The Heads of the Charge against Edmond Hickeringill, Clerk, for Barretry, exhibi­ted by Samuel Astry, Feb. 14. 1680.

IMprimis, For purchasing Lands and Tenements of one Westenraw in Bradfield and Wix in Essex; the said Defendant▪ Hickeringill, knowing that divers Sults and Pleas were then depending for the same, and Westenraw being out of Possession; and for maintaining divers Suits about the said Lands.

2. For purchasing divers Lands and Tenements of one Elizabeth Blois and others in Thorp & Kirby, or one of them in Essex, the said Defendant Hickeringill, knowing the said Elizabeth being then out of Possession; and for managing Suits about the same.

3. For purchasing divers Lands and Tenements in Thorp and Kirby, and Much Clacton, or one of them, of Ford and his Wife, and Blois and his Wife, being out of possession, the said Defendant then knowing that di­vers Suits and Pleas were then depending for the same, and maintaining Suits about the same.

4. For stirring up and maintaining divers Suits against one Petfield, Hill, Everet, and Freeman, all of the Town of Colchester, with an intent only to extort Mony from the said Parties; and to ruin them, and to put them to trouble and charges, and giving a Bill of Charges under his own Hand, and demanding five pounds for Charges, when there was not ten shillings due.

5. For publishing scandalous Libels against Sir John Shaw, Thomas Talcot Esq William Moore Esq Jonathan Merry Gent. and others, being then Magistrates in Colchester.

6. For extorting by Threats of Suits at Law, without any just Cause, great sums of Mony, and Bonds, and other Writings, for payment of Mo­ny from Tho. Shortland and others.

7. For concealing the last Will and Testament of —Andrews, delivered to him, being a Surrogate, made to prove the same; which occasioned divers Suits to be brought about the said Will, which Suits the Defendant main­tained.

8. For bringing vexatious Suits, without any probable Cause, in his own Name, against one Killingworth, letting them, fall only to vex and trouble the said Killingworth, and to put him to Charges, he himself being protected.

9. For maintaining divers Suits in anothers Name, against one Sadler, his Servants, Agents, and Tenants.

[Page 3] 10. For stirring up and procuring divers Actions of Ejectment, to be brought against one Wheely of Colchester, on the Demise of Mary Living, and solliciting the said Causes, and maintaining the said Suits at his own Cost and Charges; the said Defendant then knowing that the Lessor of the Plaintiff had no Title to the Premisses, and that several Verdicts had passed before the Commencement of the said Actions for the Defendants Title.

11. For the purchasing Lands and Tenements of one Rolph, who was then out of Possession; and divers Suits and Pleas were then depending for the same, and maintaining divers Suits about the same.

12. That the Defendant being Surrogate, did grant Administration of the Goods of one Shortland, to one Shortland the Defendant; then know­ing that the said Shortland had made a Will; but before he would grant the said Administration, he forced and compelled the said Shortland, to give a Bond to one Sewell, to the use of himself the Defendant, for payment of a great sum of Mony, and did promise to maintain any Suit that should be brought against the said Shortland, by reason of his being Administration.

13. For bringing and maintaining several Suits in the Exchequer a­gainst Luke Benny, Robert Car, and others, for Tythes, within the Pa­rish of St. Peter in Colchester, without reasonable and probable Cause, with a Design to oppress the said Parties, and unjustly to extort sums of Mony from them where none was due; and by false Suggestions, extorting sums of Mony from others, John Beacon, Mr. Langley, and others upon pretence of Tythes due to him, whereas none was; and the said Persons were after compelled to give satisfaction to Mr. Thomson Vicar of the said Parish of St. Peter, to whom the same were due.

14. That the Defendant being Surrogate, did refuse to grant Admini­stration of the Goods of one Peter Fromanteel, to his Brother John Froman­teel, altho the said John did tender sufficient Securities, according to the late Act for the due execution thereof; but did grant Administration to one John Rayner, and did encourage the said John Rayner to break open the House of the said John Fromanteel; and incited and procured the said John Rayner, to bring Actions against the said John Fromanteel, and maintaining the same; by reason whereof, the said John Fromanteel was forced to desist prosecuting in his just Title any farther for obtaining the said Administration, by reason of the great Charge.

