the Writs in the Dorse of the Clause Rolls for their expences and wages are clear proofs and evidences that the King and his Council in the Lords House are the sole Judges of the elections of the Knights Citizens Burgesses of the Commons House and that they themselves have no power at all to seclude or eject any persons duly elected and sent thither by the Kings Writs though more or less than usual or from new erected Burroughs And if any City or Burrough which sends Members to the Commons House by the kings Charter or usage forfeit their Charters and Privileges for which the king seiseth them into his hands as in 49 H. 3. he seised Londons and others Liberties and Cambridges since he may deny to send them Writs to elect Citizens or Burgesses till their Franchises be restored and their Charters renewed and deny to grant them this liberty of Election any more if he please proceeding from his meer grace and grant to them at first and so to be restored out of Grace not Justice when forfeited by their default The Statute of 5 R. 2. Parl. 2. c. 4. The King willeth and commandeth it is assented to by the Prelates Lords and Commons That all persons which shall from henceforth receive the Summons of Parliament be he Archbishop Bishop Abbot Peer Duke Earl Baron Baronet knight of the Shire Citizen of the City Burgess of the Burgh or other singular person or Commonalty and come not at the said Summons except he may reasonably and honestly excuse himself to our Soveraign Lord the King he shall be amerced and otherwise punished as of old times hath been used to be done within this Realm Here the Excuse is to be made by the Knights Citizens Burgesses and Commons as well as Lords Spiritual and Temporal to THE KING not Commons House and if they cannot excuse themselves unto him then they are to be amerced as of old time have been used And that was never by the Commons House but
rather by the King with the Lords assent in Parliament or by Indictment in the Kings Bench as Sir Edward Cook himself confesses and proves by the Cases of Segrave St. Amand and others Placitae In Parliamento Dom. Regis 33 E. 1. The Bishop of Winchesters Case Pas 3 E. 3. coram Rege Rot. 9. attached for a contempt in departing from the Parliament during its sitting without the Kings license and contrary to the Kings inhibition in contempt of the King who pleaded that this contempt ought to be corrected and amended in Parliament by the Peers and not else where in any inferiour Court. 3 E. 3.19 Fitz Corone 161. Stanford f. 153 3 and 4 Phil. and Mar. B. R. rot 39. is most clear by 31 H. 6. n. 45 46. where special fines are taxed on absent Lords by the Lords assent Therefore the Commons House cannot fine or tax their Members as now they doe since they never did it before this act and therefore are prohibited by it which restrains them to ancient usage before it In 7 R. 2. The Lord Thomas Camoyes a Peer of the Realm being elected Knight of the Shire for Surrey by the Freeholders of the County the King himself discharged him by special Writ and commanded the Sherif to cause another fit person to be elected in his place as I formerly proved p. 139 145. I read in Thomas of Walsingham that King Richard the 3. in the 11 year of his reign intending to call a Parliament summoned all the Sherifs of England to Nottingham Castle inquiring of them What power they could raise for him in every County against the Barons and charging them ut ipsi nullum Militem dâ— Pago vel Schira permitterent eligi nisi quem Rex et ejus Concilium elegissent who it seems gave them a list of the Names of those persons they should elect and return as the Major Generals have newly done Whereunto the Sherifs answered That all the Commons favoured the Lords neither was it in their power to raise any Army or Forces in this cause De Militibus eligendis dixerunt Communes velle tenere consuetudines usitatas quae volunt quod à Communibus Milites eligantur Whereupon they were dismissed Upon this the King soon after issuing out Writs to the Sherifs to elect Knights and Burgesses for the Parliament inserted this unusual Clause into them that they should chuse such Knights as were most fit and discreet and in the modern debates between the king and Lords most indifferent as the Writs themselves attest Rex Vic. Kanc. salutem quia de avisamento Consilii nostri pro quibusdum arduis urgentibus negotiis nos statum et defensionem Regni nostri Angliae ac Ecclesiae Anglicanae contingentibus quoddam Parliamenâ—um nostrum apud Westm in crastino purificationis beatae Maâ—iae prox futur teneri Ordinavimus et ibidem vobiscum ac cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus Regni nostri Angliae colloquium habere tractatum tibi praecipimus firmiter injungentes quod de Comitatu tuo duos Milites gladiis cinctos magis idoneos et discretos Com. praed et in debatis modernis magis indifferentes c. T. R. apud Wyndesore xvii die Dec. Per ipsum Regem But the King being soon after informed by his Council that these Writs were contrary to the antient form of elections and contrary to the Liberty of the Lords and Commons hitherto obtained sent out new writs to all Sherifs of England to revoke and repeal this Innovating Clause before the Elections made Rex Vic. Kanc 〈…〉 licet nuper per breve nostrum inter caetera tibi praecâ—pimus firmiter injungentes quod de Comitatu tuo duos Milites gladiis cinctos magis idoneos et discretâ—s Com. prad et 〈◊〉 debatis â—dernis magis indifferentes eligi 〈…〉 Parliamentum nostrum quod apud Westm in Crist 〈◊〉 purifiecationis bâ—atae Mariae proâ— futur tenâ—re Ordiâ—avimuâ— ad eâ—sdem idem 〈◊〉 veâ—ire facereâ— Nos tamen attendentâ—s dictam clausulam in debatis modernis magis indifferentes contra formam electionis antiquitus usitatae ac contra libertatem Dominorum et Communitatis Regni nostri Angliae hactenus obtentam existere Volenâ—esque proinde praedictos Milites libere eligi modo et forma prout antiquitus fieri consuerit Tibi praecimus firmiter inâ—ungentes quod de Com. tuo praedicto duos milites gladiis cinctos magis idoneos discretos Com. praedicti prout hactenus fieri consuevit eligi eos ad pradictos diem locum venire fac dicta clausula non obstante caeteraque omnia et singula in dicto brevi nostre contenta fac exequaris juxta tenorem ejusdem dictam clausulam penitus omittens Et habeas ibi hoc breve et aliud breve T. R. apud Westm primo die Jan. Per ipsum Regem et Consillum Consimilia brevia diriguntur singulis Vicocomitibus per Angl. Ac carissimo Aqunâ—ulo R. Johanni Regi Castell et-Legionis Duci Lancastr vel ejus Cancellar in eodem Ducatu sub eadem daâ—a A clear evidence that neither the Sherifs nor Commons house had any power to repell this new Clause but the King himself which here he did by his Councilâ— Apples before any complain against it in Parliament In the Parliament of 16 R. 2. n. 6. c. The Wednesday after the Parliament began Sir Philip Courtney returned by the Sherif of Devon for one of the Knights for that County came before the King in full Parliament and said that he understood how certain people had accused and slandered him to the King and Lords as well by Bill as by mouth of heinous matters and therefore prayed to be discharged of the said imployment until the said accusations and complaints were tried and found true or not true and because his said prayer seemed honest to the King and the Lords the King granted him his request and discharged him in full Parliament and the Monday following at the instance and prayer of the Commons the King granted that he should be restored and remitted to his place according to the return of the said Sherif for to counsel and doe that which belonged unto his office and afâ—er because he had been good and treatable with those who had complained upon him and condescended to a good treaty he was restored in full Parliament to his good fame The charge against him is expressed in the same Parliament roll n. 13 14. where two Petitions are preferred against him to THE KING and LORDS IN PARLIAMENT for putting Thomas Pontyngdon forciblyout of possession of the Maâ—or of Bygeloge without just cause and Richard Somestre out of other lands detaining them from them he being so powerfull in the County that no poor man durst to sue him Which Petitions were referred by consent in Parliament to certain Arbitrators to determine In the Parliament of 4 H.
but are enforced to petition the King and Lords for his enlargement 3ly The Lords in the kings name command the Commons to chuse and present another Speaker in his room and that with all speed which they accordingly did and then present him to the King and Lords for their approbation who allowed of their choice In the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 35. There were divers Knights of Counties Citizens and Burgesses named returned and accepted some of them without any due or free election some of them without any election at all against the course of the Kings Lawes and the Liberties of the Commons of the Realm by vertue of the Kings Letters without any other election and by the means and labours of divers seditious and evil disposed persons only to destroy certain of the great faithfull Lords and Nobles and other faithfull liege people of the Realm out of hatred malice greedy and unsatiable covetousness to gain their Lands Inheritances Possessions Offices and goods as the Statute of 39 H. 6. c. 1. relates The Commons were so farr from having power to exclude or confirm their elections themselves that they petitioned the King by advise and assent of the Lords That all such Knights Citizens and Burgesses as were thus returned to this Parliament by vertue of the Kings Letters without any other election should be good and that no Sherif for returning them might incurr the pain therefore provided by the Statute of 23 H. 6. c. 15. Which the King and Lords assented to at their request In the Parliament of 39 H. 6. n. 9. Walter Clerk one of the Burgesses of Parliament for Chippenham was arrested and imprisoned in the Fleet for divers debts due to the King and others upon a Capias Vilagatum whereupon the Commons complained thereof to the King and Lords by Petition and desired his release and rendred them an Act of Parliament ready drawn for that purpose to which Petition and Bill of theirs the King by the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal assented And thereupon he was freed Not by the Commons power order or judgement but by the Kings and Lords advice and assents William Hyde a Burgess of Chippenham in Wiltshire being taken in Execution upon a Capias ad satisfaciendum and imprisoned in the kings Bench during the Parliament contrary to his privilege the Commons thereupon by a Petition praved the King that by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal he might be delivered for the present by a Writ of privilege out of the Chancery which the King by the advice and assent of the Lords granted saving the right of his Prosecutors to have execution upon him again after the Parliament ended 14 E. 4. n. 55. In the Parliament of 17 E. 4. n. 36. John at-Will a Burgess for Exeter was condemned in the Exchequer upon 8. several Informations during the Parliament at the prosecution of Iohn Taylor of the same Town upon complaint thereof by the Commons to the King and Lords in Parliament by Petition the King by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal ordered that he should have as many Supersedeas against the said Judgements and Informations as he pleased until his coming home from the Parliament In these last recited cases the Commons had no power at all to deliver or enlarge their own Members when imprisoned as of late years they have practised but always petitioned to the King