Master Glyn's reply to the Earle of Straffords defence of the severall articles objected against him by the House of Commons Published by speciall direction, out of an authentick copy. Glynne, John, Sir, 1603-1666. 1641 Approx. 107 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 30 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A42872 Wing G892 ESTC R213348 99825763 99825763 30150

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A42872) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 30150) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1793:33) Master Glyn's reply to the Earle of Straffords defence of the severall articles objected against him by the House of Commons Published by speciall direction, out of an authentick copy. Glynne, John, Sir, 1603-1666. England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons. [2], 56 p. printed for Lawrence Chapman, London : anno 1641. Reproduction of the original in the British Library.

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

eng Strafford, Thomas Wentworth, -- Earl of, 1593-1641 -- Early works to 1800. Great Britain -- History -- Charles I, 1625-1649 -- Early works to 1800. Trials (Treason) -- England -- Early works to 1800. Ireland -- History -- Rebellion of 1641 -- Early works to 1800. 2007-08 Assigned for keying and markup 2007-08 Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-09 Sampled and proofread 2007-09 Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 Batch review (QC) and XML conversion

Maſter Glyns REPLY TO THE EARLE OF STRAFFORDS DEFENCE OF The ſeverall Articles objected againſt him by the Houſe of COMMONS.

Publiſhed by ſpeciall direction, out of an authentick Copy.

LONDON, Printed for Lawrence Chapman, Anno 1641.

Maſter GLYNS Reply to the Earle of STRAFFORDS Defence. My Lord of Strafford having concluded the recapitulation of his evidence, Mr. Glyn applied himſelfe to their Lordſhips in manner following.

MAy it pleaſe your Lordſhips, my Lord of Strafford (as your Lordſhips have obſerved,) hath ſpent a great deale of time in his evidence, and in his courſe of anſwering hath inverted the order of the Articles; He hath ſpent ſome time, likewiſe, in defending the Articles not objected againſt him, wherein he hath made a good anſwer, if in any: wee ſhall preſume to withdraw a while, and reſt upon your Lordſhips patience; and I doubt not but to repreſent my Lord of Strafford as cunning in his anſwer, as hee is ſubtill in his practice.

The Committee withdrawing for about the ſpace of halfe an houre, and then returning to the Barre, Mr. Glyn proceeded as followeth.

My Lords, your Lordſhips have obſerved how the Earle of Strafford hath been accuſed by the Commons of England of high Treaſon, for a purpoſe and deſigne to ſubvert the fundamentall Lawes of both the kingdomes, of England and Ireland, and to introduce an Arbitrary, and Tyrannicall government: The Commons have exhibited Articles in maintenance of that charge: My Lord of Strafford hath thereunto anſwered in writing. The Commons have proceeded to make good their charge by proofe, and thereunto my Lord of Strafford hath made his defence; and this day my Lord of Strafford hath taken upon him to recollect his evidence, and make his obſervation upon it, the moſt he could to his advantage.

My Lords, wee that are intruſted for the houſe of Commons, ſtand here to recollect the evidence on our part, and to apply it to the generall charge, and how farre it conduces thereunto.

My Lord of Strafford in recollecting the evidence of his defence, as I did mention before, hath (under favour) expreſt very much ſubtilty, and that in divers particulars, which I ſhall repreſent to your Lordſhips.

My Lords, before I enter upon the recollection of the proofes produced on the behalf of the Commons, I ſhall make ſome obſervations, and give ſome anſwer to that recollection of his; though very diſorderly to the method I propounded to my ſelfe.

And firſt, in generall, it will appeare to your Lordſhips, (looking upon your notes, and obſerving his recollection) that he hath uſed the repetition of evidence on both ſides, in ſuch manner as you know who uſeth Scripture; that is, to cite as much as makes for his purpoſe, & leave out the reſt. And likewiſe, that in repetition of the evidence, he hat miſ-recited, plainly, very much of the proofs on both ſides, & likewiſe hath pretended ſome proofes to be for his defence, which indeed were not: and hee hath taken this farther advantage; when it makes for his defence, he hath diſjoynted the proofes, and teſtimonies, and ſevered them aſunder, that it might appeare to your Lordſhips, like raine falling in drops, which conſidered in diſtinct drops bring no horrour, or ſeeming inconvenience with them; but when they are gathered together into an entire body, they make an Inundation, and cover the face of the earth. He would not have your Lordſhips look on thoſe Teſtimonies together, but diſtinctly, and aſunder, wch being put together look horrid, as will appeare to your Lo. when you duly conſider of them.

Theſe bee the generall obſervations, which in my Anſwer I doubt not but to make good: But before I ſhall enter into obſervations of what hee hath ſpoken, I ſhall anſwer in generall to ſome things which hee hath in generall alledged.

In the firſt place, hee hath made a flouriſh this day, and ſeverall other dayes in the way of his defence, That if hee could have had longer time, hee could have made things appeare clearer, and have produced more proofes. Give mee leave to informe your Lordſhips that he is no way ſtraightned of time, for he hath bin charged above three months ſince he knew what was laid to his charge, and therefore his pretence of want of time, and of his diſabilities to make better proofes, are but flouriſhes. And it appears plainly, whatſoever he hath had occaſion to make uſe of, even the leaſt paper, though hee fetched it from Ireland, there is not one wanting; he hath copies of papers from the Councell Table, from the Parliament of Ireland, and all that may any way tend to his juſtification, and yet he ſtands upon that flouriſh, that if he had had time he could have made it more cleare.

My Lords, he hath mentioned often this day, and oftner the dayes before, that many of the Articles laid to his charge are proved but by one witneſſe; and thereupon he takes the advantage of the Statute of E. 6. that ſayes, A man ought not to be condemned for high Treaſon without two witneſſes. My Lords, this is a fallacy knowne to his own breaſt, I doubt not, and not taught him by any of his Councell, or others learned.

The Treaſon laid to his charge, is, the ſubverting of the Lawes; the evidence is, the Articles proved: and though ſome one Article appeares to be proved but by one, yet put the evidence together, you ſhall never find it to bee within the words or meaning of the Statute; for the charge is proved by a hundred witneſſes: and becauſe one part of the evidence is proved onely by one witneſſe, ſince, when you put them together, you will find a hundred witneſſes, it is not within the words nor meaning of the Statute, neither will his Councell direct him to ſay ſo, I am confident.

My Lords, another obſervation I ſhall be bold to make, is, that hee was pleaſed to caſt an aſperſion (as we muſt apprehend) upon them that be truſted by the houſe of Commons this day, That we that ſtand here, alledged and affirmed things to be proved, that are not proved: Hee might have pleaſed to have ſpared that language; we ſtand here to juſtifie our ſelves, that we doe not uſe to expreſſe any language, but what our hearts and conſciences tels us is true; and howſoever he is pleaſed to caſt it upon us, I am confident I ſhall invert it upon himſelfe, and make it appeare, that hee hath bin this day guilty, in the higheſt degree, of what he moſt unjuſtly layeth to our charge.

And now my Lords to enter upon the particulars, hee hath beene pleaſed to make it his generall Theame to day (though hee hath not ſpoke much to day but what he hath ſpoken formerly) that theſe particulars conſidered by themſelves make not a Treaſon, and therefore put together he wonders how they ſhould make a Treaſon: Several miſdemeanours can never make a murther, and ſeverall murders can never make a Treaſon; and he wonders it ſhould be otherwiſe in this caſe. My Lords he did inſtance it (if my memory failes me not) in a caſe of Felony; That if a bloudy knife ſhould bee produced in the hand of the party ſuſpected to have ſlaine the man, if the party had bin there ſeen before the death, it were a ſtrong evidence; but there muſt bee death in the caſe, the fact muſt be committed, elſe there can be no murther: but he himſelfe might anſwer himſelfe, for there is a great difference: There cannot be murther but there muſt be death, but hee knowes very well there may be Treaſon and yet no death; it is too late to forbeare queſtioning Treaſon for killing the King, till the King be killed: God forbid wee ſhould ſtay in that caſe, for the very intention is the Treaſon, and it is the intention of the death of the Law that is in queſtion, and it had beene too late to call him to queſtion to anſwer with his life for the death of the Law, if the Law had been killed, for there had been no Law then; and how ſhould the Law then have adjudged it Treaſon, when the ſame were ſubverted and deſtroyed? and therefore he is much miſtaken.

The greateſt Traytor, in the memory of any that ſits here to heare me this day, had a better, a fairer excuſe in this particular then my Lord of Strafford, and that is Guido Faux; for hee might have objected, that the taking of the Cellar, the laying of the Powder under the Parliament Houſe, the kindling of the match, and putting it neare, are not ſo much as a miſdemeanor, if you look no further; for it was no offence in him to lay Barrels under the Parliament Houſe, and to kindle the match, and to lay it neere; but collect all together, that it was eâ intentione to blow up the King and the State, there is the Treaſon: but God be bleſſed it was not effected; So that the rule is the ſame. Nay, my Lord of Strafford hath not ſo much to ſay, when he is charged with a purpoſe and intention to ſubvert the Law; for to that purpoſe gave he trayterous counſels, and executed actions, thereby diſcovering his intentions to deſtroy the Kingdome, and to deſtroy the Kings claime by Law, and diſcent. It is true, they were not put in execution, but they declared his intentions; therefore this gives an anſwer to his firſt flouriſh, which is not ſo great an Argument as the greateſt Traytor might uſe for himſelf, and yet it proved Treaſon in him.

My Lords, he hath been pleaſed to divide his Treaſons into two parts, and his diviſion I allow of; that is, Treaſon by Statute-Law, as he tearmes it, though it be Treaſon by the Common-Law; and conſtructive Treaſon: And upon that method hee hath recited the evidence produced on either part; Give mee leave to follow and trace him a little, and afterwards to diſcharge my duty in taking my owne courſe, and repreſenting the evidence as it appeares, truly; and I will avoid (as much as I can) to fall into my Lord of Straffords errour, in miſ-reciting a Particle; if I doe, it ſhall be againſt my will.

He begins with the fifteenth Article, and pretends that that is not proved; the ground and foundation of that Article was a warrant iſſued out by himſelfe to a Sergeant at Armes, one Savill, which gave directions and power to that Serjeant to lay ſouldiers on any perſon that ſhould contemne the Proceſſe of the Councell boord in Ireland; that was the effect: Now (ſayes he) this warrant is not produced, and addes, that the Judges will tell your Lordſhips, that if a man bee charged with any thing under hand and ſeale, the deed muſt be produced and proved, or elſe no credit is to bee given to it. Truely, my Lords, it is true, if it had beene a Bond, or a Deed, where thoſe that ſeale it uſe to call their neighbours to teſtifie, and be witneſſes to it, perhaps it might be a colourable anſwer, that becauſe we do not produce the Deed, and prove it by witneſſes, you can therefore give no credit to it: But, my Lords, in caſe of authority to commit high treaſon, I ſuppoſe my Lord of Strafford, nor any other did call witneſſes to prove the ſigning, ſealing and delivering of the warrant for execution of high treaſon; and therefore it is a new way and invention found out by his Lordſhip, for ought I ſee, to commit high treaſon, and to give authority for it; and it is but taking away the originall warrant, and hee ſhall never be touched for any treaſon. But I beſeech your Lordſhips patience, till I come to open that Article, and your Lordſhips will finde the warrant, (though it be not produced,) proved by three or foure witneſſes, and his hand & ſeale proved too. And wheras he pretends the Sergeant at Armes is no competent witneſſe, becauſe he excuſes himſelfe; my Lord miſtakes himſelfe, for I take it to bee no excuſe to prove a warrant from any perſon whatſoever, if it be to commit high treaſon: and therefore Savills teſtimony is the more ſtrong, being ſo farre from excuſing, that hee doth accuſe himſelfe: And though he is charged with laying of ſouldiers upon the Kings people, contrary to an expreſſe Act of Parliament made in 18. H. 6. yet my Lord is pleaſed (I know not how to terme it, whether it be merrily, or otherwiſe) to uſe his Rhetorick, Here is a great levying of war, when there is not above foure Musketiers, or ſix at moſt, laid upon any one man.