15. For stirring up divers Freemen of Colchester, to remove Sir John Shaw out of the Office of Recordership, without any just cause, in making and causing Tumults and great Hubbubs in Colchester upon that account.

16. For procuring of Mrs Quilter, falsly to deny upon her Oath the Receipt of three pounds for Gravel.

17. For causing the Wife of Mr. Sidey to be arrested, being a Feme-Covert, at the Suit of his Son an Infant, and detained her in Custody, for four days, altho he knew she was a Feme-Cov [...]rt and her Husband living, and altho she proffered an appearance for her self he the said Hickeringill ha­ving promised to save the Bayliff harmless, for so doing, the Bayliff being af­ter [Page 4] arrested for detaining her, and coming to Hickeringill he refused to save him harmless, according as he had promised, but bid him take his course, for he was protected by three Lords.

18. For bringing a vexations Action against Mr. Thompson Clerk, up­on the Statute of Non-residence, without any just Cause, in which Action he became non-suit, or found for the Defendant.

19. For the procuring a Person to personate the Church-warden in the Parish of Wix in the County of Essex, and to join with him in the sale of the Bells belonging to the said Church.

20. For threatning to ruine by suit of Law, several Inhabitants of the Parish of Wix, if they offered to set out their Tithes in kind, and would not compound with him according to his own Rates, thereby extorting great sums of Money from them.

21. For taking upon him to give Counsel and Advice to People in Matters of Law, and for taking of Fees, as Tho. Shortland, Daniel Howler, and Widdow Lamb, and other People, on purpose to stir up contentious Suits; and in order to carry on his Designs, he hath told People, he was a Barrester at Law standing in Gray's-Inn, and could give as good Advice as any Counsel.

22. For writing two Scandalous and Seditious Books, entituled, the Na­ked Truth, and Gregory Gray-beard, the Contents of which said Books are on purpose to stir up, and animate his Majesty's Leige People to slight the Bishops, and contemn the Government, and cause Strife, Contention and Sedition.

23. That he knowing that Mr. Harris was Vicar of Fingrin [...] in Essex, and rightly entituled to the small Tithes, and being also duly made Sequestra­tor of the profits to the Churches of St. Leonards, and St. Buttolph's in Colchester; Nevertheless he the said Hickeringill, hath stirred up and forwarned several of the Parishioners of the said Parishes not to pay any of the Dues to the said Harris, on purpose to stir up contentious Suits, between the said Harris and his Parishioners; and further, promised the present Tenant in the Parsonage-House of the Parish of St. Leonards to save him harmless, if he would not deliver the Possession to the said Harris, altho the said Hickeringill hath no manner of Title or pretence of Title to the same.

24. For vexatiously bringing and maintaining several Actions at Law, against John Bridg, and one James Sidey, about certain Lands in Dedham in Essex.

Issue—Not Guilty.

On Thursday the 3d of March, 1680. in the Afternoon, about two of the Clock the Tryal began, and continued 'till after Candle-Lighting.

THe Jury return'd was a very Honourable One, the like seldom or never seen on such an occasion, which was the greatest Honour and Favour, if not, the only one, in the whole Tryal and Proceeding, granted to the Defendant.

Juries are the great Birth right (and one of the greatest Priviledges, except a Parliament) belonging to an English-man; what would be­come of us, our Lives, our Liberties, our Properties, our Honour, our Reputations, or Lively-hoods, and Estates, if Rage and Malice, Pas­sion and Prejudice (when got into Power and upon the Bench) might have its Will and bear an Arbitrary Sway? Happy English-Men! If they will stick to their Liberties, and stand up for their Native-Rights, that cost our fore-Fathers so much Blood to defend, and transmit to us their Posterity. And unhappy Sycophants and Slaves (Wretches not worth a Name) that would be Instrumental to defear us (and make a mock) of our Birth-Rights.

But the Truth is, the Defendant was allowed the Benefit of Magna Charta; he had not his Cause tryed by ordinary and common Jury-Men, but (as the Law requires) by lawful Judgement of his Peers.

The Names of the Juror's return'd, as follows. Essex Com. Inter Dominum Rege [...] & Edmundum Hickeringill Clericum.

