THe treasonable and destructive designe of divers dangerous Anabaptists, Le­vellers, Agitators in the Army, City, Countrey, and of Lilburne, Overton, (their Champions and Ring-leaders in this Seditious Plot) to dethrone the King, unlord the Lords, new-modell the House of Commons, extirpate Mo­narchy, suppresse the House of Peers, and subvert Parlia­ments, (the onely obstacles to their pretended Polarchy and Anarchy) are now so legible in their many late printed Pe­titions, Libells, Pamphlets, and visible in their actings, and publike proceedings, that it rather requires our diligence and expedition to prevent, then hesitancy to doubt or dispute them, they positively protesting against and denying both [Page 2] King and Monarchy, in theirA Remon­strance of many thousand a [...] ­zens to their own House of Commons, p. 6. the just mans Justification, p. 10. Regall Ty­ranny Discove­red, A Declara­tion from his Excellency, and the Generall Counsell of the Army, Ian. 11. 1647. p. 7. Spee­ches, &c. at a Conference new­ly published by Walker, print­ed verbatim out of Dolman the Iesuit his Booke, condemned. Pamphlets and Remonstran­ces, with the Power and Judicature of the House of Peers, and their undoubted just Hereditary right to Vote, act, or sit in Parliament, because they are not elected by the people as Knights and Burgesses are, asserting,^b That they are no naturall issues of our Lawes, but the Exorbitances and Mushromes of Prerogative, the Wenns of just Government, the Sons of Con­quest and usurpation, not of choice and election, intruded upon us by power, not made by the people, from whom ALL POWER, PLACE, and OFFICE that is just in this Kingdome OUGHT TO ARISE, meere arbitrary Tyrants, Ʋsurpers, an illegiti­mate and illegall power and Judicatory, who act and Vote in our affaires but as INTRUDERS, who ought of right not to judge, censure, or imprison any Commoner of England, even for libelling against them, refusing to appeare before them, revi­ling and contemning them and their Authòrity to their faces at their very Barre, (as Lilburne, Overton bost and print they did) or breaking any of their undoubted Priviledges. And to accomplish this their designe the better, they endeavour by their most impudent flattery to ingage the House of Com­mons against the House of Peers, the better to pull them downe, stiling and proclaming them in their^c Petitions [Page 3] and Pamphlets, The ONLY Supreme legall Judicatory of the Land, who ought BY RIGHT, to judge the Lords and their proceedings, from whom they appeale for right and reparations against the House of Peeres, affirming, That in the Commons House alone resides the formall and legall Supreme Power of England, who ONELY are chosen by the people, and THEREFORE IN THEM ONELY is the power of binding the whole Nation, by making, altering, or abolishing Lawes without the Kings or Lords concurrent assents, to whom they now absolute­ly deny any Negative voice, making the Commons a com­pleat Independent Parliament of themselves; and there­fore present all their Petitions and addresses to them alone, without any acknowledgement or notice of the House of Peers, to whom they deny any right or title to sit or vote in Parliament, unlesse they will first divest themselves of their Peerage, and Barons right of Session, and sub­mit to stand for the next Knights and Burgesses place in the House of Commons that shall fall void, where if they may have any voice or influence, the meanest Cobler, Tinker, Weaver or Water-man shall be elected a Knight, or Burgesse sooner then the best and greatest Peer, and John of Leyden preferred before King or Prince Charles, Sic Sceptra ligoni­bus aequanti, which Petitions and Pamphlets of theirs have so puffed and bladdered up many Novices, and raw Parlia­ment-men in the Commons House, unacquainted with the bounds, proceedings, and originall Constitution of Parlia­ments, and the Lawes and Customes of England, that they begin to act, vote, and dispose of the Army, Navy, &c. with­out and against the Lords, not expecting their concurrence, contrary to all former proceedings of Parliament, the Lords just Priviledges, and their own Solemne League and Covenant to maintaine them, which may prove destructive to both Houses, the Parliament, Kingdome, and oppres­sive to their Representatives the people, (who generally dis­like it) if not timely redressed, and breeds such a deadly feud between the Houses as may ruine them both and the Kingdome to boot. The end of these Anabaptists, Level­lers [Page 4] and Lilburnians being only toSee M. Ed­wards Gangrae­na, part 3. where this is fully de­monstrated. destroy the Parliament, by setting both Houses at variance, they inveighing as bit­terly against the power, proceedings, Ordinances, Votes, Power, Members, undue Elections and unequall Constitu­tions of the House of Commons, as the Lords, and there­fore have so earnestly pressed in theirLilburnes Letter to a friend. Innocen­cy and Truth justified, and his late Letters to Cromwell, Martin, Sir Thomas Fair­fax, and others. Englands Birthright. En­glands lamen­table Slavery. Another word to the wise. Comparata Comparandis Liberty against Slavery. The Arraignement of Persecution. The Ordinance against Tythes unmounted. See Mr. Edwards Gangrana, part 3. p. 209. to 204. Pamphlets, and by some late^e Remonstrances, and Engagements from their Confederates and Agitators in the Army, a speedy period and dissolution of this Parliament, and a new modelling and more equall distribution of Members in the very House of Commons for the future. All which Petitions, Papers, Remonstrances, and Pamphlets of theirs tending to the utter subversion of Parliaments, the fundamentall Lawes and Government of the Kingdome, and introduction of all arbitrary popular Polarchy and Tyranny, are rather to be ranked among and more agreeable to the Earle of Straffords and Canterburies Treasons, (which they exceed by many degrees) then to be sleighted or countenanced as they are, the keeping up of the honour of Peers, and rights and Priviledges of both Houses within their just bounds, without interfeiring or incroachment upon one another, or invading the peoples just Liberties and Rights, being the onely meanes of their and our preservation, settle­ment, security; upon which consideration, I shall endea­vour as briefly and fully as I may, to vindicate the un­doubted Right of the Lords and Peers of this Realme to sit and vote in Parliament, notwithstanding they are not elected by the people, and make good the right and power of Judicature, as well of Commoners as Peers against all cavills of the Anabaptisticall Levellers, Lilburnians, Secta­ri [...]s, Agitators, and I hope so farre to silence and stop their mouthes, if not convince their judgements, that they shall never be able to reply again hereto.

[Page 5] The sum of all they object against the Lords right of sit­ting, voting and judging, in Parliament is this:Overtons Defiance a­gainst all arbi­trary usurpati­on of the House of Lords, p. 5. 6 15. 17. 18. his Arrow against all Tyrants, p. 6 10. 11. 12. and others forecited. That they sit there only by Patent, the Kings will, Tenure or de­scent, not onely by the Peoples free Election, as the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses doe: That the people never intrusted nor invested them with any power, but the King; they represent themselves onely not the Com­mons, and the Sonnes onely of Conquest, (brought in by the Conquerour,) of Usurpation, not of Choice and Election.

1. To this I answer: first, That our Earls, Barons, Nobles (and Archbishops, Bishops, and Abbots too who held by Barony) sate anciently in all our Parliaments, and Gene­rall Counsells and Assemblies, many hundred yeares be­fore the Conquest by right of Peerage and Tenure, as now they doe, as Modus tenendi Parliamentum, Epist to his 9. Report, Institutes on Litleton, p. 110 4. Institutes, c. 1. Sir Edward Cook, Vowell M. Seldens Ti­tles of Honour, part 2. ch. 5. where this is abundantly manifested, Spel­ma [...]ni Concil t [...]m. 1. Truth trium­p [...]ing over Fals­hood, antiquity o­ver Novelty, p. 36 &c. The Freehol­ders Grand in­quest, p. 4. to 20. and others write, and our Historians re­cord; therefore this is a grosse mistake, That they are the Sonnes of Conquest introduced by the Conquerour: the rather, because in all Empires and Kingdomes in the world, though free and never conquered, their Princes, Nobles, Lords, and great Officers of State, have ever sate in all their Parlia­ments, Senates and Generall Counsells of State, by reason of their Honors and places only, without any popular Ele­ctions, as is cleare by these Texts of Scripture, 1 Chron. 13. 1, 2. c. 28. 1, 2. &c. c. 29. 1. 6. 24. 2 Chron. 1, 2, 3. c. 5. 3. 4. &c. c. 23. 2. 3. 20. 21. c. 30. 2. 3. 6. 12. c. 34. 29. 30. c. 35. 7. 8. Neh. 9. 38. c. 10. Esther 1. 13. to 22. Dan. 3. 2. 3. 2 Chro. 29. 30. c. 32. 3. Ezra 9. 1. c. 10. 8. 1 Sam. 5. 8. c. 29. 3. to 10. Psa. 68. 27. Prov. 8. 15, 16. Isa. 19. 11. 12. 13. Jer. 17. 25. c. 26. 11. 16. c. 36. 12. 14. c. 37. 14. 15. c. 38. 4. 25. 27. Dan. 6. 1. 6, 7. Jonah, 3. 7. Psa. 2. 2. Isa. 1. 23. 26. compared together, and by all Historians and Polititians testimonies.

2. Secondly, that they sit there onely by the Kings Pa­tent is false: for first, many Peeres and Nobles have been created in and bySee M. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 2. ch. 5. 14. [...], 3. c. 35. 9. R. 2. n. 16. 20. R. 2. n. 80, 1. H. 4. [...]. 81. with many more. Parliament, at the Commons and Peo­ples earnest Petitions, and by Patents confirmed in Parliament, of which there are many Presidents. Secondly, though the Kings Writ or Patent create others of them Peers and Ba­ro [...]'s without the peoples consent, yet the Lawes and Sta­tutes [Page 6] of the Realme made by the Commons consents, and approved by the people, allow the King this power, and authorize and5. R. 2. Stat. 2. c. 4 31. H. 8. c. 10. enjoyne Lords and Barons to sit in Parlia­ment, when thus created, if there be no just exceptions ta­ken to them by the Houses; therefore though they are crea­ted Lords and Peers, and sit in Parliament by the Kings Pa­tent, and Writ onely, by way of instrument and conveyance, yet originally and really they are made, and sit there by the Lawes and Statutes of the Realme, to which all the peo­ple have consented, of which more hereafter. Thirdly, all ancient and new Cities and Burroughs who send Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament, and the Divisions of Counties, were originally created and invested with this power to e­lect Citizens, Burgesses, and Knights for the Parliament L [...]e Lit. c. 10. Sect. 162, 164. & Cook Ibidem. 49. Ass. 8. only by the Kings Letters Patents and Charters, not by the peoples election and choice, and none of them do or can choose or send Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses to Par­liament Cook 4. Instit. c. 1. & Cr [...]mptons Jurisdiction of Cou [...]ts. c. 1. 1. R. 1. c 4. 8. H. 4 c. 14 8. H. 5. c. 7. 32. H. 6. c. 15 & 14 H. 5. c 3 l. 1. H. 7 12 2 H. 7. 13. a. 5. H 7. 9. H. 7. 12. 14 H. 6. 12. 7. [...]. 4. 14 15. [...] 4 15. Coo [...] 1. [...]. 250. a. without the Kings Writ, directed to them, but onely by power and vertue of it; therefore if the Lords sitting in Parliament be illegall and unwarrantable, because they sit onely by Patent and Writs from the King, the sit­ting of Knights, Citizens and Burgesses must be so too, be­cause they are elected only by the Kings Writ, and enabled to elect and choose them only by his Patents, the power of * creating Cities, Burroughs and Knights, being originally in the King, as well as the power of creating Lords and Barons.