My Lords, it is a plain levying of warre, and without all queſtion, and in all ſenſe, it is as much miſchievous to me to be ſurprized by foure or ſix Musketiers, to enforce me to any thing they would have, as if there were an Army of forty thouſand brought upon me; for if that ſtrength will but over maſter me, it is all one to me whether I be maſtered by foure, or by foure thouſand. And therefore let not this be a rule, that to ſend foure, or ſix, or ten Musketiers up and downe is not conſiderable, becauſe of the ſmalneſſe of the number (the danger is the ſame;) yet this is no levying of warre, becauſe they goe not in troops of greater number, as it pleaſes my Lord of Strafford to affirm.

My Lords, your Lordſhips remember what the effect of the Warrant is ſworn to be, that howſoever the Sergeant at Armes, and his Miniſters that executed it, brought but foure, or ſix, or ten, yet the Sergeant might have brought all the Army of Ireland, for there was authority ſo to doe.

And admitting the matter of fact proved, he mentions an Act of Parliament made 11. Eliz. whereby a penalty is laid upon men that ſhall lay ſouldiers on the Kings ſubjects, and yet (as my Lord obſerves) it muſt now be Treaſon in the Deputy.

My Lords, the very caſting of an eye upon that Act, ſhewes it to be as vainly objected, as if he had ſaid nothing; for in truth it is no other than as if he ſhould ſay, The King hath given me the command of an Army in Ireland, and therefore I may turne them upon the bowels of the Kings ſubjects: It is no more in effect.

Your Lordſhips have heard him the other day mentioning two Acts of Repeale, and I expected he would have inſiſted upon them; but it ſeemes he hath beene better adviſed, and thinks them not worthy repetition, nor indeed are they. And if the matter of fact be proved upon the fifteenth Article, I am confident he will find the Statute of 18. H. 6. to be of full force.

My Lords, I am very ſorry to heare, that when levying of warre upon the Kings ſubjects is in agitation, and he charged with high Treaſon, he ſhould make mention of the Yorkſhire men, and the army now on foot, whereby he would inſinuate, that if he be charged with high Treaſon, then they muſt be likewiſe, though they lye quartered, and have meat and drink with the aſſent of the people; which may breed ill bloud for ought I know.

From the fifteenth Article he deſcends to the three and twentieth, and that is the Article whereby he ſtands charged with ſpeaking of words, and giving of councell to his Majeſtie to incenſe him againſt his Parliament, pretending a neceſsity, and telling him he is looſe and abſolved from all rules of government; that he had an Army in Ireland which he might make uſe of to reduce this kingdome. In this he is pleaſed to begin with the teſtimony of my Lord Ranelagh, conceiving an apprehenſion and feare in him, that the Army ſhould goe over to England, which my Lord ſayes, is no more but his ſaying, and maſter Treaſurer Vane's.

I pray God my Lord Ranelagh had not much cauſe to feare; but by the ſame rule he may lay a charge of unwarrantable feare upon all the Commons; for ſure the Commons of England did feare it, elſe they would not make an Article of it: But my Lord Ranelagh's feare did not ariſe from a ſlight cauſe, and he ſhewed himſelfe a good Common-wealths man in expreſſing it, and he is to be commended for it, howſoever it be apprehended by my Lord of Strafford.

For his obſervation of the ſingle teſtimony of Mr. Treaſurer Vane, give me leave to take the ſame latitude as his Lordſhip did; for he ſhewes to three or foure Articles what he could have proved; as to the Article concerning the Army, he could have proved the deſigne of it by Sir John Burlacy, and ſome others, if they had beene here. But by this rule and liberty hee hath taken to alledge what he could have ſhowne, give me leave to tell you what we might have ſhowne, and are ready to ſhew: We could have made it expreſſe, and proved it by notes taken by Secretary Vane the fifth of May, when the words were ſpoken, which notes ſhould have beene proved, if we had proceeded on the three and twentieth Article, to corroborate the teſtimony of Mr. Secretary Vane, and that by two witneſſes. Wee could likewiſe have ſhowne how we came to the knowledge of it, it being by means unknowne to maſter Secretary Vane, and have made him an upright Councellour and witneſſe: but we ſhall prove his intentions to bring in the Iriſh Army another way, when I come to open my owne courſe and method.

My Lords, hee pretends theſe words were ſpoken the fift of May, but when they were teſtified by maſter Treaſurer, he did not ſpeak of the fifth of May, and yet now my Lord remembers the day; and I wonder how hee came to the knowledge of the day, unleſſe he likewiſe remembred the words.

But that my Lord obſerves, is, That being ſpoken then, how ſhould he perſwade the King, that he had an Army in Ireland, when in truth he had none there? for the Army was not on foot till a moneth after. This, my Lords, is plainly anſwered; and if he had thought of his owne anſwer, he had anſwered himſelfe: for he tels you, that in April before, he had taken a courſe for the levying of the Army, he had nominated the officers, giving direction for raiſing it: And, the day of the Rendezvous of the Army was appointed the 18. of May. And ſo in his owne anſwer he makes an anſwer to the objection, and the objection is taken away out of his own confeſſion.

From that Article he falls to the ſeven and twentieth Article, whereby he ſtands charged with levying money by force upon the Kings people in Yorkſhire: he is pleaſed to obſerve, that all the proofes for the maintenance of that Article, is onely the levying of money with foure ſouldiers by Sergeant Major Yaworth. Where he is pleaſed to diſdaine the war, becauſe it was ſo weak, yet it was too ſtrong for them (God help them) that were forced upon pain of life to pay it. And whereas he pretends the warrrant was not from him, I ſhall reſerve that till I come to the Article, and when I come to the proofes, I beleeve it will remain fixed upon him.

And there he left his Statute Treaſon, and now he fals to the ſecond kind of Treaſon, and that was the introductive or conſtructive Treaſon: He begins with the third Article, that is, concerning ſome words that he ſhould be charged to have ſpoken in Ireland; & I ſhal deſire that your Lordſhips would be pleaſed to look upon your notes, how he anſwers that Article; My Lords, ſayes he, I am charged to ſay that Ireland was a conquered Nation, and that their Charters were nothing worth, and bind the King no further then he pleaſeth; therefore I am a Traitor becauſe I ſpeak the truth. There was his anſwer in his collection. And for their Charters he ſayes, he might might very well ſay ſo, for he intended it no otherwiſe, but according to the validity of them, for they were ſeverall wayes queſtionable, and ought not to bind, unleſſe they were good in law. But if you look upon his Arguments, he hath, like a cunning Oratour, omitted the principall part of the Article; and that is, that Ireland is a conquered Nation, and they were to be governed as the King pleaſeth, the King might doe with them what he liſts; this hee omits: although they be proved by three witneſſes, and are appliable to his intentions fully; yet he could make uſe of ſo much as makes for him, and leaves out the reſt, like your Lordſhips know whom.

Then he deſcends to the fourth Article, and this concerns ſome words he ſhould ſpeak upon an occaſion betwixt him and my Lord of Cork, that he ſhould tell my Lord of Cork, he would have neither Law nor Lawyers diſpute or queſtion his orders. And upon another occaſion, that he would make my Lord of Cork and all Ireland know, that all Acts of State (which are Acts of Councel) there made, or to be made, ſhould be as binding as any Act of Parliament: This he ſaid was proved but by one witneſſe: and I extremely marvell to heare him ſay ſo; for the latter words wee proved by foure, or five, or ſix witneſſes, that is, that he would have Acts of State as binding as Acts of Parliament. Whereas he ſayes theſe are all the words produced againſt him in the time of ſeven yeeres government there, your Lordſhips have heard of many words, and if we would trouble your Lordſhips further in this kind, we could prove ſuch words ſpoken, as often almoſt as he remained dayes in Ireland, that is, for the miſ-recitall. The other part two witneſſes proved; but the reſidue, That they muſt expect law from the King as a Conquerour, That Acts of State ſhould be equall to Acts of Parliament, And when an Act of Parliament would not paſſe, he would make it good by an Act of State, theſe ſpeeches at other times were proved by five witneſſes.

Then he falls back to the ſecond Article, touching the words, That the Kings little finger ſhould be heavier then the loines of the Law.

My Lords, theſe words were proved expreſly by five witneſſes, to be by him ſpoken; and if he had produced five hundred that had ſaid he did not ſpeak them, they had not been equivalent to diſprove five; but he produces none. Sir William Penniman repeats other words, and inverts them, and none but he. Another party, a Miniſter, reports a report that hee heard concerning theſe words, but, my Lord, ſaith he, the occaſion of the ſpeaking of them was not mentioned. Truly perhaps it might bee the forgetfulneſſe of my Lords memory, but let me put him in mind. And your Lordſhips remember that the occaſion was expreſt by one, and that is Sir David Fowles, that he laying a command upon Sir David to repaire a bridge, and calling him to account why it was not repaired, Sir David Fowles told him, he could not doe it by law. And therefore omitting it, my Lord ſaid to him, Sir, ſome are all for Law and Lawyers, but you ſhall know that the Kings little finger will be heavier then the loines of the Law. Here is the occaſion, though he would have another buſineſſe, the knighting money to be the occaſion.

From the ſecond he falls to the three and twentieth Article, that is, concerning words, That he ſhould counſell his Majeſtie, that he might uſe his Prerogative as he pleaſed; but in ſaying there was no proofe offered, hee here begins to fall upon the other fallacy, that is, to pull things aſunder (whereas we produce them together) and would make that that is a faggot, to be but a ſingle ſtick; but, under favour, when I come, with your Lordſhips patience, to open the force of the proofes, and put them together, he ſhall find (contrary to his expectation) that they are fully proved by the teſtimony of many witneſſes, upon conſideration of the precedent, concurrent, and ſubſequent acts and intentions of my Lord of Strafford.

I ſhall not now run over my Lord Primates teſtimony, or my Lord Conwayes, or maſter Treaſurers, or my Lord of Briſtols, but make uſe of them in their proper places, when I ſhall put all together, to ſhew his deſign, and to prove his ſpeaking of the words.

