BEHEMOTH; OR AN EPITOME OF THE Civil Wars OF ENGLAND, From 1640, to 1660.

By THOMAS HOBS of Malmsbury.

LONDON, Printed ANNO DOM. 1679

THE HISTORY OF THE Civil Wars OF ENGLAND.

A.

IF in time, as in place there were Degrees of high and low; I verily believe that the highest of time, would be that which passeth betwixt, 1640, and 1660. For he that thence as from the Divils Mountain, should have looked upon the World, and obser­ved the Actions of Men, especially in England, might have had a prospect of all kinds of Injustice, and of all kinds of Folly that the world could afford, and how they were pro­duced by their Hypocrisy and self-conceit, whereof the one is double Iniquity, and the other double Folly.

B.

I should be glad to behold the Prospect. You that have lived in that time, and in that part of your Age; where­in Men used to see best into good and evil; I pray you set [...]e (that could not see so well) upon the same Mountain, by the relation of the actions you then saw, and of their causes, Pretentions, Justice, Order, Artifice and Events.

A.

In the year 1640. The Government of England was Monarchical, and the King that reigned, Charles the I. of that Name, holding the Soveraignty by Right of a Discent con­tinued above 600 years; and from a much longer Discent King of Sotland, and from the Time of his Ancestors Henry the 2. King of Ireland, a man that wanted no Vertue, ei­ther of Body or Mind, nor endeavour'd any thing more, [Page 2]than to discharge his duty towards his God, in the well-governing of his Subjects.

B.

How could he than miscarry, having in every County so many Train'd-bands, as would (put together) have made an Army of 60000 Men, and divers Magazines of Ammu­nition, in places fortified.

If those Souldiers had been (as they and all others of his Subjects ought to have been) at his Majesties command: The Peace and Happiness of the three Kingdoms, had con­tinued, as it was left by K. James; but the people were corrupted generally, and Disobedient Persons esteemed the best Patriots.

B.

But sure, there were Men enough, besides those that were ill-affected, to have made an Army sufficient for to have kept the People from uniting into a Body able to oppose him.

A.

Truly, if the King had had Money, I think he might have had Souldiers enough in England; for there were very few of the common People that cared much for either of the Causes, but would have taken any side for pay and plun­der: But the Kings Treasure was very low, and his Ene­mies that pretended the Peoples ease from Taxes, and other specious things, had the Command of the Purses of the City of London, and of most Cities and Corporate Towns in England, and of many particular Persons besides.

B.

But how comes the People to be so corrupted, and what kind of People were they that did so seduce them?

A.

The Seducers were of divers sorts. One sort were Mi­nisters, Ministers (as they called themselves) of Christ; and sometimes in their Sermons to the People Gods Embassa­dors, pretending to have a Right from God to govern every one his Parish, and their Assembly, the whole Nation.

Secondly, There were a very great number, though not comparable to the other, which notwithstanding that the Popes Power in England, both Temporal and Ecclesiastical had been by Act of Parliament abolished, did still retain a belief, that we ought to be governed by the Pope; whom they pretended to be the Vicar of Christ, and in the Right of Christ to be the Governour of all Christian People, and these were known by the Name of PAPISTS, as the Ministers [Page 3]I mentioned before, were commonly called PRESBY­TERIANS.

Thirdly, There were not a few, who in the beginning of the Troubles were not discovered, but shortly after de­clared themselves for a Liberty in Religion, and those of different Opinions one from another: Some of them (be­cause they would have all Congregations free and indepen­dant upon one another) were called INDEPENDANTS; others that held Baptism to Infants, and such as under­stood not into what they are Baptized to be ineffectual, were called therefore ANABAPTISTS: Others that held, that Christs Kingdom was at this time to begin upon Earth. were called FIFTH-MONARCHY-MEN; besides divers other Sects as QUAKERS, ADAMITES, &c. whose names and pe­culiar Doctrines I do not very well remember, and these were the Enemies, which arose against his Majesty from the private Interpretation of the Scripture exposed to every Mans scanning in his Mother Tongue.

Fourthly, There were an exceeding great number of Men of the greater sort, that had been so educated, as that in their youth having read the Books written by famous men of the Ancient Grecian and Roman Commonwealths, concerning their Policy and great Actions, in which Book the Popular Government was extol'd by that glorious Name of Liberty, and Monarchy disgraced by the Name of Ty­ranny: they became thereby in love with their form of Government: And out of these men were chosen the great­est part of the HOUSE OF COMMONS: Or if they were not the greatest part, yet by advantage of their Eloquence were always able to sway the rest.

Fifthly, The City of London, and other great Towns of Trade, having in admiration the prosperity of the low Countries, after they had revolted from their Monarch, the King of Spain, were inclined to think, that the like change of Government here would to them produce the like prosperity.

Sixthly, There were a very great Number, that had either wasted their fortunes, or thought them too mean for the good part? they thought were in themselves: and more there were that had able bodies, and saw no means how ho­nestly [Page 4]to get their Bread: These longed for a War, and hoped to maintain themselves hereafter by the lucky chu­sing of a Party to side with, and consequently did for the most part serve under them, that had greatest plenty of Money.

Lastly, The People in general were so ignorant of their Duties, as that not one perhaps of 1000. knew what Right any man had to command him, or what necessity there was of King or Commonwealth, for which he was to part with his Money against his will, but thought himself to be so much Master of whatsoever he possest, that it could not be taken from him upon any pretence of Common Safety without his own consent. King, they thought was but a Title of the highest honour, which Gentlemen, Knight, Baron, Earl, Duke, were but steps to ascend to with the help of Riches, and had no Rule of Equity, but Precedents and Custom, and he was thought wisest and fittest to be chosen for a Parliament, who was worst averse to the granting of Subsidies, or other publick Payments.

B.

In such a Constitution of People, methinks the King is already outed of his Government: so as they need not have taken Arms for it: For I cannot imagine, how the King should come by any means to resist them.

A.

There was indeed very great difficulty in the busi­ness, but of that point you will, be better informed in the pursuit of this Narration.

B.

But I desire to know first the several grounds of the Pretences, both of the Pope and of the Presbyterians, by which they claim a Right to govern us, as they do in chief, and after that, from whence, and when crept in the Pre­tences of that Long Parliament for a Democrasie.

A.

As for the Papists, they challenge this Right from a Text in Deut. 7. and other like Texts, according to the Old Latin Translation, in these words, And he that out of Pride shall refuse to obey the Commandment of that Priest, which shall at that time Minister before the Lord thy God, that man shall, by the Sentence of the Judge, be put to Death: And because the Jews were the people of God then, so is all Christendom the People of God now, they infer from thence, that the Pope, whom they pretend to [Page 5]be High Priest of all Christian People, ought also to be obeyed in all his Decrees by all Christians upon pain of Death: Again, whereas in the New Testament: Christ saith, all Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth, go therefore and teach all Nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and teach them to observe all those things, that I have com­manded you, from thence they infer, that the Command of the Apostles was to be obeyed, and by consequence the Nations were bound to be governed by them, and especi­ally by the Prince of the Apostles, St. Peter, and by his Successors the Popes of Rome.

B.

For the Text in the Old Testament, I do not see how the Commandment of God to the Jews to obey their Priests can be interpreted to have the like force in the Case of the other Nations Christian, more then upon Na­tions Unchristian: For all the World are Gods People, un­less we also grant, that a King cannot of an Infidel be made Christian without making himself subject to the Laws of that Apostle of Priest, or Minister, that shall convert him. The Jews were a peculiar people of God, a Sacerdotal Kingdom, and bound to no other Law, but what first Moses, and afterwards every High Priest did go and receive imme­diately from the Mouth of God in Mount Sinai in the Ta­bernacle of the Ark, and in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the Temple. And for the Text in St. Matthew: I know the words in the Gospel are not, Go teach, but Go and make Disciples; and that there is a great difference between a Subject and a Disciple, and between teaching and com­manding; and if such Texts as these must be so inter­preted, why do not Christian Kings lay down their Titles of Majesty and Soveraignty, and call themselves the Popes Lieutenants? But the Doctors of the Romish Church seem to decline that Title of Absolute Power, in their distinction of Power Spiritual and Temporal, but this Distinction I do not vell understand.

A.

By Spiritual Power they mean the Power to deter­mine Points of Faith, and to be Judges in the Inner Court of Conscience of Moral Duties, and of a Power to [Page 6]punish those men that obey not their Precepts by Eccle­siastical Censure, that is, by Excommunication; and this Power, they say, the Pope hath immediately from Christ, without dependance upon any King or Sovereign Assem­blies, whose Subjects they be that stand Excommunicate: But for the Power Temporal, which consists in judging and punishing those actions, that are done against the Civil Law, they say, they do not pretend to it directly, but onely indirectly; that is to say, as far forth as such actions tend to the hinderance or advancement of Reli­gion, in ordine ad spiritualia.

B.

What Power then is left to Kings and other Civil Sovereigns, which the Pope may not pretend to be in or­dine ad Spiritualia?

A.

None, or very little; and this Power the Pope not onely pretends to in all Christendom, but some of his Bishops also in their several Diocesses, jure Divino; that is, immediately from Christ, without deriving it from the Pope.

B.

But what if a man refuse Obedience to this pretend­ed Power of the Pope and his Bishops, what harm can Ex­communication do him, especially if he be a Subject of an­other Sovereign?

A.

Very great harm; for by the Popes or Bishops signi­fication of it to the Civil Power, he shall be punished sufficiently.

B.

He were in an ill case then that adventured to write or speak in defence of the Civil Power, that must be pun shed by him, whose Rights he defended like Uzza, that was slain, because he Would needs, unbidden, put forth his hand to keep the Ark from falling. But what if a whole Nation should revolt from the Pope at once? what effect could Excommunication have upon the Na­tion?

A.

Why they should have no more Mass said by any of the Pope's Priests. Besides, the Pope would have no more to with them, but cast them off; and so they would be in the same case as if a Nation should be cast by their King, and left to be governed by themselves, or whom they would.

[Page 7]

B. This would not so much be taken for a punishment to the People as to the King; and therefore when a Pope Excommunicates a whole Nation, me-thinks he ra­ther Excommunicates himself than them. But I pray you tell me what were the Rights the Pope pretended to in Kingdoms of other Princes?

A.

First, and exemption of all Priests, Friers, and Monks in Criminal Causes, from the Cognizance of Ci­vil Judges. Secondly, Collation of Benefices on whom he pleased, Native or Stranger; and Exaction of Tenths, Fruits, and other Payments. Thirdly, Appeals to Rome in all Causes, where the Church could pretend to be con­cern'd. Fourthly, To be the Supreme Judge concern­ing the Lawfulness of Marriage, (i, e. concerning the He­reditary Succession of Kings) and to have the Cogni­zance of all Causes concerning Adultery and Forni­cation.

B.

Good! a Monopoly of Women.

A.

Fifthly, a power of absolving Subjects of their Du­ties, and of their Oaths of Fidelity to their Lawful Sove­reigns, when the Pope should think fit, for the extirpation of Heresie.

B.

This power of absolving Subjects of their obedience, as also that other of being Judges of Manners and Do­ctrine, is as absolute a Sovereignty as if possible to be; and consequently there must be two Kingdoms in one and the same Nation, and so no man be able to know which of his Masters he must obey.

A.

For my part, I should rather obey that Master that had the Right of making Laws, and of inflicting Punish­ments, than him that pretendeth onely to a right of ma­king Canons, that is to say, Rules: and no Right of Co-action, or otherwise Punishing, but by Excommunication.

B.

But the Pope pretends also, that his Canons are Laws; and for punishing, can there be a greater than Excommunication, supposing it true (as the Pope saith it is) that he that dies Excommunicate is damn'd; which supposition, it seems, you believe not, else you would ra­ther have chosen to obey the Pope, that could cast your [Page 8]Body and Soul into Hell, than the King that can onely kill the Body.

A.

You say true; for it were very uncharitable in me to believe, that all Englishmen (except a few Papists) that have been born and called Hereticks, ever since the Re­formation of Religion in England, should be damn'd.

B.

But for those that die Excommunicate in the Church of England at this day, do you not think them also damn'd? and he that is Excommunicate for disobedience to the King's Law, either Spiritual or Temporal, is Ex­communicate for sin, and therefore if he die Excommu­nicate, and without desire of reconciliation, he dies im­penitent; you see what follows. But to die in disobedi­ence to the Precepts and Doctrine of those men, that have no Authority or Jurisdiction over us, is quite another case, and bringeth no such danger with it.

B.

But what is this Heresie which the Church of Rome so cruelly persecutes, as to depose Kings that do not, when they are bidden turn all Hereticks out of their Domi­nions?

A.

Heresie is a Word, which when it is used without passion, signifies a private Opinion; so the different Sect of the old Philosophers, Academians, Peripateticks, Epi­cureans, Stoicks, &c. were called Heresie: But in the Christian Church, there was, in the signification of that word, comprehended, a sinful opposition to him that was chief Judge of Doctrines in order to the Salvation of mens Souls; and consequently Heresie may be said to bear the same relation to the Power Spiritual, that Re­bellion doth to the Power Temporal, and is suitably to be persecuted by him that will preserve a Power Spiritual, and dominion over mens Consciences

B.

It would be very well (because we are all of us per­mitted to read the holy Scriptures, and bound to make them the Rule of our actions both publick and private) that Heresie were by some Law defined, and the particu­lar Opinions set forth, for which a man were to be con­demned and punished as a Heretick; for else, not onely men of mean capacity, but even the wisest and devoutest [Page 9]Christian may fall into Heresie, without any will to oppose the Church; for the Scriptures are hard, and the inter­pretations different of different men.

A.

The meaning of the word Heresie is by Law de­clared in Act of Parliament, in the First Year of Queen Elizabeth; wherein it is ordained, that the Persons who had by the Queens Letters Patents, the Authority Spiri­tual (meaning the High Commission) shall not have Au­thority to Adjudge any matter or cause to be Heresie, but only such as heretofore have been Adjudged to be Here­sie, by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures, or by the First 4 General Councils, or by any other General Council, where the same was declared Heresie by the ex­press and plain words of the said Canonical Scriptures or such as hereafter shall be adjudged Heresie, by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm; with the assent of the Clergy in their Convocation.

B.

It seems therefore, if there arise any new Error that hath not been yet declared Heresie, (and many such may arise) it cannot be Judged Heresie without a Parliament; for how foul soever the error be, it cannot have been de­clared Heresie, neither in the Scriptures nor in the Coun­cils, because it was never before heard of; and conse­quently there can be no Error unless it fall within the compass of Blasphemy against God, or Treason against the King) for which a man can in Equity be punished: Be­sides who can tell what is declared by the Scripture, which every man is allowed to read and interpret to hemself? nay more, what Protestant either of the Laity or Clergy (if every General Council can be a competent Judge of Heresie) is not already condemned; for divers Councils have declar'd a great many of our Doctrines to be Heresie (as they pretend) upon the Authority of the Scriptures.

A.

What are those points, that the first four General Counsels have declared Heresie?

B.

The first General Councel held at Nicaea declared all to be Heresie, which was contrary to the Nicene Creed. Upon occasion of the Heresie of Arrius, which was the de­nying the Divinity of Christ, the Second General Councel [Page 10]held at Constantinople, declar'd Heresie the Doctrine of Ma­cedonius, which was that the Holy Ghost was created. The Third Councel assembled at Ephesius, condemned the Do­ctrine of Nestorius, that there were two persons in Christ. The Fourth held at Calcedon condemned the Error of Em­tyches, that there was but one nature in Christ. I know of no other Points condemned in these four Councels, but such as concern Church-Government, or the same Do­ctrines taught by other Men in other words: And these Councels were all called by the Emperors, and by them their Decrees confirmed, at the Petition of the Councels themselves.

A.

I see by this, that both the Calling of the Council, and the confirmation of their Doctrine and Church-Go­vernment had no obligatory force, but from the Autho­rity of the Emperor; how comes it then to pass, that they take upon them now a Legislative Power, and say their Canons are Laws? That Text, all Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth, had the same force then as it hath now, and conferred a Legislative Power on the Councils not only over Christian men, but over all Nations in the world.

B.

They say no; for the Power they pretend to is de­rived from this, that when a King was converted from Gentilism to Christianity, he did by that very Submission to the Bishop that converted him, submit to the Bishops Government, and became one of his sheep, which Right therefore he could not have over any Nation, that was not Christian.

A.

Did Silvester (which was Pope of Rome in the time of Constantine the Great converted by him) tell the Empe­ror his New Disciple before hand, that if he became a Christian he must become the Popes Subject.

B.

I believe not, for it is likely enough, if he had told him so plainly, or but made him suspect it, he would either have been not Christian at all, or, but a Counterfeit one.

A.

But if he did not tell him so, and that plainly it was foul play, not only in a Priest, but in any Christian. And for this Derivation of their Right from the Emperors consent, [Page 11]it proceeds only from this, that they dare not challenge a Legislative power, nor call their Canons, Laws in any Kingdom in Christendom; farther than the Kings make them so: But in Peru, when Atabalipa was King, the Fryer told him, that Christ being King of all the World had given the diposing of all the Kingdoms there to the Pope: And that the Pope had given Peru to the Roman Emperor Charles the 5. and required Atabalipa to resign it, and for refusing it, seised upon his Person by the Spanish Army there present, and murdered him: You see by this how much they claim, when they have power to make it good.

B.

When began the Popes to take this Authority upon them first?

A.

After the Inundation of Northern People had over­flowed the Western Parts of the Empire, and possessed themselves of Italy, the People of the City of Rome sub­mitted themselves, as well in Temporals as Spirituals to their Bishop; and then first was the Pope a Temporal Prince, and stood no more in so great fear of the Emperors, which lived far off at Constantinople: In this time it was that the Pope began by pretence of his Power Spiritual, to encroach upon the Temporal Rights of all other Princes of the West, and so continued gaining upon them, till his Power was at the highest, in that 300 years or thereabout, which passed between the time of Pope Leo the 3. and Pope Innocent the 3. For in this time Pope Zachary 1. deposed Chilpe­rick, then King of France, and gave the Kingdom to one of his Subjects Pepin: And Pepin took from the Lombards a great part of their Territory, and gave it to the Church: Shortly after the Lombards having recovered their Estate, Charles the Great retook it, and gave it to the Church again, and Pope Leo the 3. made Charles Emperor.

B. But what Right did the Pope there pretend for the creating of an Emperor?

A.

He pretended the Right of being Christs Vicar, and what Christ could give, his Vicar, might give; and you know that Christ was King of all the World.

B.

Yes, as God, and so he gives all the Kingdoms of the World, which nevertheless, proceed from the consent of People either for fear; or hope.

But this Gift of the Empire was in a more special Manner; in such a manner, as Moses had the Government of Israel given him, or rather as Joshua had it given him, to go in and out before the People, as the High Priest should direct him, and so the Empire was understood to be given him on condition to be directed by the Pope: For when the Pope invested him with the Regal Ornaments, the People all cryed out Deus dat, that is to say, 'tis God that gives it: And from that time all, or most of the Christian Kings do put into their Titles the words Dei gra­tia, that is, by the gift of God: And their Successors use still to receive the Crown and Scepter from a Bishop: 'Tis certainly a very good Custom for Kings to be put in mind by whose gift they reign, but it cannot from that Custom he infer'd, that they receive the Kingdom, by me­diation from the Pope, or by any other Clergy: For the Popes themselves received the Papacy from the Emperor, the first that ever was elected Bishop of Rome, after Em­perors were Christians, and without the Emperors consent executed himself by Letter to the Emperor; with this, that the People and Clergy of Rome forced him to take it upon him, and prayed the Emperor to confirm it, which the Emperor did but with Reprehension of their Proceedings and prohibition of the like for the time to come: the Em­peror was Lotharius, and the Pope Calixtus the first.

A.

You see by this the Emperor never acknowledged this gift of God was the gift of the Pope, but maintained the Popedom was the gift of the Emperor; but in process of time by the negligence of the Emperor (for the great­ness of Kings makes them that they cannot easily descend into the obscure and narrow Mines of an ambitious Clergy,) they found means to make the people believe, there was a Power in the Pope and Clergy: which they ought to submit unto, rather than to the Commands of their own King, whensoever it should come into Contro­versy, and to that end devised and decreed many new Articles of Faith, to the diminution of the Authority of Kings, and to the disjunction of them and their Subjects, and to a closer adherence of their Subjects to the Church [Page 13]of Rome's Articles, either not at all found in, or not well founded upon the Scripture, as first, That it should not be lawful fur a Priest to Marry. What influence could that have upon the power of Kings? do you not see that by this, the King must of necessity either want the Priest­hood, and therewith a great part of the Reverence due to him from the most Religious part of his Subjects, or else want Lawful Heirs to succeed in? by which means being not taken for the Head of the Church, he was sure in any controversie between him and the Pope, that his Subjects would be against him.

B.

Is not a Christian King as much a Bishop now, as the Heathen Kings were of old? for amongst them, Epis­copus was a name common to all Kings; is not he a Bi­shop now, to whom god hath committed the charge of all the Souls of his Subjects, both of the Laity and of the Clergy? And though he be in relation to our Saviour, who is the chief Pastour of Sheep, yet compared to his own Subjects, they are all Sheep, both Laick and Clergy, and he the onely Shepherd; and seeing a Christian Bishop is but a Christian endued with power to govern the Clergy; it follows, that every Christian King is not onely a Bishop but an Archbishop, and his whole Kingdom his Diocess: And though it were granted, that Imposition of hands were necessary for a Priest, yet seeing Kings have the power of Government of the Clergy that are the Sub­jects, even before Baptism, the Baptism it self where he is received as a Christian, is a sufficient Imposition of Hands, so that whereas before he was a Bishop, now he is a Christian Bishop.

A.

For my part I agree with you, this prohibition of Marriage to Priests came in about the time of Pope Gre­gory the Seventh, and William the First, King of England, by which means the Pope had in England, what with Se­cular, and what with Regular Priests, a great many lusty Batchelors at his service. Secondly, that Auricular Con­fession to a Priest was necessary to Salvation. 'Tis true, that before that time, Confession to a Priest was usual, and performed for the most part (by him that Confessed) [Page 16] [...]People. And the end which the Pope had in multiplying Sermons, was no other, but to prop and enlarge his own Authority over all Christian Kings and States.

B.

Within the same time, that is, between the time of the Emperor Charles the Great, and of King Edward the Third of England, began their second Policy, which was, to bring Religion into an Art, and thereby to maintain all their Degrees of the Roman Church by Disputation, not onely from the Scriptures, but also from the Philosophy of Aristotle, both Moral and Natural; and to that end the Pope exhorted the said Emperor by Letters, to erect Schools of all kinds of Literature, and from thence began the in­stitution of Universities; for not long after, the Univer­sities began in Paris, and in Oxford. It is true, that there were Schools in England before that time, in several places, for the instruction of Children in the Latin Tongue, that is to say, in the Tongue of the Church; but for an University of Learning there was none erected till that time, though it be not unlikely there might be then some that taught Philosophy, Logick, and other Arts, in divers Monasteries, the Monks having little else to do but to study. After some Colledges were built to that purpose, it was not long before many more were added to them by the Devotion of Princes and Bishops, and other wealthy men, and the Discipline therein was confirmed by the Popes that then were, and abundance of Scholars sent thither by their friends to study, as to a place from whence the way was open and easie to preferment both in Church and Commonwealth. The profit the Church of Rome ex­pected from them, and in effect received, was the main­tenance of the Pope's Doctrine, and of his Authority over Kings and their Subjects, by School Divines, who striv­ing to make good many points of Faith incomprehensible, and calling in the Philosophy of Aristotle to their assi­stance, wrote great Books of School Divinity, which no man else, nor they themselves, were able to understand, as any man may conceive that shall consider the writing of Peter Lombard, or Scotus, or of him that wrote Com­mentaries upon him, or of Suarez, or of any other School-Divines [Page 17]of later times, which kind of Learning neverthe­less hath been much admired by two sorts of men, other­wise prudent enough. The one of which sorts were those that were already Devoted, and really affectionate to the Roman Church, for they believed the Doctrine before, but admired the Arguments, because they understood them not, and yet found the Conclusions to their mind; The other sort were negligent men, that had rather admire with others, than take the pains to examine, so that all sorts of people were fully resolved that both the Doctrine was true, and the Pope's Authority no more then that was due to him. I see that a Christian King, or State, how well soever provided he be, of Money and Arms, (where the Church of Rome hath such authority) will have but a hard match of it, for want of men; for their Subjects will hardly be drawn into the Field, and fight with courage against their Consciences.

A.

It is true that great rebellions have been raised by Church-men in the Pope's quarrel against Kings, as in England against King John, and in France against King Henry the Fourth, wherein the Kings had a more consi­derable part on their sides, than the Pope had on his, and shall always have so, if they have Money; for there are but few, whose Consciences are so tender as to refuse Mo­ney when they want it, but the great mischief done to Kings upon pretence of Religion, is when the Pope gives power to one King to Invade another.

B.

I wonder how King Henry the Eighth so utterly ex­tinguished the Authority of the Pope in England, and that without any Rebellion at home, or any Invasion from abroad?

A.

First, The Priests, Monks and Friars, being in the height of their Power, were now, for the most part grown insolent and licentious, and thereby the force of their Arguments was now taken away by the scandal of their lives, which the Gentry, and men of good education, easily perceived, and the Parliament consisting of such persons, were therefore willing to take away their Power, and generally the Common people which for a long time had [Page 18]been in love with Parliaments, were not displeased there­with. Secondly, The Doctrine of Luther beginning a little before, was now by a great many men of the greatest Judgments so well received, as that there was no hope to restore the Pope to his Power by Rebellion. Thirdly, The Revenue of the Abbies and all other Religious Houses, fal­ling hereby into the Kings hands, and by him being dis­posed of to the most eminent Gentlemen in every County, could not but make them do their best to confirm them­selves in the possession of them. Fourthly, King Henry was of a nature quick, and severe in the Punishing of such as should be the first to oppose his designs. Lastly, As to In­vasion from abroad, if the Pope had given the Kingdom to another Prince, it had been in vain, for England is another manner of Kingdom than Navarre, besides the French and Spanish Forces were imployed at that time one against another; and though they had been at leasure, they would have found perhaps no better success than the Spaniard found afterwards in 1588. Nevertheless, not­withstanding the Insolence, Avarice, and Hypocrisie of the then Clergy, and nothwithstanding the Doctrine of Luther, if the Pope had not provoked the King by endeavouring to cross his Marriage with his second Wife, his Authority might have remained in England till there had risen some other quarrel.

B.

Did not the Bishops that then were, and had taken an Oath, wherein was among other things that they should defend and maintain the Regal Rights of St. Peter, the words are Regalia Sancti Petri, which nevertheless some have said are Regulas Sancti Petri, (that is to say) St. Pe­ter's Rules or Doctrine, and that the Clergy afterwards did read it, (being perhaps written in Short-hand) by a mistake to the Pope's advantage, Regalia. Did not (I say) the Bishops oppose that Act of Parliament against the Pope's against the taking of the Oath of Supremacy?

A.

No, I do not find the Bishops did many of them op­pose the King; for having no power without him it had been great imprudence to provoke his Anger; there was besides a Controversiy in those times between the Pope and [Page 19]the Bishops, most of which did maintain, that they exer­cised their Jurisdiction Episcopal in the Right of God, as immediately as the Pope himself did exercise the same over the whole Church; and because they saw that by this Act of the King in Parliament they were to hold their power no more of the Pope, and never thought of holding it of the King, they were perhaps better content, to let the Act of Parliament pass in the reign of King Edward the Sixth, the Doctrine of Luther had taken such great root in England that they threw out a great many of the Pope's new Arti­cles of Faith, with Queen Mary succeeding him, restored again, together with all that had been abolished by King Henry the Eighth, saving (that which could not be re­stored) the Religious Houses, and the Bishops, and Clergy of King Henry were partly burnt for Hereticks, partly fled, and partly recanted; and they that fled betook themselves to those places beyond Sea, where the Reformed Religion was either protected, or not prosecuted, who after the de­cease of Queen Mary returned again to favour and prefer­ment under Queen Elizabeth, that restored the Religion of her Brother King Edward, and so it had continued to this day excepting the interruption made in this late Re­bellion of the Presbyterians and other Democratical men: But thus the Romish Religion were now cast out by the Law, yet there were abundance of people, and many of them of the Nobility that still retained the Religion of their Ancestors, who as they were not much molested in points of Conscience, so they were not by their own In­clination very troublesom to the Civil Government, but by the secret practice of Jesuites and other Emissaries of the Roman Church, they were made less quiet than they ought to have been; and some of them to venture upon the most horrid Act that ever had been heard of before, I mean upon the Gunpowder Treason, and upon that ac­count the Papists in England have been looked upon as men that would not be sorry for any disorders here that might possibly make way to the restoring of the Pope's Authority: and therefore I named them for one of the distempers of the State of England in the time of our late King Charles.

B.

I see that Monsieur du Plesis and Dr Morton Bishop of Durham writing of the progress of the Pope's Power, and intituling their Books, one of them, The Mystery of Iniquity, the other, The Grand Imposture, were both in the right, for I believe there was never such another cheat in the World: And I wonder that the Kings and States of Chri­stendom never perceived it.

A.

It is manifest they did perceive it. How else durst they make War against the Pope, and some of them take him out of Rome it self, and carry him away Prisoner? but if they would have freed themselves from his Tyranny, they should have agreed together and made themselves every one (as Henry the Eighth did) Head of the Church within their own respective dominions, but not agreeing they let his power continue, every one hopeing to make use of it (when there should be cause against his neighbour.)

B.

Now, as to the other Distemper by Presbyterians. How came their Power to be so great, being of themselves for the most part but so many poor Scholars?

A.

This Controversy between the Papist and Reformed Churches could not chuse but make every man, to the best of his power, examine by the Scriptures which of them was in the right, and to that end they were translated into Vulgar Tongue: Whereas before the Translation of them was not allowed, nor any man to read them, but such as had express License so to do, for the Pope did con­cerning the same, that Moses did concerning Mount Sinai, Moses suffered no man to go up to it, to hear God speak or gaze upon him, but such as he himself took with him, and the Pope suffered none to speak with God in the Scriptures that had not some part of the Pope's Spirit in him, for which he might be trusted.

B.

Certainly Moses did therein very wisely, and accor­ding to God's own Commandment.

A.

No doubt of it, and the event it self hath made it since appear so; for after the Bible was Translated into English, every Man, nay every Boy and Wench that could read English, thought they spoke with God Almighty, and understood what he said, when by a certain Number of [Page 21] Chapters a Day they had read the Scriptures once or twice over, the Reverence and Obedience due to the Reformed Church here, and to the Bishops and Pastors therein, was cast off, and every man became a Judge of Religion and an Interpreter of the Scriptures to himself.

B.

Did not the Church of England intend it should be so: What other end could they have in recommending the Bible to me, if they did not mean I should make it the Rule of my Actions, else they might have kept it, though open to themselves, to me Sealed up in Hebrew, Greek and Latin, and fed me out of it, in such measure as had been requisite for the Salvation of my Soul, and the Churches peace.

A.

I confess this License of Interpreting the Scripture was the cause of so many several Sects, as have lain hid till the beginning of the late King's Reign, and did then ap­pear to the disturbance of the Commonwealth, but to re­turn to the Story, Those persons that fled for Religion in the time of Queen Mary, resided, for the most part, in places where the Reformed Religion was professed and governed by an Assembly of Ministers, who also were not a little made use of (for want of better Statesmen) in points of Civil Government, which pleased so much the English and Scotch Protestants that lived amongst them, that at their return they wished there were the same Honour and Reve­rence given to the Ministry in their own Countries, and in Scotland (King James being then young) soon (with the help of some of the powerful Nobility) they brought it to pass; also they that returned into England in the begin­ning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, endeavoured the same here, but could never effect it till this last Rebellion, nor without the help of the Scots, and it was no sooner ef­fected but it was defeated again by the other Sects, which by the preaching of the Presbyterians and private Inter­pretation of Scripture, were grown numerous.

B.

I know indeed, that in the beginning of the late War, the Power of the Presbyterians was so very great, that not only the Citizens of Londen were, almost all of them, at their Devotion; but also the greatest part of all other Cities and Market Towns of England: But you have [Page 22]not yet told me by what Art and what Degrees they became so strong.

A.

It was not their own Art alone that did it, but they had the con [...]urrence of a great many Gentlemen, tha [...] did no less desire a Popular Government in the Civil State, than these Ministers did in the Church; and a [...] these did in the Pulpit draw the People to their Opini­ons, and to a dislike of the Church-Government, Canons, and Common-Prayer-Book, so did the other make them in love with Democracy by their Harangues in the Par­liament, and by their discourse and communication with people in the Countrey, continually extolling of Liberty, and inveighing against Tyranny, leaving the people to collect of themselves, that this Tyranny was the present Government of the State. And as the Presbyterians brought with them into their Churches their Divinity from the Universities, so did many of the Gentlemen bring their Politicks from thence into the Parliament: but neither of them did this very boldly in the time of Q. Eliz. and though it be not likely that all of them did it out of malice, but many of them out of error, yet cer­tainly the chief Leaders were ambitious Ministers, and ambitious Gentlemen, the Ministers envying the Autho­rity of Bishops, whom they thought less learned; and the Gentlemen envying the Privy-Council, whom they thought less wise than themselves. For 'tis a hard matter for men, who do all think highly of their own Wits (when they have also acquired the Learning of the Uni­versity) to be perswaded, that they want any ability re­quisite for the Government of a Commonwealth, especi­ally having read the Glorious Histories, and the Senten­tious Politicks of the Antient Popular Government of the Greeks and Romans, amongst whom Kings were hated, and branded with the name of Tyrants; and Popular Go­vernment (though no Tyrant was ever so cruel as a Po­pular Assembly) passed by the name of Liberty. The Presbyterian Ministers in the beginning of the Reign of Q. Eliz. did not (because they durst not) publickly preach against the Discipline of the Church; but not long af­ter [Page 23](by the favour perhaps of some great Courtier) they went abroad Preaching in most of the Market Towns of England (as the Preaching Friers had formerly done) up­on Working-days in the morning; in which these, and others of the same Tenets, that had charge of Souls, both by the Manner and Matter of their Preaching, applied themselves wholly to the winning of the People to a liking of their Doctrines, and good opinion of their Persons.

And first, for the manner of their Preaching, they so framed their Countenance and Gesture at the entrance into the Pulpit, and their Pronunciation, both in their Prayer and Sermon, and used the Scripture-phrase, whe­ther understood by the People or not, as that no Trage­dian in the World could have acted the part of a right godly man better than these did, insomuch that a man unacquainted with such Art, could never suspect any am­bitious Plot in them, to raise Sedition against the State, as they then had designed, or doubt, that the vehemence of their Voice (for the same words, with the usual Pro­nunciation, had been of little force) and forcedness of their Gesture and Looks, could arise from any thing but zeal to the Service of God. And by this Art they came into such credit, that numbers of men used to go forth of their own Parishes and Towns on working-days, leaving their Calling; and on Sunday leaving their own Churches to hear them Preach in other places, and to despise their own and all other Preachers that acted not as well as they. And as for those Ministers that did not usually Preach, but instead of Sermons did read to the People such Homilies as the Church had appointed, they esteemed and called them Dumb Dogs.

Secondly, for the matter of their Sermons, because the anger of the People in the late Roman Usurpation was then fresh, they saw there could be nothing more gra­cious with them, than to Preach against such other Points of the Romish Religion as the Bishops had not yet con­demned, that so receding farther from Popery than they did, they might with glory to themselves, leave a suspition on the Bishops, as men not well purged from Idolatry.

[Page 24]

Thirdly, before their Sermons, their Prayer was, or seemed to be, ex tempore, which they pretended to be dictated by the Spirit of God within them, and many of the People believed, or seemed to believe it; or any man might see, that they did not take care before-hand what they should say in their Prayers: and from hence came a dislike of the Common-Prayer-book, that men might not see to what they were to say Amen.

Fourthly, They did never in their Sermons, or but lightly, against the Lucrative Vices of men of Trade or Handicraft, such as are feigning, lying, couzening, hy­pocrisie, and other uncharitableness, (except want of charity to their Pastor, and to the Faithful) which was a great ease to the generality of Citizens, and the Inhabitants of Market-Towns, and no little profit to themselves.

Fifthly, By preaching up an opinion, that men were to be assured of their salvation, by the testimony of their own private spirit, meaning the holy Ghost dwelling within them: And from this opinion, the People, that found in themselves a sufficient hatred towards the Pa­pists, and an ability to repeat the Sermons of these men at their coming home, made no doubt, but that they had all that was necessary, how fraudulently and spitefully soever they behaved themselves to their Neighbours, that were not reckoned amongst the Saints, and sometimes to those also.

Sixthly, They did indeed with great earnestness and se­verity inveigh often against two sins, Carnal Lust, and vain Swearing, which without question was very well done, but the common people were thereby inclined to believe, that nothing else was sin, but that which was for­bidden in the Third and Seventh Commandment; for few men do understand by the name of Lust, any other Concupiscence, than that which is forbidden in the Seventh Commandment; for men are not ordinarily said to Lust after another man's Cattle, or other Goods or Possessions, and never made much scruple of the acts of Fraud and Ma­lice, but endeavoured to keep themselves from Unclean­ness onely, or at least from the scandal of it. And whereas [Page 25]they did both in their Sermons and Writings maintain and inculcate, that the very first motions of the Mind, that is to say, the delight Men and Women took in the sight of one anothers Form, though they checked the proceeding there­of, so that it never grew up to be a Design, was neverthe­less a Sin; they brought Young men into Desperation and to think themselves damn'd because they could not (which no man can, and is contrary to the Constition of Nature) behold a delightful Object without Delight; and by this means they became Confessors to such as were thus troubled in Conscience, and were obeyed by them, as these Spiri­tual Doctors in all Cases of Conscience.

B.

Yes, divers of them did preach frequently against Oppression.

A.

'Tis true, I had forgot that, but it was before such as were free enough from it, (I mean) the Common Peo­ple, who would easily believe themselves oppressed, but never Oppressors: And therefore you may reckon this amongst their Artificers, to make their People believe they they were oppressed by the King, or perhaps by the Bishops, or both, and inclined the meaner sort to their Party after­ward when there should be occasion; but this was but spa­ringly done in the time of Q. Eliz. whose fear and Jealousie they were afraid of: Nor had they as yet any great power in the Parliament House, whereby to call in question her Prerogative by Petitions of Right, and other Devices as they did afterwards when Democratical Gentlemen had re­ceived them into their Council, for the design of changing the Monarchical Government into Popular, which they called Liberty.

B.

Who could think that such Horrible Designs as these could so easily and so long remain, covered with the Cloak of Godliness; for that they were most Impious Hypocrites is manifest enough, by the War these proceedings ended in, and by the War committed? But when began first to ap­pear in Parliament the attempt of Popular Government and by whom?

A.

As to the time of attempting the change of Govern­ment from Monarchical to Democratical, we must-di­stinguish [Page 26]They did not challenge the Soveraignty in plain terms, and by that name, till they had slain the King; nor the Rights thereof, altogether, by particular Heads, till the King was driven from London by Tumults raised in the City against him, and retired for the security of his person to York, where he had not been many days when they sent unto him Nineteen Propositions, whereof above a Dozen were Demands of several Powers, Essential parts of the Power Soveraign, but before that time they had de­manded some of them (in a Petition which they called a Petition of Right) which nevertheless the King had gran­ted them in a former Parliament: though he deprived himself thereby, not only of the Power to Levy Money without their consent, but also of his ordinary Revenue by Custom of Tonnage and Poundage, and of the Liberty to put into Custody such men as he thought likely to disturb the Peace, and raise Sedition in the Kingdom: As for the men that did this, 'tis enough to say, they were the Mem­bers of the last Parliament, and of some other Parliaments in the beginning of the Reign of King Charles I. and the end of the Reign of King James: To name them all is not necessary, farther then the Story shall require; most of them were Members of the House of Commons, some few also of the Lords: But all such as had a great Opinion of their sufficiency in Politicks, which they thought was not sufficiently taken notice of by the King.