and Lords for their release and relief who thereupon released and relieved them against the breaches of their privileges when they saw good cause Which cases I have examined by and transcribed out of the Parliament Rolls themselves in the Tower and not taken upon trust or the Abridgements of them which leave out the main ingredients the Commons Petitions to and advice and assent of the King and Lords expressed in the Rolls at large Richard Strode Gentleman one of the Burgesses of Parliament for the Burge of Plympton in Devonshire in the Parliament of 4 H. 8. for agreeing with the Commons house in putting out Bills against certain abuses of the Tinners being a Tinner himself by the malice of John Furse Tinner Under-Steward of the Stannâ—ries and his misinformation that the said Richard Strâ—de at the last Parliament heldâ—n at Westminster would have avoided and utterly destroyed all Liberties Privileges and Franchises concerning the Scanneâ—ies was upon 4. Bills thereof made by the said Furse presented and found guilty of the premises in 4. several Stannery Courts and condemned to forfeit 40 l. on every Bill to the King upon an Act and Ordinance made by the Tinners to which he was never warned nor called to make answer contrary to all Laws right reason and good conscience And one John Aguiâ—â—iam begging 20 l. of the said forfeiture from the King caused the said Richard to be taken and imprisoned in Lidford Castle in a dungeon and deep pit under ground where he was fed only with bread and water to the peril of his life and was to have irons laid upon him Upon which he petitioned the Parliament for remedy and that it might be ordained and enacted by the King the Lords Spiritual and Temporal that the condemnations against him for the said 160 l. in the Stanneries and every parcel thereof and judgements and executions had or to be had for the premises might be utterly void and of none effect against him which was done for him accordingly And moreover it was enacted That all sutes accusations condemnations executions fines amerciameuts punishments corrections grants charges and impositions put or had or hereafter to be put or had upon the said Richard to every other person or persons that were in this Parliament or that of any Parliament hereafter shall be for any Bill speaking reasoning or declaring of any matter or matters concerning the Parliament to be communed or treated of be utterly void and of none effect And that any person vexed or troubled or otherwise charged for any causes as aforesaid shall have an action of the case against every person or persons so vexing or troubling him contrary to this Ordinance and recover treble damages and costs And that no protection Essoign or wager of Law shall in the said action in any wise be admiâ—red nor received as you may read in the Statutes at large 4 H. 8. ch 8. intituled an act concerning Richard Strode The Commons themselves being unable to releive him in this high breach of privilege but by a petition to the King and Lords and a special Act of Parliament made for him In the Parliament of 34 H. 8. there fell out this famous case thus at large recorded by Holinshed and Crompton out of him In the Lent season whilst the Parliament yet continued one George Ferrers Gentleman servant to the king being elected a Burgess for the Town of Plimmouth in the County of Devon in going to the Parliament House was arrested in
upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers or by the Law of the Land Whence thus they argue The Lords in Parliament are not Commoners Peers but the Commons only therefore they cannot be judged in Parliament by the Lords but by the Commons alone and if Peers there judge Commoners it is a tyranny and usurpation even against Magna Charta it self though it be in case of privilege To take away this grand seeming Objection and give it a satisfactory answer I say First in general that there is scarce one Parliament ever since Magna Charta was first confirmed but the Lords have sentenced and given Judgement against some Commoners capitally or penally in body purse or both without the Commons and did so doubtlesse before Magna Charta was made as I have already manifested yet never did the Commons in any one of those Parliaments till this present complain of it as a violation of Magna Charta or a tyrannical usurpation as Lilburn and Overton stile it but acknowledged ir as a just right in the Lords even in 3 Caroli it self when the Petition of Right was passed in the Lords Judgement and Sentence against Dr Manwaring a Commoner impeached by the Commons in Parliament And therfore for this Ignoramus alone against the judgment of the Commons in Parl. in all ages to averr this a breach of Magna Charta for imprisoning and sining him for the highest affront and breach of privilege ever offered to any Parl. is the extremity of ignorance malice singularity Secondly I answer That the Statute of Magna Charta extendeth not to nor was ever intended of the high Court of Parliaments Judgements Proceedings but only to and of the Proceedings Judgements in the Kings great Courts of Justice at Westminster Hall the Exchequer his Privy Council and other inferior Courts held before Judges Justices of Assise and other Officers as is evident by comparing this objected Chapter with c. 11 12 13 14 18 28 30 34 37. by the Statutes of 25 E. 3. Stat. 5. c. 4. 28 E. 3. c. 3. 37 E. 3. c. 18. 38 E. 3. c. 9. 42 E. 3. c. 2. 17 R. 2. c. 6. and the Petition of Right it self 3. Caroli which so expound it there being never any complaint against the Parliament it self or House of Peers in any age for breach of Magna Charta in censuring or imprisoning Commoners till now Therefore this misapplying of this Law to the Parl. and House of Peers is a gross oversight Thirdly the very literal sence of this Law is much mistaken by the Objectors The main scope whereof is this That no man should be deprived of his Freehold Liberties Limbs life or outlawed exiled or otherwise destroyed without legal process in due form of Law in Courts of Justice not by meer force violence injustice arbitrary and tyrannical power or martial Law nor being brought to his legal trial or answer And that none should pass upon them in any trials for freehold or life but only English Freemen Now in respect of Freedom any every Freeman of England is a Peer to another Freeman quatenus such a one within this Law though of an higher degree in point of honour dignity office estate as Knights Esquires Gentlemen Yeomen Citizens Merchants these as Freemen are all Peers one to another and may pass upon each other in Juries both in civil and criminal causes and this clause No Freemâ—n shall be imprisoned c. but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers extends only to villains and those who are not Freeholders from being Iudges of Freemen and Freeholders in trials by Jury whence the Writs to the Sherifs to summon Jurors require them alwayes to return Liberos Legales homines not to exclude Lords or Peers who are Freemen in the highest degree to be Judges of Commoners who are Freemen So as the Argument from the true meaning of this Law can be but this in respect of the persons quality who are to give judgement Villains and those who are no Freemen are not to be Judges of or impannelled in Juries to condemn Freemen because they are not their Peers nor Freemen as well as they Therefore Lords who are Freemen of the highest degree may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen Very learned nonsence We all know that the Lord Chancellor of England Lord Keeper Lord Treasurer Master of the Court of Wards and some of the Judges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times with the Chief Justiciar and Justices in Eyre were antiently and of late too as the Earl of Holland and others Peers of the Realm not Commoners and that all the Peers of the Realm are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace yet did we never hear of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery Kings Bench the Exchequer Chamber Eyres Assises or Sessions Sir I am a Commoner and you are a Peer of the Realm but no Commoner as I am besides you sit here only in the Kings right doing all in his name and representing his person who is not my Peer but Sovereign Therefore you ought not to judge my cause condemn my person nor give any sentence for or against me it being contrary to Magna Charta which enacts That no freeman should be judged or passed upon or condemned but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lilburn And if Lords Peers may judge the persons causes of Commoners in the Chancery Kings Bench Exchequer Court of Wards Eyres and at Assises Sessions without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta though they are exempted to be impannelled or serve in Juries in cases of Commoners as Commoners in Juries to try them much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it who are certainly Peers to Commoners as Freemen though Commoners be not Peers to them as Lords within the meaning of Magna Charta chap. 29. Fourthly If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners causes without breach of this clause in Magna Charta then why did Lilburn himself sue and petition to the Lords as the only competent Judges to reverse his sentence in Star Chamber and give him damages because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds without express violation of this Law then himself in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Star-Chamber sentence because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta was a great a violator of it as his Star-Chamber censurers and his sentence in Star-chamber remains still unreversed because the Lords examining reversing of it they being no Commoners as he is but Peers was Coram non judice and meerly void by the Statute of 25 E.
3. Stat. 5. c. 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it self as he now expounds it Let him therefore unriddle assoyl this his own Dilemma or for ever hold his tongue and pen from publishing such absurdities to seduce poor people as he hath done to exasperate them to clamour against the Lords for being more favourable in their censure of him than his transcendent Libels and contempts against them deserved Fifthly This Statute is in the disjunctive by the Lawfull Judgement of his Peers OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND which this Ignoramus observes not Now by the Law of the Land every inferiour Court of Justice may fine and imprison men for contempts or misdemeanors against them and their authority therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest Tribunal may much more do it and have ever done it even by this express clause of Magna Charta and the Law and Custom of Parliament as well as they may give judgements in writs of Error against or for Commons without the Commons consent as himself doth grant yea and by the Kings concurrent assent declare what is Treason and what not within the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 20. in the cases of Commoners as well as Lords without the Commons as they did in the forecited cases of William de Weston and Lord of Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39 40. Of William Thorp 25 E. 3. n. 10. Of Thomas Haxey 20 R. 2. n. 15 16.23 Of Sir Thomas Talbot 13 R. 2. n. 20 21. Of Sir Robert Plesington and Henry Bowhert 22 R. 2. Plac. Coronae in Parliamento n. 27 28. Of John Hall 1 H. 4. Plac. Coronae in Parl. n. 11. to 17. Of Sir Ralph Lumley and others 4 H. 4. n. 15. 