3. Thirdly, that the generall election of the people is not absolutely necessarie nor essentiall to the making of a King, Magistrate, Counseller of State, Peer, or member of Parlia­ment, (nor yet of a Minister) as the Objectors falsly pretend, who take it for granted as an infallible truth and Maxime of State: for then it will follow, that neitherExod 3. & 4. & 7. Moses Deut. 3. 28. Nu [...]. 27. 16. [...] 23. Deut. 31. [...]. [...]. 9. 14. 23. c. 34. 9. Iosh [...]. Joshua, Ne [...] c. 2. &c. Nehemiah, 1 Sam 9. 16. c. 10. 1. 21. Saul, Psal. 78. 70, 71, 72. 1 Sam. 1 [...]. 2 Sam. 7, 8. David, 1 Chron. 23. 1. c. 28. 5, 6. 2 Chron. 1. 8. Solomon, nor any of the2 Chron. 14 1. c. 17. 1. c. 28. 27. c. 29. 1. pious Kings of Juda who came to the Crown by Gods immediate designation, or by descent & succession, were just & lawful Governours or Kings, which none dare a­ver, That theNum. 11. 16, 17. 24, 25, 26, 27. 70. Elders, the Princes, 1 Chron. 18. 15, 16, 17. c. 26. 29, 30, 31, 32, c. 27. c. 28. 1. 2 Chron. 19. 5. [...] 7. Nobles, chief Cap­tains, Iudges, and Rulers among the Jewes under Moses, and their Kings, and other Governours, and the Jewish Sanhedrin, were no lawfull Judges, Magistrates, Counsellers of State, or Members of their generall Congregations, Parliaments and [Page 7] assemblies, since we read of none of them chosen by the peo­ple, but onely designed by God himself, or made and created such by Kings and Governours, and by them called and summo­ned to their generall congregations, assemblies and judicatures, as the premised texts and others evidence. ThatGen. 40. 40, 41, &c. Exod. 18. 25. Psal. 105. 21. Acts 8. 10. Joseph, Esther 8. & 10. Mordecai, Dan. 2. 48, 49. Daniel, Shadrac, Mesec, & Abednego, were no lawfull Rulers or Magistrates, because made such even by Heathen Kings, not by the peoples choice. And that none of the Levites, Priests, High Priests or Prophets, under the Law were lawfull, because none of them (that we read of) made a Levite, Priest, High-Priest or Prophet by the peoples call; but byExod. 40. Numb. 1, & 3. & 4 1 Chron. c. 23. c. [...]5, 29, & 26. [...]. 2 [...]. 13. Heb. 5. [...]. descent and succession in the selfesame Tribe, or by Gods own immediate call and appointment, asMat. 3. Iohn Baptist, Isa 61. 1. c. 65. 1 Ioh. 20. 21. Heb. 5. 4, 5. Christ, theMar 10. Luke 9. 10. Mar. 28. 19, 20. Iohn 20. 21. 1 Cor. 1. 17. Gal. 1. 1. Acts 8. 5. 14, 15. [...] Case Polit. l. 3. c. 2. Bod [...]. de Repub. l. 2. c. 2, 3. Ioan Mariana de Rege & Regum Instit. l. 1. c. 3, 4. Apostles, the 70. Disciples and others under the Gospell were made and created Ministers, Apostles, Evange­lists and preaching Elders, without the peoples call; and yet our opposites dare not deny their Ministery and Apostleship to be lawfull, being not of men, but of Gods and Christs own call, without the peoples. Secondly, then it will fol­low, that all Hereditary Kingdomes, which (g) Polititians and Divines generally hold the best of Governments, all Pa­tents and Commissions in all Empires, Kingdomes and States of the world creating Princes, Dukes, Earls, Lords, and such like Titles of Honour, whereby they are inabled in all Chri­stian Kingdomes to sit in their Parliaments and Assemblies of State, and for creating Privy Counsellors, Judges, Justices and other Magistrates are void, null and illegall, and so all the Lawes, Orders, Ordinances made, Acts done and Judgements given by them,d See M. Seldens Titles of Honor. are void and erroneous, because they were not chosen and called to these places and publike Counsells and Judicatures by the people, but by the Emperours, Kings, and Supreme Governours of State, and what a confusion such a Paradox as this would breed in all our Kingdomes, and in all States and Kingdomes in the world, let wise men consider, and those fools too who make this Objection.

4. Fourthly, if there be no lawfull Authority in any State, but from the Peoples immediate election, then it will necessarily follow, that Sir Thomas Fair [...]ax is no lawfull Generall, his Officers and Councell of Warre no lawfull Officers or Councell; and Colonell, and Lievtenant-Colonell Lilburne no lawfull Colonell or Lievtenant Colonell, and ought not [Page 8] to use or retaine these titles, as they do, because none of them were called and chosen to those places by the People, but made such by Commission from the Parliament.

5. Fifthly, This paradox of theirs, touching the peoples choice and call to inable Peers to sit in Parliament, or beare any office of Magistracy or Judicature, is warranted by no law of God, in old or new Testament, both which contradict it: by no Lawes or Statutes of these Kingdomes or Nati­ons, which absolutely disclaime it, and enact the contrary: by no prescription, custome or usage, which are all against it; by no Originall Law of Nature, which as allArist. Polit. l. 1. Bodin. de Repub. l. 1. c. 2. 3, 4, 5. D. F [...]eld of the Church. l. 1. c. 1, 2. Polititi­ans and Divines assert, and the Scripture manifests, gives e­very Father a Magisteriall and Judiciall rule and power over his children, progeny, Family; and makes him a King, Prince, Lord over them, without either their choice or call; the Father and first-borne of the family, being both the King, Prince and Lord over it, and Priest to it from the Creation till the Law was given, as is generally acknowledged by all Divines.

6. Sixthly, I answer, that a particular, explicit actuall choice and election by the people, of any to be Kings, Magi­strates, Judges, Ministers, Peeres or Members of Parliament, is neither necessary nor convenient to make them just and lawfull, except onely when the Lawes of God, of Nature, of Nations, or the Kingdome expresly require it; but one­ly a generall implicit or tacit consent; especially when the ancient Lawes of the Land continuing still in full force, and the custome of the Kingdome time out of mind, requires no such ceremony of the peoples particular election or call; in which case the peoples dissent is of no validity, till that Law & custome be repealed by general consent of the King, Lords and Commons in Parliament.* Seldens Titles of Honour, part 2. Cook 4. Instit. c. [...]. Cambdens [...]it. Now the ancient Lawes, Sta­tutes & Customs of the Kingdom enable all Lords who are Peers & Barons of the Realm to sit in Parliament when ever summo­ned to it by the Kings Writ, without any election of the people; and if the Lawes and Customes of the Realme were, that the King himselfe might call two Knights, Citizens and Burges­ses to Parliament, such as himselfe should nominate in his writ out of every County, City and Burrough, without the Freeholders, Citizens, and Burgesses election of them by a [Page 1] common agreement and consent to such a Law and usage made by their Ancestors, and submited and consented to for some ages without repeale, this Law and Custome were suffi­cient to make such Knights, Citizens and Burgesses lawfull Members of Parliament, and to represent the Commons of England without any election of the people, the Laws made by our Ancestors in Parliament,See Littleton, Fitz-Herbert, Brut. & Ashly. Tit. VVarranty. Obligat. Cove­nant, &c. obliging their posterity whiles unrepealed; as well as their Warranties, Obligations, Statutes, Feofements, Morgages and alienations of their Lands, as the Objectors must acknowledge, therefore they must of necessity grant, their present sitting, voting and judging too in Parliament to be lawfull, because thus war­ranted by the Lawes and Customes of the Realme.

4. If all Power in Government, and right of sitting, judging, and making Lawes or Ordinances in Parliament, be founded upon the immediate free election of all those that are to be Go­verned; and of necessity that all those who are to be subject and they ought to be represented by those who have power in Govern­ment, the Summe ofSee M. Edwards his Gangraena. part. 3. p. 142. to 162. Lilburnes Overtons, and the Level­lers reasons against the Lords Iurisdiction, then it will of necessity follow; that the orders, Votes, Ordinances and Lawes made by or consented to by the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in Parliament, ought not to bind any Ministers, Women, Children, Infants, Servants, Strangers, Free­holders, Citizens, Burgesses, Artificers, or others, (who can­not well or properly be represented but by persons of their owne sex, degrees, trades and callings, and so every sex, trade, calling in each County and Corporation in England should send Members of their own to Parliament to represent them) but only such Freeholders, and Burgesses who had voices in and gave free consent to their Elections, not any who have no voyces by Law, or dissented from those elected and re­turned; yea then it will necessarly follow; that those Counties, Cities and Burroughs whose Members have been injuriously impeached, suspended, driven away, or thrust out of the House of Commons by the objectors and the Armies practise and violence (contrary to all former presi­dents) are absolutely free, exempted and not bound by any Votes or Ordinances made, or taxes imposed by the Com­mons House, because they have no Members to represent [Page 2] them residing in Parliament; and that those Counties and Burroughs whose Knights and Burgesses are dead or absent are no wayes obliged by any Votes, Ordinances, or Grants in Parliament: And then how few in the Kingdome will or ought to yeeld obedience to any the Acts, Ordinances, or Votes of this present Parliament, or to any Mayors, Sheriffes Aldermen, or Heads of Houses made by their Votes and Authority, (usually made by election heretofore) or to any Iudges, Justices, Governours, Generalls, Captains, or other Military Officers made by their Commission or ap­pointment, without the generality of the peoples Votes, or consent, especially when above halfe, or three full parts of the Members were absent or driven from both Houses, by the Objectors violence and menaces.

These Answers premised, I shall now proceed to the proofe of the Lords undeniable Right and Authority to sit, Vote, and give Judgement in Parliament, though not actually elected and called by the people, as Knights and Burgesses are.

1. It is evident, by the Histories, Republikes of most an­cient and modern Kingdomes and Republikes in the world, that their Princes, Nobles, Peers and great Officers of State, have by the Originall Fundamentall Lawes and Instituti­ons, by right of their very 31. H. 8 c. 10 See M. Seldens Titles of Honor, Cassanaeus Cata­logus Gloriae Mundi: Alanso Lopez in Nobili­ario, and others who write of No­bility. Cambd. Brit. of the No [...]li­ty and Courts of Iustice in England Nobility, Peerage, and great Offices, without any particular election of the people, a just right and title to sit, consult, Vote, enact Lawes, and give Iudgement in all their Generall Assemblies of State, Parlia­ments, Senates, Diets, Councells; as might be mainfested by particular instances in the Kingdomes Republikes, Parlia­ments, Diets, and Generall Assemblies of the Iewes, Egyptians, Grecians, Romans, Persians, Ethiopians, Germans, French, Goths, Vandalls, Hungarians, Bohemians, Polonians, Russians, Swedes, Scythians, Tartars, Moores, Indians, Spaniards, Por­tugalls, Danes, Saxons, Scots, Irish, and many others: And to deny the like priviledge to our English Peers and Nobles, which all Nobles, Peers in all other Kingdomes, Nations, Republikes anciently have done, and yet doe constantly en­joy, without exceptions or dispute, is a grosse unjury, inju­stice and over-sight, yea a great dishonor both to our No­bility and Nation.

[Page 3] Secondly, By, and in the very primitive constitution of our English Parliaments, it was unanimously agreed by the Kingdomes and peoples generall consents, that our Parliaments should be constituted and made up, not of Knights and Burgisses onely, elected byE. H 6. c. 7. 10. H. 6. c. 2. 32 H. 6 c. 15. Crumpton. Ju­risdict. p. 1. 2. 3. Cooke 4 Instit. c. 1. Freeholders and Burgesses (not by the generality of the vulgar people, who would now claime and usurpe this right of election) but likewise of the King, the Supream Member, by whose Cooke Instit. c. 1. n. 1. 10. Modus Tenendi Parliamentum. Crompton Ju­risdiction of Courts, Tit. Parliament. M. Seldens Tit. of Honour. par. 2. c. 5. writs the Parliaments were to be sommoned, and by the Lords, Peers, Barons, (ecclesiasticall and civill) and great Officers of the Realme, who ought of right to sit, vote, make Lawes, and give Judgement in Parliament by vertue of their Peerage; Baronries and Offices, without any election of the people: the Commons themselves being no Parliament, judicatory, or Law-givers alone, without the King and Lords as Modus tenendi Parliamentorum; Sir Edward Cooke in his 4. Institutes. ch. 1. Mr. Seldens Titles of Ho­nor. part. 2. ch. 5. Ʋowell, Camden, Sir. Thomas Smith, Cowell, Minshaw, Crompton with others who have written of our Eng­lish Parliaments, assert, and all our Parliament Rolls, Statutes, and33. H. 6. 16. Br. Parliam. 4. 39. E 3. 7. 35. 11. H. 7 27. Br Parl. 107. 4. H. 7. 18. 7 H. 7. 14 Crumptons Iu­risd f. 9. Co. 4. Institutes. n 15 35. Fit f. 20. Dyer. 92. Iudge Huttons Argu­ment of Mr. Hamdens case. p 32. 33. Law-bookes, resolve, without whose threefold concurrent assents there is or can be no Act of Parliament made.

Thirdly, This right of theirs is confirmed by prescription and custome from the very first beginning of Parliaments in this King­dome till this present, their being no one president to be found in History or Record of any one Parliament held in this Island since it was a Kingdome without the King personally or representatively present (by a Protector, Custos or Regni, Commissioners) as he ought to be, or without Lords and Peeres; anciently stiled Aldermen, Here­tockes, Senators, Wisemen, Nobles, Princes, Earles, Counts, Dukes, &c. by our Historians; who make mention of their resorting to, fitting, voting and judging in our Parliaments Generall Assemblies and Councels, under those Titles, without the peoples Election, long before the Conquerors time; in the anciented Parliaments and Councels we read of, witnesse Ingulph, Beda, Huntingdon, Ma­thew Westminster, Florent [...]us, Wigorniensis, Malmesbury, Hector Boe­tius, Speed, and other in their Histories, Antiquitates Ecclesiae Bri­tanicae, Spelmanni Concilia. Tom 1. Sir Edward Cooke in his Preface to the 9. Report, and fourth Institut. c. 1. and above all others Mr. Seldens Titles of Honor. part. 2. c. 5. Truth triumphing over false­hood, Antiquity over Novelty. p. 56. to. 90. and Mr. Lambert in his Archaion: there being little or no mention at all of any Knights of [Page 4] Sbires Citizens, or Burgesses in any of our Parliaments and Coun­cels, before the Conquest, or in the Conquerors time, and his next Successors, but of Earles, Barons, Nobles, Archbishops, and Bishops onely for the most part; whom Sir Edward Cooke and others con­ceive were comprehended under the names of Sapientum, or wise men, Seniores populi, (extending to Peers too, as they con­fesse) or at least wise under these phrases;Spelman C. p. 194. praesentibus omnibus Ordinibus illius Gentis, cum vtris quibusdam Militaribus (rather Souldiers than Knights,) of which we finde mention in the Coun­cel of Be [...]henceld. l Spelman Ibid p. 21 [...]. An. 697. or, omnium Sapientum Seniorum, & POPVLORVM totius Regni; coupled with these pre-eminent Titles of Omnium Aldermannorum, Principum, Procerum, Comitum, who met together in a generall Councell under King Jue. An. 713. OrSpelman. p. 318. cujuscunque Ordinis viros, in the Conncell of Cloveskro. An. 800. which expressions we finde are now and then mentioned in some ancient Councels and Parliaments, though rarely: And if that ofHist. p. 870. Ingulph and other our Historians and some Lawyers be true, (which First institut. f. 108. Sir Edward Cooke, andTitles of Ho­nour. part 2. [...]. 5. sec. 3. p. 614 615. &c. Mr. Selden deny) (that King Alfred first divided the Realme into Counties, as all grant he did into Hundreds and Tithings, and erected Hundred Courts wherein Knights of the Shire were alwayes, & yet are, & ought to be elected) there could be no Knights of Shires at least (if any Citizens or Burgesses) to serve in Parliament, before this division, though there were Earles, Dukes, and Barons before his raigne (who were present by the Kings summons, not peoples elections, at our Parliaments, and Generall Councels) asTitles of Ho­nour 2. chap. 5. sec. 2. 3. 4. 5. Mr. Selden, andGlossarium. Tit. Comitis & Comitatus. Sir Henry Spelman un­deniably manifest.