B.

How could the Parliament, when the King had a great Navy, and a great number of Train'd Souldiers, and all the Magazines of Ammunition in his power, be able to begin the War.

A.

The King had these things in his Right, but that signifies little, when they had the Custody of the Navy and Magazines, and with them all the Trained Souldiers, and in a manner all the Subjects were by the Preaching of Presbyterian Ministers and the seditious whispering of false and ignorant Politians made his Enemies, and when the King could have no Money but what the Parliament should give him, which you may be sure should not be enough to maintain his Legal Power, which they intended [Page 27]to take from him. And yet I think they would never have adventured into the Field but for that unlucky business of imposing upon the Scots (who were all Presbyterians) our Book of Common Prayer, for I believe the English would never have taken well that the Parliament should make War upon the King upon any provocation, unless it were in their own defence, in case the King should first make War upon them, and therefore it behoved them to pro­voke the King that he might do something that might look like Hostility: It hapned in the year 1637. that the King by advice (as it is thought) of the Arch-bishop of Canter­bury, sent down a Book of Common Prayer into Scotland, not differing in substance from ours, nor much in words, besides the putting of the word Presbyter for that of Mini­ster, commanding it to be used (for Conformity to this Kingdom) by the Ministers there, for an ordinary of Divine Service, this being read in the Church at Edinburgh, caused such a Tumult there, that he that read it had much adoe to escape with his life, and gave occasion to the great­est part of the Nobility, and others, to enter (by their own Authority) into a Covenant amongst themselves to put down Episcopacy without consulting the King; which they pre­sently did, animated thereto by their own Confidence, or by assurance from some of the Democratical English-men, that in former Parliaments had been the greatest opposers of the King's Interest, that the King would not be able to raise an Army to chastise them without calling a Parlia­ment, which would be sure to favour them, for the thing which those Democraticals chiefly then aimed at, was to force the King to call a Parliament, which he had not done of ten years before, as having found no help, but hindrance, to his designs in the Parliaments he had formerly called. Howsoever contrary to their expectation by the help of his better affected Subjects of the Nobility and Gentry, he made a shift to raise a sufficient Army to have reduced the Scots to their former obedience, if it had proceeded to Battle: And with this Army he marched himself into Scotland, where the Scotch Army was also brought into the Field against him, as if they meant to fight; but then the Scotch sent to the [Page 28]King for leave to treat by Commissioners on both sides, and the King willing to avoid the destruction of his own Subjects, condescended to it, the issue was peace, and the King thereupon went to Edinburgh and passed an Act of Parliament there to their Satisfaction

B.

Did he not then confirm Episcopacy?

A.

No, but yeilded to the abolishing of it, but by the means the English were crossed in their hope of a Parlia­ment, but the Democraticals, formerly opposers of the King's Interest, ceased not to endeavour still to put the two Nations into a War, to the end the King might buy the Parliaments help at no luss a price than Soveraignty it self.

B.

But what was the Cause that the Gentry and Nobi­lity of Scotland were so averse from Episcopacy? For I can hardly believe that their Consciences were extraordinarily tender, nor that there were so very great Divines as to know what was the true Church Discipline established by our Saviour and his Apostles, nor yet so much in love with their Ministers as to be over-ruled by them in the Government either Ecclesiastical or Civil, for in their lives they were just as other men are, Pursuers of their own Interests and Preferments, wherein they were not more opposed by the Bishops than by their Presbyterian Mi­nisters.

A.

Truly I do not know, I cannot enter into other mens thoughts farther than I am led by the considerati­on of Human Nature in general: Bet upon this conside­ration I see. First, That men of Ancient Wealth and Nobility are not apt so to brook, that poor S [...]hollars should (as they must when they are made Bishops) be their Fellows. Secondly, That from the emulation of Glory between the Nations, they be willing to see their Nation afflicted with Civil War, and might hope by aid­ing the Rebels here to acquire some Power over the Eng­lish; at least so far as to establish here the Presbyterian Discipline, which was also one of the points they after­wards openly demanded. Lastly, They might hope for in the War some great sum of Money as a reward of their [Page 29]assistance, bendes great Booty, which they afterwards ob­tained, but whatsoever was the cause of their hatred to Bishops, the pulling them down was not all they-timed at; if it had (now that Episcopacy was abolished by Act of Parliament) they would have rested satisfied, which they did not; for after the King was returned to London the English Presbyterians and Democraticals, by whose fa­vour they had put down Bishops in Scotland, thought it reason to have the assistance of the Scotch for the pulling down the Bishops in England; and in order thereunto, they might perhaps deal with the Scots secretly to rest un­satisfied with that pacification which they were before con­tented with; howsoever it was, not long after the King was returned to London they sent up to some of their friends at Court a certain Paper containing (as they ap­prehended) the Articles of the said pacification: a false and scandalous Paper, which was by the King's Command burnt (as I have heard) publickly, and so both parties re­turned to the same Condition as they were in when the King went down with his Army.

B.

And so there was a great deal of Money cast away to no purpose; but you have not told me who was General of that Army.

A.

I told you the King was there in person, he that commanded under him was the Earl of Arundel; a man that wanted not either Valour or Judgement, but to pro­ceed to Battle, or to Treaty, was not in his power but in the King's.

B.

He was a man of a most Noble and Loyal Family, and whose Ancestors had formerly given a great over­throw to the Scots in their own Countrey, and in all like­lihood he might have given them the like now, if they had Fought.

A.

He might indeed, but it had been but a kind of Su­perstition to have made him General upon that account, though many Generals heretofore have been chosen for the good luck of their Ancestors in the like occasions. In the long War between Athens and Sparta a General of the Athenians by Sea, won many Victories against the Spar­tans, [Page 30]for which cause, after his death, they chose his Son for General, with ill success. The Romans that conquered Carthage, by the valour and conduct of Scipio, when they were to make War again in Africk against Caesar, chose another Scipio, a man valiant and wise enough; but he perished in the Employment. And to come home to our own Nation, the Earl of Essex made a fortunate Expedition to Cadiz, but his Son, sent afterwards to the same place, could do nothing. 'Tis a foolish Superstition to hope, that God has entailed Success in War upon a Nation or Fa­mily.

B.

After the pacification broken, what succeeded next?

A.

The King sent Duke Hamilton with Commission and Instructions into Scotland to call a Parliament there, (but all was to no purpose) and to use all the means he could otherwise; but the Scots were resolved to raise an Army, and to enter into England, to deliver (as they pretended) their grievances to his Majesty in a Petition, because the King (they said) being in the hands of evil Counsellors, they could not otherwise obtain their right: but the truth is, they were otherwise animated to it by the De­mocratical and Presbyterian English, with a promise of reward, and hope of Plunder. Some have said, that Duke Hamilton also did rather encourage them to, than deter them from the Expedition, as hoping, by the dis­order of the two Kingdoms, to bring to pass that which he had been formerly accused of, to endeavour to make himself King of Scotland: but I take this to have been a very uncharitable Censure, upon so little ground to judge so uncharitably of a man, that afterwards lost his life in seeking to procure the liberty of the King his Master. This resolution of the Scots to enter into England being known, the King wanting Money to raise an Army against them, was now, as his Enemies here wished, constrained to call a Parliamene to meet at Westminster the 13. of April, 1640.

B.

Me-thinks a Parliament of England, if upon any occasion, should furnish the King with Money now in a War against the Scots, out of an inveterate disaffection to [Page 31]that Nation, that had always taken part with their Ene­mies the French, and which always esteemed the Glory of England an abatement of their own.

A.

'Tis indeed commonly seen, that Neighbour-Nations envy one anothers Honour, and that the less potent bears the greater malice; but that hinders them not from agreeing in those things which their common ambition leads them to. And therefore the King found for the War but the less help from this Parliament; and most of the Members thereof in their ordinary discourses seemed to wonder, why the King should make a War upon Scotland, and in that Parliament sometime called them their Bre­thren the Scots: but instead of taking the King's business, (which was the raising of Money) into their consideration, they fell upon the redressing of Grievances, and especially such way of levying Money, as in the last intermission of Pa [...]liament the King had been forced to use, such as were Ship-Money, Knigh [...]hood, and such other Vails (as one may call them) of the Regal Office, which Lawyers had found justifiable by the ant [...]ent Records of the Kingdom: Besides, they fell upon the actions of divers Ministers of State, though done by the Kings own Command and War­rant, insomuch that before they were called, the Money which was necessary for this War (if they had given Mo­ney, as they never meant to do) had come too late, It is true, there was mention of a sum of Money to be given the King by way of bargain, for relinquishing his right to Ship-money, and some other of his Prerogatives; but so seldom, and without determining any Sum, that it was in vain for the King to hope for any success; and therefore on the Fifth of May following he dissolved them.

B.

Where then had the King Money to raise and pay his Army?

A.

He was forced the second time to make use of the Nobility and Gentry, who contributed some more, some less, according to the greatness of their Estates; but amongst them all, they made up a very sufficient Army.

B.

It seems then, that the same men that crossed his business in the Parliament, now out of Parliament ad­vanced [Page 32]it all they could; what was the reason of that?

A.

The greatest part of the Lords in Parliament, and the Gentry throughout England, were more affected to Monarchy than to a Popular Government; but so, as not to endure to hear of the King's absolute Power, which made them in time of Parliament easily to condescend to abridge it, and bring the Government to mixt Monarchy, as they called it, wherein the absolute Sovereignty should be divided between the King, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons.

B.

But how if they cannot agree?

A.

I think they never thought of that; but I am sure they never meant the Sovereignty should be wholly either in one or both Houses; besides, they were loth to desert the King when he was invaded by Foreigners, for the Scots were esteemed by them as a Foreign Nation.

B.

It is strange to me, that England and Scotland being but one Island, and their Language almost the same, and being governed by one King, should be thought Foreign­ers to one another: The Romans were Masters of many Nations, and to oblige them the more to obey the Edicts of the Law sent unto them by the City of Rome, they thought fit to make them all Romans; and out of divers Nations, as Spain, Germany, Italy, and France, to advance some, that they thought worthy, even to be Senators of Rome, and to give every one of the common People the privi­ledge of the City of Rome, by which they were protected from the contumelies of other Nations where they resided: Why were not the Scotch and English in like manner united into one People?

A.

King James, at his first coming to the Crown of England, did endeavour it, but could not prevail: But for all that, I believe the Scotch have now as many priviledges in England as any Nation had in Rome, of those which were so (as you say) made Romans, for they are all Natu­ralized, and have right to buy Land in England to them and their Heirs.

B.

'Tis true of them that were born in Scotland after the time that King James was in possession of the Kingdom of England.

There be very few now that were born before. But why have they a better right that were born after than they that were born before?

B.

Because they were born Subjects to the King of Eng­land, and the rest not.

A.

Were not the rest born Subjects to King James? and was not he King of England?

B.

Yes, but not then.

A

I understand not the subtilty of the distinction; but upon what Law is that distinction grounded? is there any Statute to that purpose?

B.

I cannot tell, I think not, but it is grounded upon Equity.

A.

I see little equity in this, that those Nations that are bound to equal obedience to the same King, should not have equal Priviledges: and now seeing there be so very few born before King Jame's coming in, what greater pri­viledges had those ingrafted Romans, by their Naturali­zation in the State of Rome, or in the State of England, the English themselves more than the Scotch?

D. Those Romans, when any of them were in Rome, had their voice in the making of Laws.

A.

And the Scotch have their Parliaments, wherein their assent is required to the Law there made, which is as good. Have not many of the Provinces of France their several Parliaments, and several Constitutions? yet they are all equally Natural Subjects to the King of France. And therefore for my part, I think they were mistaken, both English and Scotch, in calling one another Foreigners. Howsoever that be, the King had a very sufficient Army, wherewith he marched towards Scotland, and by that time he was come to York, the Scots Army was drawn up to the Fronteers, and ready to march into England, (which also they presently did) giving out all the way, that their march should be without damage to the Countrey, and that their Errand was onely to deliver a Petition to the King for the redress of many pretended Injuries they had received from such of the Court, whose counsel the King most followed: so they passed through Northumber­land [Page 34]quietly till they came to a Ford in the River of Tine, a little above Newcastle, where they found some little op­position from a party of the King's Army sent thither to stop them, whom the Scots easily mastered; and as soon as they were over, seized on Newcastle, and coming far­ther on, upon the City of Duresme, and sent to the King to desire a Treaty, which was granted, and the Com­missioners on both sides met at Rippon, the conclusion was that all should be referred to the Parliament which the King should call to meet at Westminster the third of No­vember following in the same year 1640. And thereupon the King returned to London.

B.

So the Armies were disbanded.

A.

No, The Scotch Army was to be defrayed by the Counties of Northumberland and Duresme, and the King was to pay his own till the disbanding of both should be agreed upon in Parliament.

B.

So in effect both the Armies were maintained at the King's Charge, and the whole Controversie to be desided by a Parliament, almost wholly Presbyterian, and as Partial to the Scotch as themselves could have wished.

A.

And yet for all this they durst not presently make War upon the King; there was so much yet left of Reve­rence to him in the Hearts of People as to have made them odious if they had declared what they intended, they must have some colour or other to make it be believed, that the King made War first upon the Parliament. And besides they had not yet sufficiently disgraced him in Sermons and Pamphlets, nor removed from about him those they thought could best counsel him, therefore they resolved to proceed with him like skilful hunters, First to single him out by men disposed in all parts to drive him into the open field, and then in case he should not seem to turn head to call that making a War against the Parliament. And first, They called in question such as had either Preached, or written, in defence of those Rights which belonging to the Crown they meant to usurp, and take from the King to themselves, whereupon some few Writers and Preachers were Imprisoned, or forced to fly: The King not pro­tecting [Page 35]these, they proceeded to call in question some of the King's own Actions in his Ministers, whereof they Im­prison'd some, and some went beyond Sea, and whereas certain persons having endeavoured by Books and Ser­mons to raise Sedition, and committed other Crimes of high Nature, had therefore been censured by the Kings Council in the Star-Chamber, and Imprisoned; the Parlia­ment by their own Authority, to try (it seems) how the King and the people would take it (for their Persons were inconsiderable) ordered their setting at Liberty, which was accordingly done, with great Applause of the People that flocked about them in London in manner of a Tri­umph. This being done without resistance, the Kings Right to Ship-money.

B.

Ship-money: what's that?

A.

The Kings of England for the defence of the Sea had power to Tax all the Counties of England whether they were Maritine or not, for the Building and Furnish­ing of Ships, which Tax the King had then lately found cause to impose, and the Parliament exclaimed against it as an oppression: And one of their Members that had been Taxed but 20 Shillings, (mark the Oppression, a Parliament-man of 500 l. a Year Land Taxed at 20 Shil­lings) they were forced to bring it to a Tryal at Law, he refusing payment, and he was cast again: When all the Judges of Westminster were demanded their Opinions con­cerning the legality of it; of Twelve, that there are, it was judged Legal by Ten; for which, though they were not punished, yet they were affrighted by the Parlia­ment.

B.

What did the Parliament mean when they did ex­claim against it as illegal? Did they mean it was against Statute Law, or against the Judgments of Lawyers given heretofore, which are commonly called Reports? or did they mean it was against Equity, which I take to be the same with the Law of Nature?

A.

It is a hard matter, or rather impossible to know what other men mean, especially, if they be crafty, but sure I am Equity was not their ground for their pretence [Page 36]of Immunity from Contributing to the King, but at their own pleasure, for when they have laid the Burthen of de­fending the whole Kingdom and governing it upon any person whatsoever; there is little Equity he should de­pend on others for the means of performing it, or if he do, they are his Soveraign, not he theirs, and as for the Common Law, contained in Reports, they have no force but what the King gives them, besides it were unreason­able that a corrupt or foolish Judge's unjust Sentence should by any time, how long soever, obtain the authority and force of a Law, but among the Statute Laws there is one called Magna Charta, or The great Charter of the Liber­ties of English men, in which there is one Article that no man shall be destrained, that is, have his Goods taken from him otherwise than by the Law of the Land.

B.

Is not that a sufficient ground for their purpose?

A.

No, that leaves us in the same doubt which you think it clears; for where was the Law of the Land then? Did they mean a another Magna Charta that was made by some King more ancient yet? No, that Statute was made not to exempt any man from payments to the pub­lick, but for securing of every man from such as abused the King's Power by surreptitious obtaining of the King's Warrants, to the oppressing of those against whom he had any Suite in Law: But it was conducing to the end of some rebellious Spirits in this Parliament, to have it in­terpreted in the wrong sense, and suitable enough to the understanding of the rest, or most part of them to let it pass.

B.

You make the Members of that Parliament very simple men, and yet the people chose them for the wisest of the Land.

A.

If Craft be Wisedom they were wise enough, but wise as I define it, is he that knows how to bring his bu­siness to pass without the assistance of Knavery and ignoble shifts, by the sole strength of his good contrivance. A Fool may win from a better Gamster by the advantage of false Dice, and Packing of Cards.

B.

According to your definition there be few wise men [Page 37]now adays, such Wisedom is a kind of Gallantry that few are brought up to; and most think Folly, fine Cloaths, great Feathers, Civilty towards men that will not swal­low Injuries, and injury towards them that will, is the pre­sent Gallantry; but when the Parliament afterwards ha­ving gotten the power into their hands levied Money to their own use, what said the People to that.

A.

What else, but that it was legal, and to be paid as being Imposed by consent of Parliament.

B.

I have heard often that they ought to pay what was imposed by consent of Parliament to the use of the King, but to their own use, never before; I see by this it is easier to gull the multitude than any one man amongst them, for what one man that has his Natural Judgment depraved by accident, could be so easily coused in a matter that concerns his Purse, had he not been passionately carried away by the rest to change of Government, or rather to a liberty of every one to govern himself.

A.

Judge then what kind of men such a multitude of Ignorant People were like to elect for the Burgesses, and Knights of Shires.

B.

I can make no other Judgment, but that they who were then elected, were just such as had been elected for former Parliaments, and as are like to be elected for Par­ments to come, for the Common people have been, and and always will be ignorant of their duty to the Publick, as never meditating any thing, but their particular Inte­rest, in other things following their immediate Leaders, which are either the Preachers, or the most potent of the Gentlemen that dwell amongst them, as Common Soul­diers for the most part follow their Captains, if they like them: If you think the late miseries have made them wiser, that will quickly be forgot, and then we shall be no wiser then we were?

A.

Why may not men be taught their Duty? that is, the Science of Just and Unjust, as divers other Sciences have been taught, from true Principles and Demonstra­tions? and much more easily than any of those Preachers and Democratical Gent. could Rebellion and Treason.

B.

But who can teach what none have learned? or if any man hath been so singular, as to have studied the Science of Justice and Equity, how can he teach it safely, when it is against the interest of those that are in possession of the power to hurt him?

A

The Rules of the Just and Unjust sufficiently de­monstrated, and from Principles evident to the meanest capacity have not been wanting; and notwithstanding the obscurity of their Author, have shined not onely in this, but in Foreign Countries, to men of good Education; but they are few in respect of the rest of men, whereof many cannot read; many, though they can have no leisure, and of them that have leisure, the greatest part have their minds wholly employed and taken up by their private businesses or pleasures: so that it is impossible that the multitude should ever learn their Duty but from the Pulpit, and upon Holy-days; but then, and from thence it is, that they learned their Disobedience; and therefore the light of that Doctrine has been hitherto co­vered and kept under, hereby a cloud of adversaries, which no man's private reputation can break through, without the Authority of the Universities; but from the Universities came all those Preachers-that taught the con­trary. The Universities have been to this Nation, as the Wooden-horse was to the Trojaus.

B.

Can you tell me why, and when, the Universities here first began?

A.

It seems, for the time, they began in the Reign of the Emperor Charles the Great, before which time, I doubt not, but there were many Grammar-Schools for the Latin Tongue, which was the Natural Language of the Roman Church; but for Universities, that is to say, Schools for the Science in general, and especially for Di­vinity, it is manifest, that the institution of them was re­commended by the Pope's Letter to the Emperor Charles the Great, and recommended farther by a Council held in his time, I think at Chal. sur. Saone; and not long after was erected an University at Paris, and the University called University Colledge at Oxford; and so by degrees se­veral [Page 39]Bishops, Noblemen, and rich men, and some Kings and Queens contributing thereunto, the Universities at last obtained their present splendor.

B.

But what was the Pope's design in it?

A.

What other design was he like to have, but what you heard before? the advancement of his own Autho­rity in the Countreys where the Universities were ere­cted; there they learned to dispute for him, and with unintelligible distinctions to blind mens eyes, whilst they encroached upon the Rights of Kings; and it was an evi­dent argument of that design, that they fell in hand with the work so quickly: For the first Rector of the University of Paris, as I have read some-where, was Pe­ter Lombard, who first brought in to them the Learning called School-Divinity, and was seconded by John Scot of Duns, who lived in or near the same time, whom any ingenious Reader, not knowing what was the design, would judge to have been the most egregious Blockhead in the world; so obscure and sensless are their Writings: And from these, the School-men that succeeded learnt the trick of imposing what they lift upon their Readers, and declining the force of true Reason by verbal Forks, I mean distinctions that signifie nothing, but serve onely to astonish the multitude of ignorant men; as for the understanding Readers, they were so few, that these new sublime Doctors cared not what they thought, these School-men were to make good all the Articles of Faith which the Pope from time to time should command to be believed; amongst which, there were very many in­consistent with the Rights of Kings, and other Civil So­vereigns, as asserting to the Pope all Authority what­soever, they should declare to be necessary in ordine ad Spiritualia, (that is to say) in order to Religion.

From the Universities also it was that Preachers pro­ceeded, and were poured out into City and Countrey, to terrifie people into obedience to the Popes Canons and Commands, which for fear of wakening Kings and Princes too much, they durst not yet call them Laws.

From the Universities it was, that the Philosophy of [Page 40] Aristotle was made an ingredient to Religion, as serving for a Salve to a great many absurd Articles concerning the nature of Christ's Body, and the state of Angels and Saints in Heaven: which Articles they thought fit to have believed, because they bring some of them profit, and others reverence to the Clergy, even to the meanest of them; for when they shall have made the People be­lieve, that the meanest of them can make the Body of Christ, who is there that will not both shew them reve­rence, and be liberal to them or to the Church, especially in the time of their sickness, when they think they make and bring to them their Saviour?

B.

But what advantage to them in these Impostures was the Doctrine of Aristotle?

A.

They have made more use of his Obscurity than his Doctrine; for none of the antient Philosophers Writing; are comparable to those of Aristotle, for their aptness to puzzle and intangle men with words, and to breed dispu­tation, which must at last be ended in the determination of the Church of Rome. And in the Doctrine of Aristotle they made use of many points; as first, the Doctrine of separated Essences.

B.

What are separated Essences?

A

Separated Beings.

B.

Separated from what?

A.

From every thing that is.

B.

I cannot understand the Being of any thing, which I understand not to be; but what can they make of that?

A.

Very much in questions concerning the nature of God, and concerning the state of man's Soul after death in Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory; by which you and every man knows how great obedience, and how much Money they gain from the common People: Whereas Aristotle holdeth the Soul of Man to be the first giver of Motion to the Body, and consequently to it self: They make use of that in the Doctrine of Free-will, what and how they gain by that, I will not say.

He holdeth forth, that there be many things that come to pass in this World from no necessity of Causes, but meer Contingency, Casualty, and Fortune?

B.

Me-thinks in this they make God stand idle, and to be a meer spectator in the Games of Fortune; for, what God is the cause of, must needs come to pass; and, in my opinion, nothing else. But because there must be some ground for Justice of the eternal Torment of the Damned, perhaps it is this, That mens Wills and Propensions are not (they think) in the hands of God, but of themselves. And in this also I see something conducing to the Autho­rity of the Church.

A.

This is not much, nor was Aristotle of such credit with them, but that when his opinion was against theirs, they could slight him; whatsoever he says is impossible in Nature, they can prove well enough to be possible from the Almighty power of God, who can make Bodies to be in one and the self-same place, and one Body to be in many places at the same time, if the Doctrine of Transubstantiation require it, though Aristotle deny it. I like not the design of drawing Religion into an Art, whereas it ought to be a Law. And though not the same in all Countreys, yet in every Countrey indisputa­ble; nor that they teach it as Arts ought to be taught, by shewing first the meaning of their Terms, and then de­riving from them the Truth they would have us believe, nor that their Terms are for the most part untelligible, though to make it seem rather want of Learning in the Reader, than want of sair dealing in themselves; they are for the most part Latin and Greek words, wried a little the point towards the Native Language of the several Countries where they are used. But that which is most intoll [...]rable is, That all Clerks are forced to make as if they believe them, if they mean to have any Church-Preferment, the Keys whereof are in the Popes hands; and the common People, whatsoever they believe of those s [...]bt [...] Doctrines, are never esteemed better Sons of the Church for their Learning. There is but one way there to Salvation, that is, extraordinary Devotion and Libera­lity to the Church, and readiness for the Churches sake, if it be required, to fight against their Natural and Lawful Sovereigns.

B.

I see what use they make of Aristotles Logick, Phy­sick and Metaphysicks: But I see not yet how his Politicks can serve their turn.

A.

Nor I, It has (I think) done them no good, though it has done us here much hurt by accident; for men grown weary at last of the Insolence of the Priests, and exa­mining the Truths of those Doctrines that were put upon them, began to search the sense of the Scriptures as they are in the Learned Languages; and consequently Study­ing Greek and Latin, became acquainted with the Demo­cratical Principles of Aristotle and Cicero, and from the Love of their Eloquence, fell in Love with the Politicks, and more and more, till it grew into the Rebellion we now talk of, without any other advantage to the Roman Church, but that it was awakening to us, whom since we broke out of their Net in the time of Henry 8. they have continually endeavoured to recover.

B.

What have they gotten by teaching of Aristotles Ethicks?

A.

It is some advantage to them, that neither the Mo­rals of Aristotle, nor of any other, have done them any harm, nor us any good. Their Doctrine have caused a great deal of Dispute concerning Vertue and Vice, but no knowledge of what they are, nor any method of attaining Vertue, nor of avoiding Vice.

The end of Moral Philosophy, is to teach men of all sorts their Duty, both to the publick, and to one ano­ther. The Estimate Virtue, partly by a Mediocrity of the Passions of Men, and partly by that, that they are praised; whereas it is not the much or little praise that makes an Action Virtuous, but the Cause; nor much or little blame that makes an Action Vitious, but its being unconform­able to the Laws, in such men as are subject to the Law; or its being unconformable to Equity or Charity in all men whatsoever.

B.

It seems you make a difference between the Ethicks of Subjects, and the Ethicks of Soveraigns.

A.

So I do: The Vertue of a Subject is comprehended wholly in obedience to the Laws of the Commonwealth. [Page 43]To obey the Laws is Justice and Equity, which is the Law of Nature, and consequently is Civil Law in all Nations of the World; and nothing is Injustice or Iniquity, other­wise then it is against the Law: Likewise to obey the Law is the Prudence of a Subject; for without such obe­dience the Commonwealth (which is every Subjects safety and protection) cannot subsist. And though it be Prudence also in private men, justly and moderately to enrich them­selves; yet craftily to withold from the Publick, or de­fraud it of such part of the Wealth as is by Law required, is no sign of Prudence, but of want of knowledge of what is necessary for their own defence.

The Vertues of Soveraigns are such as tend to the main­tenance of Peace at Home, and to the resistance of For­reign Enemies. Fortitude is a Royal Vertue, and though it be necessary in such private men as shall be Soldiers; yet for other men the less they dare the better it is, both for the Commonwealth, and for themselves. Frugality (though perhaps you would think it strange) is also a Royal Vertue, for it increases the publick stock, which cannot be too great for the Publick Use, nor any man too sparing of what he has in trust for the good of others. Li­berality also is a Royal Vertue, for the Commonwealth cannot be well serv'd without Extraordinary Diligence and Service of Ministers, and great Fidelity to their Sove­raign, who ought therefore to be incouraged, and espe­cially those that do him service in the Wars. In summ, all Actions or Habits are to be esteemed Good or Evil, by their Causes and Usefulness in reference to the Commonwealth, and not by their Mediocrity, nor by their being com­mended; for several men praise several Customes, and that which is Vertue with one, is blam'd by others; and contrarily, what one calls Vice, an other calls Vertue as their present Affections lead them.

B.

Methinks you should have placed amongst the Ver­tues, that which in my Opinion is the greatest of all Ver­tues, Religion.

A.

So I have, though it seems you did not observe it: But whether do we Disgress from the way we were in?

B.

I think you have not Digressed at all; for I sup­pose your purpose was to acquaint me with the History, not so much of those Actions that past in the time of the late Troubles, as of their Causes, and of the Counsels, and Artifi [...]es by which they were brought to pass. There be divers men that have written the History, out of whom I might have Learned what they did, and somewhat also of the Contrivance: But I find little in them of it. I would ask therefore, since you were pleased to enter into this Discourse at my request; be pleased also to inform me after my own method. And for the danger of Confusion that may arise from that, I will take care to bring you back to the place from whence I drew you; for I well re­member where it was.

A.

Well then, to your Question concerning Religion, In­asmuch as I told you, that Vertue is comprehended in Obe­dience to the Laws of the Commonweath, whereof Reli­gion is one, I have placed Religion amongst the Vertues.

B.

Is Religion then the Law of a Commonwealth?

A.

There is no Nation in the World, whose Religion is not Established, and receives not its Authority from the Laws of that Nation. It is true that the Law of God re­ceives no obedience from the Laws of Men: But because men can never by their own Wisdom come to the know­ledge of what God hath spoken and Commanded to be Ob­served, nor be obliged to obey the Laws, whose Author they know not; they are to acqui [...]ss in some humane Au­thority or other: So that the Question will be, Whether a man ought in matter of Religion (that is to say) when there is question of his D [...]ty to God and the King, to re­ly upon the Praeaching of their Fellow-Subjects, or of 2 Stranger, or upon the voice of the Law?

B.

There is no great difficulty in that point, for there is none that Preach here, or any where else, at least ought to Preach, but such as have Authority so to do, from him or them that have the Soveraign Power: So that if the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully Preach as them that do, and I believe we should perform that Office a great deal better than they, that preached us into Rebel­lion.

The Church Morals are in many points very diffe­rent from these that I have here set down for the Doctrine of Vertue and Vice, and yet without any conformity with that of Aristotle: for in the Church of Rome the principle Vertues are to obey their Doctrine, though it be Treason, and that is to be Religious; to be beneficial to the Clergy, that is their Piety and Liberality; and to believe upon their word, that which a man knows in his Conscience to the false, which is the Faith that they require: I could name a great many more such points of their Morals, but that I know you know them already, being so well versed in the cases of Conscience written by their School-men, who measure the goodness and wickedness of all Actions by their Congruity with the Doctrine of the Roman Clergy.

B.

But what is the Moral Philosophy of the Protestant Clergy in England?

A.

So much as they shew of it in their Life and Con­versation, is for the most part very good, and of very good example, much better than their Writings.

B.

It happens many times that men live honestly for fear, who if they had Power would live according to their own Opinions; that is, if their Opinions be nor right, Unrighteously.

A.

Do the Clergy in England pretend as the Pope does, or [...]s the Presbyterians do, to have a right from God im­mediately to govern the King and his Subjects in all points of Religion and Manners? If they do, you cannot doubt but that if they had Number and Strength (which they are never like to have) they would attempt to attain that Power, as the others have done.

B.

I would be glad to see a System of the present Morals written by some Divine of good Reputation and Learning, and of the late King's party.

A.

I think I can recommend unto you the best that is extant, and such an one as (except a few passages that I mislike) is very well worth your reading; the Title of it is, The whole Duty of Man, laid down in a plain and fa­miliar way. And yet I dare say, that if the Presbyterian Ministers even those of them that were the most diligent [Page 46]Preachers of the late Sedit on, were to be tried by it, they would go near to be found Not Guilty. He has divided the Duty of Man into three great Branches, His Duty to God, to Himself, and to his Neighbour. In his Duty to God he puts the acknowledgment of him in his Essence, and his Attributes, and in believing of his Word; his Attri­butes are, Omnipotence, Omniscience, Infiniteness, Ju­stice, Truth, Mercy, and all the rest that are found in Scripture. Which of these did not those Seditious Preach­ers acknowledge equally with the best of Christians? The Word of God are the Books of holy Scripture, received for Can nical in England.

B.

They receive the World of God, but 'tis according to their own interpretation.

A.

According to whose interpretation was it received by the Bishops and the rest of the Loyal Party, but their own? He puts for another Duty Obedience and Submis­sion to God's Will. Did any of them, nay, did any man living, do any thing, at any time, against God's Will?

B.

By God's Will I suppose he means there his re­vealed Will, (that is to say) his Commandments, which I am sure they did most horribly break, both by their Preaching and otherwise.

A.

As for their Actions, there is no doubt but all men are guilty enough (if God deal severely with them) to be damned: and for their Preaching, they will say, they thought it agreeable to God's revealed Will in the Scri­ptures; if they thought if so, it was not disobedience but error, and how can any man prove they thought other­wise?

B.

Hypocrisie hath this great prerogative above other sins, that it cannot be accused.

A.

Another Duty he sets down is to honour him in his House, that is, the Church, in his Possessions, in his Day, in his Word and Sacraments.

B.

They perform this Duty (I think) as well as any other Ministers, I mean, the Loyal Party; and the Pres­byterians have always had an equal care to have God's House free from prophanation, to have Tithes duly paid, [Page 47]to have the Sabbath day kept holy, the Word preached, and the Lord's Supper and Baptism duly administred. But it is not the keeping of the Feasts and of the Fasts, one of those Duties that belong to the Honour of God, if it be, the Presbyterians fail in that.

A.

Why so? they kept some Holidays, and they had Feasts among themselves, though not upon the same Days that the Church ordains, but when they thought fit: as when it pleased God to give the King any notable Victo­ry, and they govern'd themselves in this point by the holy Scriptures, as they pretend to be, and can prove they did not believe so.

B.

Let us pass over all other Duties, and come to that Duty which we owe to the King, and consider whether the Doctrine taught by these Divines, which adhered to the King, be such, in that point, as may justifie the Presby­terians that incited the People to Rebellion; for that's the thing you call in question.

A.

Concerning our Duty to our Rulers, he hath these words, An obedience we must pay either Active or Passive; the Active, in the case of all Lawful Commands, that is, when ever the Magistrate commands something which is not contrary to some command of God, we are then bound to act according to that command of the Magistrate, to do the thing he requires; but when he enjoyns any thing contrary to what God hath commanded, we are not then to pay him this Active obedience, we may, nay, we must refuse thus to act; (yet here we must be very well assur'd, that the thing is so contrary, and not pretend Conscience for a cloak of stubbornness) we are in that case to obey God rather than men. But even this is a season for the Passive obedience, we must patiently suffer what he inflicts on us for such refusal, and not, to secure our selves, rise up against him.

B.

What is there in this to give colour to the late Re­bellion?

They will say, they did it in obedience to God, in­asmuch as they did believe it was according to the Scri­pture, out of which they will bring perhaps examples of David and his Adherents, that resisted King Saul, and of the Prophets afterwards, that vehemently from time to time preached against the Idolatrous Kings of Israel and Judah: Saul was their Lawful King, and yet they paid him neither Active nor Passive obedience, for they did put themselves into a posture of defence against him, though David himself spared his person, and so did the Presbyterians put into their Commission to their General, that they should spare the King's Person. Besides, you cannot doubt, but that they who in the Pulpit did ani­mate the People to take Arms in defence of the then Par­liament, alledged Scripture, that is the Word of God for it. If it be lawful then for Subjects to resist the King when he commands any thing against the Scripture, that is contrary to the command of God, and to be Judge of the meaning of the Scripture, it is impossible that the life of any King, or the peace of any Christian Kingdom can be long secure. It is this Doctrine that Divides a King­dom within it self, whatsoever the men be (Loyal or Re­bels) that Write or Preach it publickly. And thus you see, that if those seditious Ministers be tried by this Doctrine, they will come off well enough.

B.

I see it, and wonder at People, that having never spoken with God Almighty, nor knowing one more than another, what he hath said, when the Laws and the Prea­cher disagree, should so keenly follow the Minister, for the most part an ignorant, though a ready tongu'd Scholar, rather than the Laws that were made by the King, with the consent of the Peers and the Commons of the Land.

A.

Let us examine his words a little nearer; first, con­cerning Passive obedience. When a Thief hath broken the Laws, and, according to the Law, is therefore executed, can any man understand, that this suffering of his is an obedience to the Law? Every Law is a Command to do [Page 49]or to forbear; neither of these is fulfilled by suffering. If any suffering can be called obedience, it must be such as is voluntary; for no voluntary action can be count­ed a submission to the Law. He that means that his suffering should be taken for obedience, must not onely not resist, but also flie, nor hide himself to avoid his punishment. And who is there among them that dis­courses of Passive obedience, when his life is in extreme danger, that will voluntarily present himself to the Offi­cers of Justice? Do not we see that all men when they are led to Execution, are both bound and guarded, and would break loose, if they could, and get away? such is their Passive obedience. Christ saith, The Scribes and Pha­risees sate in Moses's chair; all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, Matth. 23.3. which is a doing an an Active obedience; and yet the Scribes and Pharisees appear not by the Scriptures to have been such godly men, as never to command any thing against the revealed will of God.

B.

Must Tyrants also be obeyed in every thing actively, or is there nothing wherein a Lawful Kings commands may be disobeyed; what if he should command me with my own hands to execute my Father, in case he should be condemned to die by the Law?

A.

This is a case that need not be put, we never have read or heard of any King or Tyrant so inhumane as to command it; if any did, we are to consider, whether that command were one of his Laws; for by disobeying Kings, we mean disobeying his Laws, those his Laws that were made before they were applied to any particular person: For the King, though as a Father of Children, and a Master of domestick Secrets, yet commands the People in gene­ral never but by a precedent Law, and as a Publick, not a Natural Person; and if such a Command as you speak of were contrived into a general Law, (which never was, nor never will be) you were bound to obey it, unless you depart [Page 50]the Kingdom after the publication of the-Law, and be­fore the condemnation of your Father.

B.

Your Author says farther, in refusing active obedi­ence to the King, that commanded any thing contrary to God's Law, we must be very well assured that the thing is so contrary; I would fain know-how is it possible to be assured?

A.

I think you do not believe, that any of those Refusers do immediately, from God's own mouth, receive any Command contrary to the Command of the King, who is God's Lieutenant, nor any other way than you and I do; that is to say, than by the Scriptures: And because men do for the most part rather draw the Scriptures to their own sense, than follow the true sense of the Scripture, there is no other way to know certainly, and in all cases, what God commands or forbids us to do, but by the sen­tence of him or them, that are constituted by the King to determine the sense of the Scriptures, upon hearing of the particular Case of Conscience which is in question; and they that are so constituted, are easily known in all Christian Common-wealths, whether they be Bishops, or Ministers, or Assemblies that govern the Church under him or them that have the Sovereign Power.

B.

Some doubts may be raised from this that you now say; for if men be to learn their Duty from the Sentence which other men shall give concerning the meaning of the Scriptures, and not from their own Interpretation, I understand not to what end they were Translated into English, and every man not onely permitted, but also exhorted to read them; for what could that produce but diversity of Opinion, and consequently (as man's nature is) Disputation, breach of Charity, Disobedience, and at last Rebellion? Again, since the Scriptures were allowed to be read in English, why were not the Translations such, as might make all that's read understood, even by mean ca­pacities? [Page 51]Did not the Jews, such as could read, under­stand their Law in the Jewish Language, as well as we do our Statute Laws in English? And as for such places of the Scripture as had nothing of the Nature of a Law, it was nothing to the Duty of the Jews whether they were un­derstood or not, seeing nothing is punishable but the transgression of some Law. The same question I may ask concerning the New Testament; for I believe that those men, to whom the Original Language was natural, did understand sufficiently what Commands and Counsels were given them by our Saviour and his Apostles, and his immediate Disciples. Again, how will you answer that question which was put by St. Peter and St. John, Acts 4.19. when by Ananias the High-priest, and others of the Council of Jerusalem, they were forbidden any more to teach in the Name of Jesus, Whether is it right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God?