Then hee comes to the five and twentieth Article, which I ſhall not inſiſt on, though he pretends it not proved; I ſhall referre that to my recollection, that I may not anſwer to his pieces, but bring all together, and then the horrour of his fact ſhall more ſpeciouſly appeare. Onely this (under favour) I cannot paſſe over, when he comes to juſtifie an advice and counſell of the Kings being looſe and abſolved from all rules of government, and that he might uſe his Prerogative as hee pleaſes, he is pleaſed to mention the argument of the Judges in the ſhip-money, and what they ſhould deliver, he makes the warrant of his counſell. Now your Lordſhips may obſerve, he would juſtifie his actions by law, in ſome caſes, where it is to his advantages, but in other caſes hee muſt be ignorant of the Law.

But, my Lords, for him to mention any thing in the Argument of the Judges, concerning the ſhip-money, which is now condemned, and to make that a ground of his counſell and advice to the King, and not the judgement in truth, but the argument of the Councell at Barr, that therefore he is looſe, and abſolved from all rule of government; for him to make the Parliaments deferring to give ſupply, to be that neceſſity which was inſiſted upon in the Councells argument, and to be ſuch an unavoidable neceſſity, as to beget an Invaſion upon propriety and liberty, it reſts in your judgements, and the judgements of all that heare me, what argument this is, and what he declares his opinion to be this day.

In the latter part, let me cloſe hands, and agree with him; he ſayes, Proofes muſt be taken by themſelves, they muſt not be judged by peeces, but together; and now in good time I ſhall joyne with him, and ſhall deſire the ſame judgement, That things may not be taken aſunder, but judged together, according to his owne words.

For the twentieth Article, he is thereby charged with being an Incendiary between both Nations, and an occaſion of drawing two Armies into this kingdome, and to incenſe the warre.

My Lords, I remember (if I did not miſ-conceive, and my memory miſprompt me) my Lord ſaid, he could have no occaſion to incenſe a war, being a man of eſtate, and ſhould have no benefit by it, having ſufficient to live without it: but in due time I ſhall make it appeare, to my apprehenſion, and I beleeve to your Lordſhips, when you have heard it, that the incenſing of this war, and provoking of it, was the principall inſtrument of bringing to paſſe his deſigne of ſubverting the Lawes, through the whole work of it.

My Lords, in the paſſage of this, he takes occaſion to ſpeak of the teſtimony of maſter Secretary Vane, who teſtifies, that my Lord was for an offenſive, and himſelfe for a defenſive warre: whence my Lord argues, here is no great difference, for both were for a warre: but, my Lords, is there no difference betweene an offenſive and defenſive warre, in caſe of ſubjects that live under one King? is there no difference to bring an Army to offend them, and for the King to raiſe a force to defend himſelfe? truly I think there is a great difference, and a very materiall one too: but your Lordſhips ſee hee makes no difference between them.

My Lords, in the foure and twentieth Article he mentions, that he is charged with being an occaſion to breake the Parliament, and layes hold of that, as in the other Articles, that it was not proved, but declined. My Lords, when hee ſhall heare the repetition of the evidence, though part of the Article was not particularly inſiſted upon, yet I beleeve it will appeare to your Lordſhips, and the world, that he was the occaſion of breaking the laſt Parliament, and it is expreſly proved by witneſſes enow; and though he ſayes, how ſhould any body thinke him an occaſion of it; that did ſo often adviſe Parliaments? yet I ſhall ſhew anon, that when he did adviſe them, it was to compaſſe his owne deſigne and plot, without which his ends could not be brought to paſſe.

He came from the foure and twentieth Article to the ſeven and twentieth, and he anſwers againſt that Article, that when Armies are in the field, men cannot walke ſo peaceably, as an Atturney with his box and papers in Weſtminſter hall. I know not what he meanes; but when two Armies are in the field, they may raiſe warre againſt the Kings people, as well as the King for his juſt defence; it is the way to make his people terrified with armies, and to avoid them as a ſerpent, and therefore it is a dangerous aſperſion, as I conceive.

With theſe he concluded, except ſome things that hee took, by way of artificiall inſinuation, to perſwade your Lordſhips, that it was dangerous to raiſe a Treaſon that had laine aſleep I know not how many hundred yeeres, and create a Treaſon. A ſtrange thing indeed it is, that a man ſhould be charged with a Treaſon for ſubverting the Law! A ſtrange thing that one ſhould be charged with Treaſon for killing a Juſtice ſitting in the ſeat of juſtice, and yet it ſhould bee no Treaſon to deſtroy King, and kingdome, and people, and all; all which are deſtroyed, if the Law be ſubverted.

And now having touched upon what he hath ſpoken, with your Lordſhips good favour, I ſhall crave leave to run the courſe I have propounded with my ſelfe, and that very briefly, that is, upon the whole matter to ſhew how far the evidence, produced on the Commons part, doth prove the charge.

My Lords, That laid to his charge is a deſign and purpoſe to ſubvert the fundamentall lawes of two kingdomes, and to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannicall government; not that he did effect it, but that he did intend it: for if he had done it, it had been t •• late to queſtion it, he had left no rule whereby to cal him to triall; but his intention and his endevour are his charge.

My Lords, how farre this is proved; if your Lordſhips be pleaſed to call to mind, the Articles, and the evidence produced on the Commons part, your Lordſhips will find, I beleeve, that his words, his councells, and his actions, doe ſufficiently prove his endevouring to deſtroy.

In the firſt Article, where my Lord of Strafford hath the firſt opportunitie offered him to put this endevour in execution (that is the firſt place of eminency amongſt his other places and commands, which, I take it, was his being made Preſident of the North) he is no ſooner there, but there be Inſtructions procured to enable him to proceed in that Court, almoſt in all cauſes; for a man can ſcarce think of a cauſe which is not comprehended within the Inſtructions obtained after his comming thither: but I ſhall put your Lordſhips in mind of two clauſes of the Inſtructions procured in the eighth yeer of this King, and after he was Preſident; that is, the clauſe of habeas Corpus, and Prohibitions; that no man ſhould obtaine a Prohibition, to ſtay any ſuit that ſhould be commenced before him, in the Councell of York; that if any man ſhould be impriſoned by any proceſſe out of that Court, he muſt have no Habeas corpus. A Prohibition is the only meanes to vindicate the eſtate of the ſubject, if it be queſtioned without authoritie. A Habeas corpus is the onely meanes to vindicate his liberty, if it be detained without law: but theſe doores muſt be ſhut againſt the Kings ſubjects, that if either they be queſtioned or reſtrained before him, there muſt be no reliefe. How far he could goe further I am to ſeek, there being no means for the ſubject to •• lieve himſelfe, if he be queſtioned for his eſtate with ••… authoritie; no meanes to redeeme himſelfe, if his perſon be impriſoned without law. And he had ſo incircled himſelfe about, that if the Judges ſhould fine the party that returnes not the Habeas corpus, according to law, there was a power, and a warrant, by the Inſtructions, to the Barons, to diſcharge the Officers of that fine. And now I referre it to your Lordſhips judgements, whether this be not to draw an arbitrary power to himſelfe.

For the execution of this power, it is true, it is proved to be before the inſtructions in the eighth yeere of the King; but then it riſeth the more in judgement againſt him; for your Lordſhips have heard how he went into a grave Judges chamber, blaming him for giving way to a Prohibition, granting Attachments againſt one that moved for a Prohibition; and though this was done before the Inſtructions were granted, yet the Inſtructions comming at the heeles of it, ſheweth his diſpoſition and reſolution more clearly, for he acts it firſt, and then procures this colour to protect it: and though he pretends there was no proofe, yet I muſt put your Lordſhips in mind, that when theſe things were in queſtion, concerning the apprehenſion of a Knight, by a Sergeant at Arms, he kneeles to his Majeſtie, that this defect might bee ſupplied, and this juriſdiction maintained, elſe he might goe to his owne Cottage.

And here being the juſt commencement of his greatneſſe, if you look to the ſecond, it followes, that at the publick Aſſizes he declared, that ſome were all for law, but they ſhould find the Kings little finger heavier then the loines of the law. He did not ſay it was ſo, but he infuſed it as much as he could into the hearts of the Kings people that they ſhould find it ſo; and ſo he reflects upon the King, and upon his people: The words are proved: And to ſpeak them in ſuch a preſence, and at ſuch a time, before the Judges and Countrey aſſembled, they were ſo dangerous, & ſo high expreſſions, of an intention to counſell the King, or act it himſelfe, to exerciſe an arbitrary government, above the weight of the law, as poſſibly could be expreſt by words. And this is proved by five witneſſes, and not diſproved, nor is any colour of diſproof offered, but only by Sir William Penniman, who ſaies, he heard other words, but not that he heard not theſe words: If hee doth, he muſt give me leave not to beleeve him; for five affirmations will weigh downe the proofe of a thouſand negatives.

He ſtaies not long in England with this power (though while he ſtaies you heare how he vexes the ſubject) but then he goes into Ireland; and as his authority increaſes, ſo he ampliates his deſigne; and no ſooner is he there, but the third Article is laid to his charge, That when the City and Recorder of Dublin, the principall City of Ireland, preſented the Mayor, upon a ſolemne ſpeech and diſcourſe concerning the lawes and liberties (as your Lordſhips know that is the ſubject matter of a ſpeech at ſuch preſentments, as when the Lord Mayor of London is preſented to the King) I beſeech your Lordſhips obſerve the words he then uſed, they were a conquered Nation, and that we lay not to his charge, but they were to be governed as the King pleaſes, their Charters were nothing worth, and bind but during the Kings pleaſure.

I am to ſeek, if I were to expreſſe an arbitrary power, and tyrannicall government, how to expreſſe it in fitter words, and more ſignificant terms than theſe, that the people ſhall be governed at the Kings will, that their Charters, the finewes and ligatures of their liberties, lands, and eſtates, ſhould be nothing worth, and bind no longer then the Kings pleaſure, ſpecially being ſpoken upon ſuch an occaſion, and the words proved by two or three witneſſes of credit and quality.

From thence we deſcend to Articles, that ſhew the execution of his purpoſe. There be three things a man enjoyes by the protection of the law; that is, his life, his liberty, and his eſtate. And now, my Lords, obſerve how he invades, and exerciſes a tyrannicall juriſdiction, and arbitrary government over them all three. I ſhall begin with the fifth Article, that is concerning my Lord Mountnorris and Denwit. My Lord Mountnorris, a Peere of that Realm, was ſentenced to death by procurement of my Lord of Strafford; who, howſoever hee pretends himſelfe not to be a Judge in the cauſe, yet how farre he was an Abettor, and Procurer, and Countenancer, and drawer on of that ſentence, your Lordſhips very well remember; he was ſentenced to death, without law, for ſpeaking words at a private Table, God knows, of no manner of conſequence in the world, concerning the treading upon my Lord of Straffords toe; the ſentence procured ſeven moneths after the words ſpoken, and contrary to law, and himſelfe being put in mind of it, my Lord Mountnorris deſiring to have the benefit of the law, and yet he refuſing it.