Their sitting, voting, and judging therefore in Parliament, be­ing so ancient, cleare and unquestionable ever since their first be­ginning till now; and the sitting of Knights, Citizens, and Bur­gesses by the peoples election in our ancientest Parliaments and Councells not so cleare and evident by History or Records as theirs: we must needs acknowledge and subscribe to their Right and Title, or else deny the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses rights in Parlia­ment rather than theirs, who have not so ancient nor cleare a Ti­tle or right as they.

4 Fourthly, This Right and Priviledge of theirs is vested legally in them by the very Common-Law and Custome of the Realme, which binds all men; & the unanimous consent of all our Ancestors, & all the Commons of England from age to age assembled in Parliament, [Page 5] since we had any Parliaments, who alwaies consented to, desired, and never once opposed the Lords sitting, voting, power or Judi­cature in Parliament, and by Magna Charta it selfe wherein they are first mentioned and provided for. Hereupon King Henry the third (not long after Magna Charta was granted, and at the same time it was proclamed and confirmed with a most solemne Excommunication in the presence of all the Lords, and Commons by all the Bishops of Eng­land, against the infringers thereof) summoning a Parliament at London in the yeare 1255. to ayde him in his warrs in Apulia; the Earles and Barrons, absolutely refused to give him any assistance at all, not onely because he had undertaken that warre without their advice, but al­so for this reason;Math. Paris An. 1255. p. 884 885. Daniel. p. 172 That ALL THE BARONS were not summo­ned by him to this Parliament, AS THEY OUGHT TO BE AC­CORDING TO THE TENOR OF MAGNA CHARTA; whereupon they departing in discontent, and refusing to sit longer, the Par­liament was disolved. t Mr. St. Johns Speech concer­ning Shipmony p. 33. 1. H. 4. n. 21. 22 25. 36. And upon this very ground, among others, the Parliament of 21 R. 2. with all the Acts and proceedings therein were repealed and nulled by the Parliament of 1. H. 4. because the Lords who adhered to their King were summoned by him to the Parliament, and some of the opposite party imprisoned, impeached, and omitted, and many Knights of the shire were onely elected by the Kings nomination & Letters to the Sheriffes; And the Parliament it self kept by force, vi­ris armatis & sagittarijs minensis, brought out of Cheshire as an ex­traordinary guard, quartered in the Kings Court at Westminster, and about Charing Crosse and the Muse; of whichChron p 389. 390. Grafton, and other Historians writes thus. That they fell suddenly into so great pride of the Kings favour, that THEY ACCOVNTED THE KING TO BE AS THEIR FELLOW, and THEY SET THE LORDS AT NOƲGHT; yet few or none of them were Gentlemen, but taken from the plough, and Cart, and other Crafts. And after these rusticall people had a while cour­ted, they entred into so great a boldnesse, that they would not let, neither within nor without the Court, to beat and slay the Kings good subjects; to take from them their victualls, and pay for them little or nothing at their pleasure: (as our free-quarterers doe now) falling at last to ravish mens wives and daughters: And if any man fortuned to complaine of them to the King, he was soone rid out of the way no man knew how, or by whom, so as they did what they listed; the King not caring to doe justice upon them, but favoring them, in their misdoings, confiding in them and their guards against any others of the Kingdome, which gave Lieges of his Kingdome great matter of commotion and discontent. The bringing up [Page 6] of which guard to Westminster to force, and overawe the Parliament to effect his owne designes is one principle Article exhibited against him by the Parliament, for which he was deposed. I pray God our New armed Guard and Courtiers at Whithall and the Muse (of as meane condition as those) fall not by degrees to the selfesame exorbitan­ces, contempt of the King, Lords, Parliament, and oppression of the people, to their generall mutining and discontent. In the Parlia­ment of 6 E. 3, N 1. & Parl. 2. N. 5. 6. 8. 9. and most of the ensuing Parliaments in this Kings reigne, and in divers Parliaments in Ric. 2. Henry 4. c. 5. 6. was found in the Parliament Roules that the Par­liaments have beene proroged and adjourned from the dayes they were sum­moned to meet, and have not sate, nor acted at all; because some of the Lords were not come by reason of foule weather, shortnesse of warning or other publike imployments; all their personall presence in Par­liament being reputed necessary and expedient. And 20. R. 2. N. 8. The Commons themselves in Parliament required the King to SEND FOR SUCH BISHOPS and LORDS WHO WERE ABSENT, to come to the Parliament, before they would consult of what the Chan­cellor propounded to them in the Kings name and behalfe to con­sider of. To recite no more ancient Presidents in the Parliament of 2. Caroli, the Earle of Arundell sitting in the Parliament being commit­ted by the King to the Tower of London about his sonnes marriage May 25 1626. without the Houses privity and consent, whereby their Priviledges were infringed, and the House deprived of one of their Members pre­sence thereupon the Houses of Peeres adjourned themselves on the 25 and 26. of May without doing any thing; and upon the Kings refu­sall to release him, they adjourned from May 26. till June 2. refusing to sit, and so that Parliament disolved in discontent, his imprisonment in this case being a breach of Priviledge, contrary to Magna Charta. And not long after the beginning of this Parliament, upon the Kings accu­sation and impeachment of the Lord Kimbolton and the five Members of the Commons HouseAn Exact collection part 1. both Houses adjourned and sate not as Hou­ses, till they had received satisfaction and restitution of those Mem­bers, as the Journals of both Houses manifest; it being an high breach of their Priviledges, contrary to the Great Charter. If then the Kings bare not summoning, of some Peares to Parliament, who ought to sit there by their right of Perage; or impeaching or im­prisoning any Peere unjustly, to disable them to sit personal­ly in Parliament, be a breach of the fundamentall Lawes of the Realme, and of Magna Charta it selfe (confirmed in above 40. succeeding Parliaments,) then the Lords right to sit, vote and Judge in Par­liament, [Page 7] is as firme and indisputable as Magna Charta can make it; and consented to and confirmed by all the Commons, people and Parliaments of England, that ever consented to Magna Charta though they be not eligiable every Parliament by the freeholders, people, as Knights and Burgesses ought to be: and to deny this birth-right and Priviledge of theirs, is to deny Magna Charta it selfe, and this present Parliaments Declarations, and proceedings in the case of the Lord Kimbolton, a member of the House of Peers.

5 Fifthly, The ancient Treatise (intituled. See Cooke [...] Justit. p. 12. for the Antiquity, and for the Authority of this Treatise. The manner of holding Parliaments in England in Edward the Confessors time (before the Conquest) rehearsed (afterwards) before William the Conqueror by the discreet men of the Kingdome, and by himselfe approved and used in his time, and in the times of his Successors Kings of England; if the Title be true, and the Treatise so ancient as many now take it to be) determines thus of the Kings and Lords right to be perso­nally present in all Parliaments. The King IS BOUND by all meanes possible TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT, unlesse he be detained or let there from by BODILY SICKNESSE; and then he may keep his Chamber, yet so THAT HELYE NOT WITHOUT THE MANOUR OR TOWNE WHERE THE PARLIAMENT IS HELD: and then he ougth to send for twelve persons, of the greatest and best of them that are summoned to the Parliament; that is, two Bi­shops, two EARLES, two BARONS, two Knights of the Shire, two Burgesses▪ and two Citizens to looke upon his person to testifie and witnesse his estate; and in their presence he ought to make a Commission and give Authority to the Archbishops of the Peace, the steward of England, and Cheife Justice, that they joyntly and severally should begin the Parliament and continue the same in his name, expresse mention being made in that Commission of the cause of his absence then, which ought to suffice and ad­monish the OTHER NOBLES, cheife men in the Parliament, together with the evident testimony of the twelve Peers of theirs. The reason is, BECAVSE THERE WAS WONT TO BE A CRY OR MUR­MVR IN THE PARLIAMENT FOR THE KINGS ABSENCE, BECAUSE HIS ABSENCE IS HURTFULL and DANGEROUS TO THE WHOLE COMMONALTY OF THE PARLIAMENT and KINGDOME, WHEN THE KING SHALL BE ABSENT FROM HIS PARLIAMENT. Neither indeed OUGHT OR MAY HE BE ABSENT BUT ONELY IN THE CASE AFORESAID. After which it followes. The Archbishops, Bishops and other cheife of the Clergy ought to be summoned to come to the Parliament; and [Page 8] Also EVERY EARLE and BARON, and their PEERS OUGHT TO BE SUMMONED and COME TO THE PARLIAMENT, &c. Touching the beginning of the Parliament. The Lord the King, shall sit in the mi [...]st of the great bench, and is bound to be present in the first and last day of Parliament. And the Chancellors, Treasurer and Barons of the Eschequer, and justices were wont to record the defaults made in Parlia­ment according to the order following. In the third day of the Parliament, the Barons of the Cinqueports shall be called, and after wards the BA­RONS of England; after them the EARLES, Whereupon if the Barons of the Cinqueports be not come, the Barony from whence they are shall be amerced at an hundred markes; and an Earle at one hundred pounds: After the same manner it must be done to those who are Peers to Earles and Barons. After which it relates the manner, of place of the Earles, Ba­rons and Peers in Parliament, Then addes. The Parliament may be held, and OƲGHT every day to begin at one of the clocke in the afternoone: at which time THE KING IS TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIA­MENT and ALL THE PEERS OF THE KINGDOME. None of all the Peers of the Parliament MAY OR OUGHT TO DEPART alone from the Parliament, unlesse he have obtained (and that in full Parlia­ment) leave from the KING and of ALL HIS PEERS so to doe; and that with all there be a remembrance kept in the Parliament roll of such leave and Liberty granted. And if any of the Peers during the terme of the Par­liament shalbe sick or weake, so as he is not able to come to the Parliament, then he ought three dayes together send such as may excuse him to the Par­liament, or else two Peers must go and view him: and if they finde him sicke, then he may make a Proxy. Of the Parliament, the King is the Head, the beginning and ending. So this ancient Treatise, The Statute of 5. R. 2. Parl. 2. ch. 4. enacts by COMMAND of the King, and ASSENT of the Prelates, LORDS and COMMONS in Parliament; That all and singular persons and Commonalties, which from henceforth shall have the Summons of the Parliament, shall come from henceforth to the Parlia­ment in the manner AS THEY BE BOUND TO DOE, and hath been ACCVSTOMED within the Realme of England OF OLD TIME. And every person of the said Realme which from henceforth shall have the said Sommons, (be he Archbishop, Bishop, Abbot, Prior, DUKE, LORD, BARON, Baronet, Knight of the Shire, Citizen of City, Burgesse of Burgh, or other singular person or Commonalty) do absent himselfe, or come not at the said Summons, (except he may reasonably or honestly excuse himself to our Soveraigne Lord THE KING) HE SHALL BE AMERCED and OTHERWAYES PV­NISHED [Page 9] ACCORDING AS OF OLD TIME HATH BEEN U­SED TO BE DONE, within the said Realme in the SAID CASE: Which relates unto and agrees expresly with that forecited out of Modus tenendi Parliamentum. If then all the Judges and Peares in Par­liament are bound to attend the Parliament, & not to depart with­out the Kings and Houses leave under paine of Amercement and o­ther punishment as this Statute resolves, and 3. Ed. 3. 19. Fit. 2. C [...]ron. 161. Stamford. l 3. c. 1. f. 153. Cooke Instit. p. 15. 16. 17. 43 18. E. 3. Mo. 1. 2 8. and 31. H. 6. n. 46. (What fine were imposed on ab­sent Lords) manifest then questionlesse they ought of right to sit in Parliament, else it were the height of Injustice thus to fine them. In the tenth yeare of King [...].* Graf [...]o [...] Cron. p. [...]. [...]. 350. 2. this King absented himselfe from his Par­liament then sitting at Westminster, residing at Eltham about forty dayes, and refusing to come to the Parliament, and yet demanding from them foure fifteenes for maintenance of his Estate and outward Wars. Whereupon the whole body of the Parliament made this answer, THAT VNLESSE THE KING WERE PRESENT THEY WOULD MAKE THEREIN NO ALLOWANCE. Soone after they sent the Duke of Gloucester and Bishop of Ely, Commissioners to the King to El­tham, who declared to him among other things in the Lords and Commons behalfe; how that by AN OLD ORDINANCE THEY HAVE AN ACT if the King absent himselfe 40. dayes not being sicke, but of his owne minde, (not heeding the charge of his people, nor their great paines) and will not resort to the Parliament, they may then lawfully returne to their Houses. And now sir (said they) you have beene absent a longer time, and yet refuse to come amongst us, which is greatly to our discontent. To which the King answered; Well, we doe consider, that our owne people and Commons goe about to rise against vs, wherefore we thinke wee can doe no better, then to aske ayd of our Cosen the French King, and ra­ther to submit us to him, then unto our owne subjects. The Lords answe­red. Sir, that Counsell is not best, but a way rather to bring you into dan­ger &c. By whose good perswasions, the King was appeased, and Promised to come to the Parliament, and condiscend to their Petitions, and according to his appointment he came, and so the Parliament proceeded, which else had dissolved by the Lords departure thence in discontent, and the Kings wilfull absence.