A.

The case is not the same, Peter and John had seen and daily conversed with our Saviour, and by the Miracles he wrought did know he was God, and consequently knew certainly, that their disobedience to the High Priest's present command was just. Can any Minister now say, that he hath immediately from God's own mouth received a Command to disobey the King, or know otherwise than by the Scripture, that any Command of the King, that hath the form and nature of a Law, is against the Law of God, which in divers places he directly and evidently commandeth to obey him in all things. The Text you cite doth not tell us, that a Minister's Authority, rather than a Christian King's, shall decide the questions that arise from the different Interpretations of the Scripture. And therefore where the King is Head of the Church, and by consequence (to omit, that the Scripture it self was not received but by the Authority of Kings and States) chief Judge of the Rectitude of all Interpretations of the Scri­pture, to obey the King's Laws and publick Edicts, is not to disobey, and obey God: A Minister ought not to think, that his skill in the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew Tongues, if [Page 52]he have any, gives him a triviledge to impose upon all his fellow-subjects his own sense, or what he pretends to be his sense of every obscure place of Scripture; nor ought he, as often as he hath found some fine Interpre­tation not before thought on by others, to think he had it by Inspiration, as fine as he thinks it, is not false; and then all his stubbornness and contumacy towards the King and his Laws is nothing but pride of heart and am­b [...]tion, or else imposture. And whereas you think it need­less, or perhaps hurtful, to have the Scriptures in Eng­lish, I am of another mind; There are so many places of Scripture easily to be understood, that teach both true Faith and good Morality, and that as fully as it is neces­sary to Salvation, of which no Seducer is able to dispose the mind of any ordinary Readers, that the reading of them is so profitable, as not to be forbidden, without great damage to them and the Common-wealth.

B.

All that is required both in Faith and Manners for Man's Salvation, is, I confess, set down in Scripture as plainly as can be: Children, obey your parents in all things. Servants, obey your masters in all things. Let all men be subject to the higher powers, whether it be the King, or those that are sent by him. Love God with all your soul, and your neighbour as your self, are words of the Scripture, which are well enough understood; but neither Children, nor the greatest part of Men, do understand why it is their duty so to do; they see not that the safety of the Common-wealth, and consequently their own, depends upon the doing of it. Every man by Nature, without Dis­cipline, does in all his actions look upon, as far as he can see, the benefit that shall redound to himself by his obe­dience; he reads, that covetousness is the root of all evil, but he thinks, and sometimes finds it is the root of his Estate. And so in other cases, the Scripture says one Scripture says one thing, and they think another, we [...]gh­ing the commodities or incommodities of this present life onely, which are in their sight, never putting into the scales the good and evil of the Life to come, which they see not.

All his is no more than happens where the Scripture is sealed up in Greek and Latine, and the People taught the same things out of them by Preachers, but they that are of a Condition and Age fit to examine the sense of what they read, and that take a delight in searching out the grounds of their duty, certainly cannot chuse but by reading of the Scriptures come to such a sense of their Duty, as not only to obey the Laws themselves, but also to induce others to do the same, for commonly Men of Age and quality are followed by their inseriour Neighbours that look more upon the example of those Men whom they Reverence, and whom they are unwilling to displease, then upon Precepts and Laws.

A.

These men of the Condition and Age you speak of are in my opinion the unfittest of all others to be trusted with the reading of the Scriptures; I know you mean such as have studied the Greek or Latin, or both Tongues, and that are withal such as love knowledge, and consequently take delight in finding out the meaning of the most hard Texts, or in thinking they have found it in case it be new and not found out by others; these are therefore they that pretermitting the easie places, that teach them their duty, fall to scanning only the Mysteries of Religion: Such as are, how it may be made out with wit, that there be three that bear Rule in Heaven, and those three but one, how the Deity could be made flesh, how that flesh could be re­ally present in many places at once? where's the place, and what the Torments of Hell and other Metaphysical Doctrines? whether the Will of Man be free, or govern'd by the will of God, whether Sanctity comes by Inspiration or Education: by whom Christ now speaks to us, whether by the King, or by the Bible to every man that reads it, and interprets it to himself, or by a private Spirit, to every private Man: These and the like po [...]nts are the study of the curi­ous and the cause of all our late mischief; and the cause that makes the plainer sort of men whom the Scriptures had taught belief in Christ, love towards God, obedience towards the King, and sobriety of Behaviour; forget it all, [Page 54]and place their Religion in the Disputable Doctrines, of your wise men.

A.

I do not think these men fit to interpret the Scrip­tures to the rest: nor do I say that the rest ought to take their interpretation for the word of God. Whatsoever is necessary for them to know more, does them no good; but in case any of these unnecessary Doctrines shall be Au­thorized by the Laws of the King or other state: I say it is the duty of every Subject not to speak against them, in as­much as 'tis every Mans duty to obey him, or them that have the Soveraign power, and the wisdom of all such powers, to punish such as shall publish or teach their pri­vate Interpretations when they are contrary to the Law: and likely to incline men to sedition or disputing against the Law.

B.

They must punish then the most of those that have had there breeding in the Universities, for such curious questions in Divinity are first started in the Universities; and so are all those politick questions concerning the rights of Civil and Ecclesiastical Government, and there they are furnished with Arguments for Liberty, out of the works of Aristotle, Plato Cicero, Seneca, and out of the Histories of Rome and Greece for their disputation against the neces­sary power of their Soveraigns; therefore I dispare of any lasting peace, among our selves, till the Universities here shall bend and direct their studies to the setling of it, That is, to the Teaching of Absolute obedience to the Laws of the King, and to his publick Edicts under the great Seal of England: For I make no doubt but that solid reason backt with the Authority of so many Learned men, will more pre­vail for the keeping of us in peace within our selves than any victory over the Rebells; but I am afraid 'tis unpos­sible to bring the Universities to such a compliance with the Actions of State as is necessary for the business; seeing the Universities have heretofore from time to time maintain'd the Authority of the Pope, contrary to all Laws; Divine, Civil, and Natural: against Right of our Kings, why can [Page 55]they not as well when they have all manner of Laws and Equity on their side, maintain the Rights of him that is both Soveraign of the Kingdom, and Head of the Church.

B.

Why then were they not in all points for the Kings power presently after that. King Henry 8. was in Parlia­ment declared Head of the Church, as much as they were before for the Authory of the Pope.

A.

Because the Clergy in the Universities by whom all things there are govern'd, and the Clergy w [...]thout the Universities as well Bishops as Inseriour Clerks did think that the pulling down of the Pope, was the setting up of them, (as to England) in his place, and made no question the greate [...]t part of them, but that their spiritual power did depend not upon the Authority of the King, but of Christ himself derived to them by successible Imposition of hands from Bishop to Bishop? notwithstanding they knew, that [...]i [...]is derivation passed through the hands of Popes and Bishops whose Authority they had cast off, for though they were content that the Divine right which the Pope pretend­ed to in England should be denied him, yet they thought it rot so fit to be taken from the Church of England, whom they now supposed themselves to represent.

It seems they did not think it reasonable, that a Woman, or a Child, or a Man, that could not construe the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin Bible, nor know perhaps the Declensions and Conjugations of Greek, or Latin, Nounes and Verbs, should take upon him to govern so many Learned Doctors in matters of Religion, meaning matters of Divinity, for Religion has been for a long time, and is now by most people taken for the same thing with Divinity, to the great advantage of the Clergy.

A.

And especially now amongst the Presbyterians, for I see few that are esteemed by them very good Christians be­sides such as can repeat their Sermons and wrangle so: [Page 56]them about Interpretat on of the Scripture, and fight for them also with their Bodies or Purses when they shall be re­quired to believe in Christ is nothing with them, unless you believe as they bid you, Charity is nothing with them un­less it be Charity and Liberality to them, and partaking with them in Faction; How we can have peace while this is our Religion, I cannot tell Haeret Laterilethalis arundo. The seditious Doctrine of the Presbyterians hath been stuck so hard in the Peoples heads and memories, (I cannot say into their hearts, for they understood nothing in it, but that they may lawfully rebel) That I fear the Common­wealth will never be cured.

A.

The two great Vertues that were severally in Henry the 7. Henry the 8. When they shall be Joyntly in one King, will easily cure it, that of Henry the 7. was without much noise of the people to fill his Coffers, that of Henry the 8. was an early severity, but this without the former cannot be exercised.

B.

This that you say looks (methinks) like an advice to the King to let them alone till he have gotten ready mo­ney enough to levy and maintain a sufficient Army, and then to fall on them and destroy them.

A.

God forbid that so horrible Unchristian and unhu­main design should ever enter into the Kings heart, I would have him have money enough, readily to raise an Army, able to suppress any Rebellion and to take from the Enemies all hope of success, that they may n [...]t dare to trouble him in the Reformation of the Universities, but to put none to death, without the Actual committing such Crimes as are already made Capital by the Laws, the Core of Rebellion as you have seen by this, and read of o­ther Rebellions, are the Universities, which nevertheless are not to be cast away, but to be better disciplin'd, that is to say, that the Politicks there taught be made to be (as true Politicks should be) such as are fit to make men know that it is their duty to obey all Laws whatsoever that shall [Page 57]be by the Authority of the King enacted, till by the same Authority they shall be repeal'd such as are fit to make men understand that the Civil Laws are Gods Laws, as they that make them, and to make men know that the people and the Church are one thing, and have but one Head, the King; and that no man has Title to govern under him that has it not from him; that the King owes his Crown to Cod only and to no man Ecclesiastick, or other, and that the Religion they teach there be a quiet waiting for the coming again of blessed Saviour, and in the mean time a Resolution to obey the Kings Laws, which are also Gods Laws, to injure no man, to be in Charity with all men, to cherish the Poor and Sick, and to live Soberly, and free from Scandal, without mingling our Religion with points of Natural Phylosophy, as freedom of Will, Incorporeal sub­stance; Everlasting News, Ubiquities, Hypostases. Which the people understand not, nor will ever care for, when the Universities shall be thus disciplined, there will come out of them from time to time, well Principled Preachers, and they that are ill principled from time to time fall away.

B.

I think it a very good course, and perhaps the only one that can make our peace amongst our selves constant: for if men know not their Duty, what is there that can force them to obey they Laws? An Army you'l say; but what shall force the Army, were not the Train'd Bands an Army? Were they not the Janisaries that not long ago slew Osman in his own Palace at Constantinople! I am therefore of your opinion, both that men may be brought to a love of Obedience by Preachers and Gentlemen that imbibe good Principles in their Youth at the Univer­sities; and also that we never shall have a lasting peace, till the Universites themselves be in such manney (as you have said) reformed, and the Ministers know they have no Authority but what the supream Civil Power gives them: [...]nd [...]e Nobility and Gentry know, that the Liberty of a State is not an Exemption from the Laws of their own Countrey, whether made by an Assembly, or [Page 58]by a Monarchy, but an Exemption from the constraint and Insolence of their Neighbours.

And now I am satisfied in this point, I will bring you back to the place from whence my Curiosity drew you to this long digression; We were upon the point of Ship­money; one of those grievances which the Parliament exclaimed against, as Tyranny and Arbitrary Govern­ment, thereby to single out (as you called it) the King from his Subjects, and to make a party against him, when they should need it: And now you may proceed if it please you, to such other Artifices as they used to the same purpose.

A.

I think it were better to give over here our dis­course of his business, and refer it to some other day that you shall think fit.

B.

Content that day, I believe is not far off:

A.

You are welcome, yet if you had stayed somewhat longer: My Money would have been so much the better provided for you.

B,

Nay! I pray you give me now what you have a­bout you, for the rest I am content to take what time you please.

A.

After the Parliament had made the people believe that the Extorting of Ship-money was unlawful, and the people thereby inclined to think it Tyrannical; in the next place to increase their disaffection to his Majesty: They accused him of a purpose to Introduce and Authorize the Roman Religion in this Kingdom: Than which no­thing was more hateful to the people, not because it was Erroneous (which they had neither Learning nor Judgment enough to examine) but because they had been used to heat it inveyed against, in the Sermons and Dis­courses of the Preachers whom they trusted to, and this [Page 59]was indeed the most effectual calumny to alienate the peoples affections from him that could possibly be in­vented; the colour they had for this stand was: First, that there was one Rosseti Resident, (at and a little before the time) from the Pope with the Queen. And one Mr. George Con-secratary to the Cardinal Francisco Bar­b [...]rini, Nephew to Pope Urban the Eighth sent over un­der favour, and protection of the Queen (as was con­ceived) to draw as many persons of quality about the Court, as he should be able, to reconcile themselves to the Church of Rome, with what success I cannot tell, but it is likely he gained some, especially of the weaker Sex; If I may say they were gained by him, when not his Arguments but hope of favour from the Queen in all pro­bability prevailed upon them.

B.

In such a Conjuncture as that was, it had perhaps been better they had not been sent.

A.

There w [...]s exception also taken at a Covent of Friers, Capucines in Sommerset-house; though allowed by the Articles of Marriage; and it was reported that the Jescites also were shortly after to be allowed a Covent in Clerkenwel, and in the mean time the principal Secretary Sir Francis Windebank was accused for having by his Warrant set at liberty some English Jesuites that had been taken and Imprisoned for returning into England after Banishment contrary to the Statute, which had made it Capital, also the great resort of English Catholicks to the Queens Chappel gave them Colour to blame the Queen her self, not only for that, but also for all the favours that had been shown to the Catholicks, insomuch that some of them did not stick to say openly that the King was go­verned by her.

B.

Strange Injustice! The Queen was a Catholick by Profession, and therefore could not but endeavour to do the Catholicks all the good she could, she had not else been truely that which she professed to be, but it seen [...]s [Page 60]they meant to force her to Hypocrisie, being Hypo­crites themselves: Can any man think it a Crime in a Devour Lady (of what Sect soever) to seek Favour and Benediction of that Church whereof she is a Mem­ber.

A.

To give the Parliament another Colour for their Accusation on foot for the King, as to introducing of Popery, there was a great Controversy between the Episcopal and Presbyterian Clergy about Free-will. The Dispute began first in the Low-Countries, between Gomar and Arminius, in the time of King James, who foresee­ing it might trouble the Church of England, did what he could to compose the difference, an Assembly of Di­vines was therefore got together at Dort, to which also King James sent Divine or two, but it came to nothing, the question was left undecided, and became a Subject to be disputed of in the Universities; here all the Pres­byterians were of the same mind with Gomar, but a very great many others not, and those were called here Ar­minians, who because the Doctrine of Free-will had been exploded as Papistical, and because the Presbyterians were far the greater number, and already in favour with the People, they were generally hated; it was casie there­fore for the Parliament to make that Calumny pass cur­rently with the People; when the Archbishop of Can­terbury, Dr. Laud, was for Arminius, and had a little be­fore, by his Power Ecclesiastical, forbidden all Mini­sters to Preach to the People of Predestination; and when all Ministers that were gracious with him, and hoped for any Church-preferment fell to Preaching and Writing for Free-will to the uttermost of their Power, as a proof of their Ability and Merit. Besides they gave out, some of them, that the Archbishop was in heart a Papist, and in case he could effect here a Tolleration of the Roma [...] Religion to have Cardinal's Hat, which was not on­ly false, but also without any ground at all for a Suspi­cion.

It is a strange thing that Scholars obscure men, that could receive no Charity, but from the flame of the State should be suffered to bring their unnecessary Dis­putes, and together with them their quarrels out of the Universities into the Commonwealth, and more strange that the State should engage in their Parties, and not rather put them both to silence: A State can constrain obedience, but convince no Error, nor alter the mind of them that believe they have the better reason; Sup­pression of Doctrines dues but unite and exasperate, that is, increase both the malice and power of them that have already believed them; But what are the Points they dis­agree in? Is there any Controversy between Bishop and Presbyterian concerning the Divinity or Humani­ty of Christ? Do either of them deny the Trinity, or any Article of the Creed? Does either Party Preach openly, or Write directly against Justice, Charity, So­briety, or any other Duty, necessary to Salvation, ex­cept only the Duty to the King, and not that neither, but when they had a mind either to Rule or Destroy the King? Lord have mercy upon us. Can no body be saved that understands not their Disputations? or is there more requisite either of Faith, or Honesty for the Salvation of one Man than another? What needs so much preaching of Faith to us that are no Heathens, and believe already all that Christ and his Apostles have told us is necessa­ry to salvation, and more too? Why is there so little Preaching of Justice? I have indeed heard Righteous­ness often recommended to the People, but I have sel­dom heard the Word Justice in their Sermons: nay, though in the Latin and Greek Bible the word Justice oc­curr exceeding often, yet in the English (though it be a word that every man understands (the word Righte­ousness) which few understand to signify the same, but take it rather for Righteousness of Opinion, than of Action or Intention) is put in the place of it.

A.

I confess I know very few Controversies amongst Christians of points necessary to Salvation; they are the [Page 62]Questions of-Authority and Power over the Church, or of Profit, or Honour to Church-men, that for the most part raise all the Controversies: For, what man is he that will trouble himself, and fall out with his Neighbours for the saving of my Soul, or the Soul of any other than himself? When the Presbyterian Ministers, and others, did so furi­ously Preach Sedition, and animate men to Rebellion in these late Wars, who was there that had not a Benefit, or having one, feared not to lose it, or some other part of h [...]s Maintenence, by the alteration of the Government, that did voluntarily, without any eye to reward, Preach so earnestly against Sedition, as the other party Preached for it? I confess, that for ought I have observed in Histo­ry, and other Writings of the Heathens, Greek and La [...]ine, that those Heathens were not at all short of us in point of Vertue and Moral Doties, notwithstanding that we have had much Preaching, and they none at all; I confess al­so, that considering what harm might proceed from a Li­berty that Men have upon every Sunday, and ost [...]e [...], to Harangue all the People of a Nation at one time, whilst the State is ignorant what they will say, and that there is no such thing permitted in all the World out of Chrisien­dom, [...]or therefore any Civil Wars about Religion; I have thought much Preaching an incovenience, never­theless I cannot think, that Preaching to the People the points of their Duty both to God and Man can be too fre­quent, so it be done by Grave, Discreet, and Ancient men, that are Reverenced by the People, and not by light quib­ling young men, whom no Congregation is so simple as to look to be taught by, (as being a thing contrary to na­ture) or to pay them any Reverence, or to care what they say, except some few that may be delighted with their Jingling: I wish with all my Heart there were enough of such Discreet and Ancient men, as might suffice for all the Parishes in England, and that they would undertake it; but this is but a wish, I leave it to the wisdom of the State, to do what it pleaseth.

What did they next?

A.

Whereas the King had sent Prisoners into Places re­mote from London three Persons, that had been condemn­ed for publishing seditious Doctrine, some in Writing, some in publick Sermons; that Parliament (whether with his Majesties consent or no I have forgotten) caused them to be released, and to return to London, meaning, I think, to try how the People would be pleased therewith, and by consequence, how their endeavours to draw the Peoples Affections from the King had already prospered. When these three came through London, it was a kind of Tri­umph, the People flocking together to behold them, and receiving them with such Acclamations, and almost Ado­ration, as if they had been let down from Heaven: Inso­much that the Parliament was now sufficiently assured of a great and tumultuous Party, whensoever they should have occasion to use it, on confidence whereof, they proceeded to their next Plot, which was to deprive the King of such Ministers, as by their Courage, Wisdom and Authority, they thought most able to prevent, or oppose their further Designs against the King: And first the House of Commons resolv'd to impeach the Earl of Strafford, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, of High-Treason.

B.

What was that Earl of Strafford before he had that Place: And how had he offended the Parliament, or given them cause to think he would be their Enemy? For I have heard, that in former Parliaments, he had been as Parlia­mentary as any other.

A.

His Name was Sir Thomas Wentworth, a Gentleman both for Birth and Estate very considerable in his own Country, which was Yorkshire; but more considerable for his Judgement in the Publick Affairs, not only of that Country, but generally of the Kingdom; either as Bur­gess for some Borrough, or Knight of the Shire: For his Principles of Politicks, they were the same that were gene­rally proceeded upon by all Men else, that are thought sit [Page 64]to be chosen for the Parliament; which are commonly these, To take for the Rule of Justice and the Government, the Judgements and Acts of former Parliaments, which are commonly called Precedents; to endeavour to keep the People from being subject to Extra-Parliamentary Taxes of money; and from being with Parliamentary Taxes too much oppressed; to preserve to the People their Liberty of Body from their Ar­bitrary Power of the King out of Pa [...]liament; to seek Re­dress of Grievances.

B.

What Grievances?

A.

The Grievances were commonly such as these: The King's too much Liberality to some Favourite; the too much Power of any Minister of State of Officer; the M [...]sde­meanours of Judges Civil or Spiritual, but especially all Unparliamentary raising of Money upon the Subjects. And commonly of late till such Grievances be redressed, they refuse, or at least make great difficulty to furnish the King with Money, necessary for the most urgent occasions of the Commonwealth.

B.

How then can a King discharge his Duty, as he ought to do; or the Subject know which of his Masters he is to obey? For here are manifestly two Powers, which when they chance to differ, cannot both be obeyed.

A.

'Tis true, but they have not often differed so much to the danger of the Commonwealth, as they have done in this Parliament of 1640. In all the Parliaments of the late King Charles before the year 1640. my Lord of Straf­ford did appear in opposition to the King's Demands, as much as any man, and was for that Cause very much esteemed and cryed up by the People as a good Patriot, and one that couragiously stood up in defence of their Liber­ties, and for the same cause was so much the more hated, when afterwards he endeavoured to maintain the Royal and Just Authority of his Majesty.

How came he to change his mind so much as it seems he did?

A.

After the Dissolution of that Parliament holden in the year 1627 and 1628, the King finding no Money to be gotten from Parliaments, which he was not to buy with the Bloud of such Servants and Ministers as he loved best, abstained a long time from calling any more, and had ab­stained longer, if the Rebellion of the Scotch had not for­ced him to it. During that Parliament the King made Sir Thomas Wentworth a Baron, recommended to him for his great ability, which was generally taken notice of by the disservice he had done the King in former Parliaments, but which might be useful also for him in the times that came on; and not long after that he made him of the Council, and again Lieutenant of Ireland, which place he discharged with great satisfaction and benefit to his Maje­sty, and continued in that Office, till by the Envy and Vio­lence of the Lords and Commons of that unlucky Parlia­ment of 1640. he died, in which year he was made Gene­ral of the King's Forces against the Scotch that then entred into England, and the year before Earl of Strafford. The Pacification being made, and the Forces on both sides Dis­banded, and the Parliament at Westminster now Sitting, it was not long before the House of Commons accused him to the House of Lords of High-Treason.

B.

There was no great probability of his being a Trai­tor to the King, from whose favour he had received his greatness, and from whose protection he was to expect his safety: What was the Treason they laid to his Charge?

A.

Many Articles were drawn up against him, but the sum of them was contained in these two; First, That he had traiterously endeavour'd to subvert the Funda­mental Laws and Government of the Realm, and instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Go­vernment against Law. Secondly, That he had laboured [Page 66]to subvert the Rights of Parliaments, and the ancient course of Parliamentary Proceedings.

B.

Was this done by him without the knowledge of the King?

A.

No.

B.

Why then if it were Treason, did not the King himself call him in question by his Attorney? What had the House of Commons to do without his Command to accuse him to the House of Lords? They might have complain'd to the King, if he had not known it before, I understand not this Law.

A.

Nor I.

B.

Had this been by any former Statutes made Trea­son?

A.

Not that I ever heard of; nor do I understand that any thing can be Treason against the King, that the King hearing and knowing does not think Treason: But it was a piece of that Parliaments Artifice to put the word Trai­terously to any Article exhibited against a Man whose life they meant to take away.

B.

Was there no particular Instance of action or words, out of which they argued that endeavour of his, to sub­vert the fundamental Laws of Parliament, whereof they accused him?

A.

Yes, they said he gave the King counsel to reduce the Parliament to their duty by the Irish Army, which not long before my Lord of Strafford himself had caused to be levied there for the King's service; but it was never proved against him, that he advised the King to make use of it against the Parliament.

What are those Laws that are called fundamen­tal? for I understand not how one Law can be more fundamental than another, except only that Law of Na­ture that binds us all to obey him whosoever he be, whom lawfully and for our own safety we have promised to obey, nor any other fundamental Law to a King but Salus Populi, The safety and well being of the people.

A.

This Parliament in the use of these words when they accused any Man never regarded the signification of them, but the weight they had to aggravate their accusation to the Ignorant multitudes which think all faults hainous that are exprest in hainous terms: If they hate the rea­son accused as they did this man not only for being of the Kings party, but also for deserting the Parliaments party as an Apostate.

B.

I pray you tell me also what they meant by Arbi­trary Government, which they seemed so much to hate: Is there any Governour of a people in the World that is forced to Govern them, or forced to make this and that Law whether he will or no! I think, or if any be that forces him, does certainly make Laws and Govern Arbitrarily.

A.

That is true, and the true meaning of the Par­liament was, that not the King but they themselves should have the Arbitrary Government; not only of England but of Ireland, and (as it appeared by the event) of Scot­land also.

B.

How the King came by the Government of Scotland and Ireland by descent of his Ancestors, every body can [...]ell, but if the King of England and his Heirs should chance (which God forbid) to fail, I cannot imagine what [Page 68]Title the Parliament of England, can acquire thereby to either of those Nations.

A.

Yet they say, they have been conquer'd antiently by the English Subjects Money.

B.

Like enough, and suitable to the rew of their im­dence.

A.

Impudence in Democratical Assemblies does al­most all that is done, 'tis the Goddess of Rhetorick, and carries on proof with it for though ordinary men will not from so great boldness of affirmation conclude, there is great boldness of affirmation; conclude there is a great pro­bability in the King affirmed upon this accusation: He was brought to his Trial at Westminster-hall before the House of Lords, and found Guilty, and presently after declared a Traitor by a Bill of Attainder, that is, by Act of Parliament.

B.

It is a strange thing that the Lords should be in­duced upon so light grounds to give a sentence, or give their assent to a Bill, so prejudicial to themselves and their posterity,

A.

'Twas not well done, and yet (as it seems) not igno­rantly; for there is a clause in the Bill, that it should not be taken hereafter for an example, that is, for a prejudice in the like case hereafter.

B.

That is worse than the Bill it self, and is a plain con­fession, that their Sentence was unjust; for what har [...] is their in the example of just Sentences? Besides, if here­after the like case should happen, the Sentence is not at all made weaker by such a provision.

A.

Indeed I believe, that the Lords, most of them, were not-willing to condemn him of Treason, they were awed to it by the clamor of the common people, that came to [Page 69] Westminster, crying out, Justice, Justice against the Earl of Strafford, the which were caused to flock together by some of the House of Commons, that were well assured, after the Triumphant Welcome of Prinne, Burton, and Bastwick, to put the People into Tumult upon any oc­casion they desired: They were awed unto it partly also by the House of Commons it self, which if it desired to undo a Lord, had no more to do but to Vote him a De­linquent.

A.

A Delinquent! what's that? A sinner is't not? Did they mean to undo all sinners?

A.

By Delinquent they meant onely a man, to whom they would do all the hurt they could; but the Lords did not yet, I think, suspect they meant to casheer their whole House.

B.

It's a strange thing, the whole House should not per­ceive the ruine of the King's power, or weakening of themselves; for they could not think it likely, that they ever [...] meant to take the Sovereignty from the King, to give it to them who were few in number, and less in power, than so many Commoners, because less beloved by the People.

A.

But it seems not so strange to me for the Lords, for their personal abilities, as they were no less, so also were they no more skilful in the Publick affairs than the Knights and Burgesses; for there is no reason to think, that if one that is to day a Knight of the Shire in the Lower House, be to morrow made a Lord, and a Member of the Higher House, is therefore wiser than he was before: they are all of both Houses prudent and able men as any in the Land, in the business of their private Estates, which requires nothing but diligence and a Natural Wit to govern them; but for the Government of a Common-wealth neither Wit, nor Prudence, nor Diligence is enough, [Page 70]without infallible Rules, and the true Science of Equity and Justice.

B.

If this be true, it is impossible any Common-wealth in the World, whether Monarchy, Aristocracy, or Demo­cracy, should continue long without change or sedition, tending to change either of the Government, or of the Governours.

A.

'Tis true, nor have any the greatest Common-wealths in the World been long from Sedition; the Greeks had it, first, their Petty Kings, and then by Sedition came to be Petty Common-wealths, and then growing to be greater Common-wealths, by Sedition again became Mo­narchies, and all for want of Rules of Justice for the com­mon People to take notice of; which if the People had known in the beginning of every of these Seditions, the ambitious persons could never have had the hope to di­sturb their Government after it had been once setled; for ambition can do little without hands, and few hands it could have, if the common People were as diligently instructed in the true Principles of their Duty, as they are terrifi'd and amazed by Preachers with fruitless and dan­gerous Doctrines concerning the nature of Man's Will, and many other Philosophical Points, that tend not at all to the salvation of the Soul in the World to come, nor to their ease in this life, but onely to the discretion towards the Clergy, of that Duty which they ought to perform to the King.

B.

For ought I see, all the States of Christendom will be subject to those fits of Rebellion as long as the World lasteth.

A.

Like enough, and yet the fault (as I have said) may be easily mended, by mending the Universities.

How long had the Parliament now sitten?

A.

It began Novemb. 3. 1640. My Lord of Strafford was Impeached of Treason before the Lords, No­vember 12, sent to the Tower, November 22, his Trial began March 22, and ended April 13. After his Trial he was voted guilty of High Treason in the House of Commons, and after that in the House of Lords, May 6, and on the 12 of May beheaded.

B.

Great Expedition! But could not the King for all that have saved him by a Pardon?

A.

The King had heard all that passed at his Trial, and had declared he was unsatisfied concer­ning the Justice of their Sentence, and (I think) notwithstanding the danger of his own Person from the fury of the People, and that he was coun­selled to give way to his Execution, not-only by such as he most relied on, but also by the Earl of Strafford himself, he would have pardoned him, if that could have preserved him from the Tumult raised and countenanced by the Parliament it self, for the ter­rifying of those they thought might favour him, and yet the King himself did not stick to confess after­wards that he had done amiss, in that he did not rescue him.

B.

'Twas an Argument of a good disposition in the King, but I never read that Augustus Caesar ac­knowledged that he did a fault in abandoning Cicero to the fury of his Enemy Antonius, perhaps because Cicero having been of the contrary Faction to his Father, had done Augustus no service at all, not out of favour to him, but only out of enmity to Antonius, and of love to the Senate, that is indeed out of love to himself that swayed the Senate, as it is very likely the Earl of Strafford came over to the King's Party for his own ends, having been so much against the King in former Parliaments.

A.

We cannot safely judge of men's intentions, but I have observed often that such as seek prefer­ment [Page 72]by their Stubbornness have missed of their aim, and on the other side, that those Princes, that with preferment are forced to buy the Obedience of their Subjects, are already, or must be soon after in a very weak condition, for in a Market where Honour is to be bought with Stubbornness, there will be a great many as able to buy as my Lord Strafford was.

B.

You have read that when Hercules fighting with the Hydra, had cut off any one of his many Heads, there still arose two other Heads in it's place, and yet at last he cut them off all.

A.

The story is told false, for Hercules at first did not cut off those Heads but bought them off, and after­wards when he saw that did him no good, then he cut them off and got the Victory.

B.

What did they next?

A.

After the first Impeachment of the Earl of Straf­ford, the House of Commons upon December 18. accused the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury also of High Treason, that is, of a Design to introduce Arbitrary Govern­ment, &c. For which he was (February 18.) sent to the Tower, but his Trial and Execution were deferred a long time, till January 10. 1643. for the entertain­ment of the Scots that were come into England to aid the Parliament.

B.

Why did the Scots think there were so much danger in the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury? he was not a Man of War, nor a Man able to bring an Army into the Field; but he was perhaps a very great Poli­tician.

A.

That did not appear by any remarkable events of his Councils, I never heard but he was a very ho­nest man for his Morals, and a very zealous promo­ter of the Church Government by Bishops, and that he desired to have the Service of God per­formed, and the House of God adorned as sui­tably as was possible, to the Honour we ought to do to the Divine Majesty. But to bring, as he did, [Page 73]into the State his Former Controversies, I mean his squablings in the University about Free Will, and his standing upon Punctilio's concerning the Service-Book and its Rubricks was not (in my opi­nion) an Argument of his sufficiency in Affairs of State. About the same time they passed an Act (which the King consented to) for a Triennial Parliament, wherein was Enacted, That after the present Parliament, there should be a Parliament call'd by the King within the space of three years, and so from three years to three years to meet at Westminster upon a certain day named in the Act.

B.

But what if the King did not call it; finding it perhaps inconvenient or hurtful to the Safety or Peace of his People which God hath put into his Charge; for I do not well comprehend how any Soveraign can well keep a People in order when his hands are-tied, or when he hath any other Obligation upon him, than the benefit of those he Governs. And at this time for any thing you told me they acknowledged the King for their Soveraign.

A.

I know not, but such was the Act: And it was farther Enacted, That if the King did it not by his own Command, then the Lord Chancellour or the Lord Keeper for the time being should send out the Writs of Summons: And if the Chancellour refused, then the Sheriffs of the several Counties of themselves at the next County Courts before the day set down for the Parliament's meeting, should proceed to Election of the Members for the said Parliament.

B.

But what if the Sheriffs refused?

A.

I think they were to be sworn to it, but for that and other particulars I refer you to the Act.

To whom should they be sworn when there is no Parliament?

A.

No doubt, but to the King, whether there be a Parliament sitting or no.

B.

Then the King may Release them of their Oath.

A.

Besides, They obtained of the King the put­ting down the Star Chamber and the High Commis­sion Courts.

B.

Besides, If the King upon the refusal, should fall upon them in an Anger, Who shall (the Parliament not sitting) Protect either the Chancellor or the Sheriffs in their Disobedience?

A.

I pray you do not ask me any Reason of such things, I understand no better than you: I tell you only an Act passed to that purpose, and was Signed by the King in the middle of February, a little be­fore the Arch-Bishop was sent to the Tower. Besides this Bill, the two Houses of Parliament agreed upon another, wherein it was Enacted, That the present Parliament would continue till both the Houses did consent to the Dissolution of it; which Bill also the King Signed the same day he Signed the Warrant for the Execution of the Earl of Straf­ford.

B.

What a great Progress made the Parliament towards the ends of the most seditious Members of both Houses in so little time. They sat down in November, and now it was May; in this space of time, which is but half a year, they won from the King the Adherence which was due to him from his People: they drove his faithfullest Ser­vants from him, beheaded the Earl of Strafford, Im­prisoned the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, obtained a Triennial Parliament after their own Dissolution, and a continuance of their own sitting as long as they listed; which last amounted to a total extinction of the King's right in case that such a Grant were valid, which I think is not: unless the soveraignty it self [Page 75]be in plain terms renounced; which it was not, but what Money by way of subsidue or otherwise did they grant the King in recompence of all these his large concessions?

A.

None at all, but often promised they would make him the most glorious King that ever was in England; which were words that passed well enough for welmeaning with the common People.

B.

But the Parliament was contented now: for I cannot imagin what they should desire more from the King, than he had now granted them.

A.

Yes they desired the whole and absolute sove­raignty, and to change the Monarchical Government into an Oligarchie, that is to say, to make the Parlia­ment consisting of a few Lords, and about 400 Com­moners, absolute in the soveraignty for the present, and shortly after to lay the House of Lords aside, for this was the Design of the Presbyterian Ministers, who taking themselves to be, by right, the onely Lawful Government of the Church, endeavoured to bring the same Form of Government into the Civil state, and as the Spiritual Laws were to be made by their Sy­nods, so their Civil Laws should be made by the House of Commons; who, as they thought, would no less be ruled by them afterwards, than formerly they had been; wherein they were deceived, and found themselves out-gon by their own Disciples, though not in Malice yet in Wit.

B.

What followed after this?

A.

In August following the King supposing he had now sufficiently obliged the Parliament, to pro­ceed no farther against him, took a Journey into Scotland, to satisfie his Subjects there, as he had done here; intending perhaps so to gain their good wills, that in case the Parliament here should levy Arms against him, they should not be aided by the Scots; wherein he also was deceived, for though they seemed satisfied with what he did (whereof one [Page 76]thing was his giving away to the Aboletion of Episco­pacy:) Yet afterwards they made a League with the Parliament, and for Money (when the King began to have the better of the Parliament) invaded England, in the Parliaments Quarrel, but this was a Year or two after.

B.

Before you go any farther, I desire to know the Ground and Original of that Right, which either the House of Lords, or House of Commons, or both together pretend to.

A.

It is a question of things so long past that they are now forgotten; nor have we any thing to conjecture by, but the Records of our own Nation; and some small and obscure fragments of Roman Histories: And for the Records, seeing they are of things only done sometimes justly, sometimes unjustly you can never by them know what Right they had, but only what Right they pre­tended.

B.

Howsoever let me know what light we have in this matter from the Roman Histories.

A.

It would be too long, and an useless digression to [...]all the Antient Authors that speak of the forms of those Common-wealths, which were amongst our first Ancestors, the Saxons and other Germans, and of other Nations, from whom we derive the Titles of Honour, now in use in England; nor will it be possible to derive from them any Arguments of Right, but only Exam­ples of fact, which by the Ambition of Potent Subjects, have been oftener unjust than otherwise; and for those Saxons or Angles, that in Antient times by several Invasions, made themselves Masters of this Nation, they were not in themselves one Body of Com­mon-wealth, but only a League of divers Petty German Lords and States, such as was the Grae­cian Army in the Trojan War, without other Obligations, than that which proceeded from their own fear and weakness; nor were these [Page 77] Lords for the most part the Soveraigns at home in their own Country, but chosen by the people for the Captains of the Forces they brought with them; And therefore it was not without Equity, that when they had conquer'd any part of the Land, and made some one of them King thereof, the rest should have greater Priviledges than the common People and Soldiers, amongst which Priviledges, a man may easily conjecture this to be one; that they should be made acquainted, and be of Council with him that hath the Soveraignty in matters of Government, and have the greatest and most honourable Offices, both in Peace and War: But because there can be no Government where there is more than one Sove­raign, it cannot be inferr'd that he had a Right to oppose the King's Resolutions by force, nor to enjoy those honours and places longer than they should continue good Subjects: And we find that the Kings of England did upon every great occasion call them together by the name of Discreet and Wise men of the Kingdom, and hear their Councils, and make them Judges of all Causes, that during their Sitting were brought before them. But as he summon'd them at his own pleasure; so had he also ever at his pleasure power to Dissolve them. The Normans also that descended from the Germans, as we did, had the same Customs in this particular; and by this means, this Priviledge have the Lords to be of your King's great Council; and when they were assembled, to be the highest of the King's Court of Justice, continued still after the Conquest to this day. But though there be amongst the Lords divers Names or Titles of Honour, yet they have their Priviledge by the only name of Baron, a name receiv'd from the Antient Gauls, amongst whom that name signi­fied the King's man, or rather one of his great men: By which it seems to me, that though they gave him Council when he requir'd it, yet [Page 78]they had no Right to make War upon him, if he did not follow it.

B.

When began first the House of Commons to be part o [...] the King's great Council?

A.

I do not doubt but that before the Conquest, some discreet men, and known to be so, by the King, were called by special Writ to be of the same Coun­cil, though they were not Lords. But that is no­thing to the House of Commons: the Knights of [...]lares, and Burgesses, were never called to Parlia­ment, for ought that I know, till the beginning of Edward the first, or the latter end of the Reign [...] Henry the third, immediately after the mis-beha­viour of the Barons; and for ought any man knows, were called on purpose to weaken that Power of the Lords, which they had so freshly abused. Before the time of Henry the third, the Lords were de­ [...]o [...]ed most of them from such as in the Invasions and Conquests of the Germans were Peers and [...]ellow-Kings, 'till one was made King of them [...]ll, and their Tenants were their Subjects, as it is at this day with the Lords of France. But after the time of Henry the third, the Kings began to make Lords in the place of them, whose Issue fail'd Titu­larly only; without the Lands belonging to their Title; and by that means their Tenants being bound no longer to Terve them in the Wars, they grew every day less and less able to make a Party against the King, though they continued still to be his great Council: And as their Power decreased. To the Power of the House of Commons increased: But I do not find that they were part of the King's Council at all, nor Judges over other men, though it cannot be denied but a King may ask their ad­vice, as well as the advice of any other. But I do not find that the end of their summoning was to give advice; but only in case they had any Petitions for Redress of Grievances, to be ready there with [Page 79]them whilst the King had his great Council about him.