And then it was in time of peace, when all the Courts of juſtice were open, and to ſentence a man to death of that quality, my Lord of Strafford himſelfe being preſent, an author, a drawer on of it, makes it very hainous. Your Lordſhips remember this Article was fully proved, and though he pretends his authority by a letter from his Majeſty, I ſhall in due time give a full anſwer to that, ſo that it ſhall riſe up in judgement againſt him, to aggravate his offence, and that in a great meaſure.

Here he exerciſes a power over life, his excuſe was, that he procured a pardon for my Lord Mountnorris; but the power was exerciſed, and the tyranny appeared to be the more; he would first ſentence him to death, and then rejoyce in his power, that he might ſay, There remaines no more but my command to the Provoſt Marſhall to doe execution. To exerciſe a power over his life, and to abuſe him afterwards, is very high; but no thanks to him that the ſentence of death was not executed, it was the grace and goodneſſe of his Majeſty that would not ſuffer my Lord Mountnorris, a perſon of that eminence, to be put to death againſt law.

But the other was hanged, and, as appeares, againſt law; and though my Lord pretends the party was burnt in the hand, yet that was not proved, nor materiall: and for him to doe this in time of peace, when the Courts of juſtice were open, it argues a deſire in his breaſt to arrogate a power above law.

And in truth I may not omit ſome obſervations that my Lord made this day; he hopes his Majeſty would bee pleaſed to grant him a Pardon. I perceive hee harboured in his thoughts, that hee might hang the Kings ſubjects when he would, and then get a Pardon of courſe for it. The Lord bleſſe me from his juriſdiction.

My Lords, give me leave to goe back againe, here is power over the lives and liberties of the ſubject; but he exerciſed likewiſe a Tyrannicall power over his eſtate. Your Lordſhips may be pleaſed to remember the fourth Article, where he judges my Lord of Corks eſtate, in neither Church land, nor plantation land, and therefore had no pretence of a juriſdiction; for it is a lay fee divolved by Act of Parliament to the Crown; yet he deprives him of his poſſeſſion which he had continued for twenty nine yeeres, upon a paper petition, without rules of law. And whereas my Lord of Cork went about to redeeme himſelfe (the law being every mans inheritance, and that which he ought to enjoy) he tels him, hee will lay him by the heeles if he withdraw not his proces: and ſo when he hath judged him againſt an expreſſe Act of Parliament, and Inſtructions, and bound up a great Peere of the Realme, hee will not ſuffer him to redeeme that wrong, without a threat of laying him by the heeles, and he will not have Law nor Lawyers queſtion his Orders, and would have them all know, an Act of State ſhould be equall to an Act of Parliament: Which are words of that nature, that higher cannot be ſpoken, to declare an intention to proceed in an arbitrary way.

The next was in my Lord Mountnorris his caſe, and Rolſtone. And here I muſt touch my Lord with miſrepetition. Rolſtone preferred a petition to my Lord Deputy, my Lord Deputy himſelfe judges his eſtate, and deprived him of his poſſeſſion, though he cannot produce ſo much as one example, or precedent (though if he had, it would not have warranted an illegall action) but hee cannot produce a precedent, that ever any Deputy did determine concerning a mans private eſtate; and if hee hath affirmed it, he proved it not: ſome petitions have been preferred to him, but what they be non conſtat. But, though never any knew the Deputy alone to determine matters of land, yet he did it.

To the ſeventh Article we produce no evidence; but my Lord of Strafford cannot be content with that, but he muſt take upon him to make defence for that which is not inſiſted upon as a charge; but ſince he will doe ſo, I refer it to the book in print, where he determines the inheritance of a Nobleman in that Kingdome, that is, my Lord Dillon, by a caſe falſly drawne, and contrary to his conſent; and though he deprives him not of his poſſeſſion, yet he cauſes the Land to be meaſured out, and it is a danger that hangs over his head to this day. And had we not knowne that we had matter enough againſt my Lord of Strafford, this ſhould have riſen in judgement againſt him; but I had not mentioned it now, if he had not mentioned it himſelfe.

The eighth Article containes ſeverall charges, as that of my Lord Chancellour, how he impriſoned him upon a judgement before himſelfe and the Councell, how he inforced the Seale from him when hee had no authority, nay, though it were excepted by his Patent that hee ſhould no way diſpoſe of it; but he looked not to Authority, further then might make way to his will.

Another concerns the prime Earle of that Kingdome, my Lord of Kildare, whom he impriſoned, and kept cloſe priſoner, contrary to the Kings expreſſe command for his deliverance; and in his anſwer my Lord acknowledges it, but ſayes, that that command was obtained from the King upon a miſ-information.

Theſe things I would not have mentioned, if he had paſſed them over; but ſince he gives them in, give mee leave to mention, and ſay, we had a ground to put them into charge, and could have proved them, if there had been need, punctually and expreſly, and I beleeve little to my Lords advantage.

But Your Lordſhips I think doe remember my Lady Hibbots caſe, where the Lady Hibbots contracts with Thomas Hibbots for his inheritance for 2500. l. executes the contract by a Deed, and Fine levied, depoſits part of the money, and when a Petition was exhibited to the L. Deputy and Councell for the very eſtate, your Lordſhips remember how this came in judgement before my Lord Deputy; there was but a petition delivered, there was an anſwer made and all the ſuggeſtions of the petition denied; yet my Lord ſpake to Hibbots himſelfe, that was willing to accept the money, not to decline the way that he was in by petition; five hundred pound more will doe him no hurt to carry into England with him: and yet, without examination of a witneſſe, a Decree was made to deprive this Lady of her eſtate: And the purchaſing of this land by my Lord of Strafford was proved by two witneſſes, though not abſolutely, yet by confeſſion of Sir Robert Meredith, and others, whoſe names were uſed in truſt for my Lord of Strafford, and that it proved according to my Lord of Straffords prophecie; for the man had five hundred pounds gaine above the Contract with my Lady Hibbots:

But after, the lands were ſold for ſeven thouſand pound; ſo that the Lady Hibbots offence was her making of a bargain whereby to gain five hundred pounds; But there was no offence in my Lord, to make a bargaine for three thouſand pounds, and to gain foure thouſand pound preſently: this you ſee proved by Hibbots the party, and by maſter Hoy the ſon of the Lady Hibbots.

So that here is a determination of a cauſe before the Councell Table touching land, which was neither plantation, nor Church-land, without colour of the inſtructions, contrary to law, to ſtatute, to practice; and if this be not an exerciſing of an unlawfull juriſdiction over the Land and Eſtates of the ſubject, I know not what is.

In his anſwer to this caſe hee did open it (yet whether he miſtook or no I know not) that hee had a letter from the King, but he produces none in evidence; and that is another miſ-recitall. I am ſorry he ſhould miſrecite, and fix it upon the perſon of his Soveraigne in a caſe of this nature.

Now he falls more immediately upon the liberty of the ſubject, and that is by the Warrant mentioned in the ninth Article, to be iſſued to the Biſhop of Downe and Conner, whereby he gives power to him and his Officers to apprehend any of the Kings ſubjects that appeared not upon Proces out of his Eccleſiaſticall Courts, expreſly contrary to law; and your Lordſhips have heard how miſerably the Kings ſubjects were uſed by this warrant, as hath beene proved by a Gentleman of quality, Sir James Mountgomery: And howſoever hee pretends it was called in, it was three whole yeers in execution, before it was called in; and though he pretends his Predeceſſours did ordinarily grant Warrants of that nature, yet he proves no ſuch thing.

My Lord Primate was examined, and he ſayes, that Biſhop Mountgomery did tell him there was ſuch a Warrant, and one witneſſe more ſpeakes of one Warrant, and that is all the witneſſes produced, and that but to be a copy too. Your Lordſhips have heard how he exerciſes his juriſdiction and power over particulars, and that in a numerous manner; now your Lordſhips ſhall find it univerſall, and ſpread over the face of that Kingdome that was under his juriſdiction, and that is in the tenth Article, which concernes the Cuſtomes: where hee doth impoſe upon the Kings ſubjects a rate and taxe againſt law, and enforces them to pay it, or elſe puniſhes them for it; which is expreſly an arrogating to himſelfe of a juriſdiction above the law.

My Lords, in his anſwer he pretends that this is rather a matter of fraud than otherwiſe: in truth and ſo it is, and that a great one too. But as it is a fraud, a diſ-ſervice, and deceit to his Majeſtie, ſo it is likewiſe an exerciſe of a tyrannicall juriſdiction over his ſubjects: That it is a fraud to his Majeſtie it plainly appeares, for the King loſt exceedingly by it; whereas before the rent affoorded the King was 11050. l. there was improved by the new leaſe, that my Lord of Strafford took but 1350. l. and I beſeech your Lordſhips obſerve how much the King loſt by it; for my Lord had comprehended in his new leaſe the impoſt of wine, for which the King before that time received 1400. l. a yeere; and likewiſe the Cuſtome of London Durry, Colerane, and Knockfergus, for which the King had reſerved 1700. l. a yeere, beſides the moity of the ſeiſures: ſo here is 5000. l. that the King loſt of the old rent expreſly: and, if your Lordſhips pleaſe, obſerve the gain and benefit my Lord of Strafford made by it; in one yeere he and his ſharers received 39000. l. and in the laſt yeere 51000. l. and that expreſly proved upon two accounts: and if this be his dealing, where is his ſervice to the King in his pretence to advance the Cuſtomes?

It is true, he ſayes, the King hath five eighth parts, but it was but within theſe two yeeres, the King had it not before. And I would very gladly have heard whether the King received his part of an account of 55000. l. if he had received it, I beleeve wee ſhould have heard of it.

My Lords, there is ſomething more; here is a new impoſition on the Kings people without law, and yet I will doe my Lord of Strafford no injury: but I tell you how the proofe ſtands; It was a book of rates framed before he came to the forme, for the booke of rates was in March, and the date of his aſſignment is in April following; and therefore my Lord ſaith, it could not be for his benefit. But, my Lords, all this while my Lord of Strafford was in England, and in agitation for the procuring of it, and they come one upon the heeles of another, and I beſeech you obſerve cui bono; the book of rates was procured within a moneth of the Patent, but God knowes whether it were not within the compaſſe of his intentions to take the Patent; and therefore whether he were not the Inſtrument of raiſing rates, it reſts in your Lordſhips judgement, and all that heare me; I am ſure the benefit redounded to himſelfe: and ſo here is an arbitrary government in impoſing and forcing to pay, for that I deſire your Lordſhips to take with you; and hee might as well have raiſed nineteen ſhillings on a pound, as nine pence, or three pence, by the ſame rule of Law.

The next Article in number was the eleventh, and I would be glad my Lord had not mentioned it; it concernes the Pipe-ſtaves, wherein he pretends he did the King great ſervice, and that, he ſayes, was the reaſon of our paſsing over it: but that was not the reaſon; it had beene a foule buſineſſe if we had opened it; but having enough beſides, we made not uſe of it: for the ſubſtance of the proofes by multiplicity of witneſſes had beene, That the parties themſelves that bought the Pipe-ſtaves for foure pound odd money, were faine to ſell them to his Inſtruments for ſix pounds, and after to buy them againe for ten pounds, elſe there muſt be no licence to export them: But that I would not have mentioned if he had let it ſlip over.