19 20 21. Of Sir John Oldcastle 5 H. 5. n. 11. and of Sir John Mortymer 2 H. 6. n. 18. as the Commons and Judges in all those Parliaments agreed without contradiction against the erronious opinion of Sir Edward Cooke to the contrary in his 3. Institutes p. 22. Sixthly It is granted by Lilburn that by this express Law No Freeman of England ought to be judged or censured but only by his Peers and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobles nor Noblemen Peers to Commoners Then by what Law or reason dared he to publish to the world That the House of Commons are the Supreme Power within this Realm and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JUDGES certainly this is a Note beyond Ela a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein he placeth his strength and subverts his very ground-work against the Lords Jurisdiction in their censure of him For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords Iudges then by Magna Charta c. 29. they are and ought to be their Peers and if the Commons be the Lords Peers then the Lords must be the Commons Peers too and if so then they may lawfully be his Judges even by Magna Charta because here he grants them to be no other than his Peers Lo the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers cut off with his own sword and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and sottish contradictory Glosses on it Now to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to be by right the Lords Judges I might inform him as I have formerly proved at large that Magna Charta it self c. 14. 29. and Sir Edward Cook his chief Author in his commentary on them are express against him that in the Parliament of 15 E. 3. ch 2. in print it was enacted That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and imprisoned and their Temporalties Lands and Tenements Goods and Chattels seised into the Kings hands and some put to death without Iudgement of their Péers that no Peer of the Land Officer or other by reason of his office nor of things touching his office nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement to lose his Temporalties Lands Tenements Goods Chattels nor to be arrested or imprisoned outlawed exiled nor forejudged nor put to answer nor to be judged but by award of the said Péers in Parliament which privilege of theirs was both enjoyed and claimed in Parliament 4 E. 3. n. 14 15 E. 3. n. 6 8 44 49 51. 17 E. 3. n. 22. 18 E. 3. n. 7. to 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7 8. 11 R. 2. n. 7 c. and sundry other Parliament Rolls See Cook 4. Instit p. 15. 17 E. 3. 19. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts f. 4. 12 13. Stamford f. 151 152. This Paradox therefore of his is against all Statutes Law-Books Presidents whatsoever and Magna Charta it self And as false an assertion as that the Subjects are the Judges of their Soveraign the Servants of their Masters the children of their Parents the Wiâ—es of their Husbands the Soldiers of their General and the feet and lower members of the Head The second only Objection more of moment is this If the House of Peers may without the Commons fine and imprison Commoners then if their fine and imprisonment be unjust and illegal they shall be remediless there being no superior Court to appeal unto which will be an intollerable slavery and grievance not to be indured among free-born people I answer first That no injustice shall or ought to be presumed in the highest Court of Justice till it be apparently manifested Secondly If any such censure be given the party as in Chancery upon just grounds shewed may Petition the House of Peers for a review and new hearing of the cause which they in justice neither will nor can deny and if they do then the party grieved may petition the house of Commons to intercede in his behalf to the Peers for a rehearing but for them to discharge free any Commoner judicially censured by the Lords I have hitherto met with no president in former Parliaments nor power in the house of Commons to doe it who cannot reverse Erronious judgements in any inferiour Courts by writ of Error but the Lords alone much less then the judgements of the Higher House of Peers which is paramount them Thirdly I conceive the House of Peers being the Superior Authority and only Judicatory in Parliament may relieve or release any Commoners unjustly imprisoned or censured by the Commons house or any of their Committees and ought in justice to doe it or else there will be the same mischief or a greater in admitting the house of Commons to be Judges of Commoners if there be no appeal from them to the Lords in case their sentences be illegal or unjust Thirdly This mischief is but rare and you may object the same against a sentence given or Law made in Parliament by the King and both Houses because there is no appeal from it but only to the next or some other Parliament that shall be summoned by petition in the nature of a Writ of
Premises THe Principal scope of the Precedent Plea for the Lords and House of Peers being only to justifie and ratifie their ancient just Right to sit and vote in all English Parliaments and Great Councils or State and their Judicial Authority in them without the Commons especially in Criminal Causes then only controverted contradicted by Lilbourne Overton their Disciples I reputed it both useful and necessary to superadde thereto some memorable Presidents in former ages which no Vulgar writers of our English Parliaments have remembred of the Kings and Lords Proceedings Judicature in Parliament in Civil and Ecclesiastical Causes of publick and private concernment as no way heterogeneal but homogeneal to my Theam to make this Plea more compleat and communicate some more knowledge of Parliamentary Affairs and Proceedings both to the Ignorant and Learned in this declining age wherein learning and learned men of publick spirits in all Professions are so much decayed and little Visible Probability left of any speedy reparations of this inestimable losse for want of publick encouragement I shall proceed herein only in a Chronological Method as I have done for the most part in the premises beginning with the ancientest president I meet with of this kind and so descending to succeeding ages About the year of Christ 536 Our famous Brittish victorious King Arthur by his Letters and Messengers summoned all the Kings Prelates Dukes and Nobles subject to him to meet at the City of Caerleon on the feast of Pentecost then to be new crowned and settle the peace and affairs of his Realmes whereupon there assembled at that time and place thirteen Kings three Archbishops and many Princes Dukes Consuls Earls and LORDS whose names are registred in Geoffry Monmouth whiles they were thus convened there arrived twelve men with letters from Lucius Tiberius procurator of the Roman Republick demanding in high language The Tribute of Brittain which the Senate command King Arthur to pay with the arrears injuriously detained because Julius Caesar had reserved it upon his conquest of Brittain and hee with other Romane Emperours had long received it summoning him likewise to appear at Rome in August the year following to satisfie the Senate for the injuries done them and submit to the sentence their Justice should pronounce or else denouncing war against him This Letter being publickly read before all the Kings Princes Dukes and Nobles present the King consulted with them craving their unanimous advise and sense concerning this business affirming That this Tribute was exacted ex irrationabili causa against all reason for he demanded it to be payd as due because it was paid to Julius Caesar and his successors who invited by the devisions of the old Brittains arrived with an Army in Brittain and By force and violence subjected the Country to their power shaken with domestick commotions Now because they obtained it in this manner vectigal ex eo injuste receperunt therefore they unjustly received tribute out of it Nihil enim quod vi violentia acquiritur juste ab â—llo possidetur qui violentiam intulit irrationabilem ergo causam praeâ—endit qua nos jure sibi tribitarios arbitratur For nothing which is acquired by force and violence is justly possessed by any man who hath offered the violence Therefore hee pretends An irrationable cause whereby hee reputes us to be Tributaries to him c. The whole Council upon debate fully assented to this opinion and promised the King their assistance against the Romans in this cause Whereupâ—n King Arthur returned this answer That he would by no mâ—ans render them tribute neither would he submit himself to their judgement concerning it nor repare to Rome c. An expresse resolution That Conquest by warr force and violence is no good just nor lawful but an unlawful and unjust Title to any Tributes or Possessions which these who now pretend they are Conquerors and us a meer conquered Nation and therefore they may impose what Taxes Excises Tributes Laws Executions they please upon us when as they were only raysed waged commissioned to defend preserve our Laws Liberties King Parliament and Kingdomes not to conquer or enslave them may do well to consider In the year of our Lord 799. King Kenulfus upon the petition and complaint of Athelardus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury consentientibus EPISCOPIS ET PRINCIPIBUS MEIS assembled in a Parliamentary Council restored four parcels of Lands to Christ-Church in Canterbury which King Offa heretofore had taken from this Church and conferred on his Officers Kenulfus King of Mercia calling a Provincial Council held at Cloveshe Anno Dom. 800. wherein all the Bishops Dukes Abbots and Nobles of every order were assembled complaint was made therein that after the death of Arch-Bishop Cuthhert Verheb and Osbert led by a malignant spirit stole away the evidences and writings of the Monastery of Cotham and all the Lands thereunto belonging given by King Athelbald to our Saviours Church in Canterbury and brought them to Kenulfus King of the West-Saxons who thereupon converted the said Monastery and Lands to his own use After which â—regwin and Jambert Arch-Bishops of Canterbury complained of this injurie done to the Church in sundry Councils both to King Kenulfus and Offa King of Mercia who took from Kenulfus the Monastery of Cotham with many other Lands and Towns and subjected them to the Realme of Mercia At last Kenulfus induced by late repentance restored the evidences and writings of the said Monastery together with a great summe of mony to the said Church to prevent the danger of an excommunication but King Offa as hee received the said Monastery without writings so hee retained them during his life and left them to descend to his heirs without any evidence after his death whereupon Athelardus the Arch-Bishop and other wise men of Christ-Church brought these Evidences and Writing touching Gotham into this Council of Clovesho where when they had been publickly read OMNIUM VOCE DECRETUM EST that it was just the Metropoliticall Church should bee restored to the said Monastery of which shee had been unjustly spoiled for so long a time Athelardus receiving also in this Council the dignities and possessions which King Offa had taken from Jamberâ— annuente ipso Rege as Gervasius records In a Council held at Clovesho Anno 813. Upon complaint of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury the Arch-Bishoprick of Litchfield was dissolved and the Bishopricks annexed to it by King Offa taken from the See of Canterbury restored and reunited thereunto by the consent of King Kenulfus his Bishops Dukes and Nobles who writ a Letter to Pope Leo for that purpose unanimo consilio totius sanctae Synodi And in this Council also other lands were restored to the Bishop of Worcester and other controversies between Bishops concerning their Lands and Limits decided In another Council at Clovesho Anno 821. Wherein King Kenulfus Wulfred Arch-Bishop of Canterbury with the rest of the Bishops Abbots