But neither they, nor the Lords, could present to the King as a Grievance; That the King took upon him to make the Laws, to chuse his own Privy Council, to raise Money and Soldiers, to defend the Peace and Honour of the Kingdom, to make Cap­tains in his Army, to make Governours of his Castles whom he pleased; for this had been to tell the King that it was one of their Grievances that he was King.

B.

What did the Parliament do whilst the King was in Scotland?

A.

The King went in August; after which the Par­liament, September the 8th, adjourn'd till the 20th of October, and the King return'd about the end of No­vember following, in which time the most Seditious of both Houses, and which had designed the Change of Government, and to cast off Monarchy, (but yet had not wit enough to set up another Government in its place, and consequently left it to the chance of War) made a Cabal amongst themselves, in which they projected how by seconding one another to Go­vern the House of Commons; and invented how to put the Kingdom by the Power of that House into a Rebellion, which they then called a posture of De­fence against such Dangers from abroad as they them­selves should feign and publish. Besides, whilst the King was in Scotland, the Irish Papists got together a great Party, with an Intention to Massacre the Pro­testants there, and had laid a design for the [...]eizing of Dublin Castle, October the 20th. where the King's Officers of the Government of the County made their Residence, and had effected it, had it not been Discovered the night before: The manner of the discovery, and the Murders they committed in the Country afterwards, I need not tell you, since the whole story of it is extant.

I wonder they did not expect and provide for a Rebellion in Ireland, as soon as they began to quarrel with the King in England: For was there any body so ignorant as not to know that the Irish Papists did long for a change of Religion there, as well as the Presby­terians in England? Or that in general the Irish Na­tion did hate the name of Subjection to England, or would longer be quiet than they feared an Army out of England to chastize them? What better time then, could they take for their Rebellion than this, wherein they were encouraged, not only by our weakness, caused by this Division between the King and his Parliament, but also by the Example of the Presbyterians, both of the Scorch and English Nation? But what did the Parlia­ment do upon this occasion in the King's absence?

A.

Nothing; but consider what use they might make of it to their own ends; partly by imputing it to the King's evil Councellors, and partly by occasion thereof to demand of the King the Power of Pressing and Ordering of Soldiers, which Power whosoever has, has also without doubt the whole [...]overaignty.

B.

When came the King back?

A.

He came back the 25th of November, and was welcomed with the Acclamations of the common peo­ple, as much as if he had been the most beloved of the Kings before him, but found not a Reception by the Parliament answerable to it: They presently began to pick new Quarrels against him out of every thing he said to them. December 2. the King called together both Houses of Parliament, and then did only recommend unto them the raising of Succours for Ireland.

B.

What Quarrel could they pick out of that?

A.

None but in order thereto, as they may pretend, they had a Bill in Agitation to assert the power of Le­vying and Pressing [...]oldiers to the two Houses of the Lords and Commons; which was as much as to take [...]om the King the Power of the Militia, which is in [Page 81]effect the whole Soveraign Power; for he that hath the Power of Levying and Commanding of his Sol­diers, has all other Rights of Soveraignty which he shall please to claim: The King hearing of it, called the Houses of Parliament together again on December the 14th, and then pressed again the business of Ireland, (as there was need) for all this while the Irish were mur­dering the English in Ireland, and strengthening them­selves against the Forces they expected to come out of England, and withall told them, he took notice of the Bill in Agitation for Pressing of Soldiers; and that he was content it should pass with a Salvo Jure both for him and them, because the present time was unreasonable to dispute it in.

B.

What was there unreasonable in this?

A.

Nothing; what's unreasonable is one question; what they quarrell'd at is another: They quarrell'd at this, that His Majesty took notice of the Bill while it was in debate in the House of Lords, before it was presented to him, in the Course of Parliament: And also that he shewed himself displeased with those that propounded the third Bill; both which they de­clared to be against the Priviledges of Parliament, and petitioned the King to give them Reparation against those by whose evil Council he was induced to it, that they might receive condign punish­ment.

B.

This was cruel proceeding: Do not the Kings of England use to sit in the Lords House when they please? And was not this Bill then in debate in the House of Lords? It is a strange thing that a man should be lawfully in the company of men, where he must needs hear and see what they say and do; and yet must not take notice of it; so much as to the same Com­pany; for though the King was not present at the Debate it self, yet it was lawful for any of the Lords to make him acquainted with it. Any one of the House of Commons, though not present at a Proposition, [Page 82]or Debate, in the House, nevertheless hearing of it from some of his fellow Members, may certainly, not only take notice of it, but also speak to it in the House of Commons: But to make the King give up his Friends and Counsellors to them to be put to Death, Banishment or Imprisonment, for their good will to him, was such a Tyranny over a King, no King ever exercised over any Subject, but in cases of Treason, or Murder, and seldom then.

A.

Presently hereupon grew a kind of War be­tween the Peers of Parliament, and those of the Se­cretaries, and other able Men that were with the King. [...]or upon the 15th of December they sent to the King a Paper called a Remonstrance of the State of the King­dom, and with it a Petition, both which they caused to be published; in the Remonstrance they complained of certain mischievous Designs of a Malignant Party then, before the beginning of the Parliament grown [...]pe, and did set forth what means had been used for the preventing of it by the Wisdom of the Parlia­ment; what Rubs they had found therein; what course was fit to be taken for the restoring and esta­blishing the Antient Honour, Greatness and Safety of the Crown and Nation: And of those Designs the Promoters and Actors were, they said,

  • 1. Jesuits and Papists.
  • 2. The Bishops, and part of the Clergy, that cherish formality as a support of their own Ecclesiastical Ty­ [...]nny and Usurpation.
  • 3. Counsellors and Courtiers, that for private ends (they said) had engaged themselves to farther the In­terests of some Foreign Princes.
B.

It may well be, that some of the Bishops, and also some of the Court may have, in pursuit of their private Interest, done something indiscreetly, and per­ [...]ps wickedly; therefore I pray tell me particularly what their Crimes were; for me thinks the King should not have conniv'd at any thing against his own Su­ [...]eam Authority.

The Parliament were not very keen against them that were against the King. They made no doubt but all they did was by the King's Command, but accused thereof the Bishops, Counsellors, and Cour­tiers, as being a more mannerly way of Accusing the King himself, and defaming him to his Subjects. For the truth is, the Charge they brought against them was so general, as not to be called an Accusation, but Railing. As first; They said, they nourished Questi­ons of Prerogatives and Liberty between the King and his People, to the end, that seeming much addicted to His Majesty's Service, they might get themselves into places of greatest Trust and Power in the King­dom.

B.

How could this be call'd an Accusation, in which there is no Fact for any Accusers to apply their Proof to, or their Witnesses? for, granting that these Que­stions of Prerogative had been moved by them, who can prove that their End was to gain to themselves and Friends the Places of Trust and Power in the King­dom?

A.

A second Accusation was, that they endeavour'd to suppress the Purity and Power of Religion.

B.

That's Canting. It is not in Man's power to sup­press the Power of Religion.

A.

They meant, that they supprest the Doctrine of the Presbyterians; that is to say, the very Foundation of their Parliaments Treacherous Pretensions.

A third; That they cherished Arminians; Papists, and Libertines (by which they meant the common Protestants that meddle not with Disputes) to the end they might compose a body fit to Act according to their Counsels and Resolutions.

A fourth; That they endeavoured to put the King upon other courses of raising of Money, than by the ordinary way of Parliaments. Judge whether these may be properly called Accusations, or not rather [...]pightful Reproaches of the King's Government.

Methinks this last was a very great fault; for what good could there be in putting the King upon any odd course of getting Money, when the Parliament was willing to supply him as far as to the security of the Kingdom, or to the honour of the King should be necessary?

A.

But I told you before they would give him none, but with a Condition he should cut off the heads of whom they pleased, how faithfully soever they had serv'd him; and if he would have sacrificed all his Friends to their Ambition, yet they would have found other excuses to deny him Subsidies; for they were resolv'd to take from him the Soveraign Power to themselves, which they would never do without taking great care that he should have no Money at all. In the next place, they put into the Remon­strance as faults of them whose Council the King followed, All those things which since the begin­ning of the King's Reign were by them misliked, whether faults or not, and whereof they were not able to judge, for want of knowledge of the Causes and Motives that induced the King to do them, and were known only by the King himself, and such of his Privy-Council as he revealed them to.

B.

But what were those particular pretended faults?

A.

First, The Dissolution of the last Parliament at Oxford.

Secondly, The Dissolution of his second Parliament, being in the second year of his Reign.

Thirdly, The Dissolution of his Parliament in the fourth year of his Reign.

Fourthly, The fruitless Expedition against Cales.

Fifthly, the Peace made with Spain, whereby the Palatine's Cause was deserted and left to chargeable and hopeless Treaties.

Sixthly, The sending of Commissions to raise Money by way of Loan.

Seventhly, Raising of Ship-money.

[Page 85]

Eighthly, Enlargements of Forrests contrary to Magna Charta.

Ninthly, The Designment of Engrossing all the Gun-powder into one hand, and keeping it in the Tower of London.

Tenthly, A Design to bring in the Use of Brass-Money.

Eleventhly, The Fines, Imprisonments, Stigmati­zings, Mutilations, Whippings, Pillories, Gaggs, Con­finements and Banishments, by Sentence in the Court of Star-Chamber.

Twelfthly, The displacing of Judges.

Thirteenthly, The Illegal Acts of Council-Table.

Fourteenthly, The Arbitrary and Illegal Power of the Earl-Marshal's Court.

Fifteenthly, The Abuses in Chancery, Exchequer-Chamber, and Court of Wards.

Sixteenthly, The selling of Titles of Honour, of Judges and Serjeants Places, and other Offices.

Seventeenthly, The Insolence of Bishops, and other Clarks in Suspensions, Excommunications, and De­gradations of divers painful, and learned, and pious Ministers.

B.

Were there any such Ministers Degraded, De­praved, or Excommunicated?

A.

I cannot tell. But I remember I have heard threat­ned divers painful, unlearned and seditious Ministers.

Eighteenthly, The Excess of Severity of the High-Commission-Court.

Nineteenthly, The Preaching before the King a­gainst the Property of the Subject, and for the Prero­gative of the King above the Law, and divers other petty Quarrels they had to the Government; which though they were laid upon this Faction, yet they knew they would fall upon the King himself in the Judgment of the People, to whom by Printing it was communicated.

Again, After the Dissolution of the Parliament May [Page 86]the 5th, 1640. they find other faults; as the Dissolution it self; the Imprisoning some Members of both Houses; a forced Loan of Money attempted in London; the Continuance of the Convocation when the Parliament was ended; and the favour shewed to Papists by Se­cretary Windebank and others.

B.

All this will go currant with common people for Mis-government, and for faults of the King's, though some of them were Mis-fortunes, and both the Mis-fortunes and the Mis-governments (if any were) were the faults of the Parliament, who by denying to give him Money, did both frustrate his Attempts abroad, and put him upon those extraor­dinary ways (which they call Illegal) of raising Mo­ney at home.

A.

You see what a heap of Evils they have raised to make a shew of ill Government to the People, which they second with an enumeration of the many services they have done the King in overcoming a great many of them, though not all, and in divers other things, and say, that though they had contracted a Debt to the Scots of 22000 l. and granted six Subsidies, and a Bill of Pole-money worth six Subsidies more, yet that God had so blessed the Endeavours of this Parliament, that the Kingdom was a gainer by it; and then fol­lows the Catalogue of those good things they had done for the King and Kingdom: For the Kingdom they had done (they said) these things; They had abolished Ship-money, They had taken away Coat and Conduct-money, and other Military Charges, which they said amounted to little less than the Ship-money; That they supprest all Monopolies, which they reckoned above a Million yearly sav'd by the Sub­ject; That they had quell'd Living Grievances mean­ing, Evil Counsellors and Actors by the Death of my Lord Strafford; by the flight of the Chancellor Finch, and of Secretary Windebank, by the Imprisonment of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Judges; that they [Page 87]had past a Bill for a Triennial Parliament, and another for the Continuance of the present Parliament, till they should think fit to Dissolve themselves.

B.

That is to say, for ever, if they be suffered. But the summ of all those things which they had done for the Kingdom, is, that they had left it without Govern­ment, without Strength, without Money, without Law, and without good Council.

A.

They reckoned also putting down of the High-Commission, and the abating of the Power of the Council-Table, and of the Bishops, and their Courts; the taking away of unnecessary Ceremonies in Reli­gion, removing of Ministers from their Livings that were not of their Faction, and putting in such as were.

B.

All this was but their own, and not the Kingdoms business.

A.

The Good they had done the King was, first, (they said) the giving of 25000 l. a month for the Re­lief of the Northern Counties.

B.

What need of Relief had the Northern more than the rest of the Counties of England?

A.

Yes, In the Northern Counties were quartered the Scotch Army, which the Parliament call'd in to oppose the King, and consequently their Quarters was to be discharged.

B.

True, but by the Parliament that call'd them in.

A.

But they say no; and that this Money was given the King, because he is bound to protect his Subjects.

B.

He is no farther bound to that, than they to give him Money wherewithal to do it. This is very great Impudence; to raise an Army against the King, and with that Army to oppress their Fellow-subjects, and then require that the King should relieve them; that is to say, be at the Charge of Paying the Army that was raised to fight against him.

A.

Nay farther, they put to the King's Accounts the 30000 l. given to the Scots, without which they would not have Invaded England; besides many other things that I now remember not.

I did not think there had been so great Impu­dence and Villany in Mankind.

A.

You have not observ'd the world long enough to see all that's ill: such was their Remonstrance, as I have told you; with it they sent a Petition con­taining three points.

First, That His Majesty would deprive the Bishops of their Votes in Parliament, and remove such Op­pressions in Religion, Church, Government, and Dis­cipline, as they had brought in.

Secondly, That he would remove from his Council, all such as should promote the Peoples Grievances, and Imploy in his great and public Affairs such as the Parliament should confide in.

Thirdly, That he would not give away the Lands Escheated to the Crown by the Rebellion in Ireland.

B.

This last point, methinks, was not wisely put in at this time; it should have been reserv'd till they had subdued the Rebels, against whom there were yet no Forces sent over: 'Tis like selling the Lion's Skin, before they had kill'd him. But what answer was made to the other two Propositions?

A.

What answer should be made but a Denial?

About the same time the King himself Exhibited Articles against six persons of the Parliament, five whereof were of the House of Comons, and one of the House of Lords, accusing them of High Treason: and upon the fourth of January went himself to the House of Commons to demand those five of them; but private notice having been given by some Trea­cherous person about the King, they had absen­ted themselves, and by that means frustrated His Majesties Intention; and after he was gone, the House making a hainous matter of it, and a High Breach of their Priviledges, adjourned themselves into London, there to sit as a General Committee, pretending they were not safe at Westminster; for the King, when he went to the House to demand those [Page 89]persons, had somewhat more attendance with him (but not otherwise armed than his servants used to be) than he ordinarily had, and would not be paci­fied (though the King did afterwards wave the pro­secution of those persons) unless he would also dis­cover to them those that gave him Counsel to go in that manner to the Parliament-House, to the end they might receive condign punishment, which was the Word they used instead of Cruelty.

B.

This was a harsh Demand: Was it not enough that the King should forbear his Enemies, but also that he must betray his Friends? If they thus tyrannize o­ver the King before they have gotten the Soveraign Power into their Hands, how will they tyrannize over their Fellow-Subjects when they have gotten it?

A.

So as they did.

B.

How long staid that Commitee in London?

A.

Not above 2 or 3 Days, and then were brought from London to the Parliament-House by Water in great Triumph, guarded with a tumultuous num­ber of Armed Men, there to sit in security in de­spite of the King, and make Traiterous Acts against Him, such and as many as they listed, and under favour of these Tumults, to frighten away from the House of Peers all such as were not of their own Faction; for at this time the Rabble was so insolent, that scarce any of the Bishops durst go to the House for fear of Violence upon their Persons: insomuch that Twelve of them excused themselves of Coming thither, and by way of Petition to the King remonstrated that they were not permitted to go quietly to the Performance of that Duty, and protesting against all Determina­tions as of none Effect, that should pass in the House of Lords during their forced Absence, which the House of Commons taking hold of, sent up to the Peers one of their Members to accuse them of High Treason; whereupon Ten of them were sent to the Tower, after which time there was no more [Page 90]words of their High Treason, but there passed a Bill, by which they were deprived of their Votes in Parlia­ment: And to this Bill they got the King's Assent, and in the beginning of September after they Voted the Bi­shops should have no more to do in the Government of the Church, but to this they had not the King's Assent, the War being now begun.

B.

What made the Parliament so averse to Episco­pacy, and especially the House of Lords, whereof the Bishops were Members: For I see no reason why they should do it to gratifie a number of poor Parish Priests that were Presbyterians, and that were never likely to serve the Lords; but, on the contrary, to do their best, to pull down their power, and subject them to their Synods and Classes.

A.

For the Lords, very few of them did per­ceive the intention of the Presbyterians; and besides that, they durst not, I believe, oppose the Lower House.

B.

But why were the Lower House so earnest against them?

A.

Because they meant to make use of their Te­nants; and with pretended Sanctity, to make the King and his Party odious to the People, by whose help they were to set up Democracy, and Depose the King; or to let him have the Title only so long as he should Act for their purposes: But not only the Parliament, but in a manner all the People of England, were their Enemies upon the account of their behaviour, as be­ing (they said) too imperious. This was all that was colourable laid to their charge; the main of the pul­ling them down was the Envy of the Presbyterians, that incensed the People against them, and against Episcopacy it self.

B.

How would the Presbyterians have the Church to be govern'd?

A.

By National and Provincial Synods.

B.

Is not this to make the National Assembly an [Page 91]Arch-Bishop, and the Provincial Assemblies so many Bishops?

A.

Yes; but every Minister shall have the delight of sharing the Government, and consequently of be­ing able to be reveng'd on them that do not admire their Learning, and help to fill their purses, and win to their service them that do.

B.

'Tis a hard Case, that there should be two Fa­ctions to trouble the Common-wealth without any In­terest of their own, other than every particular man may have; and that their quarrels should be only about Opinions, that is, about who has the most Learning, as if their Learning ought to be the Rule of Governing the whole World. What is it they are Learned in? is it Politicks and Rules of State? I know it is called Divinity; but I hear almost nothing preacht but matter of Philosophy; for Religion in it self admits of no Controversie: 'Tis a Law of the Kingdom, and ought not to be disputed. I do not think they pretend to speak with God, and know his will by any other way than reading the Scriptures, which we also do.

A.

Yes, some of them do, and give themselves out for Prophets, by extraordinary Inspiration; but the rest pretend only (for their Advancement to Benefices, and Charge of Souls) a greater skill in the Scriptures than other men have by reason of their breeding in the Universities, and knowledge there gotten of the Latin Tongue, and some also of the Greek and Hebrew Tongues wherein the Scriptures were written; besides their knowledge of Natural Philosophy, which is there publickly taught.

B.

As for the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, it was once (to the Detection of the Roman Fraud, and to the Ejection of the Romish Power) very profitable, or ra­ther necessary. But now that is done, and we have the Scripture in English, and Preaching in English, I see no great need of Latin, Greek and Hebrew: I should [Page 92]think my self better qualified by under standing well the Languages of our Neighbours, French, Dutch, and Italian. I think it was never seen in the world be­fore the Power of Popes was setup, that Philosophy was much conducing to power in a Commonwealth.

A.

But Philosophy, together with Divinity, hath very much conduced to the Advancement of the Pro­fessors thereof, to places of the greatest Authority, next to the Authority of Kings themselves, in most of the Antient Kingdoms of the world, as is manifestly to be seen in the History of those times.

B.

I pray you cite me some of the Authors and pla­ces.

A.

First, what were the Druids of old time in Bri­tany and France, what Authority these had you may see in Caesar, Strabo, and others, and especially in Diodorus Siculus, the greatest Antiquary perhaps that ever was, who speaking of the Druids (which he calls Sarovides) in France, saith thus; There be also amongst them cer­tain Philosophers and Theologians that are exceeding­ly honoured, whom they also use as Prophets. These men by their skill in Augury, and Inspection into the Bowels of Beasts sacrificed, foretel what is to come, and have the multitude in obedience to them; and a little after; It is a custom amongst them, that no man may sacrifice without a Philosopher, because (say they) men ought not to present their Thanks to the Gods, but by them that know the Divine Nature, and are as it were of the same language with them; and that all good things ought by such as these to be prayed for.

B.

I can hardly believe that those Druids were very skilful either in Natural Philosophy or Moral.

A.

Nor I; for they held and taught the Transmi­gration of Souls from one Body to another, as did Py­thagoras, which Opinion, whether they took from him, or he from them, I cannot tell. What were the Magi in Persia but Philosophers and Astrologers? You know how they came to find our Saviour by the Conduct of a [Page 93]Star, either from Persia it self, or from some Country more Eastward than Judea: were not these in great Authority in their Country? And are they not in most part of Christendom, thought to have been Kings? Aegypt hath been thought by many the most Antient Kingdom and Nation of the world, and their Priests had the greatest power in Civil Affairs that any Subject ever had in any Nation. And what were they but Philosophers and Divines? Concerning whom the same Diodorus Siculus saies thus; The whole Country of Egypt being divided into three parts, the Body of the Priests have One as being of most credit with the people, both for their Devotions towards the Gods, and also for their Understanding gotten by Education, and presently after: for generally those men in the greatest Affairs of all the King's Councel­lors, partly Executing, and partly Informirg and Ad­vising; foretelling him also (by their skill in Astrolo­gy and Art in the Inspection of Sacrifices) the things that are to come; and reading to him out of their Holy Books such of the Actions there recorded, as are profitable for him to know. 'Tis not there as in Greece, one man, or one woman that has thé Priesthood, but they are many that attend the Honours and Sacrifices of the Gods, and leave the same Imployment to their posterity, which next to the King have the greatest Power and Authority. Concerning the Judicature amongst the Aegyptians, he saith thus; From out of the most eminent Cities, Hieropolis, Thebes and Memphis, they chuse Judges, which are Council not inferiour to that of Areopagus in Athens, or that of the Senate in Lacedoemon; when they are met, being in number thir­ty, they chuse one from among themselves to be Chief Justice; and the City, whereof he is, sendeth another in his place: This Chief Justice wore about his neck, hung in a gold Chain, a Jewel of precious Stones; the name of which Jewel was Truth, which when the Chief Justice had put on then began the Pleading, &c. [Page 94]And when the Judges had agreed on the Sentence, then did the Chief Justice put this Jewel of Truth on one of the Pleas. You see now what power was acqui­red in Civil matters by the conjuncture of Philosophy and Divinity: Let us come now to the Common-wealth of the Jews; was not the Priesthood in a Family (namely the Levites) as well as the Priesthood of. Aegypt? Did not the High-Priest give Judgment by the Brest­plate of Ʋrim and Thummim? Look upon the King­dom of Assyria, and the Philosophers and Chaldeans; had not they Lands and Cities belonging to their Fa­mily, even in Abrabam's time, who dwelt (you know) in Ʋr of the Chaldeans? Of these the same Author says thus; The Chaldeans are a Sect in Politicks, like to that of the Aegyptian Priests; for being ordained for the service of the Gods, they spend the whole time of their life in Philosophy, being of exceeding great reputation in Astrology, and pretending much also to Prophecy, foretelling things to come by Purifications and Sacrifices; and to find out by certain Incantations the preventing of harm, and the bringing to pass of good. They have also skill in Augury, and in the Inter­pretation of Dreams and Wonders; nor are they un­skilful in the Art of Foretelling by the Inwards of Beasts sacrificed, and have their Learning not of the Greeks; for the Philosophy of the Chaldeans goes to their family by Tradition, and the Son receives it from his Father. From Assyria let us pass into India, and see what esteem the Philosophers had there. The whole multitude (says Diodorus) of the Indians, is divided into seven parts, whereof the first is the Body of the Phi­losophers, for number the least, but for eminency the first; for they are free from Taxes; and as the are not Masters of others, so are no others Masters of them. By private men they are called to the Sacrifices, and to the care of the Burials of the Dead, as being thought most beloved of the Gods, and skilful in the Doctrine concerning-Hell; and for this Imployment [Page 95]receive Gifts and Honours very considerable. They are also of great use to the people of India, for being taken at the beginning of the year in the great Assem­bly, they foretell them of great Drouths, great Rains, also of Winds, and of Sicknesses, and of whatsoever i profitable for them to know beforehand.

The same Author concerning the Laws of the Aethiopians, saith thus, The Laws of the Aethiopians seem very different from those of other Nations, and especially about the Election of their Kings; for the Priests propound some of the chief men among them named in a Catalogue: and when the God, (which according to a certain Custom is carried about to Feastings) does accept of him, the Mul­titude Elect for their King, and presently adore and honour him as a God, put into the Government by Divine Providence. The King being chosen, he has the manner of his life limited to him by the Laws, and does all other things according to the custom of the Country, neither rewarding nor punishing any man otherwise than from the beginning is Establish'd amongst them by Law; nor use they to put any man to death, though he be condemn'd to it, but to send some Officer to him with a Token of Death, who seeing the Token, goes presently to his own house, and kills himself presently after Bat the strangest thing of all is that which they do concerning the Death of their Kings. For the Priests that live in Meroe, and spend their time about the worship and honour of the Gods, and are in greatest Authority; when they have a mind to it, send a Messenger to the King, to bid him dye, for that the Gods have given such order, and that the Commandments of the Immortals are not by any means, to be neglected by those that are by nature Mortal, using also other speeches to him, which men of simple Judgment, that have not reason enough to dispare against those unnecessary commands, as being edu­cated under an old and undelible [...]lom are [...] [Page 96]to admit of; therefore in former times the Kings did obey the Priests, not as mastered by force and Arms, but as having their reason mastered by superstition. But in the time of Ptolomy the second, Ergamenes, King of the Aethiopians, having had his breeding in Philosophy after the manner of the Greeks, being the first that durst dispute their power, took heart as befit­ted a King; came with Soldiers to a place called Aba­ton, where was then the Golden Temple of the Aethi­opians; killed all the Priests, abolished the Custom, and rectified the Kingdom according to his will.

B.

Though they that were kill'd were most dam­nable Impostors, yet the Act was cruel.

A.

It was so; but were not the Priests cruel to cause their Kings, whom a little before they adored as Gods, to make away themselves? The King kill'd them for the safety of his person, they him, out of Ambition, or love of Change. The King's Act may be coloured with the good of his People; the Priests had no pre­tence against their Kings, who were certainly very godly, or else would never have obeyed the command of the Priests by a Messenger unarmed to kill them­selves. Our late King, the best King perhaps that ever was (you know) was murdered, having been first persecuted by War at the Incitement of Presby­terian Ministers, who are therefore guilty of the Death of all that fell in that War, which were, I believe, in England, Scotland, and Ireland, near one hundred thousand persons. Had it not been much better that those seditious Ministers which were not perhaps a thousand, had been all kill'd before they had Preached? It had been (I confess) a great Massacre; but the killing of a hundred thousand is a greater.

B.

I am glad the Bishops were out at this business; as ambitious as some say they are, it did not appear in that business; for they were Enemies to them that were in it.

But I intend not by these Quotations to com­mend either the Divinity, nor the Philosophy of those Heathen people, but to shew only what the Reputation of those Sciences can effect among the people: For their Divinity was nothing but Ido­latry, and their Philosophy (excepting tho know­ledge of the Aegyptian Priests, and from them the Chaldeans had gotten by long Observation and Study in Astronomy, Geometry, and Arithme­tick) very little, and that in great part abused in Astrology and Fortune-telling; whereas the Divinity of the Clergy in this Nation (now conside­red apart from the mixture that has been introdu­ced by the Church of Rome, and in part retained here of the babling Philosophy of Aristotle, and other Greeks, that has no Affinity with Religion, and serves only to breed Disaffection, Dissention, and finally Sedition and Civil War, as we have lately found by dear experience in the Differen­ces between the Presbyterians and Episcopals) is the true Religion. But for these Differences, both Parties, as they were in Power, not only suppressed the Tenets of one another, but also whatsoever Doctrine look'd with an ill Aspect upon their Interest; and consequently all true Philo­sophy, especially Civil and Moral, which can never appear propitious to Ambition, or to an Exemption from Obedience due to the Soveraign Power.

After the King had accus'd the Lord Kimbolton, a Member of the Lords House, and Hollis, Hasle­rig, Hampden, Prinn, and Stroud, five Members of the Lower House, of High Treason; and after the Parliament had Voted out the Bishops from the House of Peers, they pursued especi­ally two things in their Petitions to His Majesty, the one was, that the King would declare who were the persons that advised him to go as he did to [Page 98]the Parliament-House to apprehend them; and that he would leave them to the Parliament to receive condign punishment; and this they did to stick upon His Majesty the dishonour of Deserting his Friends, and betraying them to his Enemies. The other was, that he would allow a Guard out of the City of London to be commanded by the Earl of Essex; for which they pretended they could not else sit in safety, which pretence was nothing but an upbraiding of His Ma­jesty for coming to Parliament better accompanied than ordinary, to seize the said five sedicious Members.

B.

I see no reason in petitioning for a Guard, they should determine it to the City of London in par­ticular, and the Command by name to the Earl of Essex, unless they meant the King should understand it a Guard against himself.

A.

Their meaning was, that the King should understand it so, and as (I verily believe) they meant he should take it as an affront; and the King himself understanding it so, denied to grant it, though he were willing, if they could not otherwise be satisfied, to command such a Guard to wait upon them, as he would be responsible for to God Almighty. Besides this, the City of London petition'd the King (put upon it, no doubt, by some Member of the Lower House) to put the Tower of London into the hands of persons of Trust, meaning such as the Parliament should approve of. And so appoint a Guard for the safety of His Majesty and the Parliament. This method of bringing Petitions in a Tumultuary manner by great multitudes of Clamorous people, was ordinary with the House of Commons, whose Ambition could never have been served by way of Prayer and Request, without extraordinary terror.

After the King had waved the prosecution of the five Members, but denied to make known, who had advised Him to come in person to the [Page 99]House of Commons, they questioned the Attorney-General, who, by the King's command, had Exhi­bited the Articles against them, and Voted him, A Breaker of the Priviledge of Parliament. And no doubt had made him feel their Cruelty, if he had not spee­dily fled the Land.

About the end of January, they made an Order of both Houses of Parliament, to prevent the go­ing over of Popish Commanders into Ireland; not so much fearing that, as that by this the King Him­self choosing his Commanders for that Service, might aid Himself out of Ireland against the Parlia­ment. But this was no great matter in respect of a Petition they sent His Majesty about the same time, that is to say, about the Twenty seventh, or Twenty eighth of January, 1641. wherein they desired, in effect, the absolute Soveraignty of England, though by the name of Soveraignty they challeng'd it not, whil'st the King was living; for to the end, that the fears and dangers of this Kingdom might be removed, and the mischievous designs of those who are Enemies to the Peace of it, might be prevented, they pray that His Majesty would be pleased to put forthwith,

First, The Tower of London.

Secondly, All other Forts.

Thirdly, The whole Militia of the Kingdom into the hands of such Persons as should be recommended to him by both the Houses of Parliament.

And this they style a necessary Petition.

B.

Were there really any such fears and dangers generally conceived here? Or did there appear any Enemies at that time, with such designs as are men­tioned in the Petition?

A.

Yes, but no other fear of danger, but such as discreet and honest men might justly have of the designs of the Parliament it self, who were the greatest Enemies to the Peace of the Kingdom that [Page 100]could possibly be. 'Tis also worth observing, that this Petition began with these words, Most Gracious Sove­reign; so stupid they were, as not to know, that he that is Master of the Militia, is Master of the King­dom, and consequently is in possession of a most ab­solute Sovereignty. The King was now at Windsor, to avoid the Tumults of the Common People before the Gates at Whitehall, together with the Clamors and and Affronts there the Ninth of February; after, he came to Hampton Court, and thence went to Dover with the Queen, and the Princess of Orange his Daugh­ter, where the Queen, with the Princess of Orange, embarked for Holland, but the King returned to Greenwich, whence he sent for the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, and so went with them towards York.

B.

Did the Lor [...]s join with the Commons in this Petition for the Militia.

A.

It appears so by the Title, but I believe they durst not but do it; the House of Commons took them but for a Cypher, Men of Title onely, without real Power, but they were very much mistaken; for the House of Commons never intended they should be sha­rers in it.

B.

What Answer made the King to this Petition?

A.

That when He shall know the Extent of Power which is intended to be established in those persons, whom they desire to be the Commanders of the Mili­tia in the several Counties, and likewise to what time it shall be limited; that no Power shall be Executed by His Majesty alone, without the advice of Parlia­ment, then he will declare that (for the securing them from all Dangers or Jealousies of any) then His Maje­sty will be content to put into all the places, both Forts and Militia in the several Counties, such persons as both the Houses of Parliament shall either approve, or recommend unto him, so that they declare before un­to His Majesty, the names of the persons whom they [Page 101]approve or recommend, unless such persons shall be nam'd, against whom he shall have just and unquesti­onable Exceptions.

B.

What Power? For what Time? And to whom did the Parliament grant concerning the Militia?

A.

The same Power which the King had before planted in his Lieutenants, and his Deputy-Lieute­nants in the several Counties, and without other limi­tation of time, but their own pleasure.

B.

Who were the Men that had this Power?

A.

There is a Catalogue of them Printed, they are very many, and most of them Lords; nor is it necessa­ry to have them nam'd, for to name them, is (in my opinion) to brand them with the mark of Disloyalty, or of Folly. When they had made a Catalogue of them, they sent it to the King, with a new Petition for the Militia.

Also presently after they sent a Message to His Ma­jesty, praying Him to leave the Prince at Hampton Court; but the King granted neither.

B.

Howsoever it was well done of them to get Ho­stages (if they could) of the King, before He went from them.

A.

In the mean time, to raise Mony, for the redu­cing of Ireland, the Parliament invited Men to bring in Mony by way of Adventure, according to these Pro­positions.

First, That two Millions, and five hundred thousand Acres of Land in Ireland, should be assigned to the Ad­venturers, in this proportion.

For an Ad­venture of

  • 200 l.—1000 Acres in Ʋlster.
  • 300 l.—1000 Acres in Conaught.
  • 450 l.—1000 Acres in Munster.
  • 600 l.—1000 Acres in Lemster.

All according to English Measure, and consisting of Meadow, arable and profitable Pasture; Bogs, Woods, and Barren Mountains, being cast in over and above.

[Page 102]

Secondly, A Revenue was reserv'd to the Crown, from 1 d. to 3 d. on every Acre.

Thirdly, That Commissions should be sent by the Parliament, to erect Mannors, settle Wastes and Com­mons, maintain preaching Ministers, to create Corpo­rations, and to regulate Plantations. The rest of the Propositions concern only the times and manner of payment of the Sums subscribed by the Adventurers; and to those Propositions His Majesty assented, but to the Petition for the Militia, His Majesty denied His Assent.

B.

If He had not, I should have thought it, a great Wonder. What did the Parliament after this?

A.

They sent Him another Petition, which was presented to Him when He was at Theobalds, in his way to York; wherein they tell him plainly, That unless He be pleased to assure them by those Messengers them sent, that He would speedily apply His Royal Assent to the satisfaction of their former Desires, they shall be forc'd, for the Safety of his Majesty and his Kingdoms, to dispose of the Mili­tia by the Authority of both Houses, &c.

They Petition'd His Majesty also, to let the Prince stay at St. James's, or some other of His Majesties Houses near London. They tell him also, That the Power of Raising, Ordering and Disposing of the Militia, cannot be granted to any Corporation, without the Authority and Consent of Parliament. And those Parts of the Kingdom, that have put themselves into a posture of Defence, have done nothing therein, but by direction of both Houses, and what is justifiable by the Laws of this Kingdom.

B.

What Answer made the King to this?

A.

It was a putting of themselves into Arms, and under Officers, such as the Parliament should approve of.

Fourthly, They Voted that His Majesty should be again desir'd, that the Prince might continue about London.

Lastly, They Voted a Declaration to be sent to His [Page 103]Majesty by both the Houses, wherein they accuse His Majesty of a design of altering Religion, though not directly Him, but them that counsel'd Him; whom they also accus'd of being the Inviters and Fomenters of the Scots War, and Framers of the Rebellion in Ire­land. And upbraid the King again, for accusing the Lord Kimbolton, and the Five Members; and of being privy to the purpose of bringing up His Army, which was rais'd against the Scots, to be employ'd against the Parliament. To which His Majesty replied from New-market.

Whereupon it was Resolv'd by both Houses, That in this Case of extream Danger, and of His Majesties Refusal, the Ordinance agreed upon by both Houses, for the Militia, doth oblige the People by the Fundamental Laws of this Kingdom. And also that whosoever should execute any Power over the Militia, by colour of any Commission of Lieutenancy, without Consent of both Houses of Parliament, shall be accounted a Disturber of the Peace of the Kingdom.

Whereupon His Majesty sent a Message to both Houses from Huntingdon, Requiring Obedience to the Laws Established, and Prohibiting all Subjects, upon pretence of their Ordinance, to Execute any thing concerning the Militia, which is not by those Laws warranted.

Upon this the Parliament Vote a standing to their former Votes; as also, That when the Lords and Com­mons in Parliament, which is the Supreme Court of Judica­ture in the Kingdom, shall declare what the Law of the Land it, to have this not only questioned, but contradicted, is a high Breach of the Priviledge of Parliament.

B.

I thought that he that makes the Law, ought to declare what the Law is; for what is it else to make a Law, but to declare what it is; so that they have taken from the King not only the Militia, but also the Legi­slative Power.

A.

They have so. But I make account the Legisla­tive Power (and indeed all Power possible) is con­tain'd in the Power of the Militia.

[Page 104]

After this they seize such Mony as was due to His Majesty upon the Bill of Tunnage and Poundage, and upon the Bill of Subsidies, that they might disable him every way they possibly could. They sent Him also ma­ny other contumelious Messages and Petitions after His coming to York, amongst which one was, That where­as the Lord Admiral, by indisposition of Body, could not command the Fleet in Person, He would be pleased to give Authority to the Earl of Warwick to supply his place; when they knew the King had put Sir John Penington in it before.

B.

To what End did the King entertain so many Petitions, Messages, Declarations, and Remonstrances, and vouchsafe His Answers to them, when He could not choose but clearly see they were resolv'd to take from Him His Royal Power, and consequently His Life? For it could not stand with their safety, to let either Him or His Issue live, after they had done Him so great Injuries.

A.

Besides this, the Parliament had at the same time a Committee residing at York, to spy what His Majesty did, and to inform the Parliament thereof; and also to hinder the King from gaining the People of that County to His Party: so that when His Majesty was Courting the Gentlemen there, the Committee was Instigating of the Yeomanry against Him; to which also the Ministers did very much contribute, so that the King lost His opportunity at York.

B.

Why did not the King seize the Committee into His hands, or drive them out of His Town.

A.

I know not; but I believe, He knew the Parlia­ment had a greater Party than He, not only in York­shire, but also in York.