I come to the twelfth Article, and that is concerning the Tobacco, wherein he pretends the Kings ſervice, and, if my memory faile me not, the deſire of the Parliament, that hee ſhould take this into his hands for the King.

My Lords, therein, under his favour, hee hath miſrecited the evidence, and ſpoken that hee cannot juſtifie; for he can ſhew no ſuch deſire of the Parliament. It is true, there was a deſire of the Parliament, that the King would be pleaſed to take his Cuſtomes into his hands for the advancement of his revenew, that it might goe to maintaine himſelfe, and he might not be abuſed, and others live by it; but to take the Tobacco into his hands, he never did, nor can produce a witneſſe to prove ſuch their deſire; and therefore, under favour, he fixes a wrong upon the Parliament, and injures your Lordſhips by his reciting that he neither did nor can make good; for there was no ſuch thing.

But if you obſerve the courſe he takes, he makes Proclamation to hinder the importing of Tobacco into Ireland; that if it be imported, it muſt be ſold to him at his own rate; and by this meanes he firſt hinders the liberty of the ſubject from doing what the law allowes him, and ſo takes on him an arbitrary power; and ſecondly, he ingroſſes this commodity to himſelfe, deceiving his Majeſtie, to whom he profeſſeth ſo much fidelity; for whereas there is 5000. l. rent to the King, he, by the computation of Merchants, receives neere 140000 l. a yeer: And becauſe their computations are not alwayes true, I doe not care if I allow him 40000. l. miſtaken, and then he will gaine neere 100000. l. ſo that if he intends the Kings benefit, it is wonder he told not his Majeſtie of the great profit that might thereby have riſen, and let him partake of it, as in juſtice he ſhould have done, according to the truſt repoſed in him: but you have heard of no ſuch matter. And ſurely my Lord of Strafford would not have omitted it, if it had been for his advantage, eſpecially in this preſence, where hee omits nothing to cleere himſelfe, or to inſinuate with his Majeſty.

Now I come to the thirteenth Article, the Article concerning Flax, which I know is freſh in your Lordſhips memories, and I beleeve will be ſo in the memories of the ſubjects of Ireland for many yeeres, how he ingroſſed it into his hands, and interrupted the trade of the poore people, whereby ſuch miſeries and calamities befell many of that Nation, that, as you have heard it proved, thouſands dye in ditches for want of bread to put in their mouths. And whereas he pretends that this was proved but by one witneſſe, and that man to be impriſoned, and of no credit, though he was his owne inſtrument; your Lordſhips remember Sir John Clatworthy his teſtimony, and anothers, and his own Warrant produced, and acknowledged here to juſtifie the execution of it, and ſuch a thing was thereby taken into his owne hands, that I profeſſe I never heard the like, that the poore people ſhould be conſtrained to uſe their owne as he pleaſed, and that pleaſing of himſelfe laid an impoſſibility on the people to execute his pleaſure, which was a bondage exceeding that of the Iſraelites under the Egyptians; for there was not laid ſo much upon the Children of Iſrael, but there was a poſſibility to performe; they might with much labour perchance get ſtubble to burn their brick, but the natives here muſt have a charge laid upon them without poſſibility to performe, and the diſobedience muſt coſt them no leſſe then the loſſe of their goods, which drew with it even the loſſe of their lives for want of bread. This was not proved by onely one witneſſe, but by many. And your Lordſhips remember the remonſtrance of that Parliament of Ireland, which declares it to a greater height than I have opened it.

The fifteenth Article is that of levying warre upon the Kings ſubjects, expreſly within the Statute of 25. E. 3. and 18. H. 6. Your Lordſhips have heard the Warrant proved by the party himſelfe, to whom it was directed; whereby power was given to lay ſouldiers upon any party, that did not obey my Lord of Straffords orders at the Councell Table, but not to circumſcribe him to a certain number; but the Seargeant at Arms, and his miniſters, might lay as many as they would. It is true, this warrant was not it ſelfe produced, but a copy was offered, which was not read; and therefore I will not offer it to be proved, but the party that executed the Warrant it ſelf, proves it to be under the hand and ſeale of my Lord of Strafford, he proves the expreſſe authority of it, which was to the effect I opened; three or foure more, who ſaw and read it, proved the ſame: and that it was under the hand and ſeale of my Lord of Strafford, that accordingly it was executed upon divers of the Kings ſubjects; it was proved by three witneſſes expreſly in the point, how by colour of this Warrant the Sergeant at Armes, and his Officers, ſent ſouldiers to lye in the houſes and lands of the Kings ſubjects; how the owners were thereby forced out from their own habitation; how their goods were waſted and devoured, their corn and victuals eaten up, and the ſouldiers never left them, as long as any part of their eſtates remained to maintain them.

My Lord of Straffords defence is, that it hath been uſed before his time in Ireland; wherein hee hath againe miſ-recited; for he did not offer a proofe, nor a particle of a proofe, that ever any man did know ſouldiers laid upon any party for refuſing to appeare to a Warrant, or for other contempt at Councell Table, before himſelfe did it; but hee offered to prove, that formerly ſouldiers were ſent against Rebels, and that after they were declared to be Rebels, and juſtly too; and he proved an uſe and cuſtome to force men to pay the contribution mony due to the King, but that was by conſent of the people, who granted a contribution of 20000. l. a yeere, for encreaſe of the Kings revennue; and that it might not be upon record in the Exchequer, and ſo claimed as due in time to come, they conſented that ſouldiers ſhould be laid upon them that refuſed it; and the word (conſent) is within the Statute of 18. H. 6. Againe, did he prove all manner of rents were levied by ſouldiers? no ſuch thing; but ſuch rents as were deſigned for payment of the Army: he proved by Sir Arthur Terringham the laying of ſouldiers once for the payment of a ſumme of mony; but ſir Arthur being demanded whether it were the Kings rents, or comprehended within the ſame generall rule, he could make no anſwer thereunto.

Your Lordſhips remember, he ſayes he did not know it, and therefore probably it was the Kings rents; and doubtleſſe it was ſo.

But if he had produced preſidents, it could not be an authority for Treaſon, that if people did not appeare to his orders, he muſt levie warre againſt the Kings ſubjects; and for his extenuation of the warre, that the ſame was of no great danger, there being not above five or ſix ſouldiers layd at a time. I would to God the people oppreſſed by it, had cauſe to undervalue it: I am ſure foure or ſix Musketiers are as ſtrong to oppreſſe a man as foure thouſand; ſo the matter of fact is ſtrongly and expreſly proved. Beſides, though there came not above foure or five to a houſe, yet the authority given to the Sergeant was generall; he might have brought more if hee had liſted: and in truth hee brought as many as the eſtate of the party would maintain.

And as to the not producing of the Warrant, I have already anſwered it. If it were in the caſe of a Deed wherin men call for witneſſes, it were ſomething; but God forbid that the Treaſon ſhould be gone, and the Traitor not queſtionable, if his warrant can be once put out of the way.

The next Article which is laid to his charge is, for iſſuing out a Proclamation, and Warrant of reſtraint, to inhibit the Kings ſubjects to come to the Fountaine, their Soveraigne, to deliver their complaints of their wrongs and oppreſſions. Your Lordſhips have heard how hee hath exerciſed his juriſdiction, and now he raiſes a battery to ſecure and make it ſafe. If he doe wrong, perhaps the complaint may come to the gracious eares of a King, who is ready to give reliefe, and therefore he muſt ſtop theſe cries, and prevent theſe meanes, that hee may goe on without interruption. And to that end he makes propoſitions here, that the Kings ſubjects in Ireland ſhould not come over to make complaint againſt Miniſters of State, before an addreſſe firſt made to himſelfe. It is true, hee makes a faire pretence and ſhew for it, and had juſt cauſe of approbation, if he had intended what he pretended; But as ſoon as he came into Ireland, what uſe made hee of it? he ingroſſes the proceedings of almoſt all the Courts of Juſtice into his owne hands, and ſo pre-poſſeſſes the King by a colourable propoſition, and prevents their comming over before they had made their addreſſe to himſelfe, and then he becomes the wrong doer, and iſſues Proclamations for the hindering of the Kings ſubjects to ſeeke redreſſe without his leave; which is as great a proofe of his deſigne, and as great an injury to the people, governed under a gracious Prince, as a heart can conceive. And what his intention was in exhibiting this propoſition, it will appeare in the ſentence of a poor man, one David, who was cenſured, and moſt heavily fined for comming over into England to proſecute complaint againſt my Lord of Strafford. It is true, that this was not the cauſe expreſſed, but this was the truth of the matter. Your Lordſhips remember a clauſe in the order at Councell Boord, whereby is ſet forth the cauſe wherefore the party is not ſentenced, which I never ſaw in an order before, nor ſhould now, but that my Lord foreſaw there was danger in it, that he might be charged in this place for the fact; and therefore puts in negatively why the party was not cenſured. Clauſula inconſulta inducit ſuſpitionem. And how defends he this Article? he ſayes, his Predeceſſours iſſued Proclamations to hinder the Kings ſubjects from going over, leſt they ſhould joyne with O Neale and Tirconnell beyond ſea, and ſo it might be dangerous to the State; but becauſe they may joyn with Forreiners, ſhall they therefore not come to the King to make juſt complaint? what this argument is, I referre to your Lordſhips judgments.

Then he pretends a former preſident, affirming that the like Inſtructions were given to my Lord of Faulkland; but was there any, that none ſhould come to their Soveraigne to make their juſt appeale if injured? Surely there was never any ſuch Inſtruction before, and I hope never will be againe.

The next Article is the nineteenth: And now when hee had ſo plentifully exerciſed his tyranny over the lives, the liberty, and the eſtates of the Kings ſubjects. A man would think he could goe no further; but ſee a Tyranny exerciſed beyond that, and that is over the Conſciences of men: hitherto hee dealt with the outward man, and now hee offers violence to the inward man, and impoſes an Oath upon the Kings ſubjects, and ſo exerciſeth a tyranny over the Conſciences of men.

And ſetting aſide the matter of the Oath, if he hath authority and power to impoſe ſuch an Oath as he ſhall frame, he may by the ſame power impoſe any Oath to compell Conſciences.

He pretends a Warrant from his Majeſtie to doe it, but the Kings Miniſters are to ſerve the King according to law; and I dare be bold to ſay (and we have good reaſon to thank God for it) if any of the Kings Miniſters tell him that any Command he gives is againſt law, there is no doubt but in his goodneſſe and piety hee will withdraw his Command, and not enforce execution; and therefore if there were an errour, the King is free, and the Miniſters to be juſtly charged with it.

But there was no Command from the King to compell and enforce them to take the Oath by the power of the Star-chamber, to commit them to priſon, to impoſe heavie fines, and tyrannize over them; all which he did in the caſe of Steward.