Andrew Horne in his Mirrour of Justices, in the raigne of King Edward the first, writes, That our Saxon Kings divided the Realme into 38 Counties, over which they set so many Counts or Earles, and though the King ought to have no Peers in his land, but PARLIA­MENTS, [Page 10] all Writs and Plaints of the Moneys of the King, Queene, and their Children, and of those especially, who otherwise could not have common right of their wrongs. These Companions are now called Counts after the latine word Comites. For to the Estates of the Realme King Alfred assembled the COƲNTS or Earles, and ordained by a Per­petuall Law, that twice a yeare or oftner, they should assemble at London in Parliament to consult of the Government of the people of God.

Fleta. l. 2. c. 2. p. 66. writes thus in the same Kings raigne. Habet enim Rex curiam suam in concilio suo in Parliamentis suis, PRAESEN­TIBUS Praelatis, COMITIBUS, BARONIBUS, PROCERIBUS, & alijs viris peritis vbi terminatae sunt dubitationes, judiciorum, & moris injuriis eversis, nova constituuntur remedia. And l. 17. c. 17. he writes thus. Rex in populo regendo superiores habet, Vidilicet legem per­factus est Rex; & Curiam suam, (to wit of Parliament.) videlicet, COMI­TES & BARONES. Comites enim a Comitia dicuntur, qui cum vide­rint Regem sine froeno, Froenum sibi apponere TENENTƲR, ne clament sabditi: Domine Jesu Christe in Chamo & froeno maxillas eorum con­stringe. Sir Thomas Smith in his Common-wealth of England.* Bracton l. 2. c. [...]. l. 3. c 9. [...] the like in the same words in Henry the 3. his reigne. l. 2. c. 1. John Ʋowel, and Ralph Hollinshed, vol. 1. c. 6. p. 173. Mr. Camb­den in his Britania. p. 177. John Minshew in his Dictionary vuell in his Interpreter Title Parliament; Powell in his Attornyes Acade­my, and others, unanimously conclude. That the Parliament con­sisteth of the KING, the LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPO­RALL and the Commons; which STATES represent the body of all England, which make but one assembly or Court called the Parliament, and is of all other the Highest and greatest Authority, and hath the most high and absolute power of the Realme: And that no Parliament is or can be holden without the King and Lords, Mr. Crompton in his Juris­diction of Courts, affirmes, particularly of the High Court of Parlia­ment. f. 1. &c. This Court is the highest Court of England, in which the King himself fits in person, and comes there at the beginning and end of the Parliament, and AT ANY OTHER TIME WHEN HE PLEASETH ORDERING THE PARLIAMENT. To this Court come ALL THE LORDS OF PARLIAMENT, as well spirituall a [...] temporall, and are severally summoned by the Kings writ at a certaine day and place assigned; The Chancellour of England and other great officers or Judges are there likewise present; together with the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses; who all ought to be personally present, or else to be amerced, and otherwise punished if they come not being summoned, unlesse good cause be shewed, or in case they depart without the Houses or Kings speciall li­cense [Page 11] after their appearance before the Sessions ended: And he resolves that the King, Lords and Commons doe all joyntly make up the Par­liament, and that no Law nor Act of Parliament can be made to binde the subject, without all their concurrent assents.

Sir Edward Cooke not onely in his Epistle before his ninth Re­port and Institutes on Littleton. p. 109. 110. But likewise in his 4. Institutes (published by Order of this present Parliament. c. 1. p. 1. 2 &c) writes thus of the high & Honorable Court of Parliament. This Court consisteth OF THE KINGS MAJESTIE, sitting there, as in his royall politick capacity, and of the three Estates of the Realme, viz. Of the Lords Spirituall, Archbishops and Bishops, being in number 24. who sit there in respect of their Counties or Barronies, parcell of their Bishopricks, which they hold also in their politick capacity; and every one of these when the Parliament is to be holden, ought exdebito Justitiae, to have a writ of sum­mons. The LORDS TEMPORALL, Dukes, Marquesses, Earles, Viscounts and Barons, who sit there by reason of their dignities which they hold by dis­cent or creation: And likewise EVERY ONE OF THESE being of full age OUGHT TO HAVE a writ of summons EX DEBITO JUSTI­TIAE. The third estate are the Commons of the Realme, whereof there bee Knights of Shires or Counties, Citizens of Cities & Burgesses of Burro. All which are respectively by the Shires or Counties, Cities & Buroughs by force of the Kings writ, Ex debito Justitiae; and none of them ought to be omitted: and these represent all the Commons of the whole Realme, and trusted for them, and are in number at this time 493. Headed. And it is observed that when there is best appeareance, there is the best succession in Parliament. At the Parliament holden in the 7. yeare of H. 5. holden before the Duke of Bedford Guardian of England, of the Lords Spirituall & Tem­porall there appeared but 30. in all: at which Parliament there was but one Act of Parliament passed and that of no great weight. In An. 50. H. 3. ALL THE LORDS APPEARED IN PERSON, and not one by Proxy: at which Parliament as appeareth by the Parliament Roll, so many excellent things were sped and done, that it was called Bonum Par­liamentum. And the King and these three estates are the great Corporati­on or the body of the Kingdome, & doe sit in two Houses, & of this Court of Parliament the King is Caput, Principium, & Finis. The Parlia­ment cannot begin but by the Royall Presence of the King either in person or representation, by a Guardian of England, or Commissioners, both of them appointed under the great Seale of England, &c. And 42. E. 3. Rot. Parl. num. 7. It is declared by the [Page 12] Lords and Commons in full Parliament, upon demand made of them, on the behalfe of the King, That they could not assent to any thing in Parlia­ment, that tended to the disinherison of the King and his Crowne whereun­to they were sworne. And p. 35. he hath this speciall observation; That it is o [...]served by ancient Parliament men out of Record that Parliaments have not succeeded well in five cases. First, when the King hath beene in dif­fe [...]ence with his Lords and with his Commons. Secondly, When any of the great Lords were at variance betweene themselves. Thirdly, When there was no good correspondence between the Lords and Commons. Fourthly, When there was no vnity between the Commons themselves (in all which our present Parliament is now most unhappy, and so like to mis­carry and succeede very ill.) Fiftly, When there was no preparation for the Parliament before it began: every of which hee manifests by particular instances.

From all these and sundryJudge H [...] ­rons Argument of Mr. Hamp­dens case. p. 32. 33. Daltons of­fice of Sherriffs other Authorities, it is most evident & transparent, That both the King himselfe and Lords, ought of right to be present in Parliament, and ever have been so, as well as the Commons: and neither of them to be excluded, since they all make up but one Parliament ought of right and duty to be present at, and no Lords and Commons to depart from it without speciall leave, under paine of amercement and other penalties, because no binding Law can be passed without their joynt consents. And that the Commons alone are no more a Parliament of themselves without the King and Lords, than the Common Councell of London are an intire Corporation without the Lord Major, Aldermen; or the Covent without the Abbot; the Chapter without the Deane, or the leggs or belly a perfect man without the head, or neck.

6 Sixtly, The ancient and constant forme of endorsing Bills in Parliament begun in the Commons House in all Parliaments since the Houses first divided,33. H. 6. 17. Brooke Parlia­ment. 4 Cromp­tons jurisdicti­on of Courts. f. 8. Mr. Hackuel of the manner of passing Bills in Parliament. unanswerably demonstrates the Commons of Englands acknowledgment of the Lords right to fit, vote, assent or disassent to Bills in Parliament. viz. SOIT'BAYLE A SEIGNE­URS: let it be delivered or sent up to the Lords. Yea, the Commons constant sending up of their own Members, with Messages to the Lords, and receiving Messages from them, and intertaining frequent conferen­ces with them in matters where their opinions differ, in which conferences the Lords usually adhere to their dissents, unlesse the Commons giveth emsatisfaction and convince them, and the Lords oft times convince the Commons, so farre as to consent to their [Page 13] alterations of Bills, Ordinances, Votes, and oft to lay them quite a­fide; is an unquestionable argument of their Right to sit and vote in Parliament; and of their Negative Ʋoyce too: All which would prove but a meer absurdity and superfluity if the Commons in all ages and now too, were not convinced, that the Lords had as good right to sit and vote in Parliament, and a Negative and dissenting voyce, as well as they, never once questioned or doubted till within this yeare or two, by some seditious Disciples of Lilburnes and Overtons entering, who endeavoured to evade their justice on them.

7 Seventhly, This just Right of the Lords is expresly and notably confirmed by all the Commons of England in the Parliament of 31. H. 8. c. 10. concerning the placing and sitting of the Lords and Great Officers of State in the Parliament House; made by the Commons consent, It being in vaine to make such a Law, (continuing still till this ve­ry day both in force and use) if they had no lawfull right to fit and vote in Parliament, because they are not elective, as Knights, and Burgesses are. And by the Statute of 39. H. 6. c. 1. made at the Commons own Petition to repeale the Parliament and all proceedings of it held at Coventry the yeare before, by practice of some seditious persons, of purpose to destroy some of the great Nobles, faithfull and Lawfull Lords and Estates, meerly out of malice, and greedy and unsatiable coveteousnesse to possesse themselves of their lands, possessions, Offices and goods, whereby many great Injuries, Enormities, and Inconveniences, well nigh to the ru­ine, decay, and universall subvertion of the Kingdome, ensued. The very designe of our Lilburnists, Sectaries, and Levellers now; out of particular malice and coveteousnesse, to share the Lords and all rich Commoners lands and estates between them, being poore and in­digent covetuous people for the most part, scarce forty of them worth one groat, at least before these times.