Towards the End of April the King, upon Petition of the People of Yorkshire, to have the Magazine of Hull to remain still there, for the greater security of the Northern Parts, thought fit to take it into his own hands. He had a little before appointed Governor of [Page 105]the Town the Earl of Newcastle, but the Townsmen having been already corrupted by the Parliament, re­fused to receive him, but refus'd not to receive Sir John Hotham, appointed to be Governor by the Par­liament. The King therefore coming before the Town, Guarded only by a few of His own Servants, and a few Gentlemen of the Country thereabouts, was deny'd Entrance by Sir John Hotham that stood upon the Wall; for which Act, he presently caused Sir John Hotham to be Proclaim'd Traytor, and sent a Message to the Parliament, requiring Justice to be done upon the said Hotham, and that the Town and Magazine might be delivered into His hands.

To which the Parliament made no Answer, but in­stead thereof published another Declaration, in which they omitted nothing of their former Slanders against His Majesties Government, but inserted certain Propo­sitions declarative of their own pretended Right, viz.

I. That whatsoever they declare to be Law, ought not to be questioned by the King.

II. That no Precedent can be Limits to bound their Pro­ceedings.

III. That a Parliament, for the Public Good, may di­spose of any thing wherein the King or Subject hath a Right; and that they, without the King, are this Parliament, and the Judge of this Public Good, and that the King's consent is not necessary.

IV. That no Member of either House ought to be trou­bled for Treason, Felony, or any other Crime, unless the Cause he first brought before the Paliament, that they may judge of the Fact, and give leave to proceed, if they see Cause.

V. That the Sovereign Power resides in both Houses, and that the King ought to have no Negative Voice.

[Page 106]

VI. That the Levying of Forces against the Personal Commands of the King, (though accompanied with his pre­sence) is not Levying War against the King, but the Levying of War against his Politic Person, viz. his Laws, &c.

VII. That Treason cannot be committed against his Per­son, otherwise than as he is intrusted with the Kingdom, and discharges that Trust; and that they have a Power to judge, whether he hath discharged his Trust, or not.

VIII. That they may dispose of the King when they will.

B.

This is plain-dealing, and without hypocrisie; Could the City of London swallow this?

A.

Yes, and more too, if need be; London (you know) has a great Belly, but no palate nor taste of Right and Wrong.

In the Parliament Roll of Henry IV. amongst the Articles of the Oath the King at his Coronation took, there is one runs thus.

Concedes Justas Leges & Consuetudines esse tenendas, & promi [...]tes per te eas esse protegendas, & ad honorem Dei corro­borandas quas Vulgus elegerit.

Which the Parliament urged for their Legislative Authority, and therefore interpret quas Vulgus elegerit, which the People shall choose; as if the King should swear to protect and corroborate Laws before they were made, whether they be Good or Bad: where­as the words signifie no more, but that he shall pro­tect and corroborate such Laws, as they have cho­sen; that is to say, the Acts of Parliament then in being.

And in the Records of the Exchequer it is thus Will yea grant to hold and keep the Laws, and rightful [Page 107]Customs, which the Commonalty of this your Kingdom have? And will you defend and uphold them, &c?

And this was the Answer His Majesty made to that Point.

B.

I think His Answer very full and clear; but if the words were to be interpreted in the other sence, yet I see no reason why the King should be bound to swear to them; for Henry IV. came to the Crown by the Votes of a Parliament, not much inferior in wic­kedness to this Long Parliament, that Deposed and Murdered their Lawful King, saving that it was not the Parliament it self, but the Usurper that murdered King Richard II.

A.

About a week after, in the beginning of May, the Parliament sent the King another Paper, which they stil'd, The Humble Petition and Advice of both Houses: Containing Nineteen Propositions, which when you shall hear, you shall be able to judge what Power they meant to leave to the King, more than to any of His Subjects. The first of them is this:

I. That the Lords, and other of His Majesties Privy Council; and all great Officers of State both at home and abroad, be put from their Imployments, and from his Coun­cil, save only such as should be approved of by both Houses of Parliament; and none put into their places, but by approbation of the said Houses. And that all Privy Counsellors take an Oath for the due Execution of their places, in such form as shall be agreed upon by the said Houses.

II. That the great Affairs of the Kingdom be Debated, Resolv'd and Transacted only in Parliament; and such as shall presume to do any thing to the contrary, to be reserved to the Censure of the Parliament; and such other Mat­ters of State as are proper for His Majesties Privy Coun­cil, shall be Debated and Concluded by such as shall from time to time be chosen for that place by both Houses of [Page 108]Parliament. And that no Publick Act concerning the Af­fairs of the Kingdom which are proper for his Privy Coun­cil, be esteemed valid, as proceeding from the Royal Au­thority, unless it be done by the Advice and Consent of the Major part of the Council, attested under their Hands; and that the Council be not more than 25, nor less than 15; and that when a Counsellors place falls, it shall not be sup­plied, without the assent of the Major part of the Council; and that such choice also shall be void, if the next Parlia­ment after confirm it not.

III. That the Lord High Steward of England, Lord High Constable, Lord Chancellor, or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privy Seal, Earl Mar­shal, Lord Admiral, Warden of the Cinque Ports, chief Governor of Ireland, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Ma­ster of the Wards, Secretaries of State, Two Chief Ju­stices, and Chief Baron, be always chosen with the Appro­bation of both Houses of Parliament; and in the Intervals of Parliament, by the Major part of the Privy Council.

IV. That the Government of the King's Children shall he committed to such as both Houses shall approve of; and in the Intervals of Parliament, such as the Privy Council shall approve of, that the Servants then about them, a­gainst whom the Houses have just exception, should be re­mov'd.

V. That no Marriage be concluded, or treated of, for any of the King's Children, without consent of Parliament.

VI. That the Laws in force against the Jesuits, Priests, and Popish Recusants, be strictly put in execution.

VII. That the Votes of Popish Lords in the House of Peers be taken away; and that a Bill be passed for the Edu­cation of the Children of Papists in the Protestant Reli­gion.

[Page 109]

VIII. That the King will be pleas'd to reform the Church-Government and Liturgy, in such manner as both Houses of Parliament shall advise.

IX. That he would be pleased to rest satisfied with that course, the Lords and Commons have appointed for ordering the Militia, and recall his Declarations and Proclamations against it.

X. That such Members as have been put out of any Place or Office since this Parliament began, may be restor'd, or have satisfaction.

XI. That all Privy Counsellors and Judges take an Oath, the Form whereof shall be agreed on, and setled by Act of Parliament, for the maintaining the Petition of Right, and of certain Statutes made by the Parliament.

XII. That all the Judges and Officers placed by Ap­probation of both Houses of Parliament, may hold their places quamdiu benè se gesserint.

XIII. That the Justice of Parliament may pass upon all Delinquents, whether they be within the Kingdom, or fled out of it; and that all persons cited by either House of Parliament, may appear and abide the Censure of Par­liament.

XIV. That the General Pardon offered by his Majesty, be granted with such Exceptions as shall be advised by both Houses of Parliament.

B.

What a spightful Article is this? All the rest proceeded from Ambition, which many times well-natur'd men are subject to; but this proceeded from an inhumane and devilish cruelly.

XV. That the Forts and Castles be put under the Command of such Persons, as with the Approbation of the Parliament the King shall appoint.

XVI. That the extraordinary Guards about the King be discharged, and for the future none raised but ac­cording to the Law, in case of actual Rebellion or In­vasion.

B.

Methinks these very Propositions sent to the King, are an actual Rebellion.

A.

XVII. That his Majesty enter into a more strict Alli­ance with the United Provinces, and other Neighbour Protestant Princes and States.

XVIII. That his Majesty be pleased, by Act of Parlia­ment, to clear the Lord Kimbolton, and the Five Mem­bers of the House of Commons, in such manner, as that fu­ture Parliaments may be secur'd from the consequence of evil Precedent.

XIX. That his Majesty be pleased to pass a Bill for restraining Peers, made hereafter from sitting or voting in Parliament, unless they be admitted with consent of both Houses of Parliament. These Propositions granted, they promise to apply themselves to regulate his Maje­sties Revenue to his best advantage, and to settle it to the support of his Royal Dignity, in Honour and Plenty; and also to put the Town of Hull into such hands as his Majesty shall appoint, with consent of Par­liament.

B.

Is not that to put it into such hands as His Majesty shall appoint by the consent of the Petitioners, which is no more than to keep it in their hands, as it is? Did they want, or think the King wanted common sense, so [Page 111]as not to perceive that their promise herein was worth nothing?

A.

After the sending of these Propositions to the King, and His Majesties refusal to grant them, they began on both sides to prepare for War, the King raising a Guard for his Person in York-shire, and the Parliament thereupon having Voted, That the King intended to make War upon his Parliament, gave Or­der for the Mustering and Exercising the People in Arms, and published Propositions to Invite and Encourage them to bring in either ready Money or [...]late, or to promise under their hands to maintain certain numbers of Horse, Horsemen, and Arms, for the Defence of the King and Parliament, (mean­ing by King, as they had formerly declar'd, not his Person, but his Laws) promising to repay their Money with Interest of Eight Pound in the Hun­dred, and the Value of their Plate with Twelve Pence the Ounce for the Fashion. On the other side, the King came to Nottingham, and there did set up his Standard Royal, and sent out Commissioners of Ar­ray to call those to him, which by the ancient Laws of England were bound to serve in the Wars. Upon this occasion there passed divers Declarations be­tween the King and Parliament, concerning the Lega­lity of this Array, which are too long to tell you at this time.

B.

Nor do I desire to hear any Mooting about this Question, for I think that general Law of Salus Po­puli, and the Right of defending himself against those that had taken from him the Sovereign Power, are sufficient to make Legal whatsoever he should do, in order to the recovery of his Kingdom, or the punish­ing of the Rebels.

A.

In the mean time the Parliament raised an Ar­my, and made the Earl of Essex General thereof; by which Act they declar'd what they meant former­ly, when they Petition'd the King for a Guard, [Page 112]to be Commanded by the said Earl of Essex. And now the King sends out his Proclamations, forbid­ding Obedience to the Orders of the Parliament con­cerning the Militia; and the Parliament send out Or­ders against the Executions of the Commissions of Array; hitherto (though it were a War before) yet there was no Blood shed, they shot at one another nothing but Paper.

B.

I understand now how the Parliament destroy'd the Peace of the Kingdom, and how easily, by the help of Seditious Presbyterian Ministers, and of am­bitious ignorant Orators, they reduced the Govern­ment into Anarchy: but I believe it will be a harder task for them to bring in Peace again, and settle the Government either in themselves, or in any other Governor, or form of Government; for granting that they obtain the Victory in this War, they must be beholding for it to the Valor, good Conduct, or Felicity of those to whom they give the Command of their Armies, especially to the General, whose good success will, without doubt, bring with it the love and admiration of the Soldiers, so that it will be in his power either to take the Government upon himself, or to place it where himself thinks good. In which Case, if he take it not to himself, he will be thought a Fool; and if he do, he shall be sure to have the Envy of his subordinate Commanders, who will look for a share either in the present Government, or in the Succession to it; for they will say, Has he obtain'd this Power by his own without our Danger, Valor, and Council? And must we be his Slaves, whom we have thus rais'd? Or is not there as much Justice on our side against him, as was on his side against the King?

A.

They will and did, insomuch that the reason why Cromwel, after he had gotten into his own hands the absolute Power of England, Scotland, and Ireland, by the Name of Protector, did never dare to take upon him the Title of King, nor was ever able to settle it upon [Page 113]his Children, his Officers would not suffer it, as pre­tending after his death to succeed him; nor would the Army consent to it, because he had ever declared to them against the Government of a Single Person.

B.

But to return to the King, What Means had he to pay? What Provision had he to Arm, nay Means to Levy an Army, able to resist the Army of the Parlia­ment, maintained by the great Purse of the City of London, and Contributions of almost all the Towns Corporate in England, and furnished with Arms as ful­ly as they could require?

A.

'Tis true, the King had great disadvantages, and yet by little and little he got a considerable Army, with which he so prospered, as to grow stronger every day, and the Parliament weaker, till they had gotten the Scots with an Army of 21000 Men to come into Eng­land to their assistance; but to enter into the particular Narrative of what was done in the War, I have not now time.

B.

Well then, we will talk of that at next meeting.

B.

VVE left at the Preparations on both sides for War, which when I consi­dered by my self, I was mightily puzled to find out what possibility there was for the King to equal the Parliament in such a course, and what hopes He had of Money, Men, Arms, Fortified Places, Shipping, Council, and Military Offices, sufficient for such an Enterprize against the Parliament, that had Men and Money as much at Command, as the City of London, and other Corporation Towns were able to furnish, which was more than they needed. And for the Men they should set forth for Soldiers, they were almost all of them spightfully bent against the King, and his whole Party, whom they took to be either Papists, or Flatterers of the King, or that had design'd to raise their Fortunes by the Plunder of the City, and other Corporation Towns; and though I believe not that they were more valiant than other Men, nor that they had so much Experience in the War, as to be accounted good Soldiers; yet they had that in them, which in time of Battle is more conducing to Victory than Valor, and Experience both together, and that was Spight.

And for Arms, they had in their hands the chief Magazines, the Tower of London, and Kingston upon Hull, besides most of the Powder and Shot that lay in se­veral Towns, for the use of the Trained Bands.

Fortified places there were not many then in Eng­land, and most of them in the hands of the Parlia­ment.

The King's Fleet was wholly in their Command, under the Earl of Warwick; Counsellors they needed no more, than such as were of their own Body, so that the King was every way inferior to them, except it were perhaps in Officers.

I cannot compare their chief Officers for the Parliament. The Earl of Essex (after the Parliament had Voted the War) was made General of all their Forces, both in England and Ireland, from whom, all other Commanders were to receive their Com­missions.

B.

What moved them to make the Earl of Essex General? And for what cause was the Earl of Essex so displeased with the King, as to accept that Office?

A.

I do not certainly know what to answer to either of those Questions, but the Earl of Essex had been in the Wars abroad, and wanted neither Experience, Judgment nor Courage to perform such an under­taking; and besides that, you have heard, (I believe) how great a Darling of the People his Father had been before him; and what Honour he gad gotten by the success of his Enterprize upon Cales, and in some other Military Actions.

To which I may add, That this Earl himself was not held by the People to be so great a Favourite at Court, as that they might not trust him with their Army against the King, and by this you may perhaps conjecture the cause for which the Parliament made choice of him for General.

B.

But why did they think him discontented with the Court?

A.

I know not that, nor indeed that he was so; he came to Court as other Noblemen did, when oc­casion was to wait upon the King, but had no Office till a little before this time, to oblige him to be there continually; but I believe verily, that the unfor­tunateness of his Marriage, had so discountenanced his Conversation with Ladies, that the Court could not be his proper Element, unless he had had some extra­ordinary favour there, to balance that calamity. For particular discontent from the King, or intention of re­venge for any supposed disgrace, I think he had none; nor that he was any ways addicted to Presbyterian [Page 116]Doctrines, or other Phanatic Tenets in Church or State, saving only that he was carried away with the stream (in a manner) of the whole Nation, to think that England was not an absolute, but a mixt Monarchy, not considering that the Supreme Power must always be absolute, whether it be in the King, or in the Parliament.

B.

Who was General of the King's Army?

A.

None yet but Himself, nor indeed had He yet any Army; but there coming to him at that time two Ne­phews, the Princes Rupert and Maurice, He put the Command of His Horse into the hands of Prince Ru­pert, a man than whom no man living has a better cou­rage, nor was more active and diligent in prosecuting his Commission; and though but a young man then, was not without experience in the conducting of Sol­diers, as having been an Actor in part of his Father's Wars in Germany.

B.

But how could the King find Money to pay such an Army as was necessary for Him, against the Parlia­ment?

A.

Neither the King nor Parliament had much Mo­ney at that time in their own hands, but were fain to rely upon the Benevolence of those that took their parts, wherein (I confess) the Parliament had a mighty great advantage. Those that helped the King in that kind, were only Lords and Gentlemen, which not ap­proving the proceedings of the Parliament, were willing to undertake the payment every one of a cer­tain number of Horse, which cannot be thought any very great assistance, the persons that paid them being so few; for other Moneys that the King then had, I have not heard of any but what he borrow'd upon Jewels in the Low-Countries; whereas the Parliament had a very plentiful Contribution, not only from Lon­don, but generally from their Faction in all other places of England, upon certain Propositions, (published by the Lords and Commons in June, 1642. at which time they had newly Voted, That the King intended to make [Page 117]War upon them) for bringing in of Money or Plate, to maintain Horse and Horse-men, and to buy Arms for the preservation of the public Peace, and for the de­fence of the King, and both Houses of Parliament; for the Repaying of which Money and Plate, they were to have the Public Faith.

B.

What Public Faith is there, when there is no Pub­lic? What is it that can be call'd Public, in a Civil War, without the King?

A.

The truth is, the Security was nothing worth, but serv'd well enough to gull those seditious Block­heads that were more fond of change, than either of their peace or profit; having by this means gotten Con­tributions from those that were the well-affected to their Cause, they made use of it afterwards, to force the like Contribution from others; for in November following, they made an Ordinance for Assessing also of those that had not contributed then, or had contribu­ted, but not proportionably to their Estates. And yet this was contrary to what the Parliament promised and declared in the Propositions themselves; for they decla­red in the first Proposition, That no man's Affection should be measured by the proportion of his Offer, so that he expressed his good will to the Service in any proportion whatsoever.

Besides this, in the beginning of March following, they made an Ordinance to Levy weekly a great Sum of Money upon every County, City, Town, Place, and Person of any Estate almost in England; which weekly Sum (as may appear by the Ordinance it self, printed and published in March, 1642, by Order of both Houses) comes to almost 33000 l. and consequently to above 1700000 l. for the year. They had, besides all this, the profits of the King's Lands and Woods, and what­soever was remaining unpaid of any Subsidy formerly granted Him, and the Tunnage and Poundage usually received by the King, besides the profit of the Seque­stration of great persons, whom they pleas'd to Vote Delinquents, and the profits of the Bishops Lands, which [Page 120] [...] [...] ­troversie, understood not the Reasons of either Par­ty; and for those that by Ambition were once set upon the Enterprize of changing the Government, they cared not much what was Reason and Justice, in the Cause, but what Strength they might procure, by re­ducing the multitude, with Remonstrances from the Parliament-House, or by Sermons in the Churches; and to their Petitions, I would not have had any an­swer at all more than this, That if they would disband their Army, and put themselves upon his Mercy, they should find Him more Gracious than they expected.

A.

That had been a gallant answer indeed, if it had proceeded from Him after some extraordinary great Victory in Battel, or some extraordinary assurance of a Victory at last in the whole War.

B.

Why, what could have hapned to Him worse, than at length He suffered, notwithstanding His gen­tle answer, and all His reasonable Declarations?

A.

Nothing; but, who knew that?

B.

Any Man might see, that He was never like to be restor'd to His Right without Victory, and such His Statutes being known to the People, would have brought to His assistance many more hands, than all the arguments of Law, or force of Eloquence, couched in Declarations, and other Writings, could have done by far; and I wonder what kind of Men they were, that hindered the King from taking this Resolution.

A.

You may know by the Declarations themselves, which are very long, and full of Quotations of Re­cords, and of Cases formerly Reported, that the Pen­ners of them were either Lawyers by Profession, or such Gentlemen as had the ambition to be thought so. Besides, I told you before, that those which were then likeliest to have their counsel asked in this business, were averse to absolute Monarchy, as also to absolute Democracy, or Aristocracy; all which Governments they esteemed Tyranny, and were in love with Mo­narchy, which they us'd to praise by the name of mixt [Page 121]Monarchy, though it were indeed nothing else but pure Anarchy: and those Men whose Pens the King most us'd in these Controversies of Law, and Politics, were such (if I have not been misinformed) as having been Members of this Parliament, had declaim'd a­gainst Ship-money, and other Extra-Parliamentary Taxes, as much as any: but when they saw the Par­liament grow higher in their demands, than they thought they would have done, went over to the King's Party.

B.

Who were those?

A.

It is not necessary to name any Man, seeing I have undertaken only a short Narration of the Follies and other Faults of Men during this trouble, but not (by naming of persons) to give you or any man else oc­casion to esteem them the less, now the faults on all sides have been forgiven.

B.

When the Business was brought to this height, by levying of Soldiers, and seizing on the Navy, Arms, and other Provisions on both sides, that no Man was so blind, as not to see they were in an estate of War one against another, why did not the King (by Proclamati­on or Message) according to his undoubted Right, Dis­solve the Parliament, and thereby diminish in some part the Authority of their Levies, and of other their unjust Ordinances?

A.

You have forgotten that I told you that the King Himself, by a Bill that He passed at the same time when He passed the Bill for the Execution of the Earl of Strafford, had given them Authority to hold the Parlia­ment, till they should by consent of both Houses dissolve themselves: If therefore He had by any Proclamation or Message to the Houses dissolv'd them, they would, to their former Defamations of His Majesties actions, have added this, That He was a Breaker of His Word, and not only in Contempt of Him, have continued their Session, but also have made advantage of it, to the increase and strengthning of their own Party.

Would not the King's raising of an Army against them, be interpreted as a purpose to dissolve them by force? And was it not as great a breach of promise to scatter them by force, as to dissolve them by Proclama­tion? Besides I cannot conceive that the passing of that Act was otherwise intended than conditionally, so long as they should not ordain any thing contrary to the Sovereign Right of the King, which condition they had already by many of their Ordinances broken; and, I think, that even by the Law of Equity, which is the unalterable Law of Nature, a man that has the Sove­reign Power cannot, if he would, give away the right of any thing which is necessary for him to retain for the good Government of his Subjects, unless he do it in express words, saying, That he will have the Sovereign Power no longer; for the giving away that which by consequence only draws the Sovereignty along with it, is not (I think) a giving away of the Sovereignty, but an error, such as works nothing but an invalidity in the Grant it self. And such was the King's passing this Bill, for the continuing of the Parliament, as long as the Two Houses pleas'd. But now that the War was resolv'd on, on both sides, what needed any more di­spute in writings?

A.

I know not what need they had, but on both sides they thought it needful to hinder one another as much as they could from levying of Soldiers, and therefore the King did set forth Declarations in Print, to make the people know that they ought not to obey the Officers of the new Militia set up by the Ordi­nance of Parliament, and also to let them see the Le­gality of His own Commissions of Array; and the Parliament on their part did the like, to justifie to the people the said Ordinance, and to make the Commissi­on of Array appear unlawful.

B.

When the Parliament were Levying of Soldi­ers, was it not lawful for the King to Levy Soldiers, to defend Himself and His Right, though there had been [Page 123]no other Title for it, but His own preservation, and that the name of Commission of Array had never been heard of?

A.

For my part, I think there cannot be a better Title for War, than the defence of a Man's own Right, but the People at that time thought nothing lawful for the King to do, for which there was not some Statute made by Parliament. For the Lawyers, I mean the Judges of the Courts of Westminster, and some few others, though but Advocates, yet of great Reputation for their skill in the Common Laws and Statutes of England, had infected most of the Gentry of England with their Maxims and Cases prejudg'd, which they call Precedents, and made them think so well of their own knowledge in the Law, that they were glad of this occasion to shew it against the King, and thereby to gain a Reputation with the Parliament, of being good Patriots, and wise States­men.

B.

What was this Commission of Array?

A.

King William the Conqueror had gotten into his hands by Victory, all the Lands in England, of which he disposed some part, as Forests and Chaces for his own Recreation, and some part to Lords and Gentle­men, that had assisted him, or were to assist him in the Wars; upon which he laid a charge of service in his Wars, some with more Men, and some with less, according to the Lands he had given them; where­by, when the King sent Men unto them with Com­mission to make use of their Service, they were ob­liged to appear with Arms, and to accompany the King to the Wars, for a certain time at their own Charges, and such were the Commissions by which this King did then make his Levies.

B.

Why then was it not Legal?

A.

No doubt but it was Legal, but what did that amount to with Men that were already resolv'd to acknowledge for Law, nothing that was against their [Page 124]design of abolishing Monarchy, and placing a sove­reign and absolute Arbitrary Power in the House of Commons.

B.

To destroy Monarchy, and set up the House of Commons, are two Businesses.

A.

They found it so at last, but did not think it so then.

B.

Let us come now to the Military power.

A.

I intended only the Story of their Injustice, Im­pudence and Hypocrisie; therefore for the proceeding of the War, I refer you to the History thereof, written at large in English.

I shall only make use of such a Thread as is neces­sary for the filling up of such Knavery and Folly also, as I shall observe in their several Actions.

From York the King went to Hull, where was His Magazine of Arms for the Northern Parts of Erg­land, to try if they would admit Him; the Parlia­ment had made Sir John Hotham Governor of the Town, who caused the Gates to be shut, and pre­seating himself upon the walls, flatly denied Him entrance; for which the King caused him to be pre­clam'd Traytor, and sent a Message to the Parliament, to know if they own'd the Actions?

B.

Upon what grounds?

A.

Their pretence was this. That neither this, nor any other Town in England was otherwise the King's, than in Trust for the People of England.

B.

I cannot see the force of this Argument: We represent the People: Ergo, all that the People has is ours. The Mayor of Hull did represent the King, Is therefore all the King had in Hull the Mayor's? The People of England may be represented with Li­mitations, as to deliver a Petition, or the like, does it follow, that they who deliver the Petition, have Right [Page 125]to all the Towns in England? When began this Par­liament to be a Representative of England? Was it November 3. 1640? Who was it the day before that had the Right to keep the King out of Hull, and possess it for themselves? For there was then no Parliament, whose was Hull then?

A.

I think it was the King's; not only because it was called the King's Town upon Hull, but because the King Himself did then and ever represent the Person of the People of England. If He did not, who then did, the Parliament having no Being?

B.

They might perhaps say, the People had then no Representative.

A.

Then there was no Commonwealth, and conse­quently all the Towns of England being the Peoples, you and I, and any Man else, might have put in for his share. You may see by this, what weak People they were, that were carried into the Rebellion, by such weak reasonings as this Parliament used; and how impudent they were, that did put such Fallacies upon them.

B.

Surely they were such, as were esteem'd the wi­sest Men in England, being upon that account chosen to be the Parliament.

A.

And were they also esteem'd the wisest Men of England, that chose them?

B.

I cannot tell that; for I know it is usual with the Freeholders in the Counties, and the Tradesmen in the Cities and Burroughs, to choose, as near as they can, such as are most repugnant to the giving of Subsidies.

A.

The King in the beginning of August, after He had summon'd Hull, and tried some of the Counties thereabout, what they would do for Him, set up His Standard at Nottingham, but there came not in thither Men enow to make an Army sufficient to give Battel to the Earl of Essex.

[Page 126]

From thence He went to Shrewsbery, where He was quickly furnished; and appointing the Earl of Lindsey to be General, He resolv'd to march towards Lon­don.

The Earl of Essex was at Worcester with the Parlia­ment Army, making no offer to stop Him in His pas­sage, but as soon as He was gone by, marched close after him.

The King therefore, to avoid being inclosed be­tween the Army of the Earl of Essex, and the City of London, turned upon him, and gave him Battel at Edge-hill; where, though he got not an intire Victory, yet he had the better, if either had the better; and had certainly the fruit of a Victory, which was to march on, in his intended way towards London, in which the next morning he took Banbury Castle, and from thence went to Oxford, and thence to Brentford, where he gave a great Defeat to Three Regiments of the Parliaments Forces, and so return'd to Oxford.

B.

Why did not the King go on from Brentford?

A.

The Parliament, upon the first notice of the King's marching from Shrewsbery, caused all the Trai­ned Bands, and the Auxiliaries of the City of London (which were so frighted, as to shut up all their shops) to be drawn forth; so that there was a complete and numerous Army ready for the Earl of Essex, that was crept into London just at that time to head it, and this was it that made the King retire to Ox­ford.

In the beginning of February, after Prince Rupert took Cirencest [...]r from the Parliament, with many Pri­soners, and many Arms, for it was newly made a Ma­gazine; and thus stood the business between the King's and the Parliaments Forces.

The Parliament in the mean time, caused a Line of Communication to be made about London and the Suburbs of 12 miles in compass, and constituted a Committee for the Association, and the putting into [Page 127]a posture of defence the Counties of Essex, Cambridge, Suffolk. and some others; and one of those Commis­sioners was Oliver Cromwel, from which employment he came to his following greatness.

B.

What was done, during this time, in other parts of the Country?

A.

In the West, the Earl of Stamford had the em­ployment of putting in execution the Ordinance of Parliament for the Militia; and Sir Ralph Hopton for the King, executed the Commission of Array. Be­tween those two was fought a Battel at Liscard in Corn­wal, where Sir Ralph Hopton had the Victory, and presently took a Town called Saltash, with many Arms, much Ordnance, and many Prisoners. Sir William Waller in the mean time seized Winchester and Chiche­ster for the Parliament.

In the North, for the Commission of Array, my Lord of Newcastle; and for the Militia of the Parlia­ment, was my Lord Fairfax. My Lord of Newcastle took from the Parliament Tadcaster, in which were a great part of the Parliaments Forces for that County, and had made himself, in a manner, Master of all the North. About this time, that is to say, in February, the Queen landed at Burlington, and was conducted by my Lord of Newcastle, and the Marquis of Montross, to York; and not long after, to the King.

Divers other little Advantages, besides these, had the King's Party of the Parliaments in the North.

There hapned also between the Militia of the Par­liament, the Commission of Array in Staffordshire, un­der my Lord Brook for the Parliament, and my Lord of Northampton for the King, great contention, where­in both these Commanders were slain; for my Lord Brook besieging Lichfield-Close, was kill'd with a shot, notwithstanding which they gave not over the Siege, till they were Masters of the Close. But presently after my Lord of Northam [...]ton bes [...]ed [...] again for the [Page 128]King, which to relieve, Sir William Brereton, and Sir John Gell, advanced towards Lichfield, and were met at Hopton-heath by the Earl of Northampton, and routed. The Earl himself was slain, but his Forces with Victory return'd to the Siege again; and shortly after second­ed by Prince Rupert, who was then abroad in that Country, carried the place.

These were the chief Actions of this year 1642. wherein the King's Party had not much the worse.

B.

But the Parliament had now a better Army, in­somuch that if the Earl of Essex had immediately fol­lowed the King to Oxford (not yet well fortified) he might, in all likelihood, have taken it; for he could not want either Men or Ammunition, whereof the City of London (which was wholly at the Parliaments devotion) had store enough.

A.

I cannot judge of that; but this is manifest, con­sidering the estate the King was in at his first march­ing from York, when he had neither Money, nor Men, nor Arms enough, to put him in hope of Victory, that this year (take it altogether) was very prosperous.

B.

But what great Folly or Wickedness do you observe in the Parliaments Actions for this first year?

A.

All that can be said against them in that point, will be excus'd with the pretext of War, and come under one Name of Rebellion, saving that when they summoned any Town, it was in the Name of the King and Parliament.

The King being in the contrary Army, and many times beating them from the Siege, I do not see how the right of War can justifie such Impudence as that. But they pretended that the King was always virtual­ly in the Two Houses of Parliament, making a di­stinction between his Person Natural and Politique, which made the Impudence the greater, besides the folly of it: For this was but an University Quibble, such as Boys make use of in maintaining (in the Schools) [Page 129]such Tencts as they cannot otherwise defend.

In the end of this year, they solicited also the Scots to enter England with an Army, to suppress the power of the Earl of Newcastle in the North, which was a plain Confession, that the Parliament Forces were at this time inferior to the King's; and most men thought, that if the Earl of Newcastle had then marched South­ward, and joined his Forces with the King's, that most of the Members of Parliament would have fled out of England.

In the beginning of 1643. the Parliament seeing the Earl of Newcastle's power in the North grown formidable, sent to the Scots, to hire them to an In­vasion of England; and (to complement them in the mean time) made a Covenant among themselves, such as the Scots before had made against Episcopacy, and demolished Crosses, and Church-windows (such as had in them any Images of Saints) throughout all Eng­land.

Also in the middle of the year, they made a Solemn League with the Nation, which was called, The Solemn League and Covenant.

B.

Are not the Scots as properly to be called Fo­reigners, as the Irish? seeing then they persecuted the Earl of Strafford, even to death, for advising the King to make use of Irish Forces against the Parliament; with what face could they call in a Scotch Army against the King?

A.

The King's Party might easily here have dis­cern'd their design, to make themselves absolute Ma­sters of the Kingdom, and to dethrone the King.

Another great Impudence, or rather a Bestial Inci­vility it was of theirs, That they Voted the Queen a Traytor, for helping the King with some Ammuni­tion, and English Forces, from Holland.

B.

Was it possible that all this could be done, and Men not see that Papers and Declarations must be use­less? And that nothing could satisfie them, but the [Page 130]Deposing of the King, and setting up of themselves in his place.

A.

Yes, very possible, for who was there of them, though knowing that the King had the Sovereign Power, that knew the Essential Rights of Sovereign­ty? They dreamt of a mixt Power of the King and the Two Houses, That it was a divided Power, in which there could be no Peace, was above their under­standing, therefore they were always urging the King to Declarations, and Treaties, (for fear of subjecting themselves to the King in an absolute obedience) which increased the hope and courage of the Rebels, but did the King little good; for the People either understand not, or will not trouble themselves with Controversies in writing, but rather by his compliance by Messages, go away with an opinion, That the Parliament was likely to have the Victory in the War.

Besides, seeing that the Penners and Contrivers of those Papers, were formerly Members of the Parlia­ment, and of another mind, and now revolted from the Parliament, because they could not bear that sway in the House which they expected men were apt to think, they believed not what they wrote.

As for Military Actions (to begin at the Head Quar­ters) Prince Rupert took Brinningram, a Garison of the Parliaments.

In July after, the King's Forces had a great Victory over the Parliaments near the Devizes on Roundway­down, where they took 2000 Prisoners, four Brass Peeces of Ordnance, 28 Colours, and all their Bag­gage. And shortly after Bristol was surrendred to Prince Rupert for the King; and the King himself marching into the West took from the Parliament many other considerable places.

But this good Fortune was not a little allay'd, by his besieging of Glocester, which, after it was re­liev'd to the last gasp, was reliev'd by the Earl of Essex, [Page 131]whose Army was before greatly wasted, but now re­cruited with Train'd Bands, and Apprentices of London.

B.

It seems not only by this, but also by many Examples in History, That there can hardly arise a long or dangerous Rebellion, that has not some such overgrown City, with an Army or two in its belly, to foment it.

A.

Nay more, those great Capital Cities, when Rebellion is upon pretence of Grievances, must needs be of the Rebel Party, because the Grievances are for Taxes, to which Citizens, (that is Merchants, whose profession is their private gain) are naturally mortal Enemies, their only glory being, to grow ex­cessively rich, by the wisdom of buying and selling.

B.

But they are said to be, of all Callings, the most beneficial to the Commonwealth, by setting the poorer sort of people on work.

A.

That is to say, by making poor people sell their Labour to them at their own prizes, so that poor people, for the most part, might get a better Living by working in Bridewell, than by spinning, weaving, and other such labour as they can do, saving that by working slightly, they may help themselves a little, to the disgrace of our Manufacture. And as most com­monly they are the first Encouragers of Rebellion, presuming in their strength; so also are they, for the most part, the first that repent, deceiv'd by them that command their strength.

But to return to the War: Though the King with­drew from Glocester, yet it was not to fly from, but to fight with the Earl of Essex, which presently after he did at Newbery, where the Battel was bloody, and the King had not the worst, unless Cirencester be put into the Scale, which the Earl of Essex had in his way a few days before surpriz'd.

But in the North and the West the King had much the better of the Parliament; for in the North, at the [Page 132]beginning of the year, May 29. the Earls of Newcastle and Cumberland defeated the Lord Fairfax (who com­manded in those parts for the Parliament) at Bramham­moor, which made the Parliament to hasten the assist­ance of the Scots.

In June following, the Earl of Newcastle routed Sir Thomas Fairfax (Son to the Lord Fairfax) upon Adderton-heath, and in pursuit of them to Bradford, took and kill'd 2000 Men, and the next day took the Town and 2000 Prisoners more, (Sir Thomas himself hardly escaping) with all their Arms and Ammuni­tion; and besides this, made the Lord Fairfax quit Hallifax and Beverley.

Lastly, Prince Rupert reliev'd Newark, besieg'd by Sir John Meldrum for the Parliament with 7000 men, whereof 1000 were slain, the rest upon Articles departed, leaving behind them their Arms, Bag and Baggage.

To ballance in part this success, the Earl of Manche­ster, whose Lieutenant General was Oliver Cromwel, got a Victory over the Royalists, near Horn-Castle, of which he slew 400, took 800 Prisoners, and 1000 Arms, and presently after took and plunder'd the City of Lincoln.

In the West, May 16. Sir Ralph Hopton at Strat­ton in Devonshire, had a Victory over the Parlia­mentarians, wherein he took 1700 Prisoners, 13 Brass Peeces of Ordnance, and all their Ammu­nition, which was 70 Barrels of Powder, and their Magazine of their other Provisions in the Town.

Again at Landsdown, between Sir Ralph Hopton and the Parliamentarians under Sir William Waller was fought a fierce Battel, wherein the Victory was not very clear on either side, saving that the Parlia­mentarians might seem to have the better, because presently after Sir William Waller follow'd Sir Ralph Hopton to the Devizes in Wiltshire, though to his cost, [Page 133]for there he was overthrown, as I have already told you.

After this, the King in Person marched into the West, and took Exeter, Dorchester, Barnstable, and divers other places, and had he not at his Return besieged Glocester, and thereby giving the Parliament time for new Levies, 'twas thought by many he might have routed the House of Commons. But the end of this year was more favourable to the Parliament; for in January the Scots entered England, and March the first crossed the Tyne; and whil'st the Earl of Newcastle was marching to them, Sir Thomas Fairfax gathered together a considerable Party in York­scire, and the Earl of Manchester from Lyn advanced towards York; so that the Earl of Newcastle having two Armies of Rebels behind him, and another be­fore him, was forced to retreat to York, which those three Armies joyning presently besieged, and these are all the considerable Military Actions in the year 1643.

In the same year the Parliament caused to be made a new great Seal, the Lord Keeper had carried the former Seal to Oxford: Hereupon the King sent a Messenger to the Judges at Westminster, to for­bid them to make use of it; this Messenger was taken, and condemned at a Council of War, and Hang'd for a Spy.

B.

Is that the Law of War?

A.

I know not: But, it seems, when a Soldier comes into the Enemies Quarters, without address, or notice given to the chief Commander, that it is presum'd he comes as a Spy.

The same year, when certain Gentlemen at London received a Commission of Array from the King, to Levy Men for his Service in that City, being discover'd, they were Condemn'd, and some of them Executed. This Case is not unlike the former.

Was not the making of a new great Seal a suffi­cient proof that the War was raised, not to remove evil Counsellors from the King, but to remove the King himself from the Government; what hope then could there be had in Messages and Treaties?

A.

The Entrance of the Scots was a thing un­expected to the King, who was made to believe by continual Letters from His Commissioners in Scotland, and Duke Hamilton, that the Scots never intended any Invasion. The Duke being then at Oxford, the King (assur'd that the Scots were now entered) sent him Prisoner to Pendennis Castle in Cornwal.

In the beginning of the year 1644. the Earl of Newcastle being (as I told you) besieged by the joint Forces of the Scots, the Earl of Manchester, and Sir Thomas Fairfax; the King sent Prince Rupert to relieve the Town, and as soon as he could, to give the Enemy Battle; Prince Rupert passing through Lancashire, and by the way having storm'd the se­ditious Town of Bolton, and taken in Stock ford and Leverpool, came to York, July 1. and relieved it, the Enemy being risen thence, to a place called Mar­ston-moor, about four miles off, and there was fought that unfortunate Battel, that lost the King, in a manner, all the North; Prince Rupert return'd by the way he came, and the Earl of Newcastle to York, and thence with some of His Officers over the Sea to Hamburgh.

The Honour of this Victory was attributed chiefly to Oliver Cromwel; (the Earl of Manchester's Lieutenant General:) the Parliamentarians return'd from the Field, to the Siege of York, which, not long after, upon honourable Articles was surrendred; not that they were favoured, but because the Parliament could not employ much time, nor many men in the Siege.

This was a great and sudden abatement of the King's prosperity.

A.