And now one would have thought hee had acted his part, when he had acted as much as lay in his own power; and yet he goes beyond this, he was not content to corrupt all the ſtreames (which was not a diverting of the courſe, as he ſpoke in his anſwer; for he not onely turned the courſe of the water, but changed the nature of it, converted it into poyſon, a legall and juſt proceeding into a Tyrannicall and Arbitrary government, which is not turning, but corrupting of the cleere and chriſtall ſtreams to bitterneſſe and death.) But yet the Fountaine remains cleere, and perhaps when his hand is taken off, you ſhall have the ſtreames run as pure and uncorrupt as ever they did. This is it troubles him, remove but this obſtacle, and the work is perfect; and therefore now he will goe about to corrupt the ſtreames: if hee can but infuſe his poyſon into the Kings heart, which is the Fountain, then all is done; and now he attempts that, and approacheth the Throne, endeavours to corrupt the Kings goodneſſe with wicked counſels; but God be thanked he finds too much piety there to prevaile.

And therefore the next Article is that, that charges him to be an Incendiary to the warre betwixt the two Kingdomes: and now I ſhall be bold to unfold the myſterie, and anſwer his objection: To what purpoſe ſhould he be an Incendiary? were it not better to enjoy his eſtate in peace and quietneſſe, then have it under danger of a warre? Now your Lordſhips ſhall have the Riddle diſcovered.

The firſt thing hee doth after his comming into England is, to incenſe the King to a warre, to involve two Nations, of one faith, and under one Soveraigne, to imbrue their hands in each others blood, and to draw Armies into the field.

That he was this Incendiary, give me leave to revive your Lordſhips memories with the proofes which will make it plaine; and firſt give me leave to note unto your Lordſhips, that his Majeſtie, with much wiſedome, did in July 1639. make a pacification with his ſubjects, and even at the very heeles of this pacification, when all things were at peace, upon the tenth of September, which was the next moneth but one, your Lordſhips remember the ſentence of Steward in the Star-chamber of Ireland, for not taking the oath; your Lordſhips may call to mind the language my L. of Strafford was pleaſed to uſe of the Scots: when all was in quietneſſe, he then calls them no better then Traitours and Rebels, if you will beleeve what the witneſſe teſtifies, whom my Lord is pleaſed to call a School-maſter: And truly admit hee were ſo, becauſe he is a School-maſter, therefore not to be beleeved, is a non ſequitur. And another witneſſe, one Loftus, ſpeaks to the words, though not in the ſame manner; but, I ſay, the tenth of September, when things were at peace and reſt, when the King was pleaſed to be reconciled to them by that pacification, what boiled in his breaſt then to the breaking forth of ſuch expreſſions, I know not, unleſſe it were an intention to be an Incendiary.

My Lords, I muſt ſay and affirme, and he hath not proved it to the contrary, that all this while (I am confident) there was not any breach of the pacification on either ſide, and it lyes on his part to prove there was: But the Parliament of Scotland then ſitting, and making preparation for their demands in purſuance of the Articles of pacification, hee, comming over into England in September, immediately upon the pacification, anſwers, That he found things ſo diſtracted here that it was fit the Scots ſhould be reduced by force, if they could not be otherwiſe: yet no breach appeares, no war was denounced, there was no intention of a warre: But ſee what harboured in his breaſt all the while?

The fourth of December following, my Lord Traquaire made his relation to the Councell of the Scots proceedings: and all this while there was no Demands brought by the Scots themſelves, nor reaſon of their Demands brought by others, though they were prepared; yet you have heard his advice was for an offenſive warre, and that the Demands were a juſt cauſe of the war. And though he pretends hee ſaid no more then what the reſt of the Lords of the Councell concurred with him in, I will joyne in iſſue with him in that, and if ſome of your Lordſhips be not ſatisfied, you have many noble Lords among you, from whom you may be ſatisfied that it is not ſo; I am ſure he proves it not. It is true, in the propoſition of the Demands ſome of the Lords of the Councell did ſay, that theſe Demands hypothetically, if the Scots did not give ſatisfaction by their reaſons, were a juſt cauſe of warre; but not any Lord of the Councell was of opinion, that the very Demands, poſitively, without hearing of the reaſons, were a juſt cauſe of warre, but himſelfe; and I beleeve the noble Lords of the Councell their Conſciences can tell them, and I beleeve will deliver it to the reſt of the Peeres, that I ſpeake truth.

For the offenſive warre he pretends a concurrence of the reſt, but it was diſproved; many were for it upon theſe termes, if they did not give reaſons, and ſhew juſt cauſe for their Demands; and many were againſt an offenſive warre upon any terms, and therefore herein he fixes that upon the Lords of the Councell, that hee cannot make good.

All this while his intentions are diſcovered by a matter precedent, but after the breach he diſcovers his anger further towards the Scottiſh Nation, and makes it his deſigne to incenſe the King to this warre.

My Lords, hee is not at an end yet, for he confeſſes himſelfe that hee adviſed the King to call a Parliament; and now I come to his work of merit, but it was to his deſtruction, and ſerves to prove this Article directly; for to what purpoſe was this Parliament called? Exitus acta probat; it was no ſooner ſet, but within three weekes a propoſition is made for ſupply towards a warre againſt the Scots: who was the cauſe of calling the Parliament? himſelfe; and therefore who was the cauſe of this propoſition but himſelfe? and ſo the calling of the Parliament is a concurring evidence of his being an Incendiary to put on the warre; and it ſhall appeare anon abſolutely, that he was the occaſion of it, though he thinkes there be no proofe of it.

Did not he goe over into Ireland, and by his ſolicitation there, Subſidies were granted by the Parliament, onely to maintaine this warre, and to ſhew their ingagement in it? and who was the occaſion of drawing them on, I referre to your Lordſhips judgements, by the circumſtances precedent.

Your Lordſhips heard his good opinion of the Scots, when he began to diſcourſe with the Citizens touching money, and their affording of the King ſupply, and ſeiſing the mint, by giving them no better expreſsions than Rebels; for, ſaith he, you are more forward to help the Rebels, than to pay the King his owne: I know not who hee meant, but certainly the Scots were in his thoughts; ſo that from the beginning he incenſed the warre againſt them: firſt, hee exclaimed againſt them during time of peace. He alledges in his anſwer, that things were found in ſuch diſtraction, that it was fit the Scots ſhould be reduced by force he gave advice precipitately without hearing the reaſons, and not concurrent to the Councell, for an offenſive warre; and putting all together, I referre it to your Lordſhips judgement who is the Incendiary; for how can it be proved more cleerely, unleſſe it ſhould appeare under his hand and ſeale, proved by two or three witneſſes?

Now, my Lords, how comes this to be his deſigne? here the myſtery comes to be unfolded. Having thus incenſed to the warre, and ingaged the King to the uttermoſt, and having a Parliament now diſſolved without ſupply, he ſets up an Idol of his owne creation, as a means to draw on his deſigne, and that was neceſsity; neceſſity is it that muſt enforce the King: what to doe? to levie money, to uſe his Prerogative, to raiſe ſupplies upon his ſubjects without their conſent, againſt their will, neceſsity muſt be his argument, and this warre muſt be thē occaſion of that neceſsity, and without that he cannot ſuggeſt to the Kings eare, or adviſe this neceſſity, till this bee brought to paſſe.

And now he hath brought it to paſſe, he began in the one and twentieth, two and twentieth, and three and twentieth Article, to perſwade the King that neceſsity hath ſurprized him, by the Parliaments deſerting of him; that the Parliament had for ſaken the King, in denying ſupply, and having tried the affections of his people, hee was looſe, and abſolved from all rules of government, and had an Army in Ireland which he might employ, to reduce this Kingdome.

That he ſpake theſe words to the King, part is proved by two concurrent witneſſes, that is, that having tried the affections of his people, he was now looſe, and abſolved from all rules of government; which words are proved by two witneſſes of eminent quality, that is, my Lord of Northumberland, and Sir Henry Vane: and truly, howſoever my Lord in his ſpeech pretends, that the moſt materiall words are proved but by one witneſſe (it ſeeming that hee held it not a materiall charge, that he counſelled the King that he was abſolved from all rules of government) for my part, if your Lordſhips be ſatisfied thoſe words were proved, I could willingly ſatisfie my owne Conſcience in it, and make no great matter to quit the reſt; for I know not how he could expreſſe it in higher termes, then that the King was abſolved from rules of government, for then he might doe what he would.

It is true, the latter words, touching the Iriſh Army, are expreſly proved but by one witneſſe, maſter Secretary Vane; but are fortified againe with ſuch circumſtances as make up more then one, yea, more than two other witneſſes, if your Lordſhips will have the patience to have it repreſented, as it is proved.

For howſoever it be ſlighted by him, if your Lordſhips will call to mind the words of Sir George Radcliffe, his boſome friend (to whom he had contributed without queſtion his advice in all cauſes) the ſaid Sir George Radcliffe expreſſed it before, and told ſome of his friends (ſuppoſing that he never ſhould be called in queſtion, and that the power of my Lord of Strafford had been enough to protect any thing he had done, and out of the aboundance of the heart his mouth ſpake) the King muſt now want no money; if he did, no body would pity him, now he had his ſword in his hand.

Sir Robert King proves it ſo. My Lord Renula diſcovered the ſmoake of the fire that hee had juſt cauſe to ſuſpect, and on good grounds, I am ſure; and if the Commons of England had not juſt cauſe to ſuſpect him (as I beleeve he is convinced they had good cauſe) what is the reaſon this ſuſpition ſhould bee entertained at that time, my Lord of Strafford being not then queſtioned for it? and yet my Lord Renula ſhould ſay, Shall wee turne our ſwords upon our owne bowels? ſhall we bring this Army to turne the points of our blades upon that Nation from whence we were all derived? and that was before any conference with maſter Secretary Vane.

Sir William Penniman himſelfe, his owne witneſſe and friend, ſayes, at York, before my Lord of Strafford was queſtioned, that there was a common fame of bringing the Army into England, and there is ſomething in that ſurely; and after all this, to produce one witneſſe that expreſly proves the very words ſpoken in terminis, as they bee charged, if your Lordſhips put the whole together, ſee whether there be not more then one witneſſe.

And, under favour, my Lord Cottington, if you call to mind his teſtimony, I muſt juſtifie, he did declare, that he heard my Lord of Strafford tell the King, that ſome reparation was to be made to the ſubjects property; which muſt inferre, he had adviſed an invaſion upon the property; elſe by no good coherence ſhould a reparation bee made. And that he teſtifies this, I muſt affirme, and moſt here will affirme it; and I think your Lordſhips well remember it: and that is an addition to it; for if your Lordſhips caſt your eye upon the interrogatory adminiſtred to my Lord Admirall, and my Lord Cottington, that very queſtion is asked; ſo that his owne Conſcience told him, he had adviſed ſomething to invade upon the people, when he adviſed to a reſtitution after things ſhould be ſettled: and ſo I referre it to your Lordſhips conſideration, whether here bee not more then one witneſſe by farre.