8 This apparent Right of theirs, is undeniably ratified and ac­knowledged not only by the very words of the writs by which the Lords themselves are summoned to the Parliament, but even of the writs for election of Knights and Burgesses, the forme and substance whereof are ancient, and can receive NO ALTERATION NOR ADDITION but by Act of Parliament, asInstitutes. 4 p. 10. Sir Edward Cooke resolves, By this writ the Prelates, Nobles and others of the Realme are summo­ned to the Parliament there to treat and conferre with the King, of the arduous and [...]rgent affaires of the Realme and Church of England: as the [Page 14] first clause of the writ. Carolus &c. quia, &c. pro quibusdam arduis & [...] negotiis Nos, Statum & defensionem Regni nostri Angliae, & [...]l [...]siae Anglicanae concernent: quiddam Parliamentum nostrum & teneri [...]avimus; & ibidem, cum Praelatis, MAGNATIBUS & PROCE­RIBUS dicti Regni nostri COLLOQUIUM HABERIET TRAC­TARE, Tibi praecipimus, And the Commons are summoned, to performe and consent to those things which shall there happen to be ordained by this Com. Coun. of the Kingdom, &c. And if they are thus summo­ned, not to treat amongst themselves as an independent and intire Parliament, but to confirme and consent to what the King, Pre­lates, Great men, and Peers, the Common Councell, of the Realm shall ordaine about such affaires, as they must of necessity admit the King, Lords and Peers to be altogether as essentiall (yea more principall eminent Members) of Parliament though not elective, as the Knights & Burgesses, who are but summoned to consent to & performe what shall happen there by common advise to ordaine, or at least to consult and advise with them, as their inferiors; not to o­ver-rule them, as their superiors, and the only Supream power in the Kingdom; and if they will totally exclude either King or Lords from Parliament, who are distinct & essentiall Members of it as well as the Commons, and have always been so reputed untill now, the Commons may sit alone as Cyphers, but not as a Parliament, to vote or act any thing that is binding to the people; since though in extraordinary cases for the saving of the Kingdome, they may se­curely use extraordinary meanes & proceedings, yet regularly they are no more a Parliament without the King, & Lords, thē the King or Lords alone are a Parliament without the Commons; or the trunke of a man, a perfect man without a head or shoulders. IfDyer. 61. 62. Cooke. 5 Re­port f. 90. 91. 94. 120. 121. v. 1. Rep. 111. 173 19. R. 8. 9. Br. executors 3. 15 11. 7. 12. 3. be joyntly impowred or commissioned to doe any act by Commission Deed, or Warrant, any one or two of them can do nothing without the 3^d. If many be in Commission of the Peace, Sewers or the like and three of the Quorum joyntly, & act there joyntly, if any one of the three be absent all the rest can do nothing, In Parliament it selfe, If either House appoint a Committee of 3. 5. or 7. to examine act or execute any thing, if but one of this number be absent or put out, the rest can doe nothing, that is legall or valid even by course of Parliament, neither can either House sit and vote as a House un­lesse there be so many Members present, as by the Law and custome of Parliament will make up an House as every mans experience can [Page 15] informe him. If these Levellers then will absolutely cut off or ex­clude the King or Lords from the Parliament, they absolutely null and dissolve it: and the Act [...]or c [...]ntinuing this Parliament cannot make nor continue the Commons alone together as a Parliament, no more then the Lords or King alone without the Commons; the King or either House alone being no Parliament, but both conjoyned and enlivened with the Kings personall or representa­tive presence. The cutting of the head alone, or of the head and shoulders, altogether destroyes and kills the body Politicke and Parliament, as well as the body naturall, If the King dies or re­signes his Crowne, or be deposed, the Parliament thereby is actually dissolved, as it was resolved in the Parliament of 1. H. 4. n. 1. 2. 3. and 4. F. 4. 44. And so if the Lords or Commons dissolve and leave their House, without any adjournment, the Parliament is thereby dissolved, as the forecited presidents, and the latter clause of the writ for the election of Knights and Burgesses manifests. And a new kind of Parliament consisting onely of Commoners, when the old one (onely within the Act for continuing this Parlia­ment made up both of King, Lords, and Commons) is dissolved; neither will or can be supported or warranted by the letter or in­tention of this Law.

9 Ninthly, All the Petitions of the Commons in all Parliaments since the Conquest to the King, or Peeres for their redresse of gri­vances recorded in many ancient Parliament Roules: All Acts of Parliament extant usually runne in this formeCooke 4. Instit. c. 1. The King with the assent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall in Parliament hath ordained, and be it enacted by the Kings most Excellent Ma­jesty, the Lords Spirituall and temporall in this present Parliament assem­bled. The famous Petition of Right. 3. Car. so much insisted on, beginning thus, Humbly shew unto our Soveraigne Lord the King, the Lords spirituall and Temporall and Commons in Parliament assembled; thus answered by the King; Let right be done as is desired. The Act of continuing this Parliament made by the King and Lords, as well as by the Commons, (who never intended to exclude themselves out of this Parliament by that Act, or that it should continue if either of them were quite dismembred from it,) with all Acts and Ordinan­ces since. Yea the Protestation, Solemne League and Covenant, taken by the Commons and Lords, & prescribed by them to all others through­out [Page 16] the three Kingdomes, which couple the Lords and Commons al­waies together, (neither of them alone being able to make any bind­ing Ordinance to the subjects unlesse they both concurre, no more than one Member alone of either House can make a House) and ranck the Lords alwaies before the Commons, and the King before them both; so firmely hold forth, establish the Lords and Kings undoubt­ed Right to sit, and Vote in Parliament, and decry this new mounted Monopoly of a sole Parliament, of Commons without King or Lords, & that absolute Soveraigne Power these new Lights have spied out and set up for them in Vtopia, that impudency it selfe would blush to vent such mad, absurd, irrationall Frenzies and Paradoxes as these crackbrain'd persons dare to publish, and they may with as much truth & reason argue, that one man is three, & that the Leggs and trunke of a man are a perfect man without head, necke, armes and shoulders; or that the Leggs and Body are and ought to be pla­ced above the head, neck and shoulders; as that the House of Com­mons are or ought to be an entire Parliament; the sole Legislative Power, the onely Supreame Authority paramount both King & Lords, who must not have now so much as a Negative voyce to deny or contradict any of the Commons Ʋotes, or Ordinances, though never so rash, unjust, dishonorable, prejudiciall or dangerous to the whole Kingdome.

10 Tenthly, These very Sectaries and Levellers themselves have ac­knowledged and asserted this Right of Power of the Lords all a­long this Parliament till of late, ^c See innocen­cy and truth justified. p. 74. 75. Mr. Ed­wards Gangrae­na▪ part. 3. p. 156 157. where his words & con­tradictions in this kinde are receited at larg. as appeares by their severall Peti­tions and Complaints to them upon sundry occasions heretofore; by their resorting to them for Justice against Strafford, Canterbury, and others; Yea John Liburne himselfe, till his late quarrell with them, not onely acknowledged their very power of Judicature, but highly applauded their Justice, in his owne cause, Petitioning and suing to them not onely for reversall of the sentence against him in Starchamber, but likewise for dammages and reparations against his Prosecutors, [...]leading his cause by his Counsell before them, as his proper Judges; who thereupon by Judgement of the House vacated the De­cree against him, as illegall; voted him Dammages, and passed him an Ordinance for the recovery and levying thereof; all which he himselfe both published in sundry of his printed Pamphlets, wherein he acknowledg­eth and extolleth their Justice. Take but one passage for all in his In­nocency [Page 17] and Truth justified p. 74. 75. If I be transmitted up to the Lords, and confidently beleeve I shall get forward, out of the former experien­ces of that Justice that I have found there, and I will instance two particulars. First, when I was a Prisoner in the Fleet, and secondly May the fourth, one thousand sixe hundred forty one. The King accused mee of High Treason, and before the Lords barre was I brought for my life, where although one Littleton, servant to the Prince, swore point blanke against mee, yet had I free liberty toHe did not then demurr to their Juris­diction. speake for my selfe in the open House; And upon my desire that Master Andrewes also might declare upon his Oath what hee knew about my businesse, it was done; And his Oath being absolutely contradictory to Master Littletons, I was both freed from Littletons malice, and the Kings accusation at the Barre of the whole House: And for my partNota. I AM RESOLVED TO SPEAKE WELL OF THOSE THAT HAVE DONE ME JUSTICE; and not to doubt THEY WILL DENY IT MEE, till such time as by experience I finde they doe it.

And at that time he was so much for the Lords, that he writes most disgracefully, derogatorily of the Commons (and other his Confederates by his example) and of their want of power, injusti­ce, and proceedings,His [...]etter to a friend-Inno­cency and truth justified. His [...]etters to the Generall Hen. Martin, & L. G. Cromwell Eng­lands Birthright See Mr. Edw. Gangraena. part 3. p. 146. to 228. quarrells onely with them, and their Com­mittees for their delayes and injustice towards him: telling them to their faces in many of his former, and late printed Libels: That they have no power at all to commit or examine him, or any other Commoner of England without the Lords: nor yet to give or take an Oath: That they are but a peece and lowest part of the Parliament, not a Parliament alone, That they can make no binding Votes, Ordinances or Lawes, nor commit, nor command any Commoner, without the Lords, and in one or two Pamphlets he endeavours to prove them to be now no lawfull House of Commons at all, nor would hee ever acknowledge them to be so, and that he would make no more consci­ence of cutting theirs and the Lords throates, (the Tyrants and Oppres­sors, at Westminster) then of killing so many Weasels and Polcats; with many other like scurrilous and mutinous expressions. His owne printed Papers, Petitions and Actions therefore are an un­answerable confutation of his malicious contradictions of their Authority and judicature since, for their exemplary justice on him: and he must either now re-acknowledge their right of sit­ting, [Page 18] voting, and judging in Parliament to be lawfull, or else renounce his owne former Petitions and addresses to them for justice, retract all his former printed Papers asserting their Power and judicature, and extolling their justice; yea disclaime their judgment for vacating his owne Sentence, in the Starchamber, their awarding him Dammages, and passing an Ordinance to re­cover them, as meerly null and voyd, being made before no law­full or competent Judges, as now he writes, since not elected, by the peoples Votes. And let those his followers who admire him for his Law, observe these his palpable and invincible con­tradictions, and be ashamed and afraid to follow such an igno­rant and erronious guide, who writes onely out of malice, and faction, not of judgement, as his contradictions evidence. 11^ly. The Acts for preventing the inconveniences happening by the long inter­mission of Parliaments. And to prevent the inconveniences which may happen by the untimely adjourning proroging, or dissolving the Parliament, made this Parliament, and assented to by the King at the Commons importunity, confirme the Lords interrest and right to sit and Vote in Parliament beyond all dispute, and give them an [...]w power to summone a Parliament themselves in some cases.

[...] ^ly. The ancient forme still continued till this day of dis­missing Parliaments and dissolving them, by the Kings licensive, THE LORDS and COMMONS TO DEPART HOME and TAKE THEIR EASE. 37. E. 3. n. 34. 38. E. 3. n. 18. 40. E. 3. n. 16. 43. E. 3. n. 34. 45. E. 3. n. 8. 13. 47. E. 3. n. 7. and all Parli­aments since) proves their right of sitting in, and attending the service of the Parliament in person (without speciall li­cence of the King) during its continuance, in dispite of all ignorant cavils to the contrary.

Having thus impregnably evinced the Lords undoubted right to sit and vote in Parliament, though they be not elective by the peoples voyces as Knights and Burgesses are; I shall next discover unto our illiterate Ignoramusses, who oppose this their right, the justice and good grounds and reasons of our An­cestors, why they instituted the Lords and Peers to sit and vote in Parliament by right of their Nobility and Peerage; which will abundantly satisfie rationall men, and much confirme their right.

[Page 19] 1 First, the Nobles and Great Officers in all Kingdomes, and in our Kingdome too, in respect of their education, birth, experi­ence and imployment in State-affaires, have alwayes been ge­nerally reputed the wisest and best experienced Common-wealths men, best able to advise and Councell the King and Kingdome in all matters of Government, Peace, or War; as our Historians, Antiquaries, Polititians and Records, acknowledge and attest; whence they were antiently stiledMr. Selden [...] Titles of ho­nour part 3. ch. 5. Sir Ed­ward Cookes Epistle to the 9. Report: and [...] Instit. p. 120. 4. Instit. p. 2. Cambdens Brit. p. 177. Spel­manni Concil. Tom. 1. Aeldermen, Wisemen; Magnates, Optimates, Sapientes, Sapientissimi, & Clarissimi viri: Conspicui Clari (que) viri, Primates, Nobiles, &c. in our Historians and Records: and our Parliaments in that respect are frequently stiled in ancient times Consilium SAPIENTVM: upon which Grounds our Kings (and1. E. 3. n. 36. 55, 56. 45 E. 3. n. 15, 16. 50 E. 3. n. 10. to 14. 1 R. 2. n. 10. to 27 47 50, 51. 112, 113. 17 R. 2. c. 1 2. 13 R. 2. n. 6, 7. 17 R. 2. n. 17 18. 8 H. 4. n. 31. to 92. 11 H. 4. n. 14. 28. 39. 44. 13 H. 4. n. 11. Commons too, when ever they recom­mended Councellors of State to the King in Parliament) made choice of See the So­veraigne Pow­er of Parlia­ments part 1. and 2. Lords and other Peers for their Privy Councellors) and therefore it was thought fit, just and equall the King should ever summon them to the Parliament by his Writ, without any election of the people,Mr. Pryns Truth Triumphing over falshood. p. 56. to 70. Stat. de 4 E. 1. c. 2. Lambert Archai­on. for their own inherent wisdome, excel­lency and worth, the Originall cause of advancing and ennobling them at first, as is expressed in their Patents: and evident by these Scripture texts. Esth. 1. 13, 14. Isay 59. 11, 12, 13. Jer. 5. 5. c. 10. 7. c. 51. 57. Dan. 2. 48. c. 6. 1, 2, 3. Gen. 41. 39, 40. Psal. 101. 21, 22. compared together. This ground of calling the Nobles to the Parliament, is intimated in the very words of the summons: Et ibidem VOBIS CUM Coloquium habere & tractare de arduis & urgentibus Regni & Ecclesiae Anglicanae negociis VESTRUM QUE CONSILIUM IMPENSUR: &c. Et hoc nullatenus omittatis; which implies them to be men of wisdome and experience able to counsell and advise the King in all his weighty and arduous af­faires both of the Kingdome and Church: I could give many instances wherein the Commons in Parliament have extraordina­rily applauded the Lords and Peers for their great wisdome, and especially desired their wholesome Counsell, as persons of greater wisdome and experience then themselves: but for brevity sake, I shall cite onely two Records; one of them most sutable to the present deplorable condition of our State, and worthy imi­tation: In the Parliament of 21 Edw. 3. no. 45. William de Thorpe in the presence of the King, Prelates, Earles, Barons and Com­mons [Page 20] declared, that the Parliament was called for two causes: The first concerning the Wars which the King had undertaken by the consent of the Lords and Commons against His Enemies of France. The second, how the Peace of England may be kept. Whereupon▪ the King would the Commons should consult together, and that within four daies they should give answer to the King and His Counsell what they think therein. On the fourth day the Commons declare, THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO COUNSEL ANY THING TOUCHING THE POINT OF WAR; wherefore they desire in that behalf to be excused: And that the King will thereof AD­VISE WITH HIS NOBLES AND COUNCEL; and what shall be so amongst them determined they the Commons will thereto assent, confirme and establish. By which it is evident the Commons then reputed the Nobles more wise and able to advise the King in mat­ters of War then themselves, who confessed their inability here­in, and therefore submitted to assent to whatever the Nobles and Councel should therein advise Him. 28 Edw. 3. n. 55. The Com­mons submit the whole businesse of the Treaty of Peace with France, TO THE ORDER OF THE KING, AND OF HIS NO­BLES. And [...]6 Edw. 3. n. 6. The LORDS only advise the King touching Truce or War with Scotland. In the first Parliament of 15 Edw. 3. n. 11. the Commons having delivered in divers Ar­ticles concerning the redresse of grievances and publick affaires to the King, prayed, that unto the Wednesday ensuing their Ar­ticles may be committed to certain BISHOPS, BARONS, AND OTHER WISE MEN there named, BY THEM TO BE AMENDED: which the King granted: whereas the Lords exhibited their Articles [...] to the King, and the Bishops their Articles apart in this Parliament, and protested that they ought not to answer but in open Parliament BY AND WITH THEIR PEERES; without joyning with the Commons, num. 6, 7, 18, &c. 26, 27, 35, 37. which course they held in most following Parliaments.