It was so, but amends was made him for it within 5 or 6 weeks after; for Sir William Waller (after the loss of his Army at Roundway-down) had another raised for him by the City of London, who, for the payment thereof, imposed a weekly Tax of the value of one Meals meat upon every Citizen. This Army, with that of the Earl of Essex, intended to besiege Oxford, which the King understanding, sent the Queen into the West, and marched himself to­wards Worcester. This made them to divide again, and the Earl to go into the West, and Waller to pur­sue the King. By this means it so sell out, that both their Armies were defeated; for the King turn'd upon Waller, routed him at Copredy-Bridge, took his Train of Artillery, and many Officers, and then presently followed the Earl of Essex into Corn­wal, where he had him at such advantage, that the Earl himself was fain to escape in a small Boat to Plymouth; his Horse broke through the King's Quar­ters by night, but the Infantry were all fore'd to lay down their Arms, and upon conditions never more to bear Arms against the King, were permitted to depart.

In October following, was fought a second and sharp Battel at Newbery; for this Infantry making no Conscience of the Conditions made with the King, being now come towards London, as far as Basing­stoke, had Arms put again into their hands; to whom some of the Trained Bands being added, the Earl of Essex had suddenly so great an Army, that he attempted the King again at Newbery, and certainly had the better of the day, but the night parting them, had not a complete Victory. And it was observed here, that no part of the Earl's Army fought so keenly, as they who had laid down their Arms in Cornwal.

[Page 136]

These were the most important Fights in the year 1644, and the King was yet (as both himself and others thought) in as good a condition as the Parliament, which despair'd of Victory by the Commanders then us'd; therefore they voted a new modelling of the Army, suspecting the Earl of Essex, though I think wrongfully, to be too much a Roya­list, for not having done so much as they look'd for in this second Battel at Newbery.

The Earls of Essex and Manchester perceiving what they went about, voluntarily laid down their Commissions; and the House of Commons made an Ordinance, That no Member of either House, should enjoy any Office or Command Military or Civil.

With which oblique blow they shook off those that had hitherto serv'd them too well, and yet out of this Ordinance they excepted Oliver Crom­wel, in whose Conduct and Valour they had very great confidence, (which they would not have done, if they had known him as well then, as they did afterwards) and made him Lieutenant-General.

In the Commission to the Earl of Essex, there was a Clause for Preservation of His Majesty's Person, which in this new Commission was left out, though the Parliament (as well as the General) were as yet Presbyterians.

B.

It seems the Presbyterians also (in order to their ends) would fain have had the King mur­dered.

A.

For my part, I doubt it not: For a Rightful King living, an usurping Power can never be suffi­ciently secured. In this same year the Parliament put to death Sir John Hotham and his Son, for tam­pering with the Earl of Newcastle, about the Ren­dition of Hull. And Sir Alexander Carew, for en­deavouring to deliver up Plymouth, where he was [Page 137]Governour for the Parliament. And the Arch­bishop of Canterbury, for nothing but to please the Scots. For the General Article of going about to subvert the Fundamental Laws of the Land, was no Accusation, but only soul words.

They then also voted down the Book of Common-Prayer, and ordered the use of a Directory, which had been newly compos'd by an Assembly of Presby­terian Ministers.

They were also then with much ado prevailed with for a Treaty with the King at Ʋxbridge, where they remitted nothing of their former demands.

The King had also at this time a Parliament at Oxford, consisting of such discontented Members as had lest the Houses at VVestminster, but sew of them had changed their old principles, and therefore that Parliament was not much worth. Nay rather, be­cause they endeavoured nothing but Messages and Treaties; that is to say, defeating the Soldiers hope of benefit by the War, they were thought by most men to do the King more hurt than good.

The year 1645, was to the King very unfortunate; for by the loss of one great battel, he lost all he had formerly gotten, and at length his life.

The new model'd Army, after consultation whe­ther they should lay Siege to Oxford, or march West­ward, to the relief of Taunton, (then besieged by the Lord Goring, and desended by Blake, famous after­ward for his Actions at Sea) resolv'd for Taunton, leaving Cromwel to attend the motions of the King, though not strong enough to hinder him. The King upon this advantage drew his Forces and Artillery out of Oxford. This made the Parliament to call back their General Fairfax, and order him to besiege Oxford. The King in the mean time relieved Chester, which was besieged by Sir VVilliam Brereton, and coming back, took Leicester by force, a place of great importance, and well provided of Artillery, [Page 138]and Provision, Upon this success, it was generally thought that the King's party was the stronger. The King himself thought so, and the Parliament in a manner, confest the same, by commanding Fairfax to rise from the Siege, and endeavour to give the King battel; for the Successes of the King, and the treacherous divisions growing now among them­selves, had driven them to rely upon the fortune of one day, in which, at Naseby, the King's Army was utterly overthrown, and no hope left him to raise another; therefore after the battel he went up and down, doing the Parliament here and there some shrewd turns, but never much increasing his number.

Fairfax in the mean time first recovered Lei [...]ester, and then marching into the West, subdued it all, except only a few places, forcing, with much ado, my Lord Hopton (upon honourable conditions) to disband his Army, and with the Prince of VVales, to pass over to Scilly, whence not long after they went to Paris.

In April, 1646, General Fairfax began to march back to Oxford, in the mean time Rainsborough, who besieged VVoodstock, had it surrendered. The King therefore, who was now also returned to Oxford, from whence VVoodstock is but six miles, not doubting but that he should there by Fairfax be besieged, and having no Army to relieve him, resolved to get away disguised to the Scotch Army to New [...]rk, and thither he came the 4th of May; and the Scotch Army being upon remove homewards, carried him with them to Newcastle, whither he came May the 13th.

B.

Why did the King trust himself with the Scots? They were the first that rebell'd. They were Presbyterians, i. e cruel. Besides, they were indigent, and consequently might be suspected would sell him to his Enemies for money. And lastly, They were too weak to defend him, or keep him in their Country.

What could he have done better? For he had in the Winter before sent to the Parliament, to get a Pass for the Duke of Richmond, and others, to bring them propositions of Peace, it was denied; he sent again, it was denied again. Then he desired he might come to them in person; this also was denied. He sent again and again to the same purpose; but in­stead of granting it, they made an Ordinance, That the Commanders of the Militia of London, in case the King should attempt to come within the Line of Communication, should raise what Forces they thought fit to suppress Tumults, to apprehend such as came with him; and to secure (i.e. to imprison) his Person from danger.

If the King had adventured to come, and had been imprisoned, what would the Parliament have done with him? They had dethron'd him by their Votes, and therefore could have no security while he lived, though in Prison; it may be they would not have put him to death by a High Court of Justice publicly, but secretly some other way.

B.

He should have attempted to get beyond Sea.

A.

That had been from Oxford very difficult. Be­sides, it was generally believ'd that the Scotch Army had promis'd him, that not only His Majesty, but also his Friends that should come with him, should be in their Army safe, not only for their persons, but also for their honours and consciences. 'Tis a pretty trick, when the Army, and the particular Soldiers of that Army are different things, to make the Soldiers promise what the Army means not to perform.

July 11. the Parliament sent their Propositions to the King at Newcastle, which Propositions they preten­ded to be the only way to a settled and well-grounded Peace. They were brought by the Earl of Pem­broke, the Earl of Suffolk. Sir VValter Earl, Sir John Hyppesley, Mr. Goodwin, and Mr. Robinson, whom the King asked, If they had power to treat? And when they said No, he ask'd why they might not as well have [Page 140]been sent by a Trumpeter. The propositions were the same dethroning ones which they used to send, and therefore the King would not assent to them. Nor did the Scots swallow them at first, but made some excepti­ons against them; only it seems, to make the Parlia­ment perceive, they meant not to put the King into their hands gratis; and so at last the bargain was made between them, and upon payment of 200000 l. the King was put into the hands of the Commissioners, which the English Parliament sent down to receive him.

B.

What a vile Complexion hath this Action, com­pounded of feigned Religion, and very covetousness, cowardize, perjury, and treachery?

A.

Now the War that seemed so just, by many un­seemly things is ended, you will see almost nothing in these Rebels but baseness and falseness, besides their folly.

By this time the Parliament had taken in all the rest of the Kings Garisons, whereof the last was Pendennis Castle, whither Duke Hamilton had been sent Prisoner by the King.

B.

What was done during this time in Ireland and Scotland?

A.

In Ireland there had been a Peace made, by order from His Majesty, for a time, which by divisions by the Irish was ill kept. The Popish Party (the Pope's Nun­cio being then there) took this to be the time for delivering themselves from their subjection to the English; besides, the time of the Peace was now ex­pired.

B.

How were they subject to the English, more than the English to the Irish? They were subject to the King of England, but so also were the English to the King of Ireland.

A.

The distinction is somewhat too subtil for com­mon understanding. In Scotland the Marquis of Mon­tross for the King with a very few men had miracu­lously with Victories over-run all Scotland, where ma­ny [Page 141]of his Forces (out of too much security) were per­mitted to be absent for a while, of which the Enemy having intelligence, suddenly came upon them, and forced them to flie back into the High-lands to recruit; where he bagan to recover strength, when the King commanded him (being then in the hands of the Scots at Newcastle) to disband, and he departed from Sco [...] ­land by Sea.

In the end of the same year 1646. the Parliament caused the King's great Seal to be broken. Also the King was brought to Holmeby, and there kept by the Parliaments Commissioners, and here was an end of that War as to England and Scotland, but not to Ireland. About this time also dyed the Earl of Essex, whom the Parliament had discarded.

B.

Now that there was Peace in England, and the King in Prison, in whom was the Sovereign Power?

A.

The Right was certainly in the King, but the ex­ercise was yet in no body, but contended for, as in a game at Cards, (without fighting both the years 1647. & 1648.) between the Parliament and Oliver Cromwel, Lieutenant General to Sir Thomas Fairfax. You must know that when King Henry VIII. abolished the Pope's Authority here, and took upon him to be the Head of the Church, the Bishops, as they could not resist him, so neither were they discontented with it. For where­as the Pope before allowed not the Bishops to claim Jurisdiction in their Diocesses, Jure Divino, that is, of Right immediately from God, but by the Gift and Au­thority of the Pope; now that the Pope was outed, they made no doubt but the divine Right was in themselves.

After this, the City of Geneva, and divers other pla­ces beyond Sea, having revolted from the Papacy, set up Presbyteries for the Government of their several Churches; and divers English Scholars that went be­yond Sea, during the Persecution of Queen Mary, were much taken with this Government; and at their return in the time of Q. Elizabeth, and ever since, have en­deavor'd [Page 142]to the great trouble of the Church and Na­tion, to set up that Government here, wherein they might domineer, and applaud their own Wit and Learning. And these took upon them not only a Di­vine Right, but also a Divine Inspiration; and having been connived at, and countenanced sometimes in their frequent Preaching, they introduced many strange and many pernicious Doctrines, out-doing the Reformati­on (as they pretended both of Luther and Calvin) re­ceding from the former Divinity, or Church-Philoso­phy, (for Religion is another thing) as much as Luther and Calvin had receded from the Pope, and distracted their Auditors into a great number of Sects, as Brow­nists, Anabaptists, Independants, Fifth-Monarchy Men, Qua­kers, and divers others, all commonly called by the name of Fanaticks, insomuch as there was no so dangerous an Enemy to the Presbyterians, as this Brood of their own hatching.

These were Cromwel's best Cards, whereof he had a very great number in the Army, and some in the House, whereof he himself was thought one, though he were nothing certain, but applying himself always to the Faction that was strongest, was of a colour like it. There was in the Army a great number (if not most part) that aimed only at Rapine, and sharing the Lands and Goods of their Enemies; and these also, upon the opinion they had of Cromwel's Valor and Conduct, thought they could not any way better arrive at their Ends, than by adhering to him.

Lastly, In the Parliament it self, though not the ma­jor part, yet a considerable number were Fanaticks, e­now to put in doubts, and cause delay in the Resoluti­ons of the House; and sometimes also by advantages of a thin House, to carry a Vote in favour of Cromwel, as they did upon the 26 of July; for whereas on the 4th of May precedent, the Parliament had Voted, That the Mi­litia of London should be in the hands of a Committee of Citizens, whereof the Lord Mayor, for the time being should be one.

[Page 143]

Shortly after the Independants chancing to be the major, made an Ordinance, whereby it was put into hands more favourable to the Army. The best Cards the Parliament had, were the City of London, and the person of the King. The General, Sir Thomas Fairfax, was right Presbyterian, but in the hands of the Army, and the Army in the hands of Cromwel, but which Party should prevail, depending on playing of the Game. Cromwel protested still Obedience and Fidelity to the Parliament, but meaning nothing less, bethought him, and resolv'd on a way to excuse him­self of all that he should do to the contrary upon the Army; therefore he and his Son-in-law, Commissary General Ireton, as good at contriving as himself, and at speaking and writing better, contrive how to mu­tiny the Army against the Parliament. To this end they spread a whisper through the Army, that the Parliament, now they had the King, intended to dis­band them, to cheat them of their Arrears, and to send them into Ireland, to be destroyed by the Irish.

The Army being herewith inrag'd, were taught by Ireton to crect a Council among themselves of two Soldiers out of every Troop, and every Company to consult for the good of the Army, and to assist at the Council of War, and to advise for the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom. These were called Adjuta­tors, so that whatsoever Cromwel would have to be done, he needed nothing to make them do it, but secretly to put it into the head of these Adjutators; the effect of the first Consultation, was to take the King from Holmeby, and to bring him to the Ar­my.

The General hereupon, by Letters to the Parlia­ment, excuses himself and Cromwel, and the Body of the Army, as ignorant of the Fact; and that the King came away willingly with those Soldiers that brought Him, assuring them withal, That the whole [Page 144]Army intended nothing but Peace, nor opposed Presby­tery, nor affected Independency, nor did hold any li­centious freedom in Religion.

B.

'Tis strange, that Sir Thomas Fairfax could be so abused by Cromwel, as to believe this which he him­self here writes.

A.

I cannot believe that Cornet Joyce could go out of the Army with a 1000 Soldiers to fetch the King, and neither the General, nor the Lieutenant-General, nor the Body of the Army take notice of it; and that the King went willingly, appears to be false by a Message sent on purpose from his Majesty to the Parliament.

B.

Here is Perfidy upon Perfidy; first the Perfidy of the Parliament against the King, and then the Per­fidy of the Army against the Parliament.

A.

This was the first Trick Cromwel play'd, where­by he thought himself to have gotten so great an ad­vantage, that he said openly, That he had the Parlia­ment in his Pocket, (as indeed he had) and the City [...]o. For upon the news of it, they were both the one and the other in very great disorder; and the more, because there came with it a Rumor, that the Army was marching up to London.

The King in the mean time, till his residence was setled at Hampton Court, was carried from place to place, not without some oftentasion; but with much more Liberty, and with more Respect shewn Him by far, then when He was in the hands of the Parlia­ments Commissioners; for His own Chaplains were allow'd Him, and His Children, and some Friends permitted to see Him: besides, that He was much Complimented by Cromwel, who promised Him in a serious and seeming passionate manner, to restore Him to His Right against the Parliament.

B.

How was he sure he could do that?

A.

He was not sure, but he was resolv'd to march up to the City and Parliament, to set up the King [Page 145]again, and be the second man; unless in the attempt he found better hopes than yet he had, to make him­self the first man, by dispossessing the King.

B.

What assistance against the Parliament and the City, could Cromwel expect from the King?

A.

By declaring directly for Him, he might have had all the King's Party, which were many more now since His misfortune, than ever they were before; for in the Parliament it self, there were many that had discover'd the hypocrisie and private aims of their Fellows. Many were converted to their Duty, by their own natural Reason; and their Compassion for the King's Sufferings, had begot generally an In­dignation against the Parliament; so that if they had been by the protection of the present Army brought together, and embodied, Cromwel might have done what he pleas'd in the first place for the King, and in the second for himself; but it seems he meant first to try what he could do without the King, and if that prov'd enough, to rid his Hands of him.

B.

What did the Parliament and City do, to op­pose the Army?

A.

First the Parliament sent to the General, to have the King re-deliver'd to their Commissio­ners.

Instead of an Answer to this, the Army sent Ar­ticles to the Parliament, and with them a Charge a­gainst eleven of their Members, all of them active Presbyterians; of which Articles these are some:

  • I. That the House may be purged of those, who, by the Self-denying Ordinance, ought not to be there.
  • II. That such as abused, and endeavouted the King­dom might be disabled, to do the like hereafter.
  • III. That a day might be appointed to determine this Parliament.
  • [Page 146]IV. That they would make an Accompt to the King­dom of the vast Sums of Money the had received.
  • V. That the Eleven Members might presently be sus­pended sitting in the House.

These were the Articles that put them to their Trumps, and they answered none of them, but that of the Suspension of the Eleven Members, which they said they could not do by Law, till the particulars of the Charge were produced.

But this was soon answer'd, with their own Pro­ceedings against the Arch-bishop of Canterbury, and the Earl of Strafford.

The Parliament being thus somewhat aw'd, and the King made somewhat confident, he undertakes the City, requiring the Parliament to put the Militia into other hands.

B.

What other hands? I do not well understand you.

A.

I told you that the Militia of London was on the 4th of May, put into the hands of the Lord Mayor; and other Citizens, and soon after put into the hands of other Men more favourable unto the Army. And now I am to tell you, that on July 26. the violence of certain Apprentices, and disbanded Soldiers, forced the Parliament to re-settle it as it was in the Citizens; and hereupon the two Speakers, and divers of the Members ran away to the Army where they were in­vited, and contented to sit and Vote in the Coun­cil of War, in the nature of a Parliament; and out of these Citizens hands they would have the Militia taken away, and put again into those hands out of which it was taken the 26th of July.

B.

What said the City to this?

A.

The Londoners mann'd their works, viz. the Line of Communication, rais'd an Army of valiant [Page 147]Men within the Line, chose good Officers, all being desirous to go out and fight, whensoever the City should give them Order; and in that posture stood, expecting the Enemy. The Soldiers in the mean time enter into an Engagement to live and dye with Sir Thomas Fairfax, the Parliament, and the Army.

B.

That's very fine; they imitate that which the Parliament did, when they first took up Arms against the King, stiling themselves, The King and Parlia­ment; maintaining, That the King was always vertually in his Parliament: So the Army now making War against the Parliament, called themselves, the Parliament and the Army; but they might with more reason say, That the Parliament (since it was in Crom­wel's Pocket) was vertually in the Army.

A.

Withall they send out a Declaration of the grounds of their March towards London, wherein they take upon them to be Judges of the Parliament, and of who are fit to be trusted with the business of the Kingdom, giving them the name, not of the Parlia­ment, but of the Gentlemen at Westminster; for since the violence they were under July 26. the Army denied them to be a lawful Parliament.

At the same time they sent a Letter to the Mayor and Aldermen of London, reproaching them with those late Tumults, telling them, They were Enemies to the Peace, Treacherous to the Parliament, Ʋnable to defend either the Parliament or themselves, and demand­ed to have the City delivered into their hands, to which purpose (they said) they were now coming to them.

The General also sent out his Warrants to the Counties adjacent, summoning their Train'd Sol­diers to join with them.

B.

Were the Train'd Soldiers part of the Generals Army?

A.

No, not at all in Pay, nor could be, with­out an Order of Parliament. But what might not [Page 148]an Army do, that had master'd all the Laws of the Land?

The Army being come to Hounsloe-heath, distant from London but ten Miles, the Court of Aldermen was called, to consider what to do; the Captains and Soldiers of the City were willing, and well-provided to go forth, and give them Battel; but a Treacherous Officer, that had charge of a work on Southwark side, had let in within the Line a small Party of the Ene­mies, who marched as far as to the Gate of London-Bridge, and then the Court of Aldermen (their Hearts failing them) submitted on these Conditi­ons.

  • To relinquish their Militia.
  • To desert the eleven Members.
  • To deliver up the Forts and Line of Communication, to­gether with the Tower of London, and all Magazines and Arms therein to the Army.
  • To disband their Forces, and turn out all the Refarma­does, i. e. all Essex's old Soldiers.
  • To draw off their Guards from the Parliament.

All which was done, and the Army marched Triumphantly through the principal' Streets of the City.

A.

'Tis strange that the Mayor and Aldermen hav­ing such an Army, should so quickly yield. Might they not have resisted the Party of the Enemies at the Bridge, with a Party of their own, and the rest of the Enemies with the rest of their own?

A.

I cannot judge of that: but to me it would have been strange if: they had done otherwise; for I consider the most part of rich Subjects, that have made themselves so by Craft and Trade, as men that never look upon any thing but their present profit, and who to every thing not lying in that way are in a manner blind, being amaz'd at the very thought of Plundering: If they had understood what vertue [Page 149]there is to preserve their Wealth in obedience to their lawful Soveraign, they would never have sided with the Parliament; and so we had had no need of arming: The Mayor and Aldermen therefore assur'd by this submission to save their Goods, and not sure of the same by resisting, seem to me to have taken the wisest course; Nor was the Parliament less tame than the City, for presently, August 6. the General brought the Fugitive Speakers and members to the House with a strong Guard of Soldiers, and re-placed the Spea­kers in their Chairs; and for this they gave the Ge­neral thanks, not only there in the House, but appoint­ed also a day for a holy Thanksgiving; and not long aster made him Generali Jimo of all the Forces of Eng­land, and Constable of the Towe [...]: But in effect, all this was the advancement of Cromwel, for he was the Usufructuary, though the Property was in Sir T [...]o. Fairfax; for the Independents immediately cast down the whole Line of Communication, divide the Militia of London, Westminster, and Southwark, which were before united, displaced such Governours of Towns and Forts as were not for their turn, though placed there by Ordinance of Parliament, instead of whom they put in men of their own party: they also made the Parliament to declare null all that had passed in the Houses, from July the 26th to Aug. the 6th, and clapt in prison some of the Lords, and some of the most Eminent Citizens, whereof the Lord Mayor was one.

B.

Cromwel had power enough now to restore the King, why did he not?

A.

His main end was to set himself in his place; the restoring of the King was but a reserve against the Parliament, which being in his pocket, he had no more need of the King, who was now an Impedi­ment to him: To keep him in the Army was a trou­ble, to let him fall into the hands of the Presbyterians had been a stop to his hopes, to murder him privately [Page 150](besides the horrour of the act) now whilst he was no more than Lieutenant General. would have made him odious, without farthering his design; there was no­thing better for his purpose, than to let him escape from Hampton-Court) where he was too near the Par­liament) whither he pleased beyond Sea: For though Cromwel had a great Party in the Parliament Houses, whilst they faw not his Ambition to be their Master, yet they would have been his Enemies as soon as that had appear'd. To make the King attempt an escape, some of those that had him in Custody, by Cromwel's directi­on told him, that the Adjutators meant to murder him; and withal, caused a rumour of the same to be generally spread, to the end it might that way also come to the Kings Ear, as it did.

The King therefore in a dark and rainy night (his Guards being retir'd, as it was thought on purpose) left Hampton Court, and went to the Sea-side, about Sonthampton, where a Vessel had been bespoken to transport him, but fail'd; so that the King was forced to trust himself with Colonel Hammond, then Governour of the Isle of Wight, expecting perhaps some kindness from him for Doctor Hammonds sake, Brother to the Colonel, and his Majesties much-fa­vour'd Chaplain; but it prov'd otherwise, for the Colonel sent to his Masters of the Parliament, to re­ceive their Orders concerning him. This going into the Isle of Wight was not likely to be any part of Crom­wel's Design, who neither knew whither, nor which way he would go, nor had Hammond known any more than other men, if the Ship had come to the ap­pointed place in due time.

B.

If the King had escaped into France, might not the French have assisted him with Forces to recover his Kingdom, and so frustrated the designs, both of Crom­wel, and all other the Kings Enemies?

A.

Yes much, just as they assisted his Son, our pre­sent most gracious Soveraign, who two years before fled thither out of Cornwal.

'Tis methinks no great policy in Neighbouring Princes, to favour, so often as they do, one anothers Rebels, especially when they rebel against Monarchy it self; they should rather first make a League against Rebellion, and afterwards (if there be no remedy) right one against another: Nor will that serve the turn among Christian Soveraigns, till Preaching be better lookt to, whereby the Interpretation of a Verse in the Hebrew, Greek, or Latine Bible, is of­tentimes the cause of Civil War, and the deposing and assassinating of Gods Anointed; and yet converie with those Divinity Disputers as long as you will, you will hardly find one in a hundred discreet enough to be employed in any great Affairs, either of War or Peace: It is not the Right of the Soveraign, though granted to him by every mans consent expresly, that can inable a Subject to do his Office, it is the obedience of the Subject; and then by and by to cry out (as some Ministers did in the Pulpit) To your Tents, O Israel. Common people know nothing of right or wrong by their own meditation; they must therefore be taught the greunds of their Duty, and the reasons why Calamities ever follow Disobedience to their lawful Soveraigns: But to the contrary, our Rebels were publickly taught Rebellion in the Pulpits, and that there was no sin, but the doing of what the Preachers forbad, or the [...]mitting of what they ad­vis'd: But now the King was the Parliaments Priso­ner, why did not the Presbyterians advance their own Interest by restoring him?

A.

The Parliament, in which there were more Presbyterians yet than Independents, might have got­ten what they would of the King, during his life, if they had not by an unconscionable and sottish Ambi­tion of structed the way to their Ends: They sent him four Propesitions to be signed and past by him as Acts of Parliament, telling him, when these were granted they would send Commissioners to treat with him of any other Articles.

[Page 152]

First, The Propositions are these: That the Parliament should have the Militia, and power of levying Money to maintain it for twenty years; and after that term, the exerciss thereof to return to the King, in case the Parliament think the safety of the Kingdom concern'd in it.

B.

This first Article takes from the King the Mi­litia, and consequently the whole Soveraignty for ever.

A.

The second was, That the King should justifie the proceedings of the Parliament against himself, and declare void all Oaths and Declarations made by him against the Parliament.

B.

This was to make him guilty of the War, and of all the Blood spilt therein.

A.

The third was, To take away all Titles of Ho­nour conferred by the King, since the Great Seal was carried to him in May 1642.

The fourth was, That the Parliament should Ad­journ themselves, when, and to what place, and for what time they pleas'd.

These Propositions the King resus'd to grant, as he had reason, but sent others of his own not much less advantagious to the Parliament, and desir'd a Personal Treaty with the Parliament, for the settling of the Peace of the Kingdom; but the Parliament denying them to be sufficient for that purpose, voted, that there should be no more Addresses made to him, nor Messages re­ceiv'd from him, but they would settle the Kingdom without him: And this they voted, partly upon the Speeches and Menaces of the Army-Faction then present in the House of Commons, whereof one ad­vised these three Points.

  • 1. To secure the King in some In-land Castle with Guards.
  • 2. To draw up Articles of Impeachment against him.
  • 3. To lay him by, and settle the Kingdom without him.
[Page 153]

Another said, that his denying the four Bills, was the denying Protection to his Subjects; and that therefore they might deny him subjection; and added, that till the Parliament forsook the Army, the Army would never soi sake the Parliament: This was threat­ning. Last of all, Cromwel himself told them, it was now expected that the Parliament should govern and defend the Kingdom, and not any longer let the people expect their safety from a man whose heart God had hardened; nor let those that had so well defended the Parliament, be left afterward to the rage of an ir­reconcilable Enemy, lest they seek their safety some o­ther way. This again was threatning; as also laying his hand upon his Sword when he spake it.

And hereupon the Vote of Non-Addresses was made an Ordinance, which the House would afterward have recalled, but were forc'd by Cromwel to keep their word.

The Scotch were displeas'd with it, partly because their Brethren the Presbyterians had lost a great deal of their Power in England, and partly also, because they had sold the King into their hands. The King now published a passionate Complaint to his People of this hard dealing with him, which made them pity him, but not yet rise in his behalf.

B.

Was not this, think you, the true time for Crom­wel to take possession?

A.

By no means, there were yet many Obstacles to be removed; he was not General of the Army; the Army was still for a Parliament; the City of London: discontented about their Militia; the Scots expected with an Army to rescue the King; his Adjutators were Levellers, and against Monarchy, who though they had helped him to bring under the Parliament, yet like Dogs that are easily taught to fetch, and nor easily taught to render, would not make him King; so that Cromwel had these businesses following to over­come.

[Page 154]
  • 1. To be Generalissimo.
  • 2. To remove the King.
  • 3. To suppress all Insurrections.
  • 4. To oppose the Scots: And

Lastly, To dissolve the present Parliament: Migh­ty businesses, which he could never promise himself to overcome; therefore I cannot believe he then thought to be King, but only by serving the strong­est Party (which was alwayes his main policy) to proceed as far as Fortune and that would carry him.

B.

The Parliament were certainly no less foolish than wicked, in deserting thus the King, before they had the Army at a better Command than they had.

A.

In the beginning of 1648. the Parliament gave Commission to Philip Earl of Pembroke (then made Chancellour of Oxford, together with some of the Doctors there, as good Divines as he) to purge the University; by vertue whereof they turn'd out all such as were not of their Faction, and all such as had approved the use of the Common Prayer-Book; as also divers scandalous Ministers and Scholars (that is, such as customarily and without need took the Name of God into their mouths, or used to speak wantonly, or use the company of lewd Women) and for this last I cannot [...]ut commend them.

B.

So shall not I; for it is just such another piece of Piety, as to turn Men out of an Hospital because they are lame: Where can a man probably learn Godliness, and how to correct his Vices better, than in the Universities erected for that purpose?

A.

It may be the Parliament thought otherwise; for I have often heard the Complaints of Parents, that their Children were debauched there to Drun­kenness, Wantonness, Gaming, and other Vices, consequent to these: Nor is it a wonder among so many. Youths, if they did not corrupt one another [Page 155]in despite of their Tutors, who oftentimes were little Elder than themselves; And therefore (I think) the Parliament did not much reverence the Institution of Universities, as to the bringing up of young men to Vertue, though many of them learn'd there to Preach, and became thereby capable of preferment and main­tenance; and some others were sent thither by their Parents, to save themselves the trouble of govern­ing them at home, during that time wherein Children are least governable. Nor do I think the Parlia­ment car'd more for the Clergy than other men did: But certainly an University is an Excellent Servant to the Clergy, and the Clergy if it be not carefully lookt too, (by their Dissenticus Doctrines, and by the advantage to publish their Dissentions) is no extraordinary means to divide a Kingdom into Fa­ction.

B.

But seeing there is no place in this part of the World, where Philosophy and other Humane Sciences are not highly valued, where can they be learned better, than in the Universities?

A.

What other Sciences? Do not Divines com­prehend all Civil and Moral Philosophy within their Divinity? And as for Natural Philosophy, is it not remov'd from Oxford and Cambridge, to Gresham-College in London, and to be learn'd out of their Ga­zets? But we are gone from our Subject.

B.

No, we are indeed gone from the great busi­ness of the Kingdom, to which, if you please, let us return.

A.

The first Insurrection, or rather Tumult, was of the Apprentices, on the 9th of April; but this was not upon the Kings Account, but arose from a customary Assembly of them for recreation in Moor-fulds, whence some zealous Officers of the Train'd-Bands would needs drive them away by force, but were themselves routed with Stones, and had their Ensign taken a­way by the Apprentices, which they carryed about in [Page 156]the Streets, and frighted the Lord Mayor into his House, where they took a Gun, called a Drake, and then they set Guards at some of the Gates, and all the rest of the day Childishly swagger'd up and down: but the next day the General himself marching into the City, quickly dispersed them. This was but a small business, but enough to let them see that the Parliament was ill-beloved of the people. Next, the Welch took Arms against them; there were three Colonels in Wales, Langhorn, Poyer, and Powel, who had formerly done the Parliament good Services, but now were commanded to disband, which they refus'd to do; and the better to strengthen themselves, declared for the King, and were about Eight Thou­sand.

About the same time in Wales also was an another Insurrection, headed by Sir Nicholas Keymish, and ano­ther under Sir John Owen; so that now all Wales was in Rebellion against the Parliament: And yet all these were overcome in a Months time by Cromwel, and his Officers, but not without store of Blood-shed on both sides.

B.

I do dot much pity the loss of those men, that impute to the King that which they do upon their own quarrel.

A.

Presently after this, some of the people of Surrey sent a Petition to the Parliament for a Perso­nal Treaty betwen the King and Parliament, but their Messengers were beaten home again by the Sol­diers that quartered about Westminster; and then the Kentish men having a like Petition to deliver, and seeing how it was like to be receiv'd, threw it away, and took up Arms; they had many Gallant Officer, and for General, the Earl of Norwich, and increas'd daily by Apprentices, and old disbanded Soldiers, inso­much as the Parliament was glad to restore to the Ci­ty their Militia, and to keep Guards upon the Thames side; and then Fairfax march'd towards the Enemy.

And then the Londoners, I think, might easily and suddenly have Master'd, first the Parliament, and next Fairfax his eight thousand, and lastly Cromwels Army, or at least have given the Scotch Army oppor­tunity to march unfought to London.

A.

'Tis true, but the City was never good at ven­turing; nor were they, or the Scots, principled to have a King over them, but under them. Fairfax matching with eight thousand against the Royalists, routed a part of them at Maidstone; another part were taking in of places in Kent farther off, and the Earl of Norwich, with the rest came to Black-Heath, and then sent to the City to get passage through it, to joyn with those which were risen in Essex, under Sir Charles Lucas, and Sir George Lisle; which being denied, the greatest part of his Kentish men deserted him; with the rest, not above five hundred, he crossed the Thames unto the Isle of Dogs, and so to Bow, and thence to Colchester. Fairfax having notice of this, crossed the Thames at Graves-End, and overtaking them, besieged them in Colchester: The Town had no defence but a Bulwark, and yet held out, upon hope of the Scotch Army to relieve them, the space of two Months.

Upon the news of the defeat of the Scots, they were forced to yield; the Earl of Norwich was sent Prisoner to London, Sir Charles Lucas, and Sir George Lisle, two Loyal and Gallant Persons, were shot to Death. There was also another little Insurrection head­ed by the Earl of Holland about Kingston, but quickly supprest, and he himself taken Prisoner.

B.

How came the Scots to be so soon dispatcht?

A.

Meerly, as it is said, for want of Conduct: The Army was led by Duke Hamilton, who was then­set at liberty, when Pendennis Castle, where he was Prisoner was taken by the Parliament: He enterd England with Horse and Foot 10000, to which came above 3000 English Royalists. Against these Crom­wel [Page 158]marched out of Wales, with Horse and Foot 11000, and near to Preston in Lancashire, in less than two hours, defeated them; and the cause of it is said to be that the Scotch Army was so ordered, as they could not all come to the Fight, nor relieve their Fellows: After the Defeat they had no way to fly but farther into England, so that in the pursuit they were almost all taken, and lost all that an Army could lose, for the few that got home, did not all bring home their Swords. Duke Hamilton was taken, and not long after sent to London, but Cromwel marched to Edenburrough, and there, by the help of the Fa­ction which was contrary to Hamilton's, he made sure not to be hindred in his Designs, the first whereof was to take away the King's life by the hand of the Par­liament: whilest these things passed in the North, the Parliament (Cromwel being away) came to it self, and recalling their Vote of Non-Addresses, sent to the King new Propositions, somewhat, but not much easier than the former, and upon the King's Answer to them, they sent Commissioners to treat with him at Neaport in the Isle of Wight, where they so long dodged with him about Trisles, that Cromwel was come to London before they had done, to the Kings destruction, for the Army was now wholly at the Devo­tion of Cromwel, who set the Adjutators on work to make a Remonstrance to the House of Commons; wherein they require:

  • 1. That the King be brought to Justice.
  • 2. That the Prince, and Duke of York, be summon'd to appear at a day appointed, and pro­ceeded with, according as they should give satisfacti­on.
  • 3. That the Parliament settle the future Go­vernment, and set a reasonable period to their own sitting, and make certain future Parliaments Annual; or Biennial.
  • 4. That a competent number of the Kings chief Instruments be executed; and this to be done both by the House of Commons, and by a Ge­neral agreement of the people, testified by their [Page 159]Subscriptions: Nor did they stay for an Answer, but presently set a Guard of Soldiers at the Parliament House Door, and other Soldiers in Westminster-Hast, suffering none to go into the House, but such as would serve their turns; all others were frighted away, or made Prisoners, and some upon divers Quarrels suspended. About ninety of them, because they had re­fused to vote against the Scots; and others because they had voted against the Vote of Non-Addresses; and the rest were a House for Cromwel.

The Phanaticks al­so in the City being countenanced by the Army, pack a new Common-Council, whereof any forty was to be above the Mayor, and their first work was to frame a Petition for Justice against the Xing; which Tichboures the Mayor (involving the City in the Regicide) delivered to the Parliament.

At the same time, with like violence they took the King from Newport, in the Isle of Wight, to Hurst Castle, till things were ready for His Try­al; the Parliament, in the mean time, to avoid Perjury, by an Ordinance declar'd void the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance; and present­ly after made another to bring the King to his Tryal.

B.

This is a piece of Law that I understood not before, that when many men swear singly, they may when they are Assembled (if they please) absolve them­selves.

A.

The Ordinance being drawn up, was brought into the House, where after three several Readings, it was Voted, That the Lords and Commons of Eng­land Assembled in Parliament, do declare, That by the Fundamental Laws of the Realm, it is Treason in the King of England to levy War against the Par­liament: And this Vote was sent up to the Lords, and they denying their consent, the Commons in Anger made another Vote, That all Members of Committees should proceed and act in any Ordinance, [Page 160]whether the Lords concurr'd or no; and that the People, under God, are the Original of all just Power; and that the House of Commons have the Supreme-Power of the Nation; and that whatsoever the House of Commons Enacted, is Law. All this passed nemine contradi­cente.

B.

These Propositions fight not only against a King of England, but against all the Kings of the World: It were good they thought on't; but yet I believe, that, under God, the Original of all Laws was in the People.

A.

But the People, for them and their heirs, by consent and Oaths, have long ago put the Supreme Power of the Nation into the hands of their Kings, for them and their Heirs; and consequently into the hands of this King, their known and lawful heir.

B.

But does not the Parliament represent the Peo­ple?

A.

Yes, to some purposes; as to put up Petitions to the King when they have leave, and are griev'd; but not to make a grievance of the Kings Power: Be­sides, the Parliament never represents the People, but when the King calls them: Is it to be imagined, that he calls a Parliament to depose himself? Put the case every County and Burrough should have given for a Benevolence a sum of Money, and that every County meeting in their County Court, or else-where, and that every Burrough in their Town-Hall, should have chosen certain men to carry their several sums respe­ctively to the Parliament, had not these men repre­sented the whole Nation?

B.

Yes, no doubt.

A.

Do you think the Parliament would have thought it reasonable to be called to an account by this Re­presentative?

B.

No, sure; and yet, I must confess, the Case is the same.

A.

This Ordinance contained; First, a Summary [Page 161]of the Charge against the King; in substance this, That not content with the Incroachments of his Predeces­sors upon the freedom of the People, he had design'd to set up a Tyrannical Power; and to that end, had rais'd and maintain'd in the Land a Civil War against the Parliament, whereby the Country hath been miserably wasted, the Publick Treasure exhausted, thousands of people murdered, and infinite other mischiefs committed.

Secondly, A Constitution passed of a High Court of Justice; that is, of a certain number of Commis­sioners, of whom any twenty had power to try the King, and proceed to Sentence, according to the Me­rit of the Cause, and see it speedily executed. The Commissioners met on Saturday; January 20. in Westminster-Hall, and the King was brought before them, sitting in a Chair: He heard the Charge read, but denied to plead to it, either Guilty, or not Guilty, till he should know by what lawful Authority he was brought thither: The President told him, that the Parliament affirm'd their own Authority; and the King persevered in his refusal to plead: though ma­ny words passed between him and the President; yet this is the sum of all: on Monday, January 22. the Court met again, and the Sollicitor moved, that if the King persisted in denying the Authority of the Court, the Charge might be taken pro confesso; but the King still denyed their Authority.

They met again, January 23. and then the Sollici­tor moved the Court for Judgment; whereupon the King was requir'd to give his Final Answer, which was again a denyal of their Authority.