the Prior of Coventry the King granteth by Assent of the Bishops and Lords that no man do break the head of their Conduit nor cast any filth into their water called Sherbouâ—n on pain of ten pound and treble dammages to the Prior. In the Parliament of 9. H. 5. n. 12. Upon long debates of the Lords and Iustices it was resolved by them that the Abbot of Ramsy should have no prohibition against Walter Cook parson of Somersham who sued for Tithes of a Meadow called Crowland Mead in the hands of the Abbots Tenants In the great case of Precedency between the Earl Marshall and Earle of Warwick in the Parliament of 3. H. 6. n. 10 11. c. The Lords being to bee Iudges of the same suspended both of them from sitting in the house till their case was fully heard and they all voluntarily swore on the Gospel that they would uprightly judge the case leaving all affection In the Parliament of 11. H. 6. n. 32 33 34 35. Upon a Petition the King and Lords in Parliament adjudged the Dignity Seigniory Earledome of Arundel and the Castle and Lands thereunto belonging to John Earle of Arundel who proved his Title thereto by a deed of Entayle against the Title of John Duke of Norfolck who layed claim thereunto And in the Parliament of 39 H. 6. n. 10. to 33. The claime of the Duke of York and his Title to the Crown of England against the Title of King Henry the 6 th was exhibited to the Lords in full Parliament the Lords upon consultation willed it to be read amongst them but not to bee answered without the King The Lords upon long consultation declared this Title to the King who willed them to call his Justices Sergeants and Attorney to answer the same Who being called accordingly utterly refused to answer the same Order thereupon was taken That every Lord might therein freely utter his conceit without any impeachment to him In the end there were five objections made against the Dukes Title who put in an answer to every of them which done the Lords upon debate made this order and agreement between the King and Duke That the King should injoy the Crown of England during his life and the Duke and his heirs to succeed after him That the Duke and his two sons should bee sworne by no means to shorten the dayes or impaire the preheminence of the King during his life That the said Duke from thenceforth shall be reputed and stiled to bee the very Heir apparent to the Crown and shall injoy the same after the death or resignation of the said King That the said Duke shall have hereditaments allotted to him and his sons of the annual value of ten thousand marks That the compassing of the death of the said Duke shall bee Treason That all the Bishops and Lords in full Parliament shall swear to the Duke and to his heirs in forme aforesaid That the said Duke and his two sons shall swear to defend the Lords for this agreement The King by Assent of the Lords without the Commons agreeth to all the Ordinances and accords aforesaid and by the Assent of the Lords utterly repealeth the statute of intayle of the Crown made in 1. H. 4. so alwaies as hereafter there be no better Title proved for the defeating of their Title and this agreement by the King After all which the said Duke and the two Earles his sonnes came into the Parliament Chamber before the King and LORDS and sware to performe the award aforesaid with protestation if the King for his part duly observed the same the which the King promised to do All which was inrolled in the Parliament Rolls Lo here the Lords alone without the Commons judge and make an award between King Henry the 6th and the Duke of York in the highest point of right and title that could come in question before them even the right and title to the Crown of England then controverted and decided the King and Duke both submitting and assenting to their award and promising swearing mutually to perform it which award when made was confirmed by an Act passed that Parliament to which the Commons assented as they did to other Acts and Bills And here I cannot but take special notice of Gods admirable Providence and retaliating Justice in the translation of the Crown of England from one head family of the royal blood to another by blood force war treason and countenance of the Authority of the temporal and spiritual LORDS and COMMONS in Parliament in the two most signal presidents of King Edward and King Richard the 2 d. which some insist on to prove the Commons Copartnership with the Lords in the power of Judicature in our Parliaments the Histories of whose Resignations of their Regal Authority and subsequent depositions by Parliament I shall truly relate Anno 1326. the 19. of Ed. 2d Queen Isabel returning with her Son Prince Edward and some armed forces from beyond the Seas into England most of the Earles and Barons out of hatred to the Spencers and Kingâ— repaired to them and made up a very great army The King thereupon proclaimed that every man should resist oppose kill them except the Queen Prince and Earle of Kent which they should take prisoners if they could and neither hold any correspondency with them nor administer victuals nor any other assistance to them under pain of forfeiting their bodies estates But they prevailing and the King being deserted by most hee fled into Wales for shelter Whereupon Proclamation was made in the Queens army every day that the King should return and receive his Kingdome again if hee would conforme himself to his Leiges Quo non comparente Magnasâ—es Regni Hereâ—ordiae Concilium injeâ—unt in quo filius Regis Edwardus factus est Cusâ—os Angliae communi Decreto cui cuncti tanquam Regni custodi fidelitatem fecerunt per fidei sacramentum Deinde Episcopum Norwicensem fecerunt Cancellarium Episcopum vero Wintoniensem regni Thesaururium statuerunt Soon after the King himself with most of his evil Counsellors were taken prisoners being betrayed by the Welch in whom they most confided Hagh Spencer Simon Reding Baldoik and others of the Kings party being executed at Hereford Anno 1327. the King came to London about the feast of Epiphany where they were received with great joy and presents Then they held a Parliament wherein they all agreed the King was unworthy of the Crown and fit to be deposed for which end there were certain Articles drawn up against him which Adam de Orleton Bishop of Winchester thus relates in his Apology i Ea autem quae de Consilio et assensu omnium Praelatorum Comitum et Baronum et totius Communitatis dicti Regni concordata ordinata fuerunt contra dictum regem ad amotionem suam a regimine regni contenta sunt in instrumentis publicis Reverendo patre domino J. Dei
Christ beseeching all that fear God to behave themselves as obedient Subjects to the Queens Highness and the superiour powers which are ordained under her rather after their example to give their heads to the block than in any point to rebell against the Lords anointed Queen Mary in no point consenting to any Rebellion or sedition against her Highness but where they cannot obey but must disobey God there to submit themselves with all patience and humility to suffer as the will and pleasure of the higher powers shall adjudge Against the doctrine practice of some new Saints of this iron age who will ward off Christs wooden Cross with their iron swords and rather bring their Soveraigns heads to the block than submit their own heads unto it for their very Treasons and Rebellions against them So farr are they from believing practising the very first Alphabetical Lesson of our Saviours prescription and real Christanity Mat. 16.24 If any man will come after me let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me The Duke of Northumberland for that he was appointed General of the Army in this Quarrel of the Lady Jane though Queen de facto was arrested of High Treason together with 3. of his Sons the Marquess of Northampton the Earl of Huntindon with sundry Knights Gentlemen and sent prisoners to the Tower of London The 16. of August next following the said Duke and Nobles were publikely arraigned of High Treason in Westminster hall before Thomas Duke of Norfolk High Steward of England being brought to the bar the D. used great reverence to his Judges professing his faith and allegiance to the Queens Majesty whom he confessed he had grievously offeâ—ded saying that he meant not to speak any thing in defence of his face but would first understand the opinion of the Court in 2. points 1. Whether a man doing any Act or thing by authority of the Princes Councel and by Warrant of the Great Seal of England and nothing doing without the same may be charged with TREASON for doing any thing by such Warrant Which question was grounded on this very Statute of 11 H. 7. c. 1. 2. Whether any such persons as were equally culpable in that crime and those by whose Letters and Commandment he was directed in all his doings might be his Iudges or passe upon his Tryal as his PEERS To the 1. was answered mark it That the Great Seal he had for his Wâ—rrant was not the Seal of the Lawfull Qu. of the Realm nor pâ—ssed by her Authority but the Seal of an Vsurper and therefore could be no Warrant to him To the 2. That if any were as deeply to be touched in that Case as himself yet so long as no attainder was of Record against them they were nevertheless persons able in Law to pass upon any tryal and not to be challenged therefore but at the Princes pleasure After which the Duke and the rest of the Lords using but few words declaring their earnest repentance and imploring the Queens mercy confessed this Indictment of Treason and thereupon had Iudgement passed upon them as Traytors And the Duke with Sir Iohn Gates and Sir Thomas Palmer were accordingly executed on Tower Hill August 22. confessing the Iustice both of their Iudgement and Execution as TRAYTORS and not justifying themselves by the Act of 11 H. 7. After this Archbishop Cranmer though at first he refused to subscribe K. Eds. will to dis-inherit Queen Mary alleging many reasons against it yet was committed Prisoner to the Tower indicted arraigned condemned of High Treason in November following for aiding the Earl of Northumb. with Horse and Men against Queen Mary And Queen Jane herself though Queen de facto meerly passive not active in this case never aspiring after the Crown being proclaimed Queen against her will with the Lord Guyldsord her husband were both indicted arraigned condemned of High Treason and accordingly executed as Traytors Feb. 12. 1 Mariae the one for usurpation of the royal Estate AS QVEEN OF ENGLAND the other as principal adherent to her in that case both of them confessing that BY THE LAW THEY WERE JUSTLY CONDEMNED After which the Duke of Suffolk her father and sundry others were condemned of High Treason executed upon the same account and that by the judgement of all the several Peers Nobles Judges Lawyers and Great Officers of Engl. though guilty of the same crime seconded with the Judgement of the whole Parl. of 1 Mar. c. 16. which confirmed their Attainders as JUST and LEGAL notwithstanding the Statute of 11 H. 7. c. 1. which extends only to indemnifie those Subjects who doe their true duty and service of allegiance to their King and Soveraign Lord which none certainly do who adhere and joyn with an apparent Usurper in possession against their lawfull undoubted King and Soveraign Lord as they here adjudged and the Parliaments of 1 4 and 14 of King Edward the 4th long before no Acts of Parliament whatsoever being able to secure Usurpers Titles though Kings de facto to themselves or their posterity or to save their own or their adherents Heads from the block or their estates from confiscation as the recited tragical Presidents and Judgements prove against the absurd opinions of many Grandees of the Law in great reputation who take all Sir Edward Cooks and others Dotages for Oracles and well deserve a part in Ignoramus for being ignorant of these late notorious Judgements and authorities against their erronious opinions wherewith they seduce their silly Clyents and young Students of the Law to their great peril for whose better information I have the larger insisted on this point to rectifie this dangerous capital mistake which may hazard both their lives estates and souls to boot And so much in answer to the objected Presidents of Edward and Richard the 2d to prove the Commons Right of Judicature in Parliaments c. As good an evidence as that grave Sir E. Cook produceth to prove this House of Commons who had no Journal Book till â— Ed. 6. to be a distinct Court of Iudicature because upon signification of the Kings pleasure to the Speaker they do and may prorogue or adjourn themselves and are not prorogued adjourned by the House of Lords By which reason he might prove every Committee of the Lords or Commons House to be a distinct Court because they may adjourn and prorogue themselves without the House and all Commissioners for examination of Witnesses Charitable uses the petty Sessions of Justices of Peace all Country Committees Archdeacons and other visitors all Auditors of Accounts Arbitrators Referrees c. to be Courts because they may all adjourn themselves from one day and place to another when as their presenting of their own Speakers in and the Kings calling them into the Lords House at the beginning and end of every Parliament or Session and at the passing of Bills and their dissolution in the Lords