• 1. Richardus Everard de Waltham magnâ Miles & Baronet.
• 2. More [...] Guyon de Cogg [...]shall magnâ Miles.
• 3. Cuthbertus Martin de Nettelswell Armiger.
• 4. Richardus Godbold de Borcham Ar.
• 5. Willielmus Maynard de Waltham-Stow Ar.
• 6. Johannes Marshal de Finchingfield Ar.
• 7. Willielmus Clapton de List [...]n Ar.
• 8. Johannes Tendring de Baddow magnâ Ar.
• 9. Henricus Pascall de eadem Ar.
• 10. Thomas Smith de Blackmore Ar.
• 11. Alexander Prescot de Mountnessing Ar.
• 12. Willielmus Peant de eadem Ar.
• 13. Richurdus How de Ingate-Stone Ar.
• 14. Thomas Reeve de West-Hamingfield Ar.
• 15. Henricus Humpbneys de eadem Gent.
• 16. Samuel Whitebread de Baddow magnâ Gen.
• 17. Willielmus Puckridge de Westham Gen.
• 18. Willielmus Wiseman de Pateswick Gen.
• 19. Johannes Everley de eadem Gen.
• 20. Andreas Prest [...]y de eadem Gen.
• 21. Robertus Alderman de Daggenham Gen.
• 22. Johannes Nicolls de Danbury Gen.
• 23. Robertus Kerrington de Boreley Gen. Et
• 24. Thomas Turner de Fearing Gen.

Eleven (only) of the Pannel appeared, to which was added a Tales; Which being Empannel'd and Sworn, The Defendant (Mr Hickerin­gill) was call'd, who appear'd in propriâ Personâ.

Then a Junior-Counsel began to open the Information, saying, I am of Counsel in this Cause for our Soveraign Lord the King, in an Infor­mation of Barretry brought against the Defendant Edmund Hickeringill of the Town of Colchester, in the County of Essex Clerk, for being a common-Barreter, and a dayly and common Disturber of the Peace of our Lord the King, and also a Brawler, a Fighter, a Calumniator, and an Oppressor of his Neighbours, and a Sower of Strife, and Conten­tion amongst his quiet Neighbours, and amongst the People of this Kingdom of England, so that the said Edmund Hickeringill at the time of the Information brought, and 'till now in the County aforesaid, and in the Town aforesaid, and in other places in the said County, the said [Page 7] Strifes, Differences, Contentions, Brawlings, Sults, and Quarrel­lings amongst his said Neighbours, and other the Leige Subjects of our said Lord the King, hath often moved, excited, and stirred up, to the great Disturbance, Ruine, Impoverishing and Dammage, not only of his said Neighbours, but also of the said Leige People, and Subjects of our said Lord the King, to the pernicious and evil Example of De­linquents in the like Case, also against the Form of the Statutes in that Case made and provided, and in Contempt of our said Soveraign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity, &c.

But the said Counsel mumbling all this between his Teeth, The Judg spoke to him in these Words, viz. Mr. Smith, You open the Cause well enough to my Understanding, but you must speak out that the Jury may hear you; and then he began again, as well as he could, and proceeded a little.