Lastly, They met again, January 27. where the King then desir'd to be heard before the Lords and Commons in the Painted Chamber; and promising after that to abide the Judgment of the Court; the Commissioners retir'd for half an hour to consider of it; and then returning, caused the King again to be brought to the Bar, and told him, that what he propos'd, was. [Page 162]but another denyal of the Courts Jutisdiction; and that if he had no more to say, they would proceed to Judgment: Then the King answering, that he had no more to say, the President began a long Speech, in justification of the Parliaments Proceedings, produ­cing the Examples of many Kings kill'd or depos'd by wicked Parliaments, Ancient and Modern, in Eng­land, Scotland, and other parts of the World: All which he endeavoured to justifie from this only Prin­ciple, that the People have the Supreme Power, and the Parliament is the People. This Speech ended, the Sentence of Death was read, and the same upon Tuesday after, January the 30. executed at the Gate of his own Palace of White-Hall. He that can de­light in reading how villanously he was used by the Souldiers, between the Sentence and Execution, may go to the Chronicle it self, in which he shall see what courage, patience, wisdom, and goodness was in this Prince, whom in their Charge the Members of that wicked Parliament styled Traytor, Tyrant, and Mur­derer.

The King being dead, the same day they made an Act of Parliament, That whereas several pretences might be made to the Crown, &c. it is Enacted by this present Parliament, and Authority of the same, that no Person shall presume to declare, proclaim, or publish, or any way promote Charles Stuart, Son of Charles late King of England, commonly called Prince of Wales, or any other Person, to be King of England and Ire­land, &c.

B.

Seeing the King was dead, and his Successors barr'd, by what declar'd Authority was the Peace maintain'd?

A.

They had in their anger against the Lords for­merly declar'd the Supreme Power of the Nation to be in the House of Commons; and now, on Februa­ry the fifth, they Vote the House of Lords to be use­less, and dangerous. And thus the Kingdom was [Page 163]turn'd into a Democracy, or rather an Oligarchy; for presently they made an Act, That none of those Mem­bers who were secluded for opposing the Vote of Non-Addresses, should ever be re-admitted: And these were commonly called the Secluded Members, and the rest were by some styled a Parliament, and by others a Rump.

I think you need not now have a Catalogue either of the Vices, or of the Crimes, or of the Pollies of the greatest part of them that composed the Long-Parliament, than which greater cannot be in the world: What greater Vices than Irreligion, Hypo­crisie, Avarice, and Cruelty, which have appeared so eminently in the actions of Presbyterian Members, and Presbyterian Ministers? What greater Crimes than Blasphemy, and killing Gods Anointed, which was done by the hands of the Indipendents, but by the folly and first Treason of the Presbyterians, who be­trayed and sold him to his Murderers? Nor was it a little folly in the Lords, not to see that by the taking away of the Kings Power, they lost withall their own Priviledges; or to think themselves either for num­ber or judgment any way a considerable assistance to the House of Commons: And for those men who had skill in the Laws, it was no great sign of under­standing, not to perceive that the Laws of the Land were made by the King, to oblige his Subjects to Peace and Justice, and not to oblige himself that made them: Lastly, and generally, all men are Fools which pull down any thing which does them good, before they have set up something better in its place: He that would set up Democracy with an Army, should have an Army to maintain it; but these men did it, when those men had the Army that were resolv'd to pull it down. To these follies, I might add the fol­lies of those five men, which out of their reading of Tully, Seneca, and other Antimonarchicks, think them­selves sufficient Politicks, and shew their discontents [Page 164]when they are not called to the management of the State, and turn from one side to the other upon eve­ry neglect they fancy from the King, or his Enemies.

A.

YOU have seen the Rump in possession (as they believ'd) of the Supreme Power over the two Nations of England and Ireland, and the Army their Servant, though Cromwel thought otherwise, serving them diligently for the advancement of his own purpose; I am now therefore to shew you their proceedings.

B.

Tell me first, how this kind of Government, un­der the Rump or Relick of a House of Commons, is to be call'd.

A.

'Tis doubtless an Oligarchy; for the Supreme Au­thority must needs be in one man, or in more; if in one, it is Monarchy; the Rump therefore was no Monarchy; if the Authority were in more than one, it was in all, or in sewer than all; when in all, it is Democraty; for every man may enter into the Assembly which makes the Soveraign Court, which they could not do here; It is therefore manifest, the Authority was in a few, and consequently the State was an Oli­garchy.

B.

Is it not impossible for a people to be well Governed, that are to obey more Masters than one?

A.

Both the Rump, and all other Soveraign Assem­blies, if they have but one Voice, though they be many Men, yet are they but one Person; for con­trary Commands cannot consist in one and the same Voice, which is the Voice of the greatest part; and therefore they might govern well enough, if they had honesty and wit enough.

The first Act of the Rump, was the Exclusion of those Members of the House of Commons which had been formerly kept out by Violence, for the pre­curing [Page 165]of an Ordinance for the King's Tryal; for these men had appear'd against the Ordinance of Non-Addresses, and therefore to be excluded, be­cause they might else be an Impediment to their future Designs.

B.

Was it not rather, because in the Authority of few, they thought the fewer the better, both in regard of their shares, and also of a nearer ap­proach in every one of them to the Dignity of a King?

A.

Yes certainly, what was their Principal End.

B.

When these were put out, why did not the Counties and Burroughs chuse others in their Pla­ces?

A.

They could not do that without Order from the House: After this, they constituted a Council of forty persons, which they termed a Council of State, whose Office was to execute what the Rump should command.

B.

When there was neither King, nor House of Lords, they could not call themselves a Parliament; for a Parliament is a meeting of the King. Lords and Commons, to confer together about the Businesses of the Common-Wealth: With whom did the Rump confer?

A.

Men may give to their Assembly what Name they please, what signification soever such Name might formerly have had, and the Rump took the Name of Parliament, as most suitable to their pur­pose; and such a Name, as being Venerable a­mong the people for many hundred years, had coun­tenanced and sweetened Subsidies, and other Levies of Money, otherwise very unpleasant to the Subject: They took also afterwards another name, which was, Custodes Libertatis Angliae, which Title they used only in their Writs issuing out of the Courts of Ju­stice?

I do not see how a Subject that is tyed to the Laws, can have more liberty in one form of Govern­ment than another.

A.

Howsoever to the people that understand by Li­berty, nothing but leave to do what they list, it was a Title not ungrateful.

Their next work was to set forth a publick Declara­tion that they were fully resolved to maintain the Fundamental Laws of the Nation, as to the preserva­tion of the Lives, Liberties, and Proprieties of the people.

B.

What did they mean by the Fundamental Laws of the Nation?

A.

Nothing but to abuse the people; for the only Fur damental Law in every Common-Wealth, is to obey the Laws from time to time, which he shall make, to whom the people have given the Supreme Power: How likely then are they to uphold the Fun­damental Laws, that had murdered him, who was by themselves so often acknowledged their lawful Sove­raign: Besides, at the same time that this Declaration came forth, they were erecting the High Court of Justice, which took away the lives of Duke Hamil­ton, the Earl of Holland, and the Lord Capel; whatsoever they meant by a Fundamental Law, the Erecting of this Court was a breach of it, as be­ing warranted by no former Law, or Example in Eng­land.

At the same time also they levied Taxes by Soldi­ers, and permitted Free Qarter to them; and did many other Actions which if the King had done, they would have said had been done against the Liberty and Propriety of the Subject.

B.

What silly things are the common sort of peo­ple, to be cozen'd as they were so grosly?

A.

What sort of people, as to this matter, are not of the common sort? the crastiest Knaves of all the Rump were no wiser than the rest whom they [Page 167]cozen'd; for the most of them did believe, that the same things which they impos'd upon the generali­ty, were just and reasonable; and especially the great Haranguers, and such as pretended to Learning: for who can be a good Subject in a Monarchy, whose Prin­ciples are taken from the Enemies of Monarchy? such as were Cicoro, Seneca, Cato, and other Polititians of Rome, and Aristotle of Athens, who spake of Kings but as Wolves, and other ravenous Beasts? You may per­hap, think a man has need of nothing else, to know the duty he owes to his Governour, and what right he has to order him, but a good Natural Wit: But it is otherwise; for it is a Science, and built upon sure and clear Principles, and to be learn'd by deep and careful study, or from Masters that have deeply studied it: And who was there in the Parliament, or in the Nati­on, that could find out those evident Principles, and derive from thence the necessary Rules of Justice, and the necessary Connexion of Justice and Peace? The people have one day in seven the leisure to hear Instru­ctions and there are Ministers appointed to teach them their duty: But how have these Ministers perform'd their Office? A great part of them, namely, the Presbyte­rian Ministers, throughout all the whole War, instiga­ted the people against the King; so did also Indepen­dant, and other Fanatick Ministers: There conten­ted with their Livings, preached in their Parishes points of Controversie, to Religion impertinent, but to the breach of Charity, among themselves, very effe­ctual; or else Eloquent things, which the people ei­ther understood not, or thought themselves not con­cern'd in: But this sort of Preachers, as they did little good, so they did little hurt; the mischief proceeded wholly from the Presbyterian Preachers, who by a long practis'd Histrionick Faculty, preached up the Rebel­lion powerfully.

B.

To what end?

A.

To the end, that the State becoming popular, [Page 168]the Church might be so too, and govern'd by an As­sembly; and consequently (as they thought) seeing Po­liticks are subservient to Religion, they might govern, and thereby satisfie their covetous humour with Riches, and also their malice with Power to undo all men that admir'd not their Wisdom. Your calling the people silly things, oblig'd me by this digression to shew you, that it is not want of Wit, but want of the Science of Ju­stice that brought them into these troubles. Perswade, if you can, that man that has made his Fortune, or made it greater, or an Eloquent Orator, or a ravishing Poet, or a subtil Lawyer, or but a good hunter, or a cunning Gamester, that he has not a good Wit; and yet there were of all these a great many so silly as to be deceived by the Rump. They wanted not wit, but the knowledg of the Causes, and grounds upon which one person has a right to govern, and the rest an obligation to obey; which grounds are necessary to be taught the people, who without them cannot live long in peace among themselves.

B.

Let us return, if you please, to the proceedings of the Rump.

A.

In the rest of the year, they voted a new Stamp for the Coyn of this Nation: They considered also of A­gents to be sent into Foreign Parts; and having lately receiv'd Applause from the Army for their work done by the High Court of Justice, and incouragement to extend the same farther, they perfected the said High Court of Justice, in which were tryed Duke Hamilton the Earl of Holland, the Lord Capel, the Earl of Nor­wich, and Sir John Owen, whereof (as I mention'd be­fore) the first three were beheaded. This affrighted di­vers of the Kings Party out of the Land, for not only they, but all that had born Arms for the King, were [...] that time in very great danger of their lives: for it wa [...] put to the question by the Army at a Council of Wa [...] whether they should be all Massacred or no; wher [...] the No's carried it but by two Voices. Lastly, Mar [...] [Page 169]24. they put the Mayor of London out of his Office, fined him two thousand pound, disfranchised him, and condemn'd him to two Months Imprisonment in the Tower, for refusing to proclaim the Act for abolishing of the Kingly Power. And thus ended the year 1648. and the Monthly Fast, God having granted that which they fasted for, the death of the King, and the possession of his Inheritance. By these their Proceedings, they had already lost the hearts of the generality of the People, and had nothing to trust to but the Army, which was not in their power, but in Cromwel's, who never fail'd, when there was occasion, to put them upon all. Ex­ploits that might make them odious to the people, in order to his future dissolving them, whensoever it should conduce to his ends. In the beginning of 1649. the Scots discontented with the proceedings of the Rump against the late King, began to levy Soldiers, in order to a new Invasion of England. The Irish Rebels, for want of timely resistance from England, were grown terrible; and the English Army at home, infected by the Adjutators, began to cast about, how to share the Land among the Godly, meaning them­selves, and such others as they pleas'd, who were there­fore call'd Levellers: Also the Rump, for the present, were not very well provided of Money; and therefore the first thing they did, was the laying of a Tax upon the people, of ninety thousand pound a Month, for the maintenance of the Army.

B

Was it not one of their Quarrels with the King, that he had levied Money without the consent of the people in Parliament?

A.

You may see by this what reason the Rump had to call it self a Parliament; for the Taxes imposed by Parliament, were always understood to be by the peo­ples consent, and consequently legal.

To appease the Scots, they sent Messengers with flattering Letters, to keep them from ingaging for the present King; but in vain, for they would hear no­thing [Page 170]from a House of Commons (as they call'd it) at Westminster, without a King, and Lords: But they sent Commissioners to the King, to let him know what they were doing for him, for they were resolv'd to raise an Army of seventeen thousand Foot, and six thousand Horse for themselves. To relieve Ireland, the Rump had resolv'd to send eleven Regiments thither out of the Army here in England. This happened well for Cromwel, for the Levelling Soldiers, which were in every Regiment many, and in some the major part. finding that instead of dividing the Land at home, they were to venture their Lives in Ireland, flatly denied to go; and one Regiment having cashier'd their Colonel a­bout Salisbury, was marching to joyn with three Re­giments more of the same resolution; but both the General, and Cromwel, falling upon them at Burford, utterly defeated them, and soon after reduced the whole Army to their obedience. And thus another of the Impediments to Cromwel's Advancement was soon remov'd. Thus done, they came to Oxford, and thence to London; and at Oxford, both the General, and Cromwel were made Doctors of the Civil Law; and at London [...]easted and presented by the City.

B.

Were they not first made Masters, then D [...]ctors?

A.

They had made themselves Masters already, both of the Laws, and Parliament. The Army being now obedient, the Rump sent over those eleven Regi­ments into Ireland, under the Command of Doctor Cromwel, Entituled, Governour of that Kingdom, the Lord Fairfax being still General of all the Forces, both here and there.

The Marquess, now Duke of Ormond, was the Kings Lieutenant of Ireland; and the Rebels had made a Confederacy among themselves, and those Confederates had made a kind of League with the Lieutenant, wherein they agreed upon liberty given them in the exercise of their Religion, to be faithful to, and assist the King. To these also were joyned [Page 171]some Forces raised by the Earls of Castlehaven, and Clanriccard, and my Lord Inchequin, so that they were the greatest United Strength in the Island; but there were among them a great many other Papists that would by no means subject themselves to Prote­stants, and these were called the Nuncio's Party, as the other were called the Confederate Party. These Parties not agreeing, and the Confederate Party having broken their Articles, the Lord Lieutenant seeing them ready to besiege him in Dublin, and not able to defend it, to preserve the place for the Pro­testants, surrenders it to the Parliament of England, and came over to the King, at this time when he was carried from place to place by the Army. From Eng­land he went over to the Prince, now King, residing then at Paris: But the Confederates affrighted with the news that the Rump was sending over an Army thither, desir'd the Prince, by Letters, to send back my Lord of Ormond, ingaging themselves to submit absolutely to the Kings Authority, and to obey my Lord of Ormond as his Lieutenant: And thereupon he was sent back. This was about a year before the going over of Cromwel; in which time, by the Dis­sentions in Ireland between the Confederate Party, and the Nuncio's Party, and discontents about Com­mand, this otherwise sufficient Power effected no­thing, and was at last defeated, August the second, by a Salley out of Dublin, which they were besieging. Within a few days after arriv'd Cromwel, who with extraordinary diligence, and horrid Executions, in less than a Twelve-month that he staid there, subdued, in a manner, the whole Nation. having kill'd, or exterminated a great part of them, and leaving his Son-in-law Ireton to subdue the rest: But Ireton died there (before the business was quite done) of the Plague. This was one step more towards Cromwel's Exaltation to the Throne.

B.

What a miserable condition was Ireland reduced [Page 172]to by the Learning of the Roman, as well as England was by the Learning of the Presbyterian Clergy?

A.

In the latter end of the preceeding year, the King was come from Paris to the Hague, and shortly after came thither from the Rump, their Agent Do­ris [...]aus, Doctor of the Civil Law, who had been imployed in the drawing of the Charge against the late King: But the first night he came, as he was at Supper, a Company of Cavaliers, near a dozen, en­tred his Chamber, kill'd him, and got away. Not long after also, their Agent at Madrid, one Ascham, that had written in defence of his Masters, was kill'd in the same manner. About this tire came out two Books; one written by Salmasius, a Presbyterian, a­gainst the Murder of the King; another written by Milton, an Independent in England, in Answer to it

B.

I have seen them both; they are very good La­ [...]i [...] both and hardly to be judged which is better; and both very ill reasoning, and hardly to be judged which is worst: like two Declamations Pro and Con, for Exercise only in a Rhetorick School, by one and the same man: So like is a Presbyterian to an Indepen­dent.

A.

In this year the Rump did not much at home, save that in the beginning they made England a Free State, by an Act that runs thus, Be it Enacted and Declared by this present Parliament, and by the Authority thereof, That the people of England, and all the Do­minions and Territories thereunto belonging, are and shall be, and are hereby constituted, made, and declared a Common-wealth, and Free State, &c.

B.

What did they mean by a Free State and Com­mon-wealth? were the people no longer to be subject to Laws? They could not mean that: for the Parlia­ment meant to Govern them by their own Laws, and punish such as broke them. Did they mean that Eng­land should not be subject to any foreign Kingdom or [Page 173]Common-wealth? That needed not be Enacted, see­ing there was no King nor People pretended to be their Masters. What did they mean then?

A.

They meant that neither this King, nor any King, nor any single person, but only that they themselves would be the Peoples Masters; and would have set it down in those plain words, if the people could have been cozen'd with words intelligible as easily as with words not intelligible.

After this they gave one another Money and Estates out of the Lands and Goods of the Loyal Party. They Enacted also an Engagement to be taken by every man, in these words, Tou shall promise to be true and faithful to the Common-wealth of England, as it is now established, without King or House of Lords.

They banished also from within 20 Miles of London all the loyal Party, forbidding every one of them to de­part more than five miles from his dwelling house.

B.

They meant perhaps to have them ready, if need were, for a Massacre: But what did the Scots in this time?

A.

They were considering of the Officers of the Ar­my which they were levying for the King, how they might exclude from Command all such as had loyally serv'd his now Majesty's Father, and all Independents, and all such as commanded in Duke Hamilton's Army: And these were the main things which passed this year.

The Marquess of Montross, that had in the year 1645. with a few men, and in a little time, done things almost incredible against the late King's Enemies in Scotland, landed now again in the beginning of the year 1650. in the North of Scotland, with Commissi­on from the present King, hoping to do him as good service as he had formerly done his Father; but the case was alter'd, for the Scotch Forces were then in England, in the service of the Parliament; whereas now they were in Scotland, and many more (for their intended Invasion) newly rais'd: Besides, the Soul­diers which the Marquess brought over were few, and [Page 174]Forreigners; nor did the High-landers come in to him, as he expected, insomuch as he was soon defeated, and shortly after taken; and (with more spightful usage than revenge requir'd) Executed by the Covenanters at Edinborough, May the 2d.

B.

What good could the King expect from joining with these men, who, during the Treaty, discover'd s [...] much malice to him in one of his one of his best Subjects?

A.

No doubt (their Church-men being then preva­lent) they would have done as much so this King, as the English Parliament had done to his Father, it they could have gotten by it that which they foolishly aspir'd to, the Government of the Nation: I do not believe that the Independents were worse than the Pres­byterians; both the one and the other were resolv'd to destroy whatsoever should stand in the way to their Ambition: but necessity made the King pass over both this and many other Indignities from them, ra­ther than suffer the pursuit of his right in England to cool, and be little better than extinguished.

B.

Indeed, I believe the Kingdom, if suffered to be­come an old Debt, will hardly ever be recover'd: Be­sides, the King was sure, where-ever the Victory light­ed, he could lose nothing in the War but Enemies.

A.

About the time of Montrosses death, which was in May, Cromwel was yet in Ireland, and his work unfinished; but finding, or by his Friends advertis'd, that his presence in the Expedition now preparing a­gainst the Scots, would be necessary to his Design, sent to the Rump, to know their pleasure, concerning his return: But for all that, he knew, or thought it was not necessary to stay for their Answer, but came away, and arriv'd at London the sixth of June following, and was welcom'd by the Rump. Now had General Fair­fax (who was truly what he pretended to be, a Pres­byterian) been so Catechis'd by the Presbyterian Mi­nisters here, that he refused to fight against the Bre­thren in Scotland; nor did the Rump, nor Cromwel, [Page 175]go about to rectifie his Conscience in that point. And thus Fairfax laying down his Commission, Cromwel was now made General of all the Forces in England and Ireland, which was another step to the Soveraign Power.

B.

Where was the King?

A.

In Scotland, newly come over, he landed in the North, and was honourably conducted to Edinborough, though all things was not yet well agreed upon be­tween the Scots and him: for he had yielded to as hard Conditions, as the late King had yielded to in the Isle of Wight; yet they had still somewhat to add, till the King enduring no more, departed from them towards the North again: But they sent Messengers after him, to pray him to return; but they furnished these Mes­sengers with strength enough to bring him back, if he should have refus'd. In fine, they agreed, but would not suffer the King, or any Royalist, to have Com­mand in the Army.

B.

The sum of all is, the King was their Prisoner.

A.

Cromwel from Berwick sends a Declaration to the Scots, telling them, he had no Quarrel against the people of Scotland, but against the malignant Party that had brought in the King, to the disturbance of the Peace between the two Nations; and that he was wil­ling by Conference to give and receive satisfaction, or to decide the Justice of the Cause by Battel: To which the Scots answering, declare, That they will not prosecute the Kings Interest, before and without his acknowledgment of the sins of his House, and his for­mer ways; and satisfaction given to Gods people in both Kingdoms. Judge by this, whether the present King was not in as bad a condition here, as his Father was in the hands of the Presbyterians of England.

B.

Presbyterians are every where the same; they would fain be absolute Governours of all they converse with, and have nothing to plead for it; but that where they reign, 'tis God that reigns, and no where else. [Page 176]But I observe one strange demand, that the King should acknowledg the sins of his House; for I thought it had been certain from all Divines, that no man was bound to acknowledg any mans sins but his own.

A.

The King having yielded to all that the Church requir'd, the Scots proceeded in their intended War. Cromwel marched on to Edinborough, provoking them all he could to Battel; which they declining, and pro­visions growing scarce in the English Army, Cromwel retir'd to Dunbar, despairing of success, and intending by Sea or Land to get back into England: And such was the condition which this General Cromwel, so much magnified for Conduct, had brought his Army to, that all his Glories had ended in shame and punishment, if Fortune's, and the faults of his Enemies, had not re­liev'd him: for as he retir'd, the Scots follow'd him close all the way, till within a mile of Dunbar. There is a ridge of Hills, that from beyond Edinborough goes winding to the Sea, and crosses the High-way between Dunbar and Barwick, at a Village called Copperspeith, where the passage is so difficult, that if the Scots had sent timely thither a very few men to guard it, the Eng­lish could never have passed: for the Scots kept the Hills, and needed not have fought, but upon great advantage, and were almost two to one. Cromwel's Army was at the Foot of those Hills, on the North side; and there was a great Ditch, or Channel of a Torrent, between the Hills and it; so that he could never have got home by Land, nor without utter ruine of the Army attempted to ship it, nor have stayed where he was for want of provisions. Now Cromwel knowing the Pass was free, and commanding a good Party of Horse and Foot to possess it, it was necessary for the Scots to let them go, whom they brag'd they had impo [...]ded, er else to fight, and therefore with the best of their Horse charged the English, and made them at first to shrink a little, but the English Foot co­ming on, the Scots were put to flight, and the flight of [Page 177]their Horse hindred the Foot from engaging, who therefore fled, as did also the rest of their Horse. Thus the folly of the Scotish Commanders brought all these odds to an even lay between two small and equal Par­ties, wherein Fortune gave the Victory to the English, who were not many more in number than those that were killed and taken Prisoners of the Scots, and the Church lost their Cannon, Bag and Baggage, with 10000 Arms, and almost their whole Army; the rest were got together by Lesby to Sterling.

B.

This Victory hapned well for the King, for had the Scots been Victors, the Presbyterians both there and here would have domineer'd again, and the King been in the same condition his Father was in at New­castle, in the hands of the Scotish Army. For in pur­suit of this Victory, the English at last brought the Scots to a pretty good habit of obedience for the King, whensoever he should recover his Right.

A.

In pursuit of this Victory the English marched to Edinborrough, quitted by the Scots, fortified Leith, and took in all the strength and Castles they thought sit on this side the Frith, which now was become the Bounds betwixt the two Nations; and the Scotch Eccle­siasticks began to know themselves better, and resolved in their new Army, which they meant to raise, to ad­mit some of the Royalists into Command: Cromwel from Edinborrough march'd towards Sterling to provoke the Enemy to fight, but finding danger in it, returned to Edinborrough, and besieged the Castle: In the mean time he sent a Party into the West of Scotland to suppress Strangham and Kerr, two great presbyte­rians, that were there levying of Forces for their new Army. And in the same time the Scots Crowned the King at Schone.

The rest of this year was spent in Scotland, on Crom­wel's part in taking of Edinborrough Castle, and in attempts to pass the Frith, or any other ways to get o­ver to the Scotish Forces; and on the Scots part, in hastening their Levies for the North.

What did the Rump at home during this time?

A.

They voted Liberty of Conscience to the Secta­ries; that is, they pluckt out the sting of Presbytery, which consisted in a severe imposing of odd Opinions upon the people, impertinent to Religion, but con­ducing to the advancement of the power of the Pres­byterian Ministers. Also they levyed more Souldiers, and gave the Command of them to Harrison, now made Major General, a Fifth-Monarchy man; and of those Souldiers, two Regiments of Horse and one of Foot were raised by the Fifth-monarchy-men, and o­ther Sectaries, in thankfulness for this their Liberty from the Presbyterian Tyranny. Also they pull'd down the late Kings Statue in the Exchange, and in the place where it stood caused to be written these words, Exit Tyrannus Regum ultimus, &c.

B.

What good did that do them? and why did they not pull down the Statues of all the rest of the Kings?

A.

What account can be given of actions that pro­ceed not from Reason, but spight and such like passi­ons? Besides this, they received Ambassadors from Por­tugal and Spain, acknowledging their Power: And in the very end of the Year, they prepared an Ambas­sador to the Netherlands, to offer them friendship: All they did besides, was persecuting and executing of Royalists.

In the beginning of the Year 1651. General Dean arrived in Scotland; and on the 11th of April the Scotish Parliament assembled, and made certain Acts in order to a better uniting of themselves, and better obedience to the King, who was now at Sterling with the Scotish Forces he had expecting more now in le­vying. Cromwel from Edinborough went divers times to Sterling, to provoke them to fight: There was no Ford there to passover his men: At last, Boats being come from London and Newcastle, Colonel Overton (though it were long first, for it was now July) tran­sported 1400 Foot of his own, besides another Regi­ment [Page 179]of Foot and four Troops of Horse, and intrencht himself at North-Ferry on the other side, and before any help could come from Sterling Major General Lambert also was got over with as many more; by this time Sir John Brown was come to oppose them with 4500 men, whom the English there defeated, kill­ing about 2000, and taking Prisoners 1600. This done, and as much more of the Army transported as was thought fit, Cromwel comes before St. Johnston's (from whence the Scotish Parliament, upon news of his passing the Iri [...]h, was removed to Dundes) and summons it; and the same day had news brought him, that the King was marching from Sterling towards Eng­land, which was true; but notwithstanding the King was three days march before him, he resolved to have the Town before he followed him, and accordingly had it the next day by surrender.

B.

What hopes had the King in coming into Eng­land, having before and behind him none, at least none armed, but his Enemies?

A.

Yes there was before him the City of London, which generally hated the Rump, and might easily be reckoned for 20000 well armed Souldiers; and most men believed they would have taken his part had he come near the City.

B.

What probability was there of that? Do you think the Rump was not sure of the service of the Mayor, and those that Commanded the City Militia? And if they had been really the Kings Friends, what need had they to stay his coming up to London? They might have seiz'd the Rump if they had pleas'd, which had no possibility of defending themselves; at least, they might have turn'd them out of the House.

A.

This they did not, but on the contrary permit­ted the recruiting of Cromwel's Army, and the raising of men to keep the Country from coming in to the King. The King began his march from Sterling the last of July, and Aug. 22. came to Worcester, by the way of Carlis [...]e, with a weary Army, of about 13000; [Page 180]whom Cromwel followed, and joining with the new Levies, environ'd Worcester with 40000, and on the third of September utterly defeated the Kings Army: Here Duke Hamilton, brother of him that was behea­ded, was slain.

B.

What became of the King?

A.

Night coming on before the City was quite taken, he left it, being dark, and none of the Enemies Horse within the Town to follow him; the plundering Foot having kept the Gates shut, lest the Horse should en­ter, and have a share of the Booty: The King before morning got into Warwickshire, 25 Miles from Worcester, and there lay disgused a while, and afterwards went up and down in great danger of being discovered, till at last he got over into France from Brighthempstead in Sussex.

B.

When Cromwel was gone what was farther done in Scotland?

A.

Lieutenant Gen. M [...]nk whom Cromwel left there with 7000 took Sterling, August the 14th, by surrender; and Dundes the third of September by Storm, because it resisted; this the Soldiers plun­dered, and had good booty, because the Scots for safety had sent thither their most precious Goods from Edinborrough and St. Johnston's; he took likewise by surrender Aberdeen, and the place where the Scotish Ministers first learned to play the Fools, St. Andrews; Also in the Highlands Colonel Alured took a knot of Lords and Gentlemen, viz. four Earls, and four Lords, and above twenty Knights and Gentlemen, whom he sent Prisoners into England, so that there was nothing more to be feared from Scotland: all the trouble of the Rump was to resolve what they should do with it, at last they resolved to Unite and Incor­porate it into a Common-wealth with England and Ireland, and to that end sent thither St. Johns, Vane, and other Commissioners, to offer them this Union by publick Declaration, and to warn them to chuse their Deputies of Shires, and Burgesses of Towns, and send them to Westminster.

This was a great favour.

A.

I think so; and yet it was by many of the Scots, especially by the Ministers and other Presbyterians re­fused: the Ministers had given way to the Levying of Money for the payment of the English Soldiers, but to comply with the Declaration of English Commissio­ners they absolutely forbad.

B.

Methinks this contributing to the pay of their Con­querors was some mark of Servitude, where entring into the Union made them free, and gave them equal Priviledge with the English.

A.

The cause why they refused the Union, rendered by the Presbyterians themselves, was this, That it drew with it a subordination of the Church to the Civil State in the things of Christ.

B.

This is a down-right Declaration to all Kings and Common-wealths in general, that a Presbyterian Minister will be a true Subject to none of them in the things of Christ, which things what they are they will be Judges themselves: what then have we gotten by our Deliverance from the Popes Tyranny, if these pretty men succeed in the place of it, that having no­thing in them that can be beneficial to the Publick, except their silence? for their Learning, it amounts to no more than an imperfect knowledge of Greek and Latin, and acquir'd readiness in the Scripture Language, with a Gesture and Tone suitable thereunto: but of Justice and Charity (the manners of Religion) they have neither knowledge nor practice, as is manifest by the Stories I have already told you: nor do they di­stinguish between the Godly and Ungodly, but by Conformity of Design in men of Judgment: or by Repetition of their Sermons in the Common sort of people.

A.

But this sullenness of the Scots was to no pur­pose, for they at Westminster Enacted the Union of the two Nations, and the Abolition of Monarchy in Scotland, and ordained Punishment for those that should transgress the Act.

What other business did the Rump this year?

A.

They sent St Johns and Strickland Ambassadors to the to Hague, to offer League to the Ʋnited Pro­vinces, who had Audiance March the third: St. Johns in a Speech shewed those States what advantage they might have by this League, in their Trade and Navi­gations, by the use of the English Ports and Harbors; the Dutch, though they shewed no great forwardness in the business, yet appointed Commissioners to treat with them about it, but the people were generally a­gainst it, calling the Ambassadors and their Follow­ers (as they were) Traytors and Murderers, and made such Tumults about their House, that their Followers durst not go abroad till the [...]tates had quiet­ed them: the Rump advertis'd hereof, presently re­call'd them; the Complement which St. Johns gave to the Commissioners, at their taking leave, is worth your hearing; You have (said he) an Eye upon the Event of the Affairs of Scotland, and therefore do refuse the Friendship we have offered now. I can as­sure you many in the Parliament were of Opinion that we should not have sent any Ambassadors to you, till we expected your Ambassadors to us: I now per­ceive our Error, and that those Gentlemen were in the right: In a short time you shall see that business ended, when it shall perplex you that you have refus'd our proffer.

B.

S. Johns was not sure that the Scotish business would end as it did; for though the Scots were beaten at Dunbar, he could not be sure of the Event of their entering of England, which happened afterward.

A.

But he guess'd well; for within a Month after the Battel at Worcester, an Act passed, forbidding the importing of Merchandize in other than English Ships: The English also molested their Fishing upon our Coast: They also many times searched their Ships (upon occasion of our War with France) and made some of them Prize: and then the Dutch sent their Ambassadors hither, to desire what they before [Page 183]refus'd; but partly also to inform themselves what Naval Forces the English had ready, and how the people were contented with the Government.

B.

How sped they?

A.

The Rump shewed now as little desire of Agree­ment, as the Dutch did then, standing upon terms ne­ver likely to be granted. First, For the Fishing on the English Coast, that they should not have it without paying for it. Secondly, That the English should have free Trade form Middleburgh to Antwerp, as they had before their Rebellion against the King of Spain. Thirdly, They demanded amends for the old (but never-to-be-forgotten) business of Amboyna; so that the War was already certain, though the Season kept them from Action till the Spring following The true Quarrel on the English part was, that their prof­fer'd Friendship was scorn'd, and their Ambassadours affronted: On the Dutch part, was their greediness to ingross all Traffick, and a false Estimate of our and their own strength. Whilst these things were do­ing, the Reliques of the War, both in Ireland and Scotland, were not neglected, though these Nations were not fully pacified till two years after: The Per­secution of Royalits also still continued, among whom was beheaded one M. Love, for holding Correspon­dence with the King.

B.

I had thought Presbyterian Ministers, whilest they were such, could not be Royalists, because they think their Assembly have the Supreme Power in the things of Christ; and by consequence they are in Eng­land by a Statute Traytors.

A.

You may think so still; for though I called Mr. Love a Royalist, I meant it only for that one act for which he was condemned. It was he, who, during the treaty at Ʋxbridge, preaching before the Commissioners there, said It was as possible for Heaven and Hell, as for the King and Parliament to agree. Both he and the rest of the Presbyterians are and were Enemies to the Kings Enemies, Cromwel and his Phanaticks, for [Page 184]their own, not for the King's sake: Their Loyalty was like that of Sir John Hotham, that kept the King out of Hull, and afterwards would have betrayed the same to the Marquess of New-castle. These Presby­terians therefore cannot be rightly called Loyal, but rather doubly perfidious; unless you think that as two Negatives make an Affirmative, so two Treasons make Loyalty.

This Year also were reduced to the obedience of the Rump, the Islands of Scilly and Man, and the Barba­do's, and St. Christophers. One thing fell out that they liked not, which was that Cromwel gave them warning to determine their sitting according to the Bill for Triennial Parliaments.

B.

That I think was harsh.

A.

In the year 1652. May 14. began the Dutch War in this manner, three Dutch Men of War, with divers Merchants from the Straights, being discovered by one Captain Young, who commanded some English Frigats, the said Young sent to their Admiral to bid him strike his Flag (a thing usually done in acknowledgment of the English Dominion in the Narrow Seas) which ac­cordingly he did. Then came up the Vice-Admiral, and being called so as the other was to take down his Flag, he answered plainly he would not; but after the exchange of four or five Broadsides, and mischief done on either part, he took it down; but Captain Young demanded also either the Vice-Admiral himself, or his Ship, to make satisfaction for the dammage already su­stained. To which the Vice-Admiral answered, that he had taken in his Flag, but would defend himself and his Ship: where-upon Captaiu Young consulting with the Captains of his other Ships, lest the beginning of the War in this time of Treaty should be charged up­on himself, and night also coming on, thought sit to proceed no farther.

B.

The War certainly began at this time; but who began it?

A.

The Dominion of the Sea belonging to the Eng­lish, [Page 185]there can be no question but the Dutch began it; and that the said Dominion belonged to the English, it was confest at first by the Admiral himself peaceably, and at last by the Vice-Admiral, taking in their Flags.

About a Fortnight after there happened another Fight upon the like occasion, upon Tromp with 42 Men of War, who came back to the back of Godwin-sands (Major Bourn being then with a few of the Parlia­ment's Ships in the Downs, and Blake with the rest farther Westward) and sent two Captains of his to Bourn to excuse his coming thither: To whom Bourn returned this answer, that the Message was civil, but that it might appear real, he ought to depart. So Tromp departed, meaning (now Bourn was satisfied) to sail towards Blake, and he did so; but so did also Bourn, for fear of the worst: When Tromp and Blake were near one another, Blake made a shot over Tromp's Ship, as a warning to him to take in his Flag: This he did thrice, and then Tromp gave him a Broad-side, and so began the Fight (at the beginning whereof Bourn came in) and lasted from two a Clock till night, the English having the better, and the Flag as before ma­king the Quarrel.

B.

What need is there, when both Nations were heartily resolved to fight, to stand so much upon this Complement of who should begin? For as to the gaining of Friends and Confederates thereby, I think 'tis in vain; seeing Princes and States on such occasi­ons, look not much upon the Justice of their Neigh­bours, but upon their own concernment in the Event.

A.

It is commonly so: but in this case the Dutch knowing the Dominion of the Narrow Seas to be a gallant Title, and envied by all the Nations that reach the Shore, and consequently that they were likely to oppose it, did wisely enough in making this point the state of the Quarrel.

After this Fight the Dutch Ambassadors residing in England, sent a Paper to the Council of State, where­in they stiled this last Encounter a rash action, and af­firmed [Page 186]it was done without the knowledge, and against the will of their Lords, the States General, and de­sired them that nothing might be done upon it in heat, which might become irreparable. The Parlia­ment hereupon voted, First, That the States General should pay the Charges they were at, and for the Dammages they sustained upon this occasion. Second­ly, That this being paid, there should be a Cessation of all Acts of Hostility, and a mutual Restitution of all Ships and Goods taken. Thirdly, And both these agreed so, that there should be made a League between the two Common-wealths. These Votes were sent to the Dutch Ambassadors, in answer of the said Paper; but with a Preamble setting f [...]rth the former kindnesses of England to the Netherlands, and taking notice of their new Fleet of 150 Men of War, without any o­ther apparent Design than the Destruction of the En­glish Fleet.

B.

What answer made the Dutch to this?

A.

None. Tromp sailed presently into Zealand, and Blake with 70 Men of War to the Orkney-Islands, to seize their Busses, and to wait for five Dutch Ships from the East-Indies? and Sir George Ascue▪ newly re­turn'd from the Barbados, came into the Downs with fifteen Men of War, where he was commanded to stay for a Recruit out of the Thames. Tromp, being recruit­ed to 120 Sail, made account to get in betwen Sir George Ascue and the Mouth of the River, but was hin­dred so long by contrary Winds▪ that the Merchants calling for his Convoy he could stay no longer, and so he went back into Holland, and thence to Orkney, where he met with the said five East-India Ships, and sent them home: and then he endeavour'd to engage with Blake; but a sudden Storm forced him to Sea, & so dis­sipated his [...]leet, that only forty two came home in one Body, the rest singly as well as they could; Blake also came home, but went first to the Coast of Holland, with 900 Prisoners and six Men of War taken, which were part of twelve which he found and took Guarding [Page 187]their Busses. This was the first Bout after the War de­clar'd.

In August following there hapned a Fight between De Ruiter the Admiral of Zeland, with fifty Men of War, and Sir George Ascue near Plimouth, with forty; wherein Sir George had the better, and might have got an entire Victory, had the whole Fleet engaged, Whatsoever was the matter, the Rump (though they re­warded him) never more imployed him, after his return, in their Service at Sea: but Voted for the year to come three Generals, Blake that was one already, and Dean, and Monk.