House is a stronger argument to prove them no Court at all at least of Judicature than their adjournment or prorogation of themselves to evidence them to be a distinct Court from the House of Lords Should I here subjoyn to the premises all the cases extant in the Lords Iournals and Parliament Records evidencing the Lords real Jurisdiction proceedings and Judicature in civil causes in the reigns of King Ed. the 4. Richard the 3. Henry the 7. and 8. Queen Mary Queen Elizabeth King Iames and King Charles I should be over tedious to the Readers I shall therefore only trouble you with 2 cases more In the Parliament of 18 Elizabeth there arose a question about place and precedency in the case of the Lord de la Ware upon debate thereof in the Lords House ALL THE LORDS except the Lord Windesore ADIUDGED that he should have place next after the Lord Wilâ—oughbie of Erisbe And the Lord Keeper was appointed to acquaint the Queens Majesty with this determination of the Peers and to know her pleasure concerning the same In the last long Parliament Pasch 20 Caroli this cale of Note and Consequence was adjudged by the Lords against the late resolutions of some Judges touching the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court between Fairfax and le Gay and Mr. Johns a London Merchant In Lent Vacation 1638. Mr. Iohns libelled in the Admiralty against one Hooper for 26000 weight of Barbadoes Tobacco sold to him at St. Maloes in France in partibus transmarinis infra jurisdictionem Admiraltatis Angliae by one Bâ—les factor to Hooper for fraight due unto him by Hooper for his Ship called the William and Anne whereof Iohns was owner without alleging that this sale and contract was made super altum mare Fairfax and le Gay became sureties for Hooper in the Admiralty Iohns had a sentence against Hooper in the Admiralty upon this Libel who soon after became a Bankrupt Whereupon Fairfax and le Gay his sureties appealed to the Delegates to avoid the sentence and execution against them and then moved in the Kings Bench for a Prohibition to stay the sute suggesting the contract to be made at St. Maloes upon the land and not super altum Mare and so not within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty Upon which they procured a rule to stay the Proceeding Whereupon Johns petitioned the House of Lords for relief against this rule and that the Delegates might proceed to give sentence upon the Appeal that so he might have execution against the sureties Hooper being a Bankrupt for above one hundred thousand pounds and all his estate sold so as his debt would be wholly lost if he should be deprived of the benefit of his sentence to which the sureties were liable Upon his Petition this point in Law amongst others whereon the hinge of his case turned was argued at the Lords Bar by Mr. Serjeant Rolls Mr. Maynard for Fairfax and le Gay and by my self for Johns Whether the Admirals Court had any true antient legal Jurisdiction of Contracts made at St. Maloes and other parts beyond the Seas between Merchants and Mariners touching their Merchandise and marine affairs upon the Land as well as on the Sea The Sureties Counsel argued confidently they had not upon the Statutes of 13 R. 2. c. 5.15 R. 2. c. 3. 2 H. 4. c. 14. and the Presidents cited in Sir Ed. Cooks 4 Instit. p. 124. and c. 22. of the Court of Admiralty and in Hubberts Reports â— 331 But I argued to the contrary and clearly proved by the Laws of Oleron Lex 1 2 6 8 9 10 15 16 22 23. made in the reign of King Richard the 1. Anno 1190. ratified under the Seal of that Island by that King confirmed and used by Henry 3. Edw. 1. and practised ever since as the Law of the land in the Court of Admiralty as Sir Edward Cook himself asserts and by the notable Record of 22 E. 1. in Cooks 4 Institutes p. 142 143 144. and Seldens Mare Clausum l. 2. c. 28 f. 275. the Black Book of the Admiralty the Parliament Roll of 4 H. 4. n. 47. for confirmation of the Laws of Oleron 1. That the Admiralty in all ages since King Rich. the 1. â—ill the making of these Statutes and ever since till Hill 2 Jacobi C. B. between Tomlinson Plaintif and Philips Defendant had held Jurisdiction of such contracts between Merchants and Mariners made upon the land in forein parts as well as on the Sea as the Marshal had always used to hold plea of Contracts and deeds of Arms Warr Treasons Murders and Felonies out of the Realm which cannot be determined by the Common Law And that without any Prohibiâ—ion granted to stay the proceedings in all that large tract of time both before and since these Statutes 2ly That these Acts were made only to restrain the Admirals Incroachments of Jurisdiction in Contracts Pleas Quarels other things made or done by Landor Water within the Bodie of the Counties of this Realm or in any Port Harbor Haven or Creek within the Counties the Conusance whereof properly belonged to the Kings Courts or to the Courts of Cities Burroughs and other Lords and to confine them only to such contracts and things within the Realm whereof the Sea is a part being under the Kings Dominion and Lordship as are made or done upon the Sea not upon the Land oâ— Water in any Haven Port River Creek within the precinct of any County but not to debar them in the least degree of their antient undoubted jurisdiction they always had and exercised de Jure without complaint or restraint in contracts of Merchants and Mariners made upon the Land in forein parts beyond the Seas of which the Kings Common Law Courts and the Courts of other Cities Burroughs Ports Lords never had nor could have the least Jurisdiction since out of the Realm and no Jury de Vicineto could be thence awarded or summoned to try the Contract in England which I proved by the Parliament Rolls and Commons Petitions whereon these Statutes were grounded being most express in point as 13 R. 2. Rot. Paerl n. 41.14 R. 2. n. 37.15 R. 2. n. 30.2 H. 4. n. 89.4 H. 4. â— 47.11 H. 4. n. 61. compared with 27 E. 3. c. 13.2 R. 2. c. 4.32 H. 8. c. 14.5 Eliz. c. 5.27 Eliz. c. 27. which so interpret it and by most of the Cases cited by Edward Cook in his Chapter of Admiralty extending only to contracts made within the body of any County within the Realm not in any forein parts on the Land or Sea without or beyond the Realm whereof the Comon Law Courts had never Jurisdiction before Sir Sir Edw. Cooke was Chief Justice and that by a meer fiction and false contradictory surmise contrary to truth reason Justice Law and the Letter of Charterparts and Contracts themselves viz. that they were made at St. Maloes Burdeaux Sevil
l. 1. p. 7. †31 H. 6. c. 1. 39 H. 6. c. 1. (e) In Eutropium l. 1 p. 67. (f) Nubtigensis l. 4. c. 14. (g) See Walsingham Holinshed Speed Stowes Survey of London Trussel Grafton (h) Sleidens Comment l. 7.11 Munsteri Cosmogr l. 3. c. 142. David Chyrraeus Chron. Saxoniae l. 12 13 14. (i) See the Animadversions on the Welsh Remonstrance and answer to Killing no Murder * As at first propounded voted and urged at several conferences See their Declarations and Papers of Feb. and March 17 and 19 1648. (l) Polydor Virgil Speed Holinshed in Anno 1216. See here p. 165. Iudge Dodderidge Mr. Agar Mr. Cambden Joseph Holland in their Treatises of the Antiquity of the Parliaments of England p. 18 19 20 40. 85 87. Sir Walter Raleigh his Prerogative of the Parliaments of England p. 2 3. The Freeholders Grand Inquest p. 13 14. (m) 4 Institutes p. 12. * See Walsingham Hist Angl. Anno 1 H. 4. p. 402. DOMINI in praesenti Parliamento Regis ASSENSU IUDICANT DECERNUNT c. ulterius DOMINI TEMPORALES REGIS ASSENSU IUDICANT DECERNUNT c. (n) Exact Collection p. 321. * Here p. 147. to 161. (2) 1 Instit f. 9 b. 10 b. See 4 Instit p. 6 7. 44 45 46. (3) Seldens Titles of Honor p. 745 746 747 748 749. (4) See my 1. Table to an Exact abridgment c the writs of summons in that abridgement (5) An Exact abridgement p. 549 558 633 636 637 639 640 640. 645 648 649 655 660 661 668. * An Exact abridgement p. 637. Seldens Titles of Honor p. 745. (6) Fitz. N. Brev. f. 165. e. †Num. 16.22 c. 27.16 * Luke 19.42 * Walsingh Trussel Hall Fabian Holinshed Grafton Speed Baker Stow and others * Gal. 3.1 c. 4.15 †Hab. 1.6 9 10 †Ezech. 2.3 to 9. * Nihil est veritatis luce dulcius Cicero Ac. Quaest l. 3. †Prov. 28.23 (c) Deut. 10.17 Psal 136.3 1 Tim. 6.15 Rev. 17.14 c. 19.8 (d) Deut. 31.4 Psal 31.5 Ier. 5.3 Isay 56.24 15. (a) A Remonstrance of many thousand Citizens to their own House of Commons p. 6. The just mans Justification p. 10. Regal Tyranny Discovered A Declaration from his Excellency the General Councel of the Army Jan. 11. 1647. p. 7. Speeches c. at a Conference newly published by Walker printed verbatim out of Dolman the Jesuit his Book condemned formerly as treasonable (b) Regal Tyranny discovered Lilburns Just Man in Bonds p. 1 2. A Pearl in a Dunghil The Free-mans Freedom vindicated An Anatomy of the Lords Tyranny his Argument and Plea before the Committee against the Lords Authority his Petition to the Commons his Letters to Henry Martin Overtons Arrow of Defiance shot into the Prerogative Bowels of the House of Lords his Petition and Appeal A Defiance against Arbitrary Vsurpation The Agreement of the People and Petitions wherein it was presented to the House of Commons An Alarum to the House of Lords See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. p. 192. to 204. (c) Overtons Petition and Appeal to the High and Mighty States the Knights and Burgesses in Parliament assembled Englands legal Soveraign Power The Remonstrance of many thousands to their own House of Commons A printed Petition now in agitation of many Free-born people to the only Supreme Power of this Realm the Commons in Parliament assembled The Anatomy of the Lords Tyranny An Alarum to the House of Lords See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. p. 154. to 204. * See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. where this is fully demonstrated (d) Lilburns Letter to a friend Innocency Truth justified and his late Letters to Cromwell H. Martin Sir Thomas Fairfax and others Englands Birthright Englands lamentable Slavery Another word to the wise Comparata Comparandis Liberty against Slavery The Arraignment of Persecution The Ordinance against Tithes unmounted See M. Edwards Gangraena part 3. p. 109. to 204. (e) See the several Remonstrances from his Excellency and the Army from June til December last 1647. and since in November and January 1648. The Agreement of the people the grand Design Putney Projects (f) Overtons Defiance against all arbitrary usurpation of the House of Lords p. 5 6 15 17 18. his Arrow against all Tyrants p. 6.10 11 12. and others forecited a. b. * See my Historical Collection of the antient Parliaments and Great Councils of England (g) Epist to his 9. Report Institutes on Littleton p. 110.4 Instit c. 1. (h) M. Seldens Titles of Honour part 2. ch 5. where this is abundantly manifested Spelmanni Concil Tom. 1. Truth triumphing over Falshood Antiquity over Novelty p. 36 c. The Freeholders Grand Inquest p. 4. to 20. * See 1 Chro. 19.3 2 Chron 12. c. 6. c. 24.17 c. 32.3 Num. 10.4 Josh 9.15 c. c. 17.4 Num. 32.2 c. 21. (i) See M. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 2. ch 5. 14 E. 3. n. 35. 9 R. 2. n. 16. 20 R. 2. n. 16. 20 R 2. n. 80. 1 H. 4. n. 81. Cooks 3. Instit f. 9.16 with many more (k) 5 R. 2. Star 2. c. 4. 31 H. 8. c. 10. (l) See Litt. c. 10. Sect. 162 164. Cook Ibidem 49 Ass 8. (m) Cook 4. Instit c. 1. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts c. 1. * 1 R. 2. c. 4. 8 H. 4. c. 14. 8 H. 5. c. 7. 32 H. 6. c. 15. 1 H. 5. c. 3. ◠1 H. 7.12 2 H. 7.3 2. 5 H. 7. 9 H. 7. 12. 14 H. 6.12 7 E. 4.14 15 E. 15. Cook 1. Instit 250. a. Brook Tit. Parliament Corporations * Psal 47.2 6 7. Ps 95.3 Psal 98.6 Psal 103.19 (n) Exod. 3. 4. 7. (o) Deut. 3 28. Num. 27.16 to 23. Deut. 31.3 to 9.14.23 c. 34 9. Iosh 1. (p) Neh. c. 2. c. (q) 1 Sam. 9.16 c. 10.1.21 Acts 13.21 (r) Psal 78.70 71 72. 1 Sam. 16.2 Sam. 7 8. Acts 13.22 (ſ) 1 Chron. 23.1 c. 28.5 6. 2 Chr. 1.8 (t) 2 Chron. 14.1 c. 17.1 c. 28.27 c. 29. 1. Acts 13.20 21 22. * 2 Sam. 7.12 Psal 132.11 12. 2 Sam. 10.1 1 Kings 14 20.35 c. 15.8.24 c. 16.6.28 c. 22.40 2. Kings 1.17 c. 3.27 c. 8.24 c. 10.35 c. 12.21 c. 13.3.24 c. 14.16.29 c. 15 7.22.38 c. 16.20 c. 19.37 c. 20.21 c. 21.26 c. 24.6 1 Chron. 29.28 2 Chron. 12.16 c. 14.1 c. 17.1 c. 21.1 c. 22.1 c. 23.3 c. 24.27 c. 1.23 c. 27.9 c. 28.27 c. 32.33 c. 33.20.25 c. 36. 1 Jer. 22.11 Isay 19.11 c. 37.38 Matth. 2.2 (v) Num. 11.16 17 24 25 26 27. (x) 1 Chron. 18.15.16 17 c. 26.29 30 31 32. c. 27. c. 28 1. Exod. 18.25 26. 2 Chron. 19.5 to 7. * Iudg. 3.9.15 c. 2.16 Acts 13.20 Num. 27.15 to 23. Exod. 18.25 26. Num. 1.4 to 18. 1 Sam. 8.1 1 Chron. 26.30 32. 2 Chr. 19.5 to the end (y] Gen. 40.40 41 c. Exod. 18.25 Psal 105.21 Acts 8.10 (z) Esther 8. 10 [a] Dan. 2.48 49. [b]
Mat. Westm An. 1244. p. 180 181. * Mat. Paris p. 638 639. Mat. Westm An. 1245. * Mat. Paris p. 646 647 648. Mat. West An. 1245. †Ypodigmae Neustriae p. 60. * Mat. Westm p. 191. * Mat. Paris p. 674 675 677 678 679 680. Mat. Westm An. 1246. p. 206 207. c. * Mat. Westm p. 207 * Mat. Paris p. 679. * Mat. Westm An. 1146. p. 208. * Mat. Paris p. 687. * Mat. Paris p. 694. * Mat. Paris p. 697 698 706 707. Mat. Westm p. 220 221 223. * Mat. Westm p. 222. * Mat. Westm p. 326. * Walsingham Hist Angl. p. 48. to 56. Ypodig Neustriae p. 88. to 95. Mat. Westm p. 435 436. * 2 Institutes p. 98. Nota. * Mat. Westm p. 463 464. * Tho. Walsingham Hist Angl. p. 76. * Walsingham Hist Angl. p. 74 75 c. * See an Exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower p. 64 65.120 121 122. * Which some have disclaimed by unPeering themselves * Stiled Magna Farta by some Grandees * See my New Discovery of Free-State Tyranny * See the Whitehall Ordinance for Excise March 17. 1653. others since * My first part of a Legal Vindication c. of the Fundamental Laws of England p. 67. to 72. My Protestation against Excise * See my speech in Parliament and Epistle to my Legal Vindication c. †Mat. Westm p. 409. Walsingham Ypodigmae Neustriae p. 83 84. * Anno 1265. p. 339. 4 (o) See Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour Part. 2. chap. 5. and Coke 4 Instit p. 1. * 11 H. 4.13 Cook 6 Report f. 52 53. (p) Coke 4 Inst p. 3. * As both Houses resolve in their Declaration of August 1642. Exact Collection p. 492. * Modus tenendi Parliament Vowel Coxe 4. Inst c. 1. * 12 R. 2. c. 12.23 H. 6. c. 12.23 H. 6 c. 11.9 H. 6. c. 16.31 H. 8. c. 11.50 E. 3. m. 209. 1 R. 2. n. 137. †Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour part 2. ch 5. p. 732. to 736. †Exact collection p. 320 321 322. Object Answer * Cook 4 Instit p. 16. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 736 737 715 716.747.721.722 724 725. * Seldens Titles of Honour part 2. c. 5. p. 663 665.747 748 751 757 563. †Claus 7 R. 2. mem 32. dorso Seldens Titles of Honor p. 737. Cook 4 Instit p. 47. * Exact Collection p. 723 724. * Exact Collection p. 654.655 †Stat. of Maâ—lbridge 52 H. 2. Prologue 33 H. 8. c. 1. * Cokes 4. Institutes p. 45. * Cokes 4 Instit p. 4 5.44 45. * Fol. 9. b. 16. b. * Plowden f. 333 334 501 Dyer 348. a. 21 E. 4.46 48.57.43 Aff. 15. Coke 1 Report f. 48.52.3 Rep. f. 73 74. 8 Rep. f. 55.167 Ashes Table Grant le Roy 46. * Titles of Honour lib. 2. p. 663 665 747 748 751 757 763. * 1 Inst f. 16.8 †Ro. Paâ— 26. E. 3. part 1. m. 21. See Rot. Claus in dors 11. E. 3. part 2. m. 11. Religious qui teignunt per Barony sont tenus de Venier au Parliament Vid. ibid. 13 E. 3. part 2. m. 8. 1. * Modus tenendi Parl. c. 2. * Dors Claus 27 H. 8. m. 24. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 541. (p) Pat. 5. H. 8. part 2. m. 12 Seldens Title of Honour p. 750 751. Sir Edward Cook 4 Inst p. 45. * See Cooks 4 Inst p. 45. Abbot Banhams case * Titles of Honour 730 731 732 733. * Pat. 26 E. 3. part 2. m. 22. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 734 735. †Selden ib. p. 727. * Titles of Honour p. 727. * Claus 49 H. 3. m. 10 dors in Schedula Seldens Titles of Honour p. 723 724. (1) Titles of Honour p. 720. to 736. (2) Claus 18 E. 2. m. 5. Seldens Titles of Honor p. 721.726 (3) Titles of Honour p. 720. (4) See an Exact Abridgment of the Records in the Tower and my first Table thereunto * And John de Leyburn â—m 14.17 18. E. 3. * Chron. Joh. Bromton col 1108. Mat. Paris p. 431 826. Hen. de Knyghton de Eventibus Angl. l. 3. c. 2. Walsingham Hist Angl. p. 17 18 19. to 23.25.32 33.42.49 to 56. * Ypodigmae Neustriae p. 101. * Walsingham Hist Angl. p. 86. (1) Claus 5 E. 2. m. 27. dorso (2) Claus 5. E. 2. m. 26. dorso (a) 7 H. 6.16 m. 19 H. 6.63 64 30 H. 6.26 a. 33 H. 6.18 a. 21 H. 7.1 Br. Parliament 28. 14 H. 8.9 b. Dyer f. 60. St. Germin l. 1. c. 26. Plowden f. 126.388 389. 398. Cook 8 Rep. f. 120.9 Report in the Epistle 1 Institute f. 109 110.4 Instit c. 1. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts f. 1 2. Ashes Tables Parliament sect 15. Cowels Interpreter Minshawes Dictionary tit Parliament Sir Thomas Smith De Republica Angl. l. 2. c. 1 2. Vowel Cambdens Britannia Justice Doderidge Mr. Tate Mr. Agar (b) My Historical Collection of the antient Parliaments of England And 2. 3. Part of my Legal Vindication and Historical Collection of the Fundamental Laws of England (c) Chron. vol. 3. p. 38. (d) Hist of Great Britain p. 438. (e) Hist Novor l. 5. p. 117. (f) Annal. pars prior p. 473 (g) Mat. Par. Anno 1114. p. 63. Mat. Westm p. 28. (h) De Gest Reg. Angl. col 237. (i) Col. 1005. * Mat. Paris Anno 1115. p. 62. Hen. Huntindon Hist l. 7. p. 380. Antiq Eccles Brit. p. 112 113. Radulph de Diceto Anno 1115. col 502 504. Gervasius Actus Pontif. Cantuar. col 1661. Thomas Stubs Actus Pontif. Eboracensium col 1714. Henry de Knighton de Event Angl. l. 2. c. 8. col 2379. Will. Malmsbury de Gestis Pontif l. 1. p. 232. * Eadmerus l 5. p. 125 126. (k) Mat. Paris p. 53 54. Eadmerus Hist Novor l. 3. Chron. Johan Bromton col 1201 1202. Malmsbury de Gest Regum l. 5. p. 156. See Holinshed Speed Daniel (l) Simeon Dunelmensis col 226. Chronicon Johannis Bromton col 998. Hovedeâ— annal pars 1. p. 408. (m) Eadmerus Hist Novorum l. 3. page 56 57 58. (n) Eadmerus l. 3. p. 58 59. Will. Malmsburiensis de Gestis Pontif. l. 1. p. 124 125. (o) Mat. Paris p. 55. Chronicon Johan Bromton col 998. (p) Matth. Westm Mat. Paris Hoveden Huntindon Simeon Dunelmensis Chronicon Johan Bromton an 1101. Henry de Knyghton de Eventib. Angl. l. 2. c. 8. (q) Eadmerus Hist Novorum l. 3. p. 61 62. Malmsburien de Gestis Pontif. l. 1. p. 225. (r) Eadmerus l. 3. p. 66. (Å¿) Eadmerus l. 3. p. 67. Wiâ—l Malmsbury de Gestis Pontif. Angl. l. 1. p. 228. Hoveden An. 1. p. 469. Mat. Par. p. 56. Matthew Westm p. 23. Simeon Dunelm Hist col 227 228. Abbrev. Chron. col 499. Chron. Johan Bromton col 1000. Antiquitates Eccles Brit. p. 104 106. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 763. (t) Eadmerus Hist Nov. l. 3. p. 69 70. Wil. Malmsbury de Gestâ—s Pontif l. 1. p. 226. Antiq. Eccles Bâ—it p.
105 106. Godwins Cat. of Bishops in the life of Anselm Radulph de Diceto col 499 Chron. Gervasii col 1658 1659. Chron. Jo. Bromton col 999. Hoveden annal pars 1. p. 47. (u) Mat. Westm anno 1103. p. 232. Mat. Paris p. 56. Chron. Gervasiii col 1659. Eadmerus l. 4. p. 76. (x) Mat. Par. p. 59. Mat. Westminster Hoveden Simeon Dunelmensis (y) De Event Angl. l. 2. c. 8. col 2374. (z) Eadmerus l. 4. p. 90. (a) Eadmerus l. 4. 91 92. Mat. Westm p. 25 26. Mat. Paris p. 60. Hoveden An. p. 471. Simeon Dunelm Hist col 230. Radulph de Diceto Abbrev. Chron. col 500. Antiq Eccl. Brit. p. 107 108. Godw. in the life of Anselm (b) Eadmerus l. 4. p. 94 95. Simeon Dunelm col 231. Hoveden p. 272. (c) Eadmerus l. 4. p. 101 102 103. Antiqu Eccles Brit. p. 107 108 110. * Eadmerus l. 3. p. 103 104. Nota. * Eligat (d) Eadmerus l. 5. p. 109 110.112 (e) Eadmerus l. 5. p. 114 115 116. (f) Eadmerus l. 5. p. 118.126 (g) Eadmerus l. 6. p. 136. (h) Eadmerus l. 6. p. 137 138. (i) See the Antiquity of the Parliaments of England p. 18 19 40 80. (k) In his Britannia p. 120 122. (l) The Antiquity of the Parliaments of England p. 18 20 87. (m) Posthuma p. 346 347 348. (n) Titles of Honour p. 712 713 717. (o) Chronicle vol. 3. p. 37 38. (p) History of Great Britain p. 538 559 (q) My Levellers levelled and Preface to an Exact abridgement of the Records of the Tower (r) See my Catalogue of the Speakers in my 2 Table to an Exact abridgement c. p. 151.155 (s) See my Table of Speakers an Title Parliament Speaker Commons to the Exact abridgemeâ— of the Records of tâ— Tower anâ— p. 155 174 189 390 53 535 618 619 640 649 661 (t) 1 R. 2. â—oâ— Parl. n. 31.42.7 R. 2. n. 13 14.21 R 2. n. 53. (u) 21 E. 2. n. 68.50 E. 3. n. 16. â—0 41.10 R. 2. n. 6.10 18.21 R. 2. n. 15 16.1 H 4. pl. Coâ—ae n. 1.2.28 H. 6. n. 14. â— 53. (x) 8 R. 2. â— (y) Coâ—ks 4 liâ—stir p. 21 2â— 23. (z) See an Exact abridgment of the Records in the Tower p. 392. (a) Henry de Knyghton de Event Angl. l. 3. c. 4.5 Polychron l. 1. c. 42 Exilium Hugonis in Totles Magna Charta f. 50. c. Claus 15 E. 2. dors 32. (b) Totle f. 53 54. (c) 15 E. 2. dors 32. * Historiae Angliae p. 91 92. Ypodig Neustriae p. 104. * Historiae Angliae p. 91 92. Ypodig Neustriae p. 104. Nota. (e) Claus 15 E. 2. m. 23 24. dors 13.32 Claus 17 E. 2. m. 30. 