It is true, he makes objections to leſſen this teſtimony; firſt, that this Army was to be landed at Ayre in Scotland, and not here; and this was declared to Sir Thomas Lucas, maſter Slings by, Sir William Penniman, and others. Secondly, that others that were preſent, when the words are ſuppoſed to be ſpoken, did not heare any ſuch words.

For the firſt: perhaps the Army might be originally intended for Scotland, and yet this is no contradiction but he might intend it afterwards for England; ſurely this is no Logick, that becauſe it was intended for one place, it could never be intended for another place; ſo his allegarion may be true, and the charge ſtand true likewiſe.

Beſide that it was intended orriginally for Scotland, what proofe makes hee? Hee told ſeverall perſons of the deſigne, but I will be tryed by himſelfe, he told ſome, it was for Scotland, he told others it was for England; and why you ſhould beleeve his telling on one ſide, more then on the other ſide I know not; though he pretends a reaſon of his ſeverall allegations that the world ſhould not know his deſigne, but if you will not beleeve him one way, why ſhould he be beleeved the other way? and if not the other way, why the firſt way?

For the ſecond, ſeverall perſons were preſent when the words were ſpoken touching the Iriſh Armie, and they were examined, and remember not the words; but one man may heare, though twentie doe not heare; and this is no contradiction at all: For thoſe perſons whom he examined, the Lord Treaſurer, Marqueſſe Hambleton, my Lord Cottington, did not heare the words that are proved by two witneſſes, concerning the Kings being looſe, and abſolved from rules of government: and if they did not heare thoſe words, no marvaile they did not heare the other: and therefore that which hee himſelfe pretends to be a convincing teſtimonie, is nothing at all; ſo that his objections are clearely taken away, and the ſingle teſtimonie fortified with teſtimonies that make above one witneſſe, and ſo the words are fully proved.

But to fortifie the whole, I ſhall handle all theſe Articles together, This deſigne to ſubvert the Law, and to exerciſe an arbitrary power above the Law in this kingdome, will (upon the proofes putting them altogether, and not taking them in pieces as my Lord of Strafford hath done) appeare to have been harboured in his thoughts, and ſettled in his heart long before it was executed.

You ſee what his Counſels were, That the King having tryed the affections of his people, was looſe and abſolved from all rules of government, and might doe every thing that power would admit, and his Majeſties had tryed all wayes, and was refuſed, and ſhould be acquitted of God and man, and had an army in Ireland, wherewith if hee pleaſed he might reduce this kingdome: ſo there muſt be a triall of his people, for ſupply that is denyed, which muſt be interpreted, a defection by refuſall, and this refuſall muſt give advantage of neceſsity, and this neceſsity muſt be an advantage to uſe his Prerogative againſt the rule of the Law, and conſent of the People; this is his advice. which ſhewes that this very thing that hapned did harbour in his thoughts long before the breach of the Parliament, and the occaſion of the Armie.

Your Lordſhips have heard it confeſſed by himſelfe, That before this laſt advice, he had adviſed the calling of a Parliament: to the Parliament a propoſition of twelve Subſidies was made for ſupply, and (which may be ſpoken with great aſſurance) before they had conſulted, or given any reſolution to that propoſition, the Parliament was diſſolved, upon a ſuppoſal that the ſupply was denied. Now that this was predeſigned by my L. of Strafford himſelfe, I beſeech you obſerve theſe things following, that is, the words in the two and twentieth Article, That his Majeſtie was firſt to try the Parliament, and if that did not ſupply him, then he would ſerve the King any other way.

His words are proved by Mr. Treaſurer, That if the Parliament ſupplyed him not, hee would ſerve him any other way; and this is before the Parliament ſet: now if your Lordſhips heare the proofes of my Lord Primate (which my Lord of Strafford ſlights taking it ſingly) My Lord Primate before the Parliament was called, when my Lord of Strafford was in Ireland, and not yet come into this kingdome, teſtifies, my Lords, ſaying, That if the Parliament will not ſupply his Majeſtie, the King was acquitted before God and Man, if hee tooke ſome other courſe to ſupply himſelfe, though againſt the will of the Subjects. I beſeech your Lordſhips obſerve how he prophecies theſe things muſt come to paſſe, and adviſed them accordingly.

My Lord Conway teſtifies, that before the Parliament ſate, my Lord of Strafford ſaid, that if the Parliament would not ſupply his Majestie, the King was acquitted before God and Man, if hee tooke another courſe to ſupply himſelfe, though it were againſt the will of the ſubject, and he doubts not but the Parliament would give, what? twelve Subſidies: and your Lordſhips very well remember, twelve were propounded; but I beſeech you obſerve the coherence of all: the Parliament muſt be called, they muſt be tryed, if they deny there is neceſſity, and this neceſſity is a warrant for the King to proceed; ſo that my Lord of Strafford muſt be judged to be either a Prophet, or to have this deſigne before hand in his thoughts.

Now the Parliament being broken before anſwer to the demand given, he vents his counſell in the three and twentieth Article, and how far it is proved your Lordſhips have heard. Now comes the Bullion to be ſeized, the Copper money to be adviſed, and now comes he to tell the King that the Aldermen of London muſt be put to fine, and ranſome, and laid by the heeles, and no good would be done till ſome of them bee hanged, ſo you heare his advice; I beſeech your Lordſhips obſerve what ſucceſſe this advice tooke; foure Aldermen were instantly committed, and then the Councell of the three and twentieth Article is fomented.

Firſt, he foments the warre, then there is a neceſſitie, the defection of the Parliament muſt ſet the King looſe from rules of government, and now ſee whether the occaſion of the warre, the calling of the Parliament, the diſſolving of it, be not adequate to what he propounded to himſelfe, namely, to ſet up an arbitrary government.

Your Lordſhips remember how freſh my Lord of Briſtowes memorie is, touching my Lord of Straffords opinion upon the diſſolution of the Parliament, how he declared unto my Lord of Briſtow inſtantly within three or fower dayes after, That the King was not to be maſtered by the frowardneſſe of his people, or rather of ſome particular perſons; and your Lordſhips remember Sir George Wentworths words ſpoken the very day of diſſolving the Parliament: which may be very well applyed as a concurrent proof to his intentions of bringing the Army into England. He was my Lords owne brother, that knew much of his Councell, and his words are, That the Engliſh Nation would never be well, till they were conquered over againe. So my Lords put all together, if he declared his owne intentions, if actions, in executing of this tyrannicall, and arbitrary power, if Counſels of as dangerous conſequence, in as high a ſtrain as can be, be not a ſufficient evidence to prove an intention, and deſire, to ſubvert the Law, I know not what can prove ſuch an Interpretation: and now I referre it to your Lordſhips judgements, whether here be not a good proofe of the Article laid to his charge.

My Lord in the ſeven and twentieth Article hee is charged with levying of warre upon the Kings people, by forcing them in Yorkſhire to pay money: to prove they were ſo forced, you have heard by two witneſſes, that Sergeant Major Yaworth, by Musketeers, fower together in the towne, and one by one out of the towne, did compell them to pay the fortnights contribution, elſe they were to ſerve in perſon: That hee did this by warrant is likewiſe confeſſed by Sir William Penyman; and whether this were an authoritie derived from, or commanded by my Lord of Strafford, that is the queſtion; and, my Lords, it is plainly proved, that it was commanded by my Lord of Strafford, for Sr. William Penyman himſelfe being examined, alledged that the warrant was made in purſuance of the relation, and direction made by my Lord of Strafford.

Your Lordſhips heard what my Lord of Strafford did ſay before hand, as is proved by two witneſſes, (Sir William Ingram and Mr. Cholmeley) that this money ſhould be paid, or levied on the ſubjects goods; Then his declaration to Sir William Penyman, (in purſuance of which he made his warrant) That it was the aſſent of the Lords of the great Councell, that this money ſhould be levied; and taking all together, whether it fixes it not upon him to be the authour and inſtrument, it reſts in your judgements in point of fact: and ſo I ſuppoſe the ſeven and twentieth Article reſts on him, and ſo I ſhall conclude the evidence produced on the behalfe of the Commons.

And now give me leave to put your Lordſhips in mind of ſome evidences offered by my Lord of Strafford himſelfe in his anſwer, and in the paſſages of his defence, for his clearing and juſtification, but tending directly to his condemnation.

I will enter upon ſome paſſages he mentioned to day, and often before When he is charged with invading the eſtates of the Peeres of the kingdome of Ireland, and determining them, upon paper petitions in an arbitrary way your Lordſhips have heard him ſpeake it before, and repeat it this day, that he did it out of compaſsion for the more expeditious proceeding on behalfe of the poore, againſt theſe mighty But then, my Lords, I beſeech you compare ſome other part of his proceedings. Your Lordſhips remember the buſineſſe of the Flax, which concernes the poore wholly and univerſally; and if compaſsion had beene the rule and direction of his actions towards the poore ſurely this would have beene a juſt cauſe to have commiſerated them in this caſe; but hee exerciſed his power over them, and over them wholly, and over them univerſally: and therefore it ſhewes, it is not his compaſsion to the poore, nor reſpect to the rich, or mighty, that will any way reſtraine or obſtruct his wayes, to his owne will. And therefore you may ſee what truth there is in his anſwer, by comparing one part of the charge with another, when the buſineſſe of the Flax brought that calamity upon the Kings Subjects, that thouſands of them periſhed for lacke of bread, and dyed in ditches.

Secondly, your Lordſhips have often heard him uſe a Rhetoricall inſinuation, wondering that he ſhould be charged with words, and they ſtrained ſo high as to be made treaſon, to queſtion his life, and poſterity, though the words might be ſpoken unadviſedly, or in diſcourſe, or by chance: your Lordſhips remember the fifth Article touching his proceedings againſt my Lord Mount-Norris where words were ſpoken in an ordinary diſcourſe at dinner, and ſlight ones, God knowes, of no conſequence at all, ſuch as another man would ſcarce have harkened after, and yet my Lord extends them to the taking away of my Lord Mount-Norris his life; gets a ſentence of death againſt him, and that againſt Law, with a high hand, in ſuch a manner, as I thinke your Lordſhips have not heard the like; and therefore, I beſeech you, compare one part of his anſwer with another, and ſee how ready he is to make uſe of any thing that may excuſe himſelfe; and yet when he comes to act his power, you ſee his exerciſe of it.

You have heard how hee magnifies his zeale for advancing the Kings benefit, & revennue, and his care of his ſervice, and would ſhelter and protect himſelfe under it, to juſtifie an exorbitant action but if your Lordſhips call to mind the buſineſſe of Cuſtomes for Tobacco, (which in truth were the Kings right and due, and a great profit was thereby advanced; and he truſted to advance it.) The King muſt looſe of his former rents in the caſe of Cuſtome, and received a ſmall rent in the caſe of Tobacco, my Lord himſelfe in the meane time imburſing ſuch vaſt ſummes of money: where is then the diſcharge of his truſt? where is his care to advance the Kings rents to encreaſe his revennue? Compare that part of his anſwer with this, and ſee what credit is to be given to his affirmation.