I shall conclude with one President more most suitable to the present deplorable condition of our State, and worthy imita­tion.

In the Parliament of 5 Hen. 4. Rot. Parl. num. 9. 10. The Com­mons having presented to the King in Parliament divers grievan­ces, [Page 21] in the ill managing of His Revenues, the decay of His Ca­stles, Houses, and Parks; the great poverty and pressures of His Subjects, and danger of the Enemies: thereupon they most in­tirely and cordially prayed the King to consider the eminent perils of all parts of the Realm by reason of the Enemies and Rebels, of which they had news from day to day, and that as the case then stood, if such mischiefs were not speedily and graciously remedied and reformed in this Parliament, it might fall out upon sodain arivall of Enemies, or by some other means this Parliament must of necessity be departed from by all and dissolved, so as the Lords and Commons should never re-assemble again to redresse the said Mischiefs and others, which God defend. And therefore that it would please the King considering the HIGH WISDOMES AND DISCRETIONS OF THE LORDS, and that THEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF MANY PERILS AND MATTERS which could not be so clearly known to the King, that he would now in this present Parliament charge ALL HIS LORDS Spirituall and Temporall, upon the faith they principally owe to God, and the faith, Homage and Allegiance which they owe to our Lord the King himself, for the aid and salva­tion of themselves, and of all the Realm, that the said Lords WOULD COUNSEL and shew Him their advice and WHOLSOME COUN­SEL IN THIS BEHALF SEVERALLY & INTIRELY with­out dissimulation, or adulation, having regard to the great mis­chiefs and necessity aforesaid. And thereupon our Lord the King most graciously, with His own mouth in full Parliament, charged and commanded as well the Lords, as the said Commons, that they should do their diligence, and shew unto Him their good and wholsome Counsels in this behalf, for the aid of Him and all His Realm. And after the said Commons in the same Parliament, made request to the said Lords, that seeing the King had given them such a charge and command, and that in so high a manner of Record, that they would do their diligence well and loyally, to persever the same without any courtesie made between them in any manner, as they would answer before the most High, and before our Lord the King, and to all the Realm in time to come; and that the Commons themselves thereupon would do the like on their party. Which if both Lords and Commons would now cordially and sincerely promise and ingage to do, without self-ends or interests, we might see our Church and Kingdome spee­dily [Page 22] setled in a peaceable and happy condition. In brief, the Lords in the very Writ touching Knights and Burgesses, are stiled, The Common Councell of the Kingdome, and the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, are called, to inform and assent to that which they and their King shall Ordain, and 5 Ric. 2. Parl. 2. n. 3. 6 R. 2. n. 8, 9, 11, 26. and Parl. 2. R. 2. n. 7, 9. they are called the GREAT COUN­CEL OF LORDS by waging of their extraordinary wis­dome and abilities. And therefore most fit to sit, vote, and judge in Parliament.

Secondly, The Lords and great Officers of the Realme, as such were ever reputed persons of greatest Valour, Courage, Power, (in regard of their great interests, Estates, allies, and retainers) and so best able to withstand, and redresse all publike grievances, and enchroachments, of the King upon their owne and the peoples Liberties, in defence whereof they have in ancient times been al­wayes most ready and active to spend not only their estates, but blood and lives for, wherewith they have redeemed and preserved those Liberties and Freedomes we now enjoy and contend for. And in this regard our ancesters in point of wisdome, policy and right, thought meet, that they should alwayes be sommoned to, and bear chief sway in our Parliaments, in respect of their Peerage, Power and Nobility only without the peoples election. This rea­son of their sitting in Parliament, we find expresly recorded in Bracton, l. 2. c. 16. fol. 34. and in Fleta, l. 1. c. 17. The King (say they) hath a Superiour, namely, God; also the Law, by which He is made a King; likewise His Count, to wit, THE EARLS & BARONS, because they are called Counts as being the KINGS FELLOWS, and he who hath a Fellow, hath A MASTER. And therefore if the King shal be without a bridle, that is, without a Law; debent ei fraenum impo­nere, THEY OUGHT TO IMPOSE A BRIDLE ON HIM, &c. which the Commons being persons of lesse power and interest were unable to do. Andrew Horn in his Mirrour of Justice, ch. 1. §. 2, 3. renders the like reason. In all the contest and Wars between K. John, Hen. 3. Edw. 2. & Rich. 2. concerning Magna Charta, and the Liberties of the Subjects, the Lords & Barons were the Ring­leaders and chief Opposers of these Kings Usurpations and En­croachments on the people, as all ourSee Mat. Paris, Matthew Westminster, Walsingham, Huntingdon, Holings head, Polythronicon, Coxton, Grim­s [...]on, Stow, Speed, Trussell, Baker, Martin, Daniel, How, and the Sove­raign Power of Parliaments & Kingdomes, part. 1, 2. & 3. 10 R. 2. c. 1, 2. 11 R. 2. c. 1. to 7. 21 R. 4. c. 7. to 13. [...] H. 4. c. 2. for proof hereof. Histories and Records re­late; whence they stile the Wars in their times, THE BARONS [Page 23] WARS: and before this, the Nobles were the principall Actors in resisting the Tyranny of K. Sigebert, and K. Bernard, and dis­throning them for their misdemeanors, as is clear by Mat. West­minster in his Flores Historiarum, an. 756. & 758. To give some brief hints to clear this truth.

An. Dom. 1214. In the 16. year ofMat. Paris: Hist. Angl. p. 233. to 282. Daniel p. 140. to 144. Speed p. 558. to 567. K. John a Parliament held at Pauls, July 16. the Charter of Liberties granted to the people by K. Hen. 1. being read and confirmed, THE BARONS swore in the Arch-bishops presence, that if need were, they would spend thier blood. And afterwards at S^t. Edmonds Bury, the BARONS swore upon the High Altar, That if K. John refused to confirm and restore to them those Liberties (the Rights of the Kingdom) they would make War upon Him, and withdraw themselves from His allegiance, till he had ratified them all by His Charter under Seal. Which they accor­dingly performed. Tota Angliae Nobilitas in unum collecta, all the NOBILITY OF ENGLAND COLLECTED INTO ONE appeared in this defence of their own and the peoples Rights and Liberties against the King: whereupon it was afterwards e­nacted, That there should be 25 BARONS chosen by the LORDS (not Commons) who should, to their utmost power, cause the Great Charter confirmed by K. John, to be duly observed; That if either the King or His Justicier should transgresse the same, or offend in any one Article, 4. of the said BARONS should imme­diately repaire to Him, and require redresse of the same without delay: which if not done within forty daies after, that then the said 4. BARONS and the rest should distrain and seize upon the Kings Castles, Lands and Goods, till amends was made according to their arbitration: Such confidence and power was then repo­sed in the BARONS alone.

Hist. Angl. p. 233. Mat. Paris, speaking of the death of Geoffry Fitz-Peeter, one of the greatest Peers of that age, writes thus of him, This year (an. 1214.) Geoffry Fitz-Peeter Justiciary of all England, a man of great power and authority, TO THE GREATEST DETRIMENT OF THE KINGDOM, ended his daies the 2 day of Octob. ERAT autem FIRMISSIMA REGNI COLƲMNA, for he was the most firm pillar of the Kingdom, as being a Nobleman, expert in the Laws, furnished with treasures, rents, and all sort of goods, and confe­derated to all the great men of England by blood or friendship: whence [Page 24] the King without love did fear him above all men, for he governed the raynes of the Kingdom. Whereupon after his death, England was be­come like a ship in a storm without an helm. The beginning of which tempest was the death of Herbert Arch-bishop of Canterbury, a mag­nificent and faithfull man, neither could England breath again after the death of these two. When K. John heard of Fitz-Peeters death, turning to those who sate about him, He said, By Gods feet▪ now am I first King and Lord of England. He had therefore from thence­forth more free power to break His Oaths and Covenants which He had made with the said Geoffry for the peoples Liberty and King­doms peace. Such Pillars and Staies are great and stout Peers to a Kingdom, & Curb to tyrannicall Kings; and therefore of mee [...] Right ought to have a place and voice in Parliaments, for the very Kingdoms safety and welfare, without the peoples election.

In the 43 year of K. Hen. 3. his reign. Mat. Paris p. 952. 953. Speed, p. 636. Daniel, p. 178. The Barons of Eng­land entred into a solemn Oath of Association upon the Evangelist, to be faithful and diligent to reform the Kingdom of England, hitherto by the counsel of wicked persons overmuch disordered, and eff ectually to expel the Rebels and disturbers of the same; which Oath they made Richard Earl of Cornwall to take, as wel as others. In these Barons wars for the Subjects Liberties, many hundred Lords and Barons spent both their blood, lives, and estates: and among o­thers Simon Mulford Earl of Leicester, the greatest Pillar of the Barons, slain in the batail of Eusham; of who [...] In his Con­tinuation of Mat. Paris, p. 968. & Daniel, p. 178. R [...]shing [...]r thus writes, Thus this magnificent Earl Simon ended his daies, who not only bestowed his estate but his person and life also, for relief of oppres­sion of the poor, for the asserting of Justice and the Right of the Realm.

In the 3, 4, 14, & 15. of K. Edw. 2. his raign, the Barons were the chief Sticklers against Gaveston, and the Spencers, who seduced the King, and oppressed the people: and principall Pillars of our Laws & Liberties, as ourWalsing­ham, Holing­shed, Daniel, Speed, Stow, Grafton, Fabi­an, Baker. Historians relate at large, & procured th [...]se ill Counsellours to be removed from the King even by force of Arms.

In 10, 11, & 22. of K. Rich. 2. the Lords were the principall op­posers of the Kings ill Counsellours, and Tyranny and protectors of the Laws and peoples Liberties, to the losse of some of their lives, h [...]ads and estates, as our Statutes and Rolls of Parliament in those years, andWalsing­ham, Trussle, Fabian, Holing­shed, Grafton, Speed, Stow. Historians witnesse: whence Walsingham writing of the Duke of Gloucester's death, murthered by the Kings [Page 25] command at Calice, who was the principall Anti-royalist and head of all the Barons, useth this expression, Thus died this [...]st of men, the Son (and Earl) of a King, in quo posita fuere spes & sola­tium TOTIVS REGNI COMMVNITATIS, in whom the hope and solace of the Common-wealth, of the whole Kingdom were placed: who resented his death so highly, that in the Parl: of 1 H. 4. Hall, who had a hand in his murder, was condemned and executed for a Traytor, and his Head and Quarters hung up in severall places, and K. Richard among other Articles deposed, for causing him to be murthered.

Since then our Pe [...]trs and Nobles have been alwaies persons of greatest valour, power, estate, interest, most able and forwards to preserve the Laws and peoples Liberties, which they have upon all occasions defended with the hazard and losse of their Lives, Li­berties, and Estates, and upon this ground were thought meet by the wisdome of our Ancestors, to enjoy this priviledge of sitting, voting and judging in Parliament by vertue of their Peerage and Baronnies: And since we must all acknowledge, that the Lords were the chiefe instruments of calling this present Parliament, and were therefore in the Act for Trienniall Parliaments, prin­cipally intrusted to summon and hold all future Parliaments in the Kings, and Lord Chancellours, or Lord Keepers defaul [...]: and were very active in suppressing the Star-chamber, High-Commis­sion, Councel-Table, Prelats, and other grievances, and those who first appeared in the Wars against the King and his party, to the great encouragement of others, (witnesse the deceased Lord Ge­nerall Essex, Brooke, Bedford, Stamford, Will [...]ngh by, Lincolne, [...], Manchester, Roberts, and others) it would be the extremity of folly, ingratitude and injustice to deny our Peeres this Privi­ledge and Honour now, which their Ancestors have purchased at so deare a rate; and a meanes to dis-ingage them for ever from the Commons, and Republike, for such an high dishonour and affront.