21 R. 2. rot Parl. m. 55. to 67. See Holinshed Fabian Polychronicon (f) Hist Angl. p. 94 95. Ypodigm Neustriae p. 120. * Walsingham Hist Angl. p. â—06 * An Abridgement of the Records p. 670 671 672.677 689 691 699 702 703 707. (g) Cooks 2. Instit p. 39 40 41. Nota. * See Straffords tryal * See my Canterburies Doom (a) Galfridus Monum hist l. 4. Porticus Verunnius Hist Brit. l. 4. Mat. Westm Flores Hist p. 66 67. Fabian Holinshed Grafton (b) Will. Malmsburiensis de Gestis Pontif. Angl. l. 3. p. 264. to 269. Chron. Johan Bromton col 792. to 795. Mat. Westm Anno 692.711 Fox Acts and Mon. Vol. 1. p. 160 161. Stubs and Godwin in Wilfrids life (c) Willelm Malmburiensis de Gestis Reg. Angl. l. â— c. 6 p. 62. Spelmanni Concil p. 407 408. Speed p. 396. (d) Mat. West Sim. Dunelm Florent Wigorn Hoveden Bromton an 985.986 992 993. Malmsb. de Gestis Regum l. 2. c. 10. (b) Malmsb. de Gest Reg. l. 2. c. c. 10. Fl. Wigor p. 382. Mat. Westm p. 395. Hoveden p. 433. (c) Aethelredus Abbas de Geneal Regum Angl. col 965 966. Flor. Wigorniensis p. 389 390. Simeon Dunelmensis col 175 176. Hoveden p. 436. Hen. de Knyghton de Eventibus Angl. l. 1. c. 3. Polychron l. 6. c. 18. Hen. Huntindon Hist l. 6. p. 363. (d) Col. 937 938. (e) Part. 6. (f) Titles of Honor part 3 ch 5. Sect. 6. p. 634. (f) See the 3. Part of my Seasonable Legal and Historical Vindication c. p. 273. to 277. (g) Malmsb. de Gestis Regum l. 2. c. 13. Mat. Westm Wigorniensis Hoveden Bromton an 1051. Huntindon Hist l. 6. p. 366 Holinshed Grafton Fabian Speed (h) Henry Huntindon Hist l. 6. p. 366. Polychron l. 6. c. 20 Chron. Johan Bromton col 445. (i) Hen. de Knyghton de Event Angl. l. 1. c. 11. Willelmus Malmsburiensis de Gestis Regum l. 2. c. 23. (k) Ingulphi Hist p. 898. Wigorniensis Simeon Dunelmensis Hoveden anno 1055 1058. * Hoveden Annal. pars prior p. 456 457. Simeon Dunelmensis col 208 209. Florent Wigorniensis Huntindon Bromton Holinshed Speed Daniel and others Anno 1174 1075. (k) Florentius Wigorniensis Mat. Westm Mat. Paris Bromton Simeon Dunelmensis Hoveden and others Anno 1070. (l) Florentius Wigorniensis Anno 1070 p. 435 436. Mat. Paris Hoveden Huntindon Simeon Dunelmensis Bromton (m) Eadmerus Hist Nov. l. 1. p. 25. to 32. Antiquitates Eccles Brit. p. 101 102. Gul. Malmesbury de Gestis Pontif. Angl. l. 1. p. 219 to 230 Speeds History p. 462 463 464 Holinshed vol. 3. p. 22 to 36. * l. 3. p. 70. c. (n) Th. Walsingham Ypodigmae Neustriae p. 33 34. (o) Chron. Jo. Bromton col 997. Hen. Huntind Hist l. 7. p. 378. Mat. Paris p. 51 54. Will. Malmesb. de gestis Pontif. Angl. l. 3. p. 277 278. Hen. de Knyghton de Event Angl. l. 2. c. 8. Polychr l. 7. c. 12. Godwins Catalogue of Bishops p. 645 646 647. Roger de Hoveden Annal pars prior p. 648. (p) Eadmerus Hist Nov. l. 3. p. 67. Wil. Malmesbury de gestis Pontif l. 5. p. 220. Antiqu. Eccles Brit. p. 103 104. Mat. Westm Mat. Paris Hoveden Bromton An. 1102. Simeon Dunelm col 227 228. Radulph de Diceto col 499. Bromton col 1000. * Eadmerus l. 3. p. 70 c. Antiq. Eccles Brit. p. 105 107. See here p. 170 171. â— * Henry de Knyghton de Event Angl. l. 2. c. 8. col 2374. Here p. 172. (q) Will. Malmesbury Historiae Novel l. 2. p. 181 182 183. Godwins Catalogue of Bishops p. 319 320 321 322. Holinshed p. 50 51. (r) Chronicon Gervasii col 1371. Gul. Nubâ—igen l. 1. c. 32. Matth. Westm anno 1152. Gervas Dorobern Act. Pontif. Cant. col 1668. Antiq. Eccles Brit. p. 117. Godwins Catal. of Bishops p. 85 86. Holinshed Vol. 3. p. 57 59. Speeds History p. 496 497. (Å¿) Neubrigensis hist l. 1. c. 6. (t) Chronicon Gervasii col 1386 1387 Roger Hoveden annal pars posterior p. 491. to 534. Mat. Paris p. 94. to 127. Mat. Westm Bromton ann 1166 c. Antiqui Eccles Brit. p. 118. to 124. Godwins Catalogue of Bishops p. 86 to 96. Fox Acts and Monum p. 186. to 206. Speeds History p.
the most best Antiquaries and English Historians I have seen who Treat of our Parliaments except that Gross Impostor who composed that ridiculous Treatise stiled Modus tenendâ— Parliamentum when there was never any Parliament held in any age in England or Ireland in such manner as â—e there relates prescribes with Sir Edward Cook and some other injudicious Antiqâ—aries seduced by this pretended forged Antiquity have not presumed to derive the Antiquity of the Knights Citizens and Burgesses summons to and siâ—ting in our Parliaments higher than the Parliament held under Henry the 1. at Salisbury Anno Dom. 1116. the 16 year of his reign To which Polydor Virgil Hist Angl. An. 1116. Judge Dodridge and others in the Antiquity of the Parliamenâ—s of England p. 18 19 20 40 80 86 87. Holinshed in his Chronicle vol. 3. p. 38 39. John Speed in his History of Great Britain p. 438 439. referre their Original if not the beginning of Parliaments themselves But under these learned mens correction who produce no warrant from histories or records in that age for proof of what they affirme I dare confidently assert that there is nothing to be found in History or Record to warrant this their fancy but many direct evidences against it which I shall briefly clear being very pertinent to the present controversie and judicature of the Lords House 1. It is most clear that to this Parliamentary Council held at Salisbury Anno 16 H. 1. No Commons Knights Citizens elected by the people were called by this Kings Writs as some of these Authors with the Manuscript of Canterbury positively assert and others of them seem to incline unto but only the Lords spiritual and temporal of the Realm as Holinshed himself relates whom Speed stileth the Estates both Spiritual and Temporal This is evident by Eadmerus who then lived and thus records the proceedings of that convention under this King 13 Kal. Aprilis factus est Conventus Episcoporum Abbatum et Principum totius regni apud Serberiam cogente eos illuc sanctione Regis â—enrici Which Rog. de Hoved. thus seconds Comites et Barones totius Angliae apud Salisberiam convenerunt who as Mat. Paris and Mat. Westminster with them relate Jurarunt fidelitatem Willielmo filio suo Simeon Dunelmensis â—â—iles it Conventus Optimatum et Baronum totius Angliae wherein jussu Regis omnes Comites et Barones cum Clero totius Regni swore fealty to him and his Son as the Chronicle of Brompton also relates not any of our antient Historians making mention of any Commons Knights Burgesses but only of Bishops Abbots Earls Lords and Barons of the Realm there present at it In this Parliament after the Earls Barons and Great men had done homage to William the Kings Son and sworn allegiance to him the Cause and complaint between Ralph Archbishop of Canterbury and Thurstan elected Archbishop of York was there heard and debated which had been agitated between them a whole year before Thurstan being admonished by Ralph to make his subjection to the See of Canterbury and to receive his consecration from him after the ecclesiastical and usual manner Answered That he would willingly receive his consecration from him but he would by no means make that profession of subjection to the See of Canterbury which he exacted but only that which Pope Gregory and after him Pope Honorius the 6. had ordained who made this agreement between the two Archbishops of England Ut neuter alteri subjectionis professionem faceret nisi tantum ut qui prior ordinatus esset quamdiu viveret prior haberetur quod proprium est servorum Dei ut verahumilitate sibi invicem acclives sint nullus super alium primatus ambitionem exercere debet Sicut Dominus noster Verae humilitatis praedicator amator discipulos suos de hac re litigantes redarguens dixit eis Qui major est vestrum erit omnium minister Nullus siquidem post beatum Auguâ—â—inum â— qui non tam Archiepiscopus quam Apostolus Anglorum dicendus est Archiepiscoporum Cantuariensium primatum totius Angliae sibi vendicare praesumpsit usque ad Theodorum Archipraesulem cui propter singularem in Ecclesiastica Disciplina solertiam omnes Angliae Episcopi subjici consenserunt sicut Beda in Ecclesiastica Historia Angliae testatur Quamobrem Turstinus nullam aliam subjectionis professionem Cantuariensi Pontifici facere voluit nisi quam beatus Papa Gregorius instituiâ— Ralph on the other side pleaded the subjection of his predecessors made to his Predecessors Rex autem Henricus ubi advâ—rtit Turstinum in sua stare pervicatia aperte protestatus est illum aut morem antecessorum suorum tam in professione facienda quam in aliis dignitatis Ecclesiae Cantuariensis ex antiquo jure competentibus executurum aut Episcopatu Eboracensi cum benedictione funditus cariturum His auditis ille suo cordis consilio inpraemeditatus credens renunciavit Pontificatui spondens Regi Archiepiscopo se dum viveret illum non reclamaturum nec aliquam calumniam inde moturum qui cunque substitutus fuisset But Thurstan afterwards repenting of his rashness contrary to his agreement in Parliament going to the Pope against the Kings command to the Council at Rhemes was there consecrated Archbishop of York by Pope Calixtus himself contrary to his promise to the Kings agent and Canterburies who there publikely protested against his consecration without making any subjection to the See of Canterbury Whereupon the King prohibited Thurstan to return into England or any of his Dominions swearing that he should never return whiles he lived unless he would make his subjection to the See of Canterbury Which Oath he refused to violate at the Popes personal request to him though he then absolved him voluntarily from this Oath saying Quod dicit se quoniam Apostolicus est me à fide quam pollicitus sum absoluturum Si contra eandem fidem Thurstinum Eboraci recepero non videtur regiae honestati convenire hujusmodi absolutioni consentire Quis enim fidem suam cuivis polâ—câ—ntii amplius crederetur cum eam meo exemplo tam facile absolutione annihilari posse videret As in this famous Parliamentary Council of Salisbury so in all precedent and subsequent Great Councils and Conventions during the whole reign of king H. 1. the Prelates Earls Barons spiritual and temporal Lords were only summoned as Members not any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people which I shall next make good In a Parliamentary Council in the 1. year of his reign Anno 1100. he was elected and crowned King of England abolished ill Laws confirmed King Edwards Laws and the Great Charter of Liberties under his Seal Communi Concilio Baronum regni Archiepiscoâ—is Episcopis Comitiâ—uâ— Proceribus Magnatibus et Optimatibus totius Regni Angliae there subscribing to his Charter then granted as witnesses See here p. 58