But Sir George Jeffreys presently took up the Argument, and began to open it, and expatiate upon it, after his loud manner of declaiming, and told a long Story of the heinousness of the Crime of Barretry, so odious to the Law, so inconsistent with the Peace of the Neighbourhood, so unwarrantable in all Men, more insufferable in a Minister of the Gospel of Peace; such was the Defendant, and the Crimes he was guilty of were great and many. And (quoth he) if my Breviate do not fail me, I will now expose before you the greatest Barreter that ever was heard off; he has by extortion taken five Pounds and eight Shillings, when but ten Shillings was Due in the Parish of St. Buttolph's in Colchester, as Fees of his own Court, as Surrogate under the Bishop in Colchester, (where note by the way, the Modesty of the Man, for of that 5 l. 8 s. instead of 10 s. the Defendant never had one Farthing, nor any Body for him, nor was one Farthing paid, or demanded; nor ever any such Cause brought before Mr. Hickeringill, as Judg of the Ecclesiastical Court; but the Cause was brought in the Bishop's Consistory-Court at London, for very good cause; nor durst Sir George Jeffreys ever all the whole Tryal, or any other of the Counsel call it to Proof and to the Test, but it served him to baul withal, and to make a noise against the Defendant.) Then Sir George Jeffreys went on, and told them of many other Crimes that the Defendant was Guilty of, (before any one Witness was call'd to prove any of the Crimes) making a long and loud Harangue; in which the Defendant interrupted him: Saying, Sir George, Sir George, Prosecute me in your Place with all the Vehe­mence and Passion that you are full of, spare me not, I neither require nor need your Favour; but you have no Authority, by vertue of your Fee, to defame me, with Stories and Untruths of your own devising; prove something upon me. To which Sir George reply'd, with enraged Eyes staring with Passion, What have you to do to interrupt me? To which Mr. Hickeringill reply'd, I will interrupt you, when you transgress the bounds of Truth and Modesty; you have no Authority, nor can any Body give you Authority to abuse me. Whereupon the Judg candidly reply'd, in these Words; Brother, Brother, when you touch a Man's Reputation, you touch him in a tender Part; I cannot blame a Man for being sensible of it, prove something upon him, and leave off your de­claiming; or Words to the like Effect. Go on to your Proofs, open no more than you can prove. Note by the way, That the Judg had [Page 8] with much ado given the Defendant leave to plead his own Cause, and make his own Defence; The Defendant alledging that he had not time to instruct his Counsel, and tho he mov'd in the beginning of the last Term by Mr. Sampson Ward at the King's-Bench-Bar, that the Judges there, would be pleased to let the Defendant know the Particulars and Heads of the said Articles, yet the Justices of the King's-Bench would not allow him more than one Fort-night before the Assizes, to know the particular Crimes of which he was accused, and to which he might pre­pare a Defence; I know not for what Reasons, but longer time would not be granted him: and that time had been spent in preparing and bringing 20 Witnesses, and in discharging his publick Duty as a Minister of the Gospel in his Rectory in Colchester, (which he neither did, nor would neglect for any private Concern of his own.) And the Defendant al­leged that the Articles against him were many and large, and all the Actions of his Life good and bad for 15 Years last past, rip'd up, to make him appear a Common-Barreter, and that the Breviate (which the De­fendant held then in his Hand) was rather a Volumn than a Breviate, and that since he had no Counsel, that his Lordship would (though it be great disadvantage for any Man to plead his own Cause, and much more the Defendant that had no Skill, no Practice, no Ability in Pleading another Man's Cause) yet that his Lordship would with Patience, hear him make his own Defence, our Law condemning no Man before it hear him; and the Defendant alledging that it was his Birth-right to have his Lordship's Patience and an indifferent Hearing, in making his own Defence: To which his Lordship passionately reply'd in these very Words, Your Birth-right, Your Birth-right, this I meet eve­ry where amongst these Men, they tell me of their Birth-right, their Birth-right, and that they are Free-born English-men. Yes, my Lord, reply'd the Defendant; I say again, my Birth right, and if your Lordship will not permit me your Patience to hear my Defence, then go on, and hear but of one Ear; I'le not speak one Word more, if you will not hear me with Patience; I need no other Favour, I have Innocence enough to protect me against the Skill, and Eloquence of all the Counsellors a­gainst me, and to defeat them all.

You are very confident, replyed his Lordship, I will give you a fair Hearing; (and so he did (ever after that) a tollerable Hearing) But (saith his Lordship) to stop his Mouth, and to silence his Plea of Inno­cence, prove upon him some Article that may be Evidence of the Informa­tion; begin with something you can prove. Whereupon the Counsel skip't over the first eight Articles for that time, and began with the ninth Article; Namely, ‘Article 9. For maintaining divers Suits in another's Name, against one Sadler, his Servants, and Agents, and Tenants.’

To prove this, they produced one Lawrence that told a blind Story of a Covenant; and sometimes he called it a Bond, that one William Sadler made to the Defendant; but not able to make any thing of it, at last they produced one Mr. Thomas Earl an Attorney in Colchester, who swore, that there were Horses, Lands, and Tenements in Horkesley [Page 9] Magnâ, that were in the quiet possession of one William Sadler for ten or twelve Years; and that he, together with the Mother of the Son and Heir of one Peter Sadler, did perswade the Tenant of the Premises, to turn Tenant to the said Widow, in the right of her said Son; which the Tenant did, knowing or believing it to be right and just; and that there was afterwards an admittance of the said Heir to the said Lands, being Copy-hold by the Lord of the Mannor, and 25 l. paid down in Court for a Fine in part, and 15 l. more was to be paid in full; and that there was a Tryal at the Assizes for the said Land, and the Right was found to be in the said Widow and her Son, who enjoy the Pre­mises to this day. Whereupon the Judg, in much indignation (inter­rupting him) said, What is all this to the Matter in hand charged against the Defendant, Mr. Hickeringill? Did he perswade you to take possession? Earl replied, He could not say that, but he believed Mr. Hickeringill had some Mony of the Widow Sadler, but he had almost forgot how much, or for what the Mony was paid unto him. Then the Counsel for the King produc'd a Receipt of 15 l. under Mr. Hickeringill's own hand, (which was read) namely, for part of the Fine due (as afore­said) to the Lord of the Mannor (for a Fine) for the said Copy-hold-Lands: which put the Judg again into a Fret, that they should make such a-do and Circumstance for nothing; and thereupon the Judg bid them go to some other Article, if they could thereby prove that the Defendant had done some Dammage (according to the Information) or Detriment, or Injury (by way of Maintenance or Barretry) to any of the King's Liege People. A heavy Toss there was then amongst the King's Counsel, which Article of the 24 to insist upon, to make good their grievous Charge; and some named the 23, some the 18, some the 13, at last, with much a-do, it was agreed to urge the 10th Article; which they did, and called their Witnesses thereunto; but so unsuc­cessfully, that the Cause began to cool, and they were all at a loss which Article should next be improv'd to prove the Charge. For they produc'd (to prove this) a Fellow that could make a demure long Prayer, as well as a thumping false Oath, one John Wheely of the Town of Colchester Brazier, in the Article mentioned, and he swore home, or (as we say, through an Inch-board) against Records; swear­ing, That he had had divers Suits at Law for the Premises, with the said Mary Living, in the Article mentioned, and he always got the bet­ter of her, and recovered both at Common-Law and in Chancery.

What's this to the purpose? (said the Judg) Did the Defendant bear the Charges of the Suit by Maintenance, to have part of the same when recovered? No, quoth Wheely, I cannot say that, but only that he once gave me a Subpoena out of Chancery, where she was Plantiff a­gainst me. What, (said the Judg to the Counsel) are these your Witnesses to prove Barretry against Mr. Hickeringill, only for deliver­ing a Subpoena; for shame go on to something that may stick upon him.

Whereupon the Defendant produc'd an Exemplification (under the King's Broad Seal of England) to prove that the said Wheely was a per­jur'd Wretch in Swearing, that he always recover'd and got the better of the said Mary Living at Common-Law and Chancery for the Premises; whereas in truth the said Mary Living had a Verdict against the said [Page 10] Wheely for the Premises, at the Assizes for the County of Essex be­fore Judg Keeling, John Robinson Attorney for the said Mary Living Plantiff Lessor, and one Richard Tiplacts Plantiff Lessee in Ejectment, and Attorney for the said John Wheeley, Thomas Ruse of Colchester; the Exemplification beginning, Carolus Secundus, &c. and concluding, J. Vaughan apud Westm. 30. Novembris, Anno Regni Regis vicessimo primo. Wyrley. But the Judg said there was no occasion for reading it at that time, for Wheely had swore nothing of harm that the Defen­dant had done; for in the first Instance, (Article 9.) all that could be gathered, was rather to the honour of the Defendant, in helping an In­fant and an Orphan to an Estate, of which she was unjustly deprived; and now in endeavouring to help a Widow to an Estate that once she recover'd, and had a Verdict for: and very angrily took up the King's Counsel, and bid them go to something that might stop the Defendants Plea of his Innocence; for the Defendant all the while, with chearful Countenance, smil'd to see them so angry and passionate one with ano­ther, in keeping such a-do for nothing.

After a great puther, it was unanimously agreed by all the Learned Counsel, that the twelfth Article should next be urg'd; and to prove it, they brought two Bum-Bayliffs, Thomas Martin, and John Groom, of Colchester, (Rascals that be too much honour'd by naming of them) but, the mischief was, they were too hot in their mettle, and swore too home, for they swore that the Defendant granted an Administration to Thomas Shortland, (in the Article mentioned) being Surrogate of the Court; but that also he refused to grant the same, till Shortland had first entred into Bond to pay him twenty Guinies. These Fellows did the Business for which they came; and disgrace enough it was to the De­fendant, to take 21 l. 10 s. for an Administration, when (in the Naked-Truth) he finds such fault in the Registers for taking so many Shillings for an Administration. Great hopes and jollity there was in the whole Court, when these pregnant Testimonies were produc'd, which were thought unanswerable; and the Judg demanded of the Defendant, What he could say for himself?

The Defendant answered, That if he did take such a mighty Bribe, it might be Extortion, but yet not Barretry. Secondly, That it was impossible but that the Fellows were perjur'd; for if the Defendant, Mr. Hickeringill, did never grant any Administration to Shortland, nor that Shortland ever had any Administration, either from the Defendant, or any other Judges of any Ecclesiastical Court in all the Diocess of London; then it was impossible that he should take a Bribe, or commit Extortion, in granting what was never granted. But to that the Fel­lows swore; one of them said, the brought he Seal; and the other swore, he saw such an Administration.

Then to prove them perjur'd, the last Will of Thomas Shortland was immediately produc'd by the Defendant, and read, (and the Execu­tors being Quakers, revoking the Executorship) an Administration with the Will annext, was granted (in the Prerogative-Court of Canterbury, under the Name and Seal of Gilbert late Arch-Bishop of Canterbury) and where the same ought to be granted, (it being a Prerogative-Case) and a Court where Mr. Hickeringill had no more Power, Authority, or [Page 11] Concern, than any other Man in England, signed, Marcus Cottle Re­gistarius; and beginning with these words,—Gilbertus Providentia Divinâ Cant. Archiepiscopus totius Angliae Primas & Metropolitanus Di­lecto nobis in Christo, Thomae Shortland Filio naturali & Legitimo Thomae Shortland nuper de villâ Colcestriâ, &c. And dated, August 7. Anno Dom. 1676. Nostraeque Translationis Anno 13.

Here was an apparent and wilful Perjury in these Witnesses Evi­dence for the King, and I believe the whole Court began to be asham'd of them; but to make them more appall'd, the Defendant produc'd a Record, prov'd by Mr. George Catesby, Town-Clerk of Sudbury; where one of the Rogues (called Thomas Martin) was whipt for a Thief; and the Defendant said, That tho his Name was not Whipping-Tom, yet he was Whipt-Tom. But the Judg made some wonder at the said Record, because the Clerk of the Court, reading the same in English (out of the Latin) said, That he was whipt from the Girdle downwards. Downwards, said the Judg, sure that cannot be! 'Tis Deorsum, said the Clerk: That's more than ever I knew, quoth the Judg, to whip a Man from the Girdle downwards at the Carts-Arse; That's the way to whip a Woman, quoth Baron Weston, but I never knew a Man order'd to be so whipt. Nevertheless it past off with a Jest, and the By-stan­ders, with much Edification, learn'd from the Judges own Mouth, the right way how and where to whip a Woman, namely, from the Girdle downwards; the new Mode belike!

In short, notwithstanding all this comical Discourse, the Judg began to be in good earnest angry with the Learned Counsel, that (after all this loud noise in Court, City, and Country, against the Defendant, as a Common Barreter) they should thus trifle and abuse his patience, (with which he is not over-loaded) at length he told the Counsel, that if they were thus bafled in all their Attempts, they should not need to charge the Defendant (as in the 21th Article) that he could give as good. Ad­vice as any Counsel; for at this rate, it would prove true, the Defen­dant would baffle them all.

Whereupon the Learned Counsel laid their Heads together, and re­solv'd to go backward, and try what work they could make with the second and seventh Articles together; but here they had worse luck than before, producing two Witnesses, one Widow Blois, and one Rolf her Son-in-Law, two more infamous Witnesses than the former; for such shameful and abominable uncleanness (betwixt them com­mitted) was proved against them then and there, in open Court, that it would offend any modest Ear to repeat the same.

Besides, The Woman, Elizabeth Blois, swore such damnable Un­truth's too; as that the Land the Defendant bought of her, (for which she had but 210 l.) did rent for 40 l. per Annum, and now for 30 l. and that she could not tell whether Mr. Hickeringill gave her the last Will of Thomas Andrews in open Court.

And yet she has sworn in the Prerogative-Court at London, that the Defendant did give her the said Will in open Court, the same is also in the same Court sworn by the said wicked Rolf her Son-in-Law, and he also swore the same at this Tryal, against her false Testimony; and so did her own Sister also, Mary Couch, testify the same.

[Page 12]Besides, it is as true, as that there is a Sun in the Firmament, that Mr. Hickeringill never had, nor has any more Land or Houses bought of her (in Thorp nor in any other place in the World bought of her) than 10 l. per Annum, and yet she swore 30 l. per Annum, which all the Countrey knows to be false; and yet Sir Francis Withins, kept a little hussing with it, as if Mr. Hickeringill bought such a Penny-worth, and yet Mr. Hickeringill proffer'd in Court to lose 20 l. by the Bargain he made with her; and I am sure he will yet willingly lose 40 l. to any Man that will buy it again of him: Tho he, I am sure, has no need to sell, for at this Day all the Men in the whole World, cannot demand 5 l. of him, as justly due to them, or any of them from him, to my certain Knowledg: Therefore what need has he of a Protection from three Lords (as in Article 17th objected against him) that is no more indebted than a Lord? Yet the Judg willing to reprove Mr. Hickeringill for something, if he could have told what, at last told him that there was cause enough for the Bishop to deprive him of his Benefice, for medling with Law Matters so much, and in Temporal Affairs, and perhaps if the Judg had the keeping of his Spiritualship, Mr. Hickeringill should nei­ther be so Rich, nor so Fat and Corpulent as he is.

Kind Man! How soon and how ready was he to shoot his Bolt at the Defendant, if he could have told how, and for which he was not unat­tentive to improve any thing against him to render him an ill Man, since he could not make a common Barreter of him.

But (alas!) the Defendant only smil'd all the while to see them tugg and labour in vain, and pitying the Judg when he saw him in a fret, and most especially when he talk'd of the Bishop's depriving a Minister for dealing in Temporal Affairs, when the Bishop himself (being a Parliament-Man and a Privy-Councellor) is forc'd (above any other Priest in the Diocess) to deal in Temporal Affairs.

Besides, That Man talks without-Book, and against Law, and Magna Charta, that dare avouch that any Man can deprive another of his Free­hold (in this Kingdom) but by Judgment of twelve Men of his Equals. The Bishop can deprive no Minister in the Diocess, but by the Law of the Land; namely, by the Judgment and Verdict of twelve Men of his Equals; other Doctrines are dangerous, and destructive: And so much the more, when spoken by one that should tell the Law in Truth, and not in Sycophantry; no Man is too great to be good, and subject to the Laws.

The Counsel, in brief, made some little Assay with the 17th, 18th, and 24th Articles which proving more unsuccessful than the former, and worse and worse, the Learned Counsel in as great Rage and Indigna­tion, as Despair (without the least mention of the Naked Truth, in the 22th Article, or offering at any other Article) furiously threw away their Breviate's at the Teeth of the Prosecuter, that Proctor Morris then in Court, and as much dismay'd, as the Learned Counsel were en­raged and ashamed. The Thunder ceased, the Judg himself could not for­bear reproving that loud speaking Man, Sir George Jeffreys, that kept such a blunder at first in his noisy-way of defaming and huffing Men (that have not the luck first to retain his Tongue) with which he kept such a splutter at the beginning of the Tryal; but by this time he was become as Patient as any Ram▪ and though he did at first (classicum canere ante [Page 13] Triumphum) wind his Horn before the Victory; yet by this time he be­gun to be almost as tame as he was at Kingston the last Assizes, before the same Judg Weston; who gave him such smart Repartees, and royl'd his Welsh-Blood, that for very madness he sat down and Wept, (Good Man!) His Courage being so cool'd, that his boyling Blood turn'd to Phlegm and Water in such abundance, his Body could not contain the same, but it found vent and run out at the Rivulets of his Eyes; And the sadder he was and heavy, the more Jocund was the by-standing Coun­sel, who could not forbear to laugh when he cryed (poor Man!) And the more he Cryed, the more they Laugh'd, hard hearted that they were!

In fine, the Judg (very calmly too) upbraiding some of the Counsel with Folly, and the Witnesses with Impertinency, told the Jury that they must find for the Defendant; which they did, after a little, a very little Pause, without stirring from the Bar.

Truth is always strongest at long-run, and will at length prevail.