3 Thirdly, ourSee Master S [...]ld [...]us Titles of Honour, Part 2 chap. 5. and Coke 4. in­stit. p. 1. Nobles are persons of greater Estates Families & Fortunes then others, and have more to keep and lose then other ordinary Commoners; and therefore have greater interest in the Common-wealth and State-affaires then they. And therefore our Ancestors thought it meet and just that they should have this pri­viledge [Page 26] among others above ordinary Commoners, to be present in all our Parliaments, by Writ onely, and that of right ex debit [...] justitiae; and not by election, as Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses are, being persons of meaner estate and quality; and present in Parliament onely in the right of others who elect them, not in their owne right, as the Lords are, whose estates anciently were far more worth then many whole Burroughes put together; and their families, retainers and followers far more in number. And so their engagements to maintaine the Lawes, Liberties and Proper­ties of the Subject, greater then inferiour mens.

4 Fourthly, It is one principall property of Members of Parlia­ment to be Coke 4. Inst. p. 3. constant, stout, inflexible, and not to be bowed or tur­ned from the right and publike good, by feare, favour, promises, re­wards. Now Peeres of noble birth and education, and more gene­rous heroick spirits then the vulgar sort of men, are not so apt to be over-awed with regall threats, terrified with menaces, temp­ted with honours, preferments, and wealth, (which they already injoy in a higher proportion then others) nor seduced with re­wards and private ends from the common good and interest, wherein their honour, wealth and safety are imbarqued; as or­dinary Commoners, and men of meaner ranke and fortunes, as experience of former Ages, and this present manifests. Therefore it was thought just and reasonable by our Ancestors, these Nobles in this regard should sit in Parliament in their owne rights,* Modus tenendi Parliam Vowel. Coke 4 Inst. c. 1. with­out the peoples election; and to leave the people to elect such other persons to represent and vote for them in Parliament in whom they most confided.

Fiftly, our Peeres in Parliament12 R. 2. c. 1 [...]. 23 H. 6. c. 11. 9 H. 6. c. 16. 31 H. 8. c. 11. 50 E. 3. n. 209. 1 R. 2. n. [...] 37. (though they serve for the common good of the whole Kingdome, which have alwayes tru­sted in them, in matters of counsel, Judicature, and making Laws) yet they represent up persons but themselves onely, and beare their owne expences: Wherefore there is no shadow of reason why the people should elect them, since they doe not represent them, nor pay them wages, as they doe to their Knights, Citiz [...]ns and Burgesses, who serve for, and represent them, and therefore ought in reason, right and justice to be elected by them. And therefore they may as well argue. That our Nobles ought to be elected by the people to their Lands and Estates, which descend unto them from their [Page 27] Ancestors, not from the common people, as to sit in Parl [...]ament by the peoples election, onely to represent themselves in their own right, not the people in theirs. And that the Knights of the Shire ought to be elected to their dignity of Knighthood (which the King onely confers on them) and to their Lands and Free­holds, which they enjoy in their owne right, because they are ele­cted by the Free-holders to sit in Parliament in their right who elected them, not their owne alone, which Barons doe not.

By all which premisses it is most apparent, That our Lords and Barons sitting and voting in Parliament, (who if you take them poll by poll, have in all ages been more able Parliament men, and States-men in all respects, then the Commons, though chosen by the people, who alwayes make choice of the best and wisest men, as experience manifests) is not onely just and lawfull in respect of Right and Title, but originally instituted upon such grounds of Reason and Policy, as no rationall nor understanding man can dislike or contradict, but must subscribe to as necessary and conve­nient, and so still to be continued & supported in this their Right and Honour, to moderate the Excesses and Encroachments both of King and Commons one upon the other & keep both of them within their just and ancient bounds, for the Kingdomes peace & safety. The rather for that the very Act made this Parliament for the preventing of inconveniences happening through the long inter­mission of Parliaments, not onely enacts, but requires all the Lords and Barons of this Realme, to meet and sit in every Parliament, under a penalty, but likewise prescribes an Oath to the Lord Keeper and Commissioners of the Great Seale under severe penalties to send forth Writs of Summons to Parliament, to them all, and in his default, ena­bled and enjoyned the Peeres of the Realme, or any twelve or more of them, to issue forth Writs of Summons to Parliament under the Great Seale of England, for the electing of Knights, Citizens and Burgesses: which Act will be meerly void and nugatory, if their Votes and Right of sit in Parliament be denyed, or the House of Peeres reduced to the House of Commons, which this very Statute doth distinguish.

The Kings and Lords sole right of Judicature in Parliament, with­out Commons cleerly evidenced.

The Lords Jurisdiction and undoubted Right to sit and Vote [Page 28] in Parl [...]ament, being cleerly evicted, and und [...]ably manife­sted by the Premises; I shall next proceed to make good their Jurisdiction and lawfull Right of Judicature, (never questi­oned nor disputed till of late) without the Commons concur­rence. To avoid mistakes, and clear all scruples, you must take notice, that there is a two-fold proceeding in Parliament, by way of Judicature and Censure. First by Bill of Attainder; and there­in the King, Lords and Commons must all concurre; because such Judgement is given extrajudicially, only by the Legislative power; wherein the Commons have of Right, a Vote and consent, as well as the King and Lords; and in this course of proceedings, the King and Lords alone can doe nothing judicially without the Commons, no more then make an Act of Parliament without them: Of this kind [...] of Judgement and Attainder by Bill, wherein the King, Lords, and Commons joyntly concurre, there are sun­dry presidents, both in cases, Trespas, Felony, Treason, and the like, in our printed Statutes: 1 H. 4. c. 6. compared with 9 H. 4. Exilium Hugonis de Spencer. 15 E. 2. 1 E. 3. prologue and c. 2. 11 R. 2. c. 1, 2, 3. 5, 6, 7. 21 R. 2. c. 10, 11, 12. 9 H. 6. c. 3. 19 H. 6. c. 1. 3 [...] H. 6. c. 1. 25 H. 8. c. 12. 28 H. [...]. c. [...]8. 33. H. [...] c. 21. 32 H. 8. c. 25. 2 and 3 E. [...]. c. 17, 18. 1 Mar. c. 1. 16. [...] Eliz. c. 1. 3. 3 Jac. c. 2. to which the Attaindors of the Earl of Strafford by Bill, and Arch-bishop of Canterbury this very Parlia­ment may be added: Besides other presidents in theSee Plac. Coronae in Parl. 33 E. 1. Rot. 17. 22 John de Segraves case, Plac. Core­nae in Parl. 21 R. 2. n. 1. to 27 31 H. 6. n. 45. 64. 38 H 6. n. 9. to 26. Parlia­ment Rolls, many of which are cited by Sir Edward Cooke, in his 3 Institutes, c. 1. [...]. and M. S. John in his Argument as Law, concerning the Bill of Attainder of High Treason of Thomas Earl of Strafford; printed by Order of the Commons House, Anno 1641. The like Presidents are extant in the Statutes of Ireland 28 H. 8. c. 1. for the Attainder of the Earl of Kildare and others, 11 Eliz. c. 1. For the Attainder of Shan [...] [...], and others, [...]3 Eliz. c. 6▪ and 7. For the Attainders of John [...]-Gerald and others. An. 27 Eliz c. 1. For the attainder of James Eustuce, and others. 28 Eliz. c. 8, 9. For the Attainders of the E. of Resmond, John Brown, and others. 11 Jac. c. 4. For the Attainder of the Earl of Tyro [...] and others.

Secondly, there is a formall Judgement given in Parliament in Causes, civill and criminall, upon Writs, Petitions [...] Indictments, informations, or Impeachments, and that either against or between [Page 29] Peers themselves, or against or between Commons who are [...] Peers, in both which the Lords have a proper Judiciary power with­out the Commons. That they have such a legall and sole Judicatory, in the case of Peers, is Cookes Instit. on Magna Char­ta. c. 14. 29. & 3 Instit. c. 1, 2. 1 H. 4. 1. Stamf. l. 3. c. 1. 10. E. 4. 6. Bro. Triall, 142. Treason, 33. 29. 13 H. 8. 11. acknowledged by all; who neither may nor ought by Law, to be cryed or judge for any Treason or criminall cause (unlesse in cases of10 E. 4. 6. Coronae, 34. Cooke, 2. Instit. p. 49. Triall. Bro. 142. Appeale at the suit of the subject) but only by the lawfull judgement of their Peers by the expresse provision ofCh. 14. 29. 20 H. 6. c. 9. 26 H. 8. c. 12. 1 El. c. 1. 5. 5 El. c. 11. and diverse other Statutes: See Ashes Ta­bles. Co [...]onae. 84. Challenge, 65. and 8. Mag­na Charta with sundry other Statutes, and by the very Common Law. This right of theirs, in case of Peers is cleerly evident by the Judge­ment given in against Earl Goodwin in a Parliament under K. Edward the Confessor, before the Conquest, An. 1052. recited at large in M. Seldens Titles of Honour, Part 2. c. 5. p. 634, 635. in the Tryall of Roger Earle of Hereford, in the 8. yeare of William the Conqueror, who was sued and found guilty of Treason by his Peers. Cooke. 2. Insti­tut. p. 50. by the Judgement given in the Parliament of Northampton against Becket, Arch-bishop of Canterbury, which you may read at large in Stephanides, & * M. Selden; by the answer of Will. du Breose to K. Johns Ministers: Paratus sum & ero Domino meo, & sine obsedibus satisfacere, secundum Judicium Curiae suae & BARONƲM, Pa­rium meorum. Which right of theirs is asserted by Sir E. Cook himself, and proved at large in his 2 Institutes on Magna Charta. c. 14. 29. & in his 3 Institutes, c. 2. where p. 31. he writes thus. A Peer of the Parl: being indicted of Treason or Felony, or of misprision, and duly transmitted to the Lords, may be arraigned thereof in the upper House of Parl. As FREQUENTLY IN PARL:† Titles of Honou [...], Part 2. c. 5. p. 705. 706, 707. ROLLS IT DOTH APPEAR. As Rot. Parl. 21 R. 2 Plac. Cor. nu. 2 to 7. the Earl of Arundels case. Rot. Parl. 5 H. 4. nu. 11, 12. 13. H. 6. nu. 49. Earl of Dovers case. 28 H. 6. nu. 19. 50, 51, 52. Duke of Suffolks case. To which might be added, 7 R. 2. nu. 22, &c. The Bishop of Norwich case, for delivering Grave­lin to the Enemy. Placita Corona in Parl. 21 R. 2. num. 1 to 26. Rot. Parl. 50 E. 3. nu. 27. The Lord Latymers case. 2 H. 6. Rot. Parl. nu. 18. The Impeachments of the Commons this Parliament against the E. of Strafford, and Arch-bishop of Canterbury who were prosecuted by the Commons, not tryed only by and before the Lords as their proper Judges and Peers. See 4 E. 3. nu. 14. 15 E. 3. nu. 6. 8. 44, 45. 51. 17 E. 3. nu. 22. 23 E. 3. nu. 7. to. 17.

The sole question men will be; Whether the House of Peers have any lawfull power of Judicature, in, or [...]ver the causes and Persons of the Commoners of England, in matter civill or criminall, so farre as to judge [Page 30] their Causes, or censure, fine, imprison, or condemne their persons in any case without the Commons? This the ignorant sottish sectaries, Le­vellers, seduced by their blinde guides, Lilburne and Overton peremp­torily deny, without the least shadow of truth or reason; the con­trary whereof I shall infallibly make good to their perpetuall shame, and refutation.

First our Histories, Law-books and Records agree, that in ancient times, our Earls, who were called Comites, or Counts from the word County, had the chief Government and Rule of most of the Counties of this Realmne under the King, and that they, and the Barons were the proper Judges of the common peoples Causes in the Tournes, County-Courts, County Barons; even by vertue of their Dignities and Offices, as our Sheriffes have now; in which Courts they did instruct the peo­ple in the Lawes of the Land; and administer Justice to them in all ordinary and criminall causes. For proof whereof you may peruse at leasure, M. Seldens Titles of Honour, Part 2. c. 5. Sect. 5. Sir. Edw. Cookes Institutes on Magna Charta, c. 35. His 4. Institutes, c. 53 Spelmanni Glossarium. Tit. Comites, M. Lamberts Archaion, Hornes Mirrour of Justices, c. 1. Sect. 2, 3. If then they were Judges of the Commons and People in the Country, by reason of their Honours & Dignities, even in ancientest times, in ordinary Causes; there was great right and reason too, they should be so, their Judges also in all their extraordinary causes, as well criminall as civill.