praesenti supersit His horumque similibus regali facundia editis praefaâ—us Petrus assensum praebere utile judicavit annuit Quapropter larga regis munificentia magnifice honoratus nullo modo se quicquam antiquae dignitatis derogaturum immo ut dignitatis ipsius gloria undecunque augmentaretur spoâ—pondit plena fide elaboraturum Pax itaque firma inter eos firmata est qui Legati officio fungi in tota Britannia venerat immunis ab omni officio tali cum ingenti pompa via qua venerat extra Angliam a Rege missus est At Canterbury he perused the antient privileges granted to the Prelates by the See of Rome touching their superiority over York Quibus ille perspectis atque perpensis testatus etiam ipse est Ecclesiam Cantuariensem grave nimis immoderatum praejudicium esse perpessam quatenus hoc velocius corrigeretur â—e modis omnibus opem adhibiturum pollicitus est Post haec Angliam egreditur By all these Parliamentary Councils and Proceedings in them and the Kings answer to this Legate it is most apparent from the testimony of Eadmorus present at most of them and then antient Hiâ—orians 1. That they all consisted during all the reign of King Henry the 1. of the King Bishops Abbots Earls Lords and Barons without any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people 2ly That not only the legislative but judicial power or judicature of Parliament in all civil ecclesiastical and criminal causes debated or judged in them resided wholly in the King Prelates Earls Barons and Nobles which they joyntly and severally exercised by mutual consent as there was occasion 3ly That our Kings Prelates Nobles were then all very vigilant and zealous in opposing the Popes usurpations upon the antient Liberties Privileges Customs of the king kingdom and Church of England 4ly That those Antiquaries and others are much mistaken who affirm the Commons were called to the Parliament of 16 H. 1. as well as the Peers and Nobles and that since that time the authority of this Court hath stood setled and the COMMONALTY had their voice therein which the said H. 1. GRANTED TO THEM in love to the English Nation being a natural Englishman himself when as the Normans were upon terms of revolt from him to his Brother Robert Duke of Normandie it being clear by these Histories and all the Parliamentary Councils under King Henry the 1. and under Hen. the 2. King Ric. the 1. King John and Henry the 3. forecited and here ensuing that there were no Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people summoned to our Parliaments in their reigns succeeding Henry the 1. therefore not in his 5ly That the Opinion of Mr. Cambden Judge Dodridge Jo. Holland Sir Ro. Cotton Mr. Selden and others is true that the first Writ of Summons of any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons to Parliament now extant is no antienter than 49 H. 3. dors 10.11 That King Henry the 3. after the ending of the Barons wars appointed and ordained That all those Earls and Barons of the Realm to whom the King himself should vouchsafe to send his Writ of Summons should come to his Parliament and none else but such as should be chosen by the voice of the Burgesses and Freemen by other Writs of the king directed to them And that this being begun about the end of Hen. the 3. was perfected and continued by Edward the 1. and his Successors Which Holinshed Speed do likewise intimate in general terms So that upon due consideration of all Histories Records and judicious Antiquaries it is most apparent that the Commons had no place nor votes by election in our Parliaments in Hen. 1. his reign noâ— before the latter end of King H. 3. and Ed. 1. who perfected what his Father newly before him began in summoning them to Parliaments This being an irrefragable truth as I conceive the next thing to be considered of is this whether the Commons when thus called and admitted by H. 3. and E. 1. into our Parliaments had any share right or interest in the judicature of Parliaments then granted to them either as severed from or joyntly with the King and Lords And if any share or right at all therein at what time and in what cases was it granted or indulged to them With submission to better judgements I am clear of opinion that the King and Lords when they first called the Knights Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament never admitted them to any share or copartnership with them in the antient ordinary Judicial power of Parl. in civil or criminal causes brought before them by Writ Impeachment Petition or Articles of complaint as they were the supreme judicature and Court of Justice but reserved the judicial power and right of giving and pronouncing all Judgements in Parliament in such cases and ways of proceeding wholly to themselves admitting them only to share with them in their consultative Legislative and Tax imposing power as the Common Council of the Realm thereby in cases of Attainder by Act Bill or Ordinance a part of the Legislative not ordinary judicial authority of Parliament allowed them a voice and partnership with themselves and a share in reversing such Aâ—tainders by Act Bill or Ordinance by another Bill or Sentence but in no cases else except such alone wherein the King or Lords should voluntarily at their own pleasures not of meer right requite their concurrence with them The Arguments reasons inducing me to this opinion and irrefragably evincing it are these 1. The Form of the Writs for electing Knights Citizens Burgesses of Parliament with the retorns and Indentures annexed to them which are only ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de Communi Concilio dicti regni contigerint ordinari Which gives them no judicial power in civil or criminal causes there adjudged as the Writs to the Lords doe give to them by these clauses Ibidem cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus regni colloquium habere tractatum vobiscum c. colloquium habere tractare Personaliter intersitis Nobiscum ac cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus super dictis negotiis tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri and usage custom time out of mind 2. Because when first summoned to our Parliaments they were never called nor admitted thereunto as Members of the Lords house or as persons equal to them in power nor admitted to sit in the same Chamber as Peers with them but as Members of an inferiour degree sitting in a distinct Chamber from them by themselves at first as they have done ever since which I have elsewhere proved against Sir Edward Cooks and others mistakes as Modus tenendi Parliamentum it self resolves if it be of any credit 3ly Because after their call to our Parliaments in 49 H. 3. they had scarce the Name nor Form of an House of Commons or Lower
Crown nor unkinged himself as unworthy to reign any longer 12ly King Edward the 2. after this his deposition was reputed a King de jure still and therefore stiled by the whole Parliament all the Lords and King Edward the 3d. himself in 4 E. 3. n. 1 2 3 4 5 6 10. their King and Leige-Lord and Mortimer with his complices were condemned and executed as TRAYTORS for murdering him after his Deposing contrary to Sir Edward Cooks false Doctrine 3 Institutes f. 7. And in the Parliament of 21 R. 2. n. 64 65. the revocation of the Act for the 2. Spencers restitution in the Parl. of 1 E. 3. was repealed because made at such time by King Edward the 3. as Edw. 2. his Father BEING VERY KING was living and imprisoned so that he could not resist the same An express resolution by these two Parliaments that his deposition was both void in Law and illegal 13ly Neither of these 2. Kings though their articles were more heinous and Government more unkingly arbitrary than the late Kings were condemned or adjudged to loâ—e their heads or lives for their misdemeanors but meerly deprived of their royal Authority with a promise to preserve their lives and treat them nobly and that upon this account that they were Kings yea anointed Kings when they transgressed therefore exempted from all capital censures penalties of Laws by any humane Tribunals as David resolves Psal 51.4 Against thee thee only have I sinned whence S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose Arnobius with others in their Expositions on that Psalm S. Hierom Epist 22 47. Peter Martyr on the 2 Sam. 2.13 learned Grotius and others conclude in these words Liberi sunt Reges à vinculis delictorum neque enim ad paenam ullis vocantur legibus tuti Imperii potestate Hence Otto Frisingensis Episcopus writes thus to the Emperor Fredericke Praeterea cum nulla inveniatur persona mundialis qui mundi legibus non subjaceat subjaciendo coerceatur SOLI REGES utpote constituti super leges in respect of corporal penalties DIVINO EXAMINI RESERVATI seculi lègibus non cohibentur unde est illud tam Regis quam Prophetae testimonium Tibi soli peccavi These 2. presidents therefore no wayes justifie the proceedings against the late beheaded King as I before hand manifested in my Speech in Parliament Decem. 4. and in my Memento in Jan. 1648. which gave ample satisfaction herein not only to out 3. kingdoms at home but to the learnedst Protestant Divines Churches abroad both in France Germany as Samuel Bochartus an eminent French Divine in his Latine Epistle to Dr. Morley printed Parisiis 1650. attests Sect 3. De Jure potestate Regum p. 145. Where after a large and solid proof out of Scripture Fathers and other Authors of the unlawfullnesse of our late Kings trial judgement and Execution and that the Presbyterian English Ministers and Membees did then professedly oppugn and write against it he thus proceeds Ex hoc numero PRYNNIUS vir multis nominibus insignis Parlamenti Delegatorum unus è carcere in quo cum pluribus aliis detenebatur Libellum composuit Parliamento oblatum in quo decem rationibus iisque validissimis contendit eos rem illicitam attentare in proceeding Criminally and Capitally against the King Then reciting the Heads of my reasons against it he concludes thus Haec ille multo plura SCRIPTOR MIRE NERVOSUS cujus verba sunt stimuli et elavi in altum defixi After which he there prooves by several instances how much the Protestant Ministers Churches of France and Geneva condemned these proceedings as repugnant to Scripture and the Principles of the Protestant Religion And Dr. Wolfgangus Mayerus a famous Writer and Professor of Divinity at Basil in Germany in his Epistle Dedicatory before his printed Latine Translation of my Sword of Christian Magistracy supported Basil 1649. Viro Nobilissimo ac consulâ—issimo omnium Doctrinarum Virtutumque Ornamentis excultissimo verae pietatis zelo flagrantissimo Orthodoxae Religionis libertatisque Patriae defensori Acerrimo GVLIELMO PRYNNE J. V. Doctori celeberrimo Domino atque Amico suo plurimum honorando Authori Interpres S. P. D. hath published to my self in particular and the world in general That the beheading of the K. as it was contrary to the Parls primitive intention so it was cum magna gentis Anglicanae ignominia qui jam discincti laudatissimique corporis compage miserrime rupta atque dissipata ferre coguntur quod evitari amplius non potest At sane non exiguam laudem APUD OMNES REFORMAT AS ECCLESIAS consecuti sunt illi Angliae Pastores qui naevos et Errores Regiae administrationis quos magnos fuisse agnoverunt precibus potius a Deo deprecandos quam capitali poena vindicandos esse censuerunt suasque Ecclesias ab omnibus sanguinariis consiliis magno zelo animo plane intrepido dehortati omnemque criminis istius suspicionem ab ipsis hoc pacto prudentissime amoliti sunt Sed hanc causam aliis disceptandam relinquo Which learned Salmasius soon after professedly undertook in the Netherlands Vincentius Heraldus and Bochartus 3 most eminent Protestant Ministers in France in printed Treatises published against the Kings Trial c. as repugnant to the Principles of the Christian Protestant Religion Which another famous Frenchman in his French Translation of 47 London Ministers Petition against it thus brands Post Christum crucifixum nullum atrocius crimen uspiam esse admissum universam terram eo concuti bonos omnes ad luctum provocari USQUE AD FINEM SECULI Which Mr. Bradshaw may do well to ruminate upon now in cold blood and all others ingaged with him in this unparalled Judgment execution being no way warranted by the depositions of King Edward or Richard the 2. 14ly When the News of K. Richards deposing was reported into France King Charls and all his Court wondered detested and abhorred such an injury to be done to an anointed King to a crowned Prince and the head of the Realm But in especial Waleram Earl of St. Paul which had maried King Richards half Sister moved with high disdain against King Henry ceased not to stir and provoke the French King and his Counsel to make sharp war in England to revenge the injury and dishonour committed and done to his Son-in-law King Richard and he himself sent Letters of defiance to England Which thing was soon agreed to and an Army royal appointed with all speed to invade England But the French King so stomached this high displeasure and so inwardly conceived this unfortunate chance in his mind that he fell into his old disease of the Frensy that he had need according to the old proverb to sail to the Isle of Anticyra to purge his melancholy humour but by the means of his Physicians he was somewhat relieved and brought to knowledge of himself This Army was come down into