My Lords, throughout the paſſages of his diſcourſe he inſinuates, (and never more then this day) with the Peeres of the Realme, magnifying them almoſt to Idolatrie; and yet my Lords, when he was in his kingdome, in Ireland, and had power over them, what reſpect ſhewed he then to the Peeres of the kingdome, when he judged ſome to death, trampled upon others in miſery, committed them to priſon and ſeized on their eſtates; where then was the Peerage he now magnifies?

And to ſhew it was an inſinuation for his owne advantage, you may remember, when there was an unlawfull Act to be committed, that is, the levying of money in the North, what regard had he then to the Peeres of the kingdome, when hee comes to juſtifie and boulſter up high treaſon it ſelfe, under the name and authoritie of the great Councell, where moſt of the Peers of the Realm then were? and ſo by this time I know what credit your Lordſhips give to his words ſpoken, when he lyes under your mercy, and power: But what doe I ſpeake of the Peers of the kingdome, and his uſing of them? My Lords, he ſpared not his Soveraigne, his Majeſtie in his whole defence; for being charged with offences of a high nature, hee juſtifies thoſe offences under the pretence, and under the authoritie of his Majeſtie, our gracious King and Soveraigne, even murder it ſelfe, in the caſe of Denwit, and my Lord Mountnorris. Treaſon it ſelfe, in the fifteenth Article by a command in Ireland, and in the ſeven and twentieth, by a pretended authoritie from his Majeſtie in the face of his people; hee juſtifies my Lord Mountnorrice his ſentence by a letter from his Majeſtie, Denwits ſentence by a Commiſsion from his Majeſtie, and hee read three or fower clauſes to that purpoſe.

My Lords, my Lord of Strafford doth very well know (and if he doth not know it, I have a witneſſe to produce againſt him, which I wil not examine, but refer it to his owne Conſcience, that is, the petition of right;) that the Kings ſervants are to ſerve him according to law, and no otherwiſe: he very well knew if an unlawfull act be committed, ſpecially to a degree of Treaſon and Murder, the Kings authority and warrant produced, is no juſtification at all. So then, my Lords, to mention the Kings name, to juſtifie an unlawfull act in that way, can doe him no good; and his owne underſtanding knowes, it may doe the King harme, if wee had not ſo gracious a King, that no ſuch thing can doe harme unto.

But, my Lords, to produce the Kings warrant to juſtifie his actions under his Patent and Command, what is it elſe, but ſo farre as in him lies, in the face of his people, to raiſe a cloud, and exhale a vapour? to interpoſe betwixt the King and his ſubjects? whereby the ſplendour of his glory and juſtice cannot bee diſcovered to his people.

My Lords, what is it elſe, when the people make complaint againſt the Miniſters (that ſhould execute juſtice) of their oppreſſion, and ſlavery, and bondage? For the Miniſter, when he is queſtioned, to juſtifie this under the Kings authority, what is it, I ſay, but, as much as in that Miniſter lies, to fix this offence, to faſten this oppreſſion upon the King himſelf, to make it to be beleeved, that the occaſion of theſe their groanes proceeded from his ſacred Majeſtie? yet God be thanked the ſtrength of that Sunne is powerfull enough to diſpell theſe vapours, and to diſperſe the cloud that hee would have raiſed; but in the meane time my Lord is nothing to bee excuſed.

My Lords, he may pretend zeale to the Kings ſervice, and affection to his honour, but give me leave not to beleeve it, ſince, when he is queſtioned by all the Kings people, and in the face of his people, and offences laid to his charge, which himſelfe now confeſſes to be againſt law; he ſhould juſtifie it under the Kings authority; that ſavours not of a good ſervant: I will ſay no more.

My Lords, he is charged with exerciſing of a tyrannicall power over the Kings people, and in his defence your Lordſh ps have often heard (and I may not omit it) that he ſhelters himſelf under the protection of the Kings Prerogative, though he be charged with tyranny of the higheſt nature that may be: ſee then how foule and malignant an aſpect this hath. My Lords, what is it elſe, but to endeavour, as much as in him lies, to infuſe into the Kings heart an apprehenſion, that his Prerogative is ſo bottomleſſe a gulfe, ſo unlimited a power, as is not to be comprehended within the rules of law, or within the bounds of government? for elſe why ſhould he mention the Prerogative, when he is charged to exceed the law? What is it elſe, but, as farre as in him lyes, to make the people beleeve (for I may not forget the words hee hath uſed) by his magnifying of the Prerogative, that it hath a ſpeciall ſtamp of Divinity on it, and that the other part of the government that God pleaſes to put into the Kings hands, had not that ſtamp upon it? as if anything done by one, was to be juſtified by authority derived from heaven, but the other not.

Theſe expreſſions your Lordſhips remember; and I may not omit to put your Lordſhips in mind of them; and I can expound them no otherwiſe, then, as much as in him lies, to make the ſubject beleeve and apprehend that which is the buckler and defence of his protection, to be the two edged ſword of his deſtruction, according to the doctrine he preached; and that that which is the Sanctuary of their liberty, is the ſnare and engine of their ſlavery. And thus he hath caſt a bone of contention, as much as in him lay, betwixt King and people, to make the ſubjects loath that glorious flower of his Crowne, by fixing a jealouſie in them, that it may bee a meanes of their bondage and ſlavery.

But there is ſo much piety and goodneſſe in the Kings heart, that I hope, upon faire underſtanding, there will be no ſuch occaſion; but no thankes to the party, that ſo much adva •• ed the prerogative in the caſe and condition he ſtands in, to juſtifie that which is laid to his charge of high treaſon.

My Lords, I beſeech you give me leave; there is no greater ſafety to Kings and people, then to have the throne incircled with good Counſellers; and no greater danger to both, then to have it encompaſſed with wicked and dangerous ones; and yet I beſeech you call to mind how hee hath attempted to deprive the ſubject of all meanes to diſcover this danger, by inſinuating to your Lordſhips, what a dangerous thing it were, if Counſellers ſhould be called in queſtion for giving of counſell; for who then (ſaith he) would be a Counſeller? where is your ſafeguard? where is the Kings ſervice? Is not this, as much as in him lies, to deprive the people of the means whereby they muſt make themſelves happy, and whereby the King muſt be happy, that is, by his having good Councellours about him? and yet he infuſes that venome, that the queſtioning of Counſellours is dangerous both to King and Peeres, if it ſhould be brought into example. My Lords, for many yeeres by paſt, your Lordſhips know an evill ſpirit hath moved amongſt us, which in truth hath been made the author and ground of all our diſtractions, and that is neceſsity and danger: this was the bulwarke, and the battery that ſerves to defend all exorbitant actions: the ground and foundation of that great invaſion of our liberties and eſtates, the judgement in the ſhip money, and the ground of the counſell given of late to doe any thing, and to perſwade the King that he was abſolved from all rules of government; and yet your Lordſhips have obſerved in the courſe of his defence, how often he hath raiſed this ſpirit, that God be thanked hath beene laid, to the great comfort of King and Kingdome, by your Lordſhips, and all the Commons in Parliament. And when he ſtands under this queſtion, and goes about to juſtifie his exorbitant actions, how often hath he created this Idol againe? and therefore I am affraid he diſcovers too much his owne heart in it.

My Lor: I may not omit ſome other paſſages in his defence, how he hath caſt ſcandalls upon three Nations in this place; that is, in his firſt day of defence, when the Iriſh Remonſtrance, made by all the Commons of Ireland, was produced by the Commons of England; he expreſſed in a paſſion, that things were carried against him by faction and correſpondence, and (if hee had time he would make it appeare) with a ſtrong conſpiracy. Here is a ſcandall caſt upon the Parliament of Ireland with a reflection on the Commons of England; howſoever, it is true your Lordſhips may remember the recantation he made that day, which I will not omit, deſiring not to lay any thing to his charge but what is true; but it is the reflection of a ſcandall that I cannot omit to put your Lordſhips in mind of; and the rather, becauſe this Remonſtrance, preſented from the Parliament of Ireland, did beare date before my Lord of Strafford was charged here, which is very remarkable, viz. the ſeventh of November; and therefore, though he pretends a correſpondence, certainly there could be none then, for he is not charged here til the tenth.

And the ſame day, juſtifying a ſentence in the Caſtle Chamber, your Lordſhips remember he affirmed, that unleſſe a ſtrict hand were kept upon the Nation there, they would find it hard to prevent perjury, one of the moſt crying ſinnes in Ireland. Now to lay an aſperſion upon the ſubjects of Ireland, being under the government of the ſame King with us, how fit this is to be done by a man in that condition that my Lord of Strafford is, I referre to your conſideration.

Another paſſage I remember, whereby in his defence he fell upon that Nation; in anſwer of which I may not omit to do the ſervice I owe to the Commons for whom I am truſted, and that is, that talking of an arbitrary and tyrannicall government, in reference to ſome Orders of the Commons Houſe in Ireland, hee uſed words to this purpoſe: You talk of an Arbitrary government, looke upon theſe Orders, here is an Arbitrary government: and yet when he produced the Orders, they appeared to have ſo much juſtice and diſcretion in them, that he can lay nothing to the charge of them, though in a paſſion he is not backward to aſperſe them.

My Lords, if this Lyon (to uſe his own language) now that hee is chained and muzzled under the reſtraint and queſtion of high Treaſon, will here take the boldneſſe to vent this language, and expreſſe this malignity, how would he doe if he were unchained? how would he devoure? how would he deſtroy? &c.

My Lords, ſomething concernes your Lordſhips; your Lordſhips remember that hee was not backward in his owne anſwer, to fix a charge of high Treaſon upon the Lords of the great Councell; and howſoever, hee hath affirmed this day, I muſt open it againe, that the charge of the ſeven and twentieth Article he fixes in his anſwer to be by conſent of the Lords of the great Councell, though he hath ſince recanted it; and yet you have heard him alledge, that he will ſtand and fall by the truth of his anſwer.

My Lords, I am now at an end. You have my Lord of Strafford here queſtioned for high Treaſon, for going about to ſubvert the fundamentall lawes of both Kingdomes, in defence whereof your noble Anceſtors ſpent their lives and bloods. My Lords, you are the ſonnes of thoſe fathers, and the ſame blood runs in your veines, that did in theirs; and I am confident you will not think him fit to live, that goes about to deſtroy that which protects your lives, and preſerves your eſtates and liberties.

My Lords you have the complaints of three kingdomes preſented before you againſt this great perſon; whereby you Lordſhips perceive that a great ſtorme of diſtemper and diſtraction hath been raiſed, that threatens the ruine and diſtraction of them all.

The Commons, with much paines and diligence, and to their great expence, have diſcoved the Jonas, that is, the occaſion of this tempeſt.

They have ſtill and will diſcharge their Conſciences, (as much as in them lyes) to caſt him out of the Ship, and allay this Tempeſt.

They expect and are confident your Lordſhips will perfect the worke, and that with expedition, leſt with the continuance of the ſtorme, both Ship, and Tackling, and Mariners, both Church and Commonwealth bee ruined and deſtroyed: The danger and horrour of this ſtorme, your Lordſhips ſhall heare by the Gentleman that is next to ſpeake.

FINIS.