About this time Arch Duke [...]eopold Besieging Dun­kirk, and the French sending a Fleet to relieve it, Ge­neral Blake lighting on the French at Cala [...]s and taking seven of their Ships was cause of the Towns Surrender.

In September they fought again, De Wit and R [...]iter commanding the Dutch, and [...]l [...]ke the English; and the Dutch were again worsted.

Again, in the end of November V [...]n Tromp, with 80 Men of War shewed himself at the back of G [...]dwin­sand [...], where Bl [...]ke, though he had with him but 40, adventur'd to fight with him, and had much the worst, and (night parting the [...]ray) retir'd into the River of Thames; whilst Van Tromp keeping the Sea, took some inconsiderable Vessels from the English; and thereup­on, (as it is said) with a Childish Varity hung out a Broom from his Main Top-Mast, signifying he meant to sweep the Sea of all English Shipping.

After this, in February, [...]he Dutch with Van Tromp, were encountred by the English under Blake and Dean, near Ports-mouth, and had the worst. And these were all the Encounters between them this year in the nar­row Seas: they fought also once at Leghorn, where the Dutch had the better.

B.

I see no great odds yet on either side, if there were any the English had it.

A.

Nor did either of them e're the more incline to Peace, for the Hollanders, after they had sent Ambas­sadors [Page 188]into Denmark, Sweeden, Poland, and the Hans Towns (whence Tar and Cordage are usually had) to signifie the Declaration of the War, and to get them to their Party, re-called their Ambassadors from England, and the Rump without delay gave their parting audi­ence, without abating a Syllable of their former severe Propositions, and presently to maintain the War for the next year, laid a Tax upon the People of 120000 l. per M [...]nsem.

B.

What was done in the mean time at home?

A.

Cromwel was now quarrelling (the last and great­est Obstacle to his Design) the Rump, and to that end there came out dayly from the Army Petitions, Ad­dresses, Remonstrances, and other such Papers, some of them urging the Rump to dissolve themselves, and make way for another Parliament; to which the Rump unwilling to yield, and not daring to refuse, determin'd for the end of their sitting the 5th of November, 1654. but Cromwel meant not to stay so long. In the mean time the Army in Ireland was taking Submissions, and granting Transportations of the Irish, and condemning who they pleased in a High Court of Justice erected there for that purpose. Among those that were execu­ted, was hang'd Sir Phelim Oneale, who first began the Rebellion in Scotland; the English built some Citadels for the bridling that stubborn Nation, and thus ended the year, 1652.

B.

Come we then to the year, 1653.

A.

Cromwel wanted now but one step to the end of his Ambition, and that was, To set his Foot upon the Neck of this Long-Parliament, which he did April the 23th of this present year, 1653. a time very seasonable; for though the Dutch were not master'd, yet they were much weakned, and what with Prizes from the Enemy, and squeezing the Royal Party, the Treasury was pret­ty full, and the Tax of 120000 l. a Month began to come in, all which was his own in right of the Army: Therefore without any more ado attended by the Major Generals Lambert and Harrison, & some other Officers, [Page 189]and as many Souldiers as he thought fit, he went to the Parliament House and dissolv'd them, turn'd them out, and lock'd up the Doors; and for this Action he was more applauded by the people, than for any of his Vi­ctories in the War, and the Parliament men as much scorn'd and derided.

B.

Now that there was no Parliament, who had the Supreme Power?

A.

If by Power you mean the right to Govern, no body had it; if you mean the Supreme Strength, it was clearly in Cromwel, who was obeyed as General of all the Forces in England, Scotland, and Ireland.

B.

Did he pretend that for Title?

A.

No, but presently after he intended a Title, which was this, That he was necessitated for the de­fence of the Cause, for which at first the Parliament had taken up Arms, (that is to say Rebell'd) to have recourse to extraordinary Actions; You know the pre­tence of the Long-Parliament's Rebellion was Salus Populi, the safety of the Nation against a dangerous Con­spiracy of Papists, and a malignant Party at home; and that every man is bound, as far as his Power extends, to procure the safety of the whole Nation, (which none but the Army were able to do, and the Parliament had hitherto neglected) was it not then the Generals duty to do it? had he not therefore right? for that Law of Salus Populi is directed only to those that have Power enough to defend the People, that is, to them that have the Supreme Power.

B.

Yes certainly, he had as good a Title as the Long-Parliament, but the Long-Parliament did represent the People, and it seems to me that the Soveraign Power is essentially annexed to the Representative of the People.

A.

Yes, if he that makes a Representative, that is (in the present case) the King, do call them together to re­ceive the Soveraign Power, and he divest himself thereof, otherwise not; nor was ever the lower house of Parlia­ment the Representative of the whole Nation, but of the Commons only; nor had that House the Power to ob­lige [Page 190]by their Acts, or Ordinances, any Lord or any Priest.

B.

Did Cromwel come in upon the only Title of Sa­lus Populi? For this is a Title very few understand?

A.

His way was to get the Supreme Power conferr'd upon him by Parliament, therefore he call'd a Parlia­ment, and gave it the Supreme Power, to the end that they should give it to him again; was not this witty: First therefore he published a Declaration of the Causes why he dissolv'd the Parliament; the sum whereof was, That instead of endeavouring to promote the good of Gods people, they endeavour'd (by a Bill then ready to pas) to recruit the House, and perpetuate their own Power Next he constituted a Council of State of his own Creatures to be the Supreme Autority of England, but no longer than till the next Parliament should be call'd and met: Thi [...]dly he summon'd 142 persons, such as he himself or his trusty Officers made choice of, the greatest part of whom were instructed what to do, ob­scure persons and most of them Phanaticks though stil'd by Cromwel, Men of approv'd fidelity and hon [...]sty; to these the Council of State surrender'd the Supreme Autho­rity; and not long after these men surrendred it to Crom­wel. July the fourth this Parliament met, and chose for their Speaker one Mr. Rous, and called themselves from that time forward The Parliament of England. But Cromwel, for the more surety, constituted also a Council of State, not of such petty Fellows as most of these were, but of himself and of his principal Officers. These did all the business both publick and private, making Ordinances, and giving Audience to Foreign Ambassa­dors. But he had now more Enem [...]es than before: Har­rison, who was the Head of the Fifth monarchy-men, laying down his Commission, did nothing but an [...] ­mate his Party against him, for which afterward he was Imprisoned. This little Parliament in the mean time were making of Acts so ridiculous and displeasing to the People, that it was thought he chose them on purpose to bring all ruling Parlia­ments into contempt, and Monarchy again into cre­dit?

What Acts were these?

A.

One of them was, That all Marriages should be made by a Justice of Peace, and the Banes asked three several days in the next Market. None were forbidden to be Married by a Minister, but without a Justice of Peace the Marriage was to be void: so divers wary Couples (to be sure of one another, howsoever they might repent it afterwards) were Married both ways: Also they abrogated the Engage­ment, whereby no man was admitted to sue in any Court of Law, that had not taken it, that is, that had not acknowledged the late Rump.

B.

Neither of these did any hurt to Cromwel.

A.

They where also in hand with an Act to Cancel all the present Laws, and Law-Books, and to make a new Code more suitable to the Humor of the Fifth-Monarchy-Men, of whom there were many in this Parliament; their Tenet being, That there ought none to be Soveraign but King Jesus, nor any to Govern under him but the Saints; but their Authority ended before this Act passed.

B.

What is this to Cromwel?

A.

Nothing yet; but they were likewise upon an Act, now almost ready for the Question; that Parlia­ments hence forward, one upon the end of another, should be Perpetual.

B.

I understand not this, unless Parliaments can beget one another like Animals, or like the Ph [...]nix.

A.

Why not like the Phoenix? Cannot a Parlia­ment at the day of their Expiration send out Writs for a new one?

B.

Do you think they would not rather Summon themselves anew, and, to save the labour of coming again to VVestminster, fit still where they were? or if they summon the Counties to make new Electi­ons, and then Dissolve themselves, by what Authority shall the People meet in their County-Court, there being no Supreme Authority standing?

All they did was absurd: though they knew not that, no nor this, whose Design was upon the Sove­raignty; the Contrivers of this Act it seems perceiv'd not, but Cromwel's Party in the House saw it well e­nough: and therefore as soon as it was laid, there stood up one of the Members and made a Motion, that since the Common-wealth was like to receive little benefit by their Sitting, they should Dissolve themselves. Harrison and they of [...]his Sect was troubled hereat, and made Speeches against it: but Cromwel's party, of whom the Speaker was one, left the House, and with the Mace before them went to VVhite-Hall, and surrendred their Power to Cromwel that had given it them; and so he got the Soveraignty by an Act of Parliament: and within four days after, (viz.) Decem­ber 16th. was Installed Protector, and took his Oath to observe certain Rules of Governing engrossed in Parchment, and read before him, the writing was called, The Instrument.

B.

What were the Rules he sware to?

A.

One was to call a Parliament every third year, of which the first was to begin Sept. the third following.

B.

I believe he was a little Superstitious in the Choice of September the third, because it was lucky in 1650 and 1651, at Dunbar and VVorcester, but he knew not how lucky the same would be to the whole Nation, in 1658. at VVhite-Hall.

A.

Another was; That no Parliament should be Dissolv'd till it had sitten five Months, and those Bills that they then presented to him should be passed with­in twenty days by him, or else they should pass without him.

A third, That he should have a Council of State of not above twenty one nor under thirteen, and that up­on the Protectors Death this Council should meet, and before they parted chuse a new Protector. There were many more besides, but not necessary to be inserted.

B.

How went on the War against the Dutch?

The Generals for the English were Blake, and Dean, and Monk; and Van Trump for the Dutch; between whom was a Battel fought the second of June (which was a Month before the beginning of this little Parliament) wherein the English had the Victory, and drove the Enemies into their Harbours, but with the loss of General Dean, slain by a Cannon-shot. This Victory was great enough to make the Dutch send over Ambassadors into England in order to a Treaty. But in the mean time they prepared and put to Sea another Fleet, which likewise in the end of July was defeated by General Monk, who got now a greater Victory than before: And this made the Dutch descend so far, as to buy their Peace with the payment of the Charge of the War, and with the acknowledgment, among other Articles, that the English had the right of the Flag. This Peace was concluded in March, being the end of this year, but not proclaimed till April; the Money it seems being not paid till them.

The Dutch War being now ended, the Protector sent his youngest Son, Henry, into Ireland, whom also some time after he made Lieutenant there; and sent Monk Lieutenant General into Scotland; to keep those Nations in Obedience. Nothing else worth remem­bring was done this year at home, saving the disco­very of a Plot of Royalists (as was said) upon the Life of the Protector, who all this while had intelli­gence of the King's Designs from a Traytor in his Court, who afterwards was taken in the manner, and kill'd.

B.

How came he into so much trust with the King?

A.

He was the Son of a Collonel that was slain in the Wars on the late King's side: Besides he pretend­ed Employment from the King's loyal and loving Sub­jects here, to convey to his Majesty Money, as they from time to time should send him: And to make this cre­dible, Cromwel himself caused Money to be sent him. The following year, 1654. had nothing of War, but [Page 194]was spent in Civil Ordinances, in appointing of Judges, preventing of Plots (for Usurpers are jealous) and in executing of the Kings Friends, and selling their Lands. The third of September, according to the Instrument, the Parliament met; in which there was no House of Lords, and the House of Commons was made as for­merly of Knights and Burgesses, but not as formerly two Burgesses of a Burrough, and two Knights for a County; for Burroughs for the most part had but one Burgess, and some Counties six or seven Knights; be­sides there were twenty Members for Scotland, and as many for Ireland: So that now Cromwel had nothing to do, but to shew his Art of Government upon six Coach-Horses newly presented him, which being as rebellious as himself, threw him out of the Coach-Box, and had almost kill'd him.

B.

This Parliament which had seen how Cromwel handled the two former, the long and the short one, had surely learnt the wit to behave themselves better to him than those had done.

A.

Yes, especially now that Cromwel in his Speech at their first meeting, had expresly forbidden them to meddle with the Government of a single Person and Parliament, or with the Militia, or with perpetuating of Parliaments, or taking away Liberty of Consci­ence. And he told them also, that every Member of the House before they sate, must take a Recognition of his Power in divers points; whereupon, of above 400 there appear'd not above 200 at first; though after­wards some relenting, there sat about 300 again. Just at their sitting down, he published some Ordi­nances of his own, bearing date before their meeting, that they might see he took his own Acts to be as valid as theirs. But all this could not make them know themselves, for they proceded to the debate of every Article of the Recognition.

B.

They should have debated that before they had taken it.

But then they had never been suffered to sit: Cromwel being informed of their stubborn proceedings, and out of hope of any Supply from them, dissolv'd them.

All that passed besides in this year, was the Exercise of the High-Court of Justice upon some Royalists for Plots.

In the Year 1655. the English, to the number of near 10000, landed in Hispaniola, in hope of the plunder of the Gold and Silver, whereof they thought there was great abundance in the Town of Santo Domingo; but were well beaten by a few Spaniards, and with the loss of near 1000 Men, went off to Jamaica, and pos­sessed it.

This year also the Royal Party made another At­tempt in the West, and proclaimed there King Charles the Second; but few joining with them, and some fal­ling off, they were soon suppressed, and many of the principal persons Executed.

B.

In these many Insurrections, the Royalists, tho they meant well, yet they did but dis-service to the King by their impatience. What hope had they to prevail against so great an Army as the Protector had ready? What cause was there to despair of seeing the King's business better done by the Dissention and Ambition of the great Commanders in that Army, whereof many had the favour to be esteem'd among them as well as Cromwel himself?

A.

That was somewhat incertain: The Protector being frustrate of his hope of Money at Santo Do­mingo, resolv'd to take from the Royalists the tenth part yearly of their Estates: And to this end chiefly, he divided England into eleven Major-General-ships, with Commission to every Major-General to make a Roll of the Names of all suspected persons of the King's party, and to receive the tenth part of their Estates within his Precinct: As also to take cau­tion from them not to act against the State, and [Page 196]to reveal all Plots that should come to their know­ledge, and to make them engage the like for their Ser­vants: They had Commission also to forbid Horse-races, and concourse of people, and to receive and account for this Decimation.

B.

By this the Usurper might easily inform himself of the value of all the Estates in England, and of the Behaviour and Affection of every person of Quality, which has hitherto been taken for very great Ty­ranny.

A.

The year 1656 was a Parliament-year, by the Instrument; between the beginning of this year, and the day of the Parliaments sitting, these Major-Gene­rals resided in several Provinces, behaving themselves most Tyrannically.

Amongst other of their Tyrannies was the awing of Elections, and making themselves, and whom they pleas'd, to be return'd Members for the Parliament, which was also thought a part of Cromwel's Design in their Constitution; for he had need of a giving Par­liament, having lately upon a Peace made with the French, drawn upon himself a War with Spain.

This year it was that Captain Stainer set upon the Spanish Plate-fleet, being 8 in number, near Cadiz, whereof he sunk two and took two, there being in one of them two millions of pieces of 8, which amounts to 400000 l. sterling.

[...]. This year also it was that James Naylor appear'd at Bristol, and would be taken for Jesus Christ; he wore his Beard forked, and his Hair compos'd to the likeness of that in the Volto Santo; and being question'd, would sometimes answer, Thou sayest it. He had also his Dis­ciples that would go by his Horse-side to the mid-le; in dirt. Being sent for by the Parliament, he was Sentenced to stand on the Pillory, to have his Tongue bored through, and to be marked in the Fore-head with the Letter B. for Blasphemy, and to remain in Bridewell. Lambert, a great Favourite of the Army, [Page 197]endeavour'd to save him, partly because he had been his Soldier, and partly to curry favour with the Se­ctaries of the Army; for he was now no more in the Protector's Favour, but meditating how he might suc­ceed him in his Power.

About two years before this there appear'd in Crom­wel's time a Prophetess, much fam'd for her Dreams and Visions, and hearkened to by many, whereof some were Eminent Officers, but she and some of her Complices being imprison'd, we heard no more of her.

B.

I have heard of another, one Lilly, that Prophe­sied all the time of the Long-Parliament, what did they to him?

A.

His Prophesies were of another kind; he was a Writer of Almanacks, and a pretender to a pre­tended Art of Judicial Astrology, a meer Cozener to get maintenance from a multitude of ignorant people, and no doubt had been call'd in question, if his Prophe­sies had been any ways disadvantageous to the Parlia­ment.

B.

I understand not how the Dreams and Prognosti­cations of mad men (for such I take to be all those that foretel future Contingencies) can be of any great disadvantage to the Common-Wealth.

A.

Yes, yes: know there is nothing that renders Humane Councils difficult, but the incertainty of fu­ture time, nor that so well directs men in their delibe­rations, as the fore-sight of the sequels of their Actions. Prophesie being many times the principal Cause of the Event foretold. If upon some prediction the people should have been made to believe confidently. That Oliver Cromwel and his Army should be upon a day to come utterly defeated, would not every one have en­deavour'd to assist, and to deserve well of that Party should give him the defeat? Upon this account it was that Fortune-tellers and Astrologers were so often ba­nished out of Rome,

[Page 198]

The last memorable thing of this Year was a Mo­tion made by a Member of the House, an Alderman of London, That the Protector might be petitioned and advised by the House to leave the Title of Protector, and take upon him that of King.

B.

That was indeed a bold Motion, and which would, if prosperous, have put an end to many mens Ambition, and to the licentiousness of the whole Army. I think the Motion was made on purpose to ruine both the Protector himself, and his ambitious Offi­cers.

A.

It may be so. In the year 1657, the first thing the Parliament did was the drawing up a Petition to the Protector, to take upon him the Title of King. As of other Parliaments, so of this, the greatest part had been kept out of the House by force, or else them­selves had forborn to sit, and became guilty of setting up this King Oliver, but those few that sat presented their Petition to the Protector, April the 9th, in the Banquetting-house at Whitehall.

Sir Thomas Widdrington, the Speaker, used the first Arguments, and the Protector desired some time to seek God, the Business being weighty: The next day they sent a Committee to him to receive his An­swer, which Answer being not very clear, they pres­sed him again for a Resolution, to which he made an­swer in a long Speech that ended in a peremptory Refusal, and so retaining still the Title of Protector, he took upon him the Government according to certain Articles contained in the said Petition.

B.

What made him refuse the Title of King?

A.

Because he durst not take it at that time, the Army being addicted to their great Officers, and a­mong their great Officers many (hoping to succeed him, and the Succession having been promised to Major General Lambert, would have mutined against him;) he was therefore forced to stay for a more propitious Conjuncture.

What were those Articles?

A.

The most important of them were, first, That he would exercise the Office of chief Magistrate of England, Scotland, and Ireland, under the Title of Pro­tector, and govern the same according to the said Pe­tition and advice; and that he would in his life time name his Successor.

B.

I believe the Scots, when they first Rebell'd, ne­ver thought of being Governed absolutely as they were by Oliver Cromwel.

A.

Secondly, That he should call a Parliament eve­ry three years at farthest. Thirdly, That those persons which were legally chosen Members should not be se­cluded without consent of the House. In allowing this Clause, the Protector observed not that the secluded Members of this same Parliament are thereby re-ad­mitted. Fourthly, The Members were qualified. Fifth­ly, The Power of the other House was defin'd. Sixthly, That no Law should be made but by Act of Parlia­ment. Seventhly, That a constant yearly Revenue of a Million of pounds should be setled for the maintenance of the Army and Navy, and 300000 l. for the support of the Government; besides other temporary supplies, as the House of Commons should think fit. Eighthly, That all the Officers of State should be chosen by the Parliament. Ninthly, That the Protector should en­courage the Ministry. Lastly, That he should cause a profession of Religion to be agreed on and published. There are divers others of less importance. Having signed the Articles, he was presently with great Cere­monies installed a-new.

B.

What needed that, seeing he was still but Pro­tector?

A.

But the Articles of this Petition were not all the same with those of his former Instrument; for now there was to be another House; and whereas before his Council was to name his Successors, he had Power now to do it himself; so that he was an absolute Mo­narch, [Page 200]and might leave the Succession to his Son, If he would, and so successively, or transfer it to whom he pleas'd. The Ceremony being ended, the Parliament adjourn'd to the 20th of January following, and then the other House also sate with their Fellows.

The House of Commons being now full, took little notice of the other House, wherein there were not of 60 persons above nine Lords: but fell a questioning all that their Fellows had done during the time of their Seclusion; whence had follow'd the avoidance of the Power newly placed in the Protector. Therefore go­ing to the House, he made a Speech to them, ending in these words, By the living God I must and do dissolve you.

In this year the English gave the Spaniard another great Blow at Santa Cruz, not much less than that they had given him the year before at Cadiz.

About the time of the dissolution of this Parliament the Royalists had another Design against the Prote­ctor, which was to make an Insurrection in England, the King being then in Flanders ready to second them from thence with an Army: But this also was disco­ver'd by Treachery, and came to nothing, but the ruin of those that were ingaged in it, whereof many in the beginning of the next year were by a High Court of Justice imprison'd, and some executed. This year also was Major General Lambert put out of all employment, a Man second to none but Oliver in the favour of the Army: but because he expected by that favour, or by promise from the Protector, to be his Suc­cessor in the Supreme Power, it would have been dan­gerous to let him have Command in the Army, the Protector having design'd his Successor his Eldest Son Richard.

In the year 1658. September the third, the Protector died at Whitehall, having ever since his last Establish­ment been perplexed with fear of being killed by some desperate attempts of the Royalists.

[Page 201]

Being importun'd in his sickness by his Privy Coun­cil to name his Successor, he nam'd his Son Richard; who incouraged thereunto, not by his own Ambition, but by Fleetwood, Desborough, Thurloe, and other of his Council, was content to take it upon him; and pre­sently Addresses were made to him from the Armies, in England, Scotland, and Ireland: His first business was, the chargeable and splendid Funeral of his Fa­ther.

Thus was Richard Cromwel seated in the Imperial Throne of England, Scotland, and Ireland, Successor to his Father, lifted up to it by the Officers of the Army then in Town, and congratulated by all the parts of the Army throughout the three Nations, scarce any Garrison omitting their particular flattering Addres­ses to him.

B.

Seeing the Army approv'd of him, how came he so soon cast off?

A.

The Army was inconstant, he himself irresolute, and without any Millitary Glory; and though the two principal Officers had a near relation to him, yet neither of them, but Lambert, was the great Favo­rite of the Army, and by courting Fleetwood to take upon him the Protectorship, and by tampering with the Soldiers, he had gotten again to be a Collonel; he and the rest of the Officers had a Council at Walling­ford-House (where Fleetwood dwelt) for the dispos­sessing of Richard, though they had not yet considered how the Nations should be govern'd afterwards. For from the beginning of the Rebellion the method of Ambition was constantly this, first to destroy, and then to consider what they should set up.

B.

Could not the Protector, who kept his Court at Whitehall, discover what the business of the Officers was at Wallingford-House, so near him?

A.

Yes: He was by divers of his Friends inform'd of it, and counsell'd by some of them, who would have done it, to kill the chief of them, but he had not cou­rage [Page 204] [...]first under his Hand engage himself never to interrupt any of the Members, but that they might freely Meet and Debate in the House. And to please the Soldiers, they Voted to take presently into their consideration the means of paying them their Arrears: But whilst they where considering this, the Protector (according to the first of those Acts) forbad the meeting of Offi­cers at Wallingford-House. This made the Government, which by the disagreement of the Protector and Army, was already loose, to fall in pieces. For the Officers, from Wallingford-House, with Soldiers enow, came to Whitehall, and brought with them a Commission ready drawn (giving power to Desborough to Dissolve the Parliament) for the Protector to sign, which also, his heart and his party failing him, he signed. The Par­liament nevertheless continued sitting; but at the end of the week the House Adjourned, till the Mon­day after, being April the 25. At their coming on Mon­day morning they found the Door shut up, and the passages to the House fill'd with Soldiers, who plainly told them they must sit no longer. Richard's Authority and business in Town being thus at an end, heretir'd into the Country, where within a few days (upon pro­mise of the payment of his Debts, which his Fathers Funeral had made great) he signed a Resignation of his Protectorship.

B.

To whom?

A.

To no body. But, after ten days cessation of the Soveraignty, some of the Rumpers that were in Town, together with the old Speaker Mr. William Lenihall, resolv'd among themselves, and with Lambert, Hasle­rig, and other Officers, who were also Rumpers, in all 42, to go into the House, which they did, and were by the Army declar'd to be the Parliament. There were also in Westminster-Hall at that time about their private business some few of those whom the Army had seclu­ded in 1648. and were called the secluded Members. These knowing themselves to have been Elected by [Page 205]the same Authority, and having the same Right to sit, attempted to get into the House, but were kept out by the Soldiers: The first Vote of the Rump, reseated, was, That such persons as were heretofore Members of this Parliament, and have not [...]tten since the year 1648. shall not sit in this House till farther order of the Par­liament: And thus the Rump recover'd their Autho­rity May the seventh 1659. which they lost in April 1653.

B.

Seeing there have been so many shiftings of the Supreme Authority, I pray you, for memories sake repeat them briefly in time and order.

A.

First, From 1640 to 1648. when the King was murthered, the Soveraignty was disputed between King Charles the First, and the Presbyterian Parlia­ment. 2ly, From 1648 to 1653. the Power was in that part of the Parliament which voted the Tryal of the King, and declar'd themselves, without King or House of Lords, to have the Supreme Authority of England and Ireland. For there were in the Long-Par­liament two Factions, the Presbyterian and Independent. The former whereof sought only the subjection of the King, not his destruction: and this part is it which was called the Rump 3ly, From April the 20 to July the 4, the Supreme Power was in the Hands of a Council of State constituted by Cromwel. 4ly, From July the 4 to December the 12 of the same year it was in the Hands of Men called unto it by Crom­wel, whom he termed men of Fidelity and Integri­ty, and made them a Parliament, which was cal­led in contempt of one of the Members, Barebone's Parliament. 5ly, From December the 12, 1653, to Sep­tember the 3. 1658, it was in the hands of Oliver Cromwel, with the Title of Protector. 6ly, From September 1658 to April the twenty fifth 1659. Ri­chard Cromwel had it as Successor to his Father. 7ly, From April the twenty fifth 1659. to May the seventh of the same year it was no where. [Page 206]8ly. From May the 7th 1659. the Rump, which was turn'd out of Door 1653. recovered it again, and did lose it again to the Committee of Safety, and again re­cover it, and again lose it to the right Owner.

B.

By whom and by that Art came the Rump to be turn'd out the second time?

A.

One would think them safe enough, the Army in Scotland, which when it was in London, had helped Oli­ver to pull down the Rump, submitted now, beg'd par­don, and promis'd Obedience. The Souldiers in Town had their pay mended, and the Commanders every where took the old Engagement, whereby they had ac­knowledged their Authority heretofore; they also re­ceived their Commissions in the House it self from the Speaker, who was Generalissimo, Fleetwood was made Lieutenant-General, with such and so many limitations as were thought necessary by the Rump, that remem­bred how they had been serv'd by their General Oliver: Also Henry Cromwel Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, having resign'd his Commission by Command, returned into England.

But Lambert, to whom (as was said) Oliver had pro­mis'd the succession, and as well as the Rump knew the way to the Protectorship by Oliver's own foot-steps; was resolv'd to proceed in it upon the first opportunity, which presented it self presently after.

Besides some Plots of Royalists. whom after the old fashion they again persecuted, there was an Insurrecti­on made against them by Presbyterians in Cheshire, headed by Sir G. Booth, one of the secluded Members, they were in number about 3000, and their pretence was for a Free-Parliament: There was a great talk of another Rising or endeavour to Rise in Devonshire and Co [...]w [...]l at the same time: To suppress Sir George Booth, the Rump sent down more than a sufficient Army under Lambert, which quickly defeated the Cheshire party, and recover'd Chester, Leverpool, and all the o­ther places they had seized; divers of their Comman­ders [Page 207]in and after the battel were taken Prisoners, whereof Sir George Booth himself was one.

This exploit done, Lambert, before his return, ca­ressed his Soldiers with an entertainment, at his own house in York-shire, and got their consent to a Petition to be made to the House; that a General might be set up in the Army, as being unfit that the Army should be judged by any power extrinsick to it self.

B.

I do not see that unfitness.

A.

Nor I. But it was (as I have heard) an action of Sir Henry Vane's: But it so much displeased the Rump, that they Voted, that the having of more Ge­neral's in the Army, than were already setled, was unnecessary, burthensom, and dangerous to the Com­mon-wealth

B.

This was not Oliver's method; for though this Cheshire Victory had been as glorious as that of Oliver's at Dunbar, yet it was not the Victory that made Oliver General, but the resignation of Fairfax, and the prof­fer of it to Cromwel by the Parliament.

A.

But Lambert thought so well of himself, as to expect it; therefore at his return to London, he and other Officers assembling at Wallingford-house, drew their Petition into form, and called it a representa­tion, wherein the chief point was to have a Gene­ral; with many other of less importance that were added: And this they represented to the House October the 4th, by Major General Desborough. And this so far forth awed them, as to teach them so much good manners, as to promise to take it presently into debate, which they did; and October the 12th, having recove­red their Spirits, Voted, That the Commissions of Lambert, Desborough, and others of the Council at Wallingford-house, should be void. Item, That the Army should be governed by a Commission to Fleet-wood, Monk, Haslerig, Walton, Morley, and Overton, till Feb. the 12th following; and to make this good against the Force they expected from Lambert, they ordered Hasle­rig [Page 208]and Morley to issue Warrants to such Officers as they could trust, to bring their Soldiers next Morning into Westminster, which was done somewhat too late, for Lambert had first brought his Soldiers thither, and beset the House, and turn'd back the Speaker, which was then coming to it; but Haslerig's For­ces marching about St. James's Park wall, came into St. Margaret's Church-yard, and so both Par­ties looked all day one upon another like Enemies, but offered not to fight; whereby the Rump was put out of possession of the House, and the Offi­cers continued their meeting as before, at Wal­lingford house; there they chose from among them­selves, with some few of the City, a Committee, which they called The Committee of Safety, whereof the chief were Lambert and Vane, who, with the advice of a General Council of Officers, had Power to call Delinquents to Tryal, to suppress Rebellions, to treat with Foreign States, &c. You see now the Rump cut off, and the Supreme Power (which is charged with Salus Populi) transferred to a Council of Offi­cers, and yet Lambert hopes for it at the end. But one of their Limitations was, That they should within six Weeks present to the Army a new Model of the Go­vernment. If they had done so, do you think they would have preser'd Lambert, or any other, to the Su­preme Authority rather than themselves?

B.

I think not. When the Rump had put into Commission (among a few others) for the Govern­ment of the Army, that is, for the Government of the three Nations, General Monk, already Commander in chief of the Army in Scotland, and that had done much greater things in this War than Lambert, how durst they leave him out of this Committee of Safety? or how could Lambert think that General Monk would for­give it and not endeavour to fasten the Rump again.

A.

They thought not of him, his Gallantry had been shown on remote Stages, Ireland and Scotland; [Page 209]his Ambition had not appeared here in their Con­tention for the Government, but he had complied both with Richard and the Rump. After General Monk had signified by Letter his dislike of the proceedings of Lambert and his Fellows, they were much surpriz'd, and began to think him more considerable than they had done, but it was too late.

B.

Why, was his Army not too small for so great an Enterprize?

A.

The General knew very well his own and their Forces, both what they were then, and how they were to be augmented, and what generally City and Country wished for, which was the Restitution of the King; which to bring about, there needed no more but to come with his Army (though not very great) to London, to the doing whereof there was no obstacle but the Army with Lambert. What could he do in this Case? If he had declar'd presently for the King, or for a free Parliament, all the Armies in England would have joyned against him, and, assu­ming the Title of a Parliament, would have furnished themselves with Money. G [...]neral Monk, after he had thus quarrelled by his Letter with the Council of Officers, he secur'd first those Officers of his own Army which were Anabaptists, and therefore not to be trusted, and put others into their places; then drawing his Forces together, march'd to Berwick. Being there he indicted a Convention of the Scots, of whom he desired, That they would take order for the security of the Nation in his absence and raise some maintenance for his Army in their march. The Convention promis'd for the security of the Nation, their best endeavour, and rais'd him a sum of money not great, but enough for his purpose, excusing themselves upon their present wants. On the other side, the Committee of Safety, with the greatest and best part of their Army, sent Lambert to oppose him; but at the same time, by divers Messages and Mediators, urged him to a Treaty, [Page 210]which he consented to, and sent 3 Officers to London to treat with as many of theirs. These six suddenly con­cluded, without power from the General, upon these Articles, That the King be excluded, a free State set­led, the Ministry and Universities encouraged, with divers which the General liked not, and imprisoned one of his Commissioners for exceeding his Commissi­on; whereupon another Treaty was agreed on, of five to five. But whilst these Treaties were in hand, Haslerig, a Member of the Rump, seized on Portsmouth, and the Soldiers sent by the Committee of Safety to re­duce it, instead of that entred into the Town, and joyned with Haslerig. Secondly, the City renewed their Tu­mults for a free Parliament. Thirdly, the Lord Fair fax, a Member also of the Rump, and greatly favoured in York-shire, was raising Forces there behind Lambert; who being now between two Armies, his Enemies, would gladly have fought the General. Fourthly, there came news that Devon-shire and Cornwal were listing of Soldiers. Lastly, Lambert's Army wanting Money, and sure they should not be furnished from the Council of Officers, which had neither Authority nor Strength to levy money, grew discontented and for their Free-Quarter were odious to the Northern Countries.

B.

I wonder why the Scots were so ready to furnish General Monk with money, for they were no Friends to the Rump.

A.

I know not; but I believe the Scots would have parted with a greater Sum, rather than the English should not have gone together by the Ears among themselves. The Council of Officers being now beset with so many Enemies, produced speedily their Model of Government, which was to have a free Parliament, which should meet December 15, but with such Qualifi­cations of no King, no House of Lords, as made the City more angry than before. To send Soldiers into the West, to suppress those that were rising there they durst not, for fear of the City; nor could they raise [Page 211]any other, for want of money; there remained nothing but to break, and quitting Wallingford-house, to shift for themselves. This coming to the knowledge of their Army in the North, they deserted Lambert, and the Rumpers, December 26, re-possessed the House.

B.

Seeing the Rump was now reseated, the busi­ness, pretended by General Monk for his marching to London, was at an end.

A.

The Rump, though seated, was not well setled, but (in the midst of so many Tumults for a free Parlia­ment) had as much need of the General's coming up now, as before. He therefore sent them word, that because he thought them not yet secure enough, he would come up to London with his Army; which they not only accepted of, but entreated him so to do, and voted him for his service 1000 l. a year.

The General marching towards London, the Coun­try every where Petition'd him for a free Parliament. The Rump, to make room in London for his Army, dis­lodg'd their own. The General, for all that, had not let fall a word in all this time, that could be taken for a Declaration of his Final Design.

B.

How did the Rump revenge themselves on Lambert?

A.

They never troubled him; nor do I know any cause of their so gentle dealing with him. But certain­ly Lambert was the ablest of any Officer they had to do them service, when they should have means and need to imploy him. After the General was come to London, the Rump sent to the City for their part of a Tax of 100000 l. a month for six months, according to an Act which the Rump had made formerly before their Dis­seisin by the Committee of Safety. But the City, who were averse to the Rump, and keen upon a free Parlia­ment, could not be brought to give their money to their Enemies, and to purposes repugnant to their own; whereupon the Rump sent Order to the General to break down the City Gates, and their Portcullices, and to imprison certain obstinate Citizens: This he per­form'd, and it was the last service he did them.

[Page 212]

About this time the Commission, by which General Monk with others had the Government of the Army put into their hands by the Rump, before the Usur­pation of the Council of Officers, came to expire, which the present Rump renewed.

B.

He was thereby the sixth part of the General of the whole Forces of the Common-wealth; if I had been as the Rump, he should have been sole General. In such cases as this, there cannot be a greater Vice than pinching: Ambition should be liberal.

A.

After the pulling down of the City Gates, the General sent a Letter to the Rump, to let them know that this service was much against his Nature; and to put them in mind, how well the City had serv'd the Parliament in the whole War.

B.

Yes; but for the City the Parliament could ne­ver have made the War, nor the Rump ever have murdered the King.

A.

The Rump considered not the Merit of the City, nor the good nature of the General, they were busie, they were giving out Commissions, making of Acts for Abjuration of the King and his Line, and for the Ol [...] Engagement, and conferring with the City to get Money. The General also desir'd to hear a Conference between some of the Rump, and some of the secluded Members, concerning the Justice of their Seclusion, and of the hurt that could follow upon their re-admis­sion, and it was granted. After long Conference, the General finding the Rumps pretences unreasonable and ambitious, declar'd himself with the City for a free Parliament, and came to Westminster with the secluded Members, (whom he had appointed to meet and stay for him at Whitehall) and re-placed them in the House among the Rumpers; so that now the same Cattel that were in the House of Commons in 1640. (except those that were dead, and those that went from them to the late King at Oxford) are all there again.

But this methinks was no good service to the King, unless they had learnt better Principles.

A.

They had learnt nothing; the major part was now again Presbyterian. 'Tis true, they were so grateful to General Monk, as to make him General of all the Forces in the three Nations: They did well also to make void the Engagement; but it was because those Acts were made to the prejudice of their Party, but recalled none of their own Rebellious Ordinances, nor did any thing in order to the good of the present King; but on the contrary, they declar'd by a Vote, that the late King began the War against his two Houses.

B.

The two Houses, considered as two Persons, were they not two of the King's Subjects? If a King raise an Army against his Subject, is it lawful for the Sub­ject to resist with force, when (as in this case) he might have had Peace upon his submission.

A.

They knew they had acted vilely and sottishly; but because they had always a greater than ordinary wisdom and godliness▪ they were loth to confess it: The Presbyterians now saw their time to make a Con­fession of their Faith, and presented it to the House of Commons, to shew they had not changed their Prin­ciples; which (after six Readings in the House) was voted to be printed, and once a year to be read publick­ly in every Church.

B.

I say again, this re-establishing of the Long Par­liament was no good service to the King.

A.

Have a little patience: they were re-established with two Conditions; one to determine their sitting before the end of March, another to send out Writs before their rising for new Elections.

B.

That qualifies.

A.

That brought in the King; for few of the Long-Parliament (the Country having felt the smart of their former service) could get themselves chosen again. This new Parliament began to sit in April 25. 1660. How soon these called in the King, with what Joy [Page 214]and triumph he was receiv'd, how earnestly His Majesty pressed the Parliament for the Act of Oblivion, and how few were excepted out of it, you know as well as I.

B.

But I have not yet observ'd in Presbyterians any Oblivion of the former principles, we are but return'd to the state we were in at the beginning of the Sedition.

A.

Not so; for before that time, though the Kings of England had the right of the Militia in virtue of the Soveraignty, and without dispute, and without any particular Act of Parliament directly to the purpose; yet now after this bloody dispute, the next, which is the present Parliament, in proper and express terms hath declar'd the same to be the right of the King only, without either of his Houses of Parliament; which Act is more instructive to the people, than any Arguments drawn from the Title of Soveraignty, and consequently fitter to disarm the ambition of all seditious Haran­guers for the time to come.

B.

Pray God it be so; howsoever I must confess, that this Parliament has done all that a Parliament can do for the security of our peace; which I think also would be enough, if our Preachers would take heed of instil­ling evil Principles into their Auditory. I have seen in this Revolution a circular motion of the Soveraign Power, through two Usurpers, from the late King, to this his Son; for (leaving out the power of the Council of Officers, which was but temporary, and no otherwise owned by them, but in trust) it moved from King Charles the First, to the Long-Parliament, from thence to the Rump, from the Rump to Oliver Cromwel, and then back again from Richard Cromwel to the Rump, thence to the Long-Parliament, and thence to King Charles the Second, where long may it remain.

A. Amen. And may he have, as often as there shall be need, such a General.

B.

You have told me little of the General, till now in the end; but truly, I think, the bringing of his little Army entirely out of Scotland up to London, was the greatest Stratagem that is extant in History.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the 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.