2 Secondly, The Lords, Peers, and great Officers of State, in respect of their education, learning and experience in all proceedings of Ju­stice and State affaires, are better able, and more fit to be Judges of Parl then ordinary Citizens and Burgesses for the most part (especi­ally if chosen out of the Cities and Burroughes themselves for which they serve, as anciently they were, and still ought to be by the Statutes of 1 H.† 7 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 19, 20. 17 R. 2. n. 17. 5. c. 1. 32 H. 6. c. 15. and the very purport of the writs for their election at the very day: & de qualibet Civitare Com. predict. DVOS CIVES, & de quolibet Burg [...], DVOS BVRGEN­SES, imports) who have better knowledge and skill in Marchan­dice, & their severall Trades then in matters of Judicature, Law, or State. Therefore the Right of Judicature was thought meet, even by the Commons themselves, to be lodged & vested in the House of Peeres, who are the [...] and fittest of the two, rather then in the Com­mons House, as I shall prove anon.

[Page 31] 3 Thirdly, since the division of the Houses one from another (which is very ancient, and not certainly known, when first made) the House of Peers hath been ever furnished with the ablest Temporall and Spi­rituall persons for their Assistants in judgment and advice, to wit, all the Judges See Modus tenendi Parlia­mentum, Vowell, Cowell, Cromp­ton, Sir Thomas Smith, Coke, and others, 17 E. 3. n. 23. 21 E. 3. n. 7. 7. R. 2. n. 30, 31. 9 R. 2, n. 13. 2 R. 2. part. 2. n. 27. 31 H. 6. n. 26, 27, 28. 28 H. 6. n. 6. of the Realm, Barons of the Ex [...]hequer, of the Coyse, the Kings learned Councell, the Masters of the Chancery that are Courtiers or Lawyers, the Master of the Rolls, the Principall Secretaries of State, and other eminent persons for parts and learning, and the Procuratores Cleri; all which are called by Writ to assist, and give their attendance in the upper House of Parliament, where they have no voices, and are to give their counsel and advice only to the Lords when they require their assi­stance. For proof whereof you may consult the Statutes of 31 H. 8. c. 10 Register 261. Fitz. Nat: Bre: 229. a. b. M. Seldens Titles of Honor, p. 2. c. 5. Sir Edw. Cokes 4. Instit. p. 4, 5, 6, 44, 45, 46. and the Parl: Rolls and Authorities there cited by them, seconded by our present expe­rience. Now the House of Peers being thus assisted with the advice of all the Iudges of England, the Kings learned Councell, and other a­blest to advise them in all Civill or Ecclesiasticall matters: were and are in this regard thought fittest by our Ancestors, and the Commons themselves in Parl: 1 H. 4. n. 79 who have no such assistants, to have the principall and sole power of Judicature, in all or most civill or criminall causes between Commoner and Commoner, that proper for the Parlia­ments Iudicature by way of relief, redresse or censure.

4 Fourthly, there can be no judgement given in any of the Kings Courts,S [...]e The Pree­holders Grand Inquest, p. 2 5. but when the King is personally or representatively present, sit­ting upon the Tribunall, and where the proceedings are CORAM REGE: But the King sits personally and representatively present in the House of Peers, not in the House of Cōmons, where nothing is said to be done Coram Rege. And therefore in the end of most ancient Parl: Rolls, we find the Title, Placita Corona CORAM DOMINO REGE IN PARLIAMENTO SVO, &c. Therefore the House of Peers only, not the Commons, are the true and proper judicatory; whence the King the supream Judge sits usually in Person.

5 Fiftly, there can be no legall triall or Judgement given in Parl: without examination of witnesses upon oath, as in all other Courts of justice. But the House of Peers alone have power to give, and exa­mine witnesses upon 7 R. 2. par. 2 [...] n. 16. Oath; and the whole House of Commons no such power, but to take Informations without Oath, which they nor their Committees cannot administer, unlesse by Order and Commission [Page 32] from the Lords: Therefore the power of judicature in Parl is inhe­rent only in the House of Poers, and not in the Commons House.

6 Sixtly, it is a rule both of Law and common Justice, Littleton, sect. 212. Coke, ibid. 4 E. 3, 7. 2 H. 6. 10. 14 H. 4. 8. 2 R. 2. 29. 5 H. 7. 8. Bur. Challeng. 23, 42, 71 that no man be an informer, prosecutor, and judge too of the persons prosecuted, and in­formed against, it being against all grounds of justice. But the Cōmons in all ancient, and in this present Parl: have been informers and prose­cutors (in nature of aCokes 4. In­stit. p. 24. Grand Inquest▪ to which some compare them) summoned from all parts of the Kingdom to present publick grievances and Delinquents to the King and Peers for their redresse) witness their many impeachments, accusations and complaints sent up and prose­cuted by them in 50 E. 3. n. 5. to 37. 21 R. 2. n. 14, 15, 16. 28 H. 6. n. 14, to 52 31 H. 6. n. 45, 64. 38 H. 6. n. 38. former parl: & this to the Lords not only against Peers, but Commoners, of which there are hundreds of presidents this very Parl: Therefore the House of Lords hath the proper right of ju­dicatory vested in them, not the Commons; who are rather informers, prosecutors and Grand-Jury men, to inform and impeach, then Judges to hear, censure, or determine.

7 Seventhly, those who are proper Judges in any Court of justice, whiles the cause is judging sit in their 25 E. 3. c. 2. 20 R 2. c. 3. 6 R. 2. c. 5. 14 H. 6. c. 3. [...] R. 2. c. 3. 2 R. 2. c. 10. Robes, covered on the bench; not stand bare at the bar; swear & examine the witnesses in the cause, not produce them or manage the evidence, & when the cause is fully heard, argue and debate the businesse between themselves and give the definitive sentence. But in cases that are to be tried & judged in Parl: the Lords only sit covered and in their Robes upon the Bench, but the Comons stand bare at the Bar: the Lords only swear and exa­mine the witnesses and judge of their testimony: the Commons only Coke 4. In­stit. p. 24. produce the witnesses, or presse and manage the evidence; and when the businesse is fully heard, the Lords only debate the businesse among themselves and give the finall Sentence and Judgment without the Cōmons; and that both in cases of Comoners and Peers. Therefore the Lords, or house of Peers, are sole Judges in Parl: not the Cōmons.

And that they are and alwaies have been so de facto (unlesse by way of Bil of Attainder or in such extraordinary cases when their concur­rence hath been desired) I shall prove by most clear and infallible e­vidence. To pretermit theMr. Seldens Titles of Ho­nor, part. 7. c. 5, p. 632, 633, 705, 706. judgment of the Earls & Barons in Parl: in the case of Earl Goodwin for the murther of Alfred in K. Edw. Conf. reign before the Conquest, and the judgment of the Barons the Lords in Parl: against Tho: Becket Arch-b. of Can. in K. Hen. 2. raign, cited by M. Selden, of which you may chuse the same, with the punctuall authority of Andr. Horne in his Mirror of Justices, c. 1. § 2. forecited.

[Page 33] First, in Pleas of the Crown, and other Common Pleas plainly [...]able in Parl: as well between Cōmoners as Peers; the Pleas have been exhi­bited, heard, and judgement given upon them by the King and Lords joyntly, or the King alone, by which the Lords assent, or by the Lords themselves, without the Cōmons; as is evident by the Parli: Rolls and Pleas in Parl: in K. Ed. 1. 2. 3. 4. Ric. 2. Hen. 4. 5. 6. where there are hun­dreds of instances to confirm it: some of them printed in Sir Edw. Cokes, 3 Instit: c. 1, 2. and M. St Johns Argument in Law upon the Bill of Attainder against the Earl of Strafford.

2 Secondly, in all18 E. 1. rot. Parl. t. 4 E. 3. n. 13. 21 E. 3. n. 65. 28 E. 3. n. 11, 12. 50 E. 3. n. 48. 1 R. 2. n. 28, 29, 104. 2 R. 2. n. 36, 37, 31, 32, 33. Parl. 2. n. 21, to 27. 3 R. 2. n. 19, 20, 21. 7 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 23, 24. 8 R. 2. n. 14, 15. 13 R. 2. n. 15, 16. 15 R. 2. 22, 23. 17 R. 2. n. 13, 14, 15, 19. 18 R. 2. n. 11, 10 16. 21 R. 2. n. 25, 55, to 66. 1 H. 4. n. 91. 2 H. 4 n. 47, 48. 5 H. 4. n. 40. 6 H. 4. n. 31, 61, 62. 3 H. 5. n. 19. 10 H. 6. n. 51. Writs of Error brought in Parl: by Peers or Cōmoners to reverse any erroneous judgements touching their reall or personall Estates, lives, or attainders, The KING & LORDS ONLY ARE JUDGES, and the proceedings upon such Writs, are ONLY BEFORE THE LORDS IN THE UPPER House, secundum Legem & co [...] ­suetudinem Parliamenti. So Sr Ed. Coke in direct terms, in his 4. In­stit. p. 21, 22, 23. where he produceth divers presidents of such writs of Error out of the Parl: Rolls, and present experience manifests as much in all the the writs of Error brought this Parl: adjudged and de­termined by the King and Lords alone, without the privity of inter­position of the Cōmons. A truth so clear that Lilburne himself in his Argument against the Lords Jurisidiction confesseth it, and the Parl: Rolls quoted in the Margine, with sundry others resolve past all dis­pute. If then the Lords be the sole Judges in all writs of Error con­cerning the goods, estates, free-holds, inheritances, lives, and attainders of the Commoners of England, notwithstanding the statute of Magna Charta, c. 29. No Free-man shall be taken, or imprisoned, or disseised of his Free-holder Liberties, of Free-customes, nor outlawed, nor exiled, neither will we passe upon him, nor condemn him, but by THE LAWFUL IUDGMENT OF HIS PEERS, &c. (the grand and principall ob­jection against their Iudicature) then by the self-same reason they are and may lawfully proceed against them in all other civill or cri­minall causes, (especially breaches of ther own priviledges of which themselves are the sole and only Iudges, the cases of Lilburne and Overton) properly triable in Parliament.

3 Thirdly, in all Petitions and complaints against Cōmoners for re­dresse of grievances, the King and Lords are the sole and proper Tuns and Judges, not the Cōmoners, as appears by all the Parl: Rolls in former times; wherein we find in the beginning of every Parl: some Assistants of the Lords house appointed by them to be receivers of [Page 34] the Petitions of England, Ireland, Wales & Scotland; others appoin­ted receivers of the Petitions of Gascoyne, & other parts beyond the Seas, and the Isles of Jersy and Gernsey, &c. And some Lords appoin­ted tryers of those Petitions, who had power given them to call the L^d Chancellor, Treasurer, Steward, Chamberlain, the Judges, Kings Ser­jeants and others to their assistance; prescribing also by what day the Pe­titions should all be exhibited, and the place where they should be exami­ned. All particular persons usually presenting all their grievances and petitions immediately to the King & Lords (without any addresse to the Cōmons by Petitions, as now of late) there being no Petitions of record in the Parl: Rolls addressed immediately and originally to the Commons, that I can find. And towards the end of the Parl: Rolls, there is this Title usually. The Petitions of the Cōmoners (containing all Petitions of the Cōmons house for redresse of publick or particular injuries and grievances) presented to the King in the Lords house, and answered by the King alone, with the consent of the Prelats Counts & Barons: with which answers the Commons rested satisfied, whether granted or denied, as ofttimes they were. Of w^ch you may read som­thing in S^r E. Cokes 4. Instit. p. 16. & more in the Records themselves.

4 Fourthly, in all criminal causes in Parl: by way of accusation, im­peachment or indictment, the King & Lords were the proper Judges; as is evident by Placita Coronae coram Domino Rege in Parliamente sue, at the end of each Parliam: Roll; wherein the King and Lords, or only the King and Lords alone generally gave Iudgement of impri­sonment, fine, banishment and death it self, even against Cōmoners them­selves without the Commons; the thing now principally controverted and denied: for proof whereof I shall cite some few punctuall presi­dents and records, in stead of many which might be insisted on.

In the famous Parl: held at ClaredonMat. Paris p. 6 97. M. Sel­dens Titles of Honor, part. 2. c 5 p. 703. 705 under K. Hen. 2. [...]. D. 1164. there was a recognition made of all the ancient Customs of the Realm, which all the Prelats, Abbots, Earls, Barons and Nobles swore firmly to observe to the King and his Successors, whereof this was one, That the Arch-b. Bishops, and other Clergy men who held of the King in Capite by Barony; Sicut caeteri Barones debent interesse JVDCIIS CVRIAE REGIS CVM BARONIBVS,Petrus Ble­s [...]sis, De Instit. Episcopi, Bibl: Patrum; tom. 12. par. 2. p. 447 quousque perveniatur AD DIMI­NVTIONEM MEMBRORVM, VEL AD MORTEM: which proves the power and right of Iudicature even in those times and long before, to be setled in the Barons as well in Parliament, as in the Sheriffs Tourne, and that in case of Commoners as Peers.

[Page 35] In the Parliament of 4. E. 3. num. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Roger Mortimer, Earle of March, a Peer, Sir Simon Bereford, Knight, of Councell and assistant to the said Earle John Mautravers Bose de Bayous, and Iohn Deverall, for being guilty of the death of Edward Earle of Kent, Thomas Gournay, VVilliam of Ocle, for murthering King Edward the second, after his deposition, were attainted and con­demned of High treason, and some of them then in cu [...]odie ac­cordingly executed by Iudgement of the Lