THat all men may the better know their duty, and upon how sure a ground they goe that follow the judgment of Parliament for their guide; let them judiciously consider the true meaning and ground of the Statute of 11. Hen. 7. cap. 1. This Statute provides, That none that shall attend upon the King, and doe him true ser­vice shall be attainted, or forfeit any thing: What! was the scope of this Statute to provide, that men should not suffer as Traytors for serving the King in his Warres, ac­cording to the duty of their Allegiance? if this had been all, it had beene a very needlesse and most ridiculous Sta­tute: Was it then intended that they should be free from all crime and penalty that should follow the King, and serve him in Warres in any case whatsoever, whether it were for or against the Kingdome and the Lawes thereof? that cannot be, for that could not stand with the duty of their Allegiance, which in the beginning of that Statute is exprest to be, so serve the King for the time being in his [Page 4] Warres, for the defence of Him and the Land; and there­fore if it be against the Land (as it cannot be otherwise un­derstood, if it be against the Parliament, who is the repre­sentative body of the Kingdome) it is a declining from the duty of Allegiance, which this Statute supposeth may be done, though men follow the Kings person in Warre: otherwise there had been no need of such a proviso in the end of that Statute, that none should take benefit by that Statute that should decline their Allegiance: that there­fore which is the principle verbe in this Statute, is the ser­ving of the King for the time being: which cannot be meant of a Perkin Warbeck, or any that should call him­selfe King; but such a one, as what ever his Title might prove, either in himselfe, or in his Ancestors, should be received and acknowledged for such by the Kingdome, the consent whereof cannot be discern'd but by Parlia­ment; the Act whereof is the Act of the whole Kingdom, by the personall suffrage of the Peers, and the deligate consent of all the Commons of England: and Henry the seventh, a wise King, considering that what was the case of Richard the third his predecessor, might by chance of Battaile be his owne, and that he might at once by such a Statute as this, satisfie such as had served his predecessor in his Warres; and also secure those that should serve him, who might otherwise feare to serve him in the Warres, l [...]st by chance of battaile that might happen to him also (if a Duke of Yorke had set up a Title against him) which had happened to his predecessor: he procured this Statute to be made, That no man should bee accounted a Traytor for serving the King in his Warres for the time being; that is, which was for the present allowed and re­ceived by the Parliament in behalfe of the Kingdome; and as it is truly suggested in the preamble of that Statute. It is not agreeable to reason or conscience that it should be otherwise, seeing men should be put upon an impossibility of knowing their duty, if the judgment of the highest Court should not be a guide to them: Now if the judg­ment [Page 5] of that Court should be followed where the question is? W [...] King, (as it must be followed as appeares by that Statute) much more then ought their judgment to be fo [...]ed, when they declare, What is the best service of the [...]ng and Kingdomes, and therefore those that shall gui [...] themselves by the judgement of Parliament, ought what [...]ver happen, to be secure and free from all accompt and [...]ties, upon the ground and equity of this Statute of 11. 11. H. 7▪ [...]ap. 1.

B [...]sid [...]s, [...]t the Parliament (that made this Act in that ele­venth yeare of Henry the seventh) had intended, that those that served the King in his wars, though never so unjustly begun, and though against the Kingdome and the Lawes thereof, should neverthelesse have been free from Treason, and not punishable, then had all the liberty of the Subject been inclusively given (by that Act) from the Subject to the King: For if that were a good construction, and the right intent of the Statute, then had Henry the seventh a lawfull dispensation for his observing those Lawes, by which our liberties were ever preserved; but that Parlia­ment never intended so, as you may clearly discerne by other wholsome Acts passed the same Parliament for the preservation of every mans liberty and propriety in his estate.

Besides, how can any people be perswaded, that that Parliament would so much betray the Lawes of the Land, and the trust reposed in them, when as they themselves had in their own particulars so great an interest of honour and estate: and whereas this present Parliament stands accused by some of desperate fortunes and lives of the same tem­per, of that very fault which that Parliament of Henry the seventh had been guilty, were the former construction ra­tionall, I hope it will gain little credit with any that have the least use of reason, that such as must have so great a share of the misery, should take so much paines in procu­ring thereof, and spend so much time, and run so many [Page 6] hazards for to make themselves slaves, and to destroy the property of their estates.

And whereas some except against this Parliament for being the authors of their owne presidents, and so varying from the course of former times; let them that urge this against the Parliament know, that if they have made any presidents this Parliament, they have made them for po­sterity; and upon the same or better reasons or law, then those were upon which their predecessors first made any for them: and as some presidents ought not to be rules for them to follow; so none can be limits to bound their pro­ceedings, which may and must vary according to the dif­ferent condition of times: And whereas you look for pre­sidents, to prove all the Kings Army that are now with him to be Traytors, remember who were adjudged Tray­tors in Richard the seconds time; and if it were Treason in them for levying a warre before a Parliament was cal­led, and for keeping a Parliament from being called? shall it not be Treason in them that warre against a Parlia­ment when it is called? Were there ever such practices to poyson the people with an ill apprehension of the Parlia­ment? Were there ever such scandals and imputations laid upon the proceedings of both Houses? Were there ever so many and so great breaches of the priviledge of Parlia­ment, as have been made this Parliament? Or were there ever so many and so desperate designes of force and vio­lence against the Parliament, and the Members thereof? If the Parliament have done more then ever their ance­stors have done, I am sure they have suffered more then ever they suffered; & yet in point of modesty or duty they need not yeild to the best of former times: but they may safely put this in issue, whether the highest & most unwar­rantable president of any of His Majesties predecessors do not fall short and much below what hath bin done to this Parliament? And on the other side, whether if they should make the highest presidents of other Parliaments their patternes, there would be cause to complaine of want of [Page 7] modesty and duty in them, when they not so much as suf­fered such things to enter into their thoughts (as their De­clarations tell me) which all the world knowes their Pre­decessors have put in act.

And whereas it seemes a riddle to those that are with the King, that they should fight for the King, and by his command, and yet be Traytors to him; for if they be Tray­tors, the King himselfe hath done as much, being present with them, as they have done: and how can a King com­mit Treason against himselfe?

To those let me answer, that what ever the King does he is not to be questioned, but yet that does not cleare them, because the King himselfe doth countenance them by his personall presence, and by his Comissions: and that their consequence might fall to the ground, let them un­derstand, that a King may commit Treason against him­selfe, and so did King Iohn in resigning of his Crowne to the Pope: and M^r Brooke, who was Recorder of London, in his reading upon the Statute of Magna Charta, cap. 16. said, That if any to whom the Crowne is committed by Act of Parliament, usurpe it, or demeane it in other manner then is exprest in the Act, it is high Treason: read the Sta­tute of 35. Hen. 8. c. 1. And thus you see, that they which joyne with the King may be punished for Treason, though the King himselfe cannot.

Besides, though they intend not hurt to the Kings per­son, as we may ghesse by severall circumstances, yet they may be Traytors: for tis true, that in some sence he is the only person against whom Treason can be committed, that is meant, as he is King: But yet that Treason which is against the Kingdome, is more against the King, then that which is against his person, because he is King; for that very Treason is not Treason as 'tis against him as a man, but as a man that is a King; and as he hath relation to the Kingdome, and stands as a person intrusted with the Kingdome, and discharging that trust: Now if that be true, as indeed it is, that Treason against the Kingdome [Page 8] is more Treason against the King, then that which is a­gainst the Kings person; what shall become of the Kings Army, which now levy Warre against the Parliament, which is the Kingdome? are they not all Traytors?

But for Prince Rupert, some are content to make this excuse for him, that he is no liege man borne, and is not subject to our Lawes, and therefore he is no Traytor, for he owes no Allegiance:

The answer to them will be but shortly thus, that any man (and so consequently Prince Rupert) whilst he is in England, and in the Kings dominions, is to yeeld a locall ligeance and obedience to the King and the Lawes, and in lieu of that he is to receive a locall Protection from the King, and so is, Cook▪ lib. 7. Now the difference between strangers, that are both aliens, stands thus, if he be alien amy 'tis Treason for him to levy Warre against the King­dome (that is) against the King, & so 'twas adjudged: But if he be an alien Enemy 'tis not Treason, but crimon lesae Majestatis, which is a thing of the same nature for the punishment, though not for the manner of the triall: Now Prince Rupert is an alien amy (and indeed hath more rea­son to be a friend to this Kingdome then an enemy, consi­deratis considerandis) so that his offence is as plainly dis­covered as the rest; and appears to be no lesse then High Treason against the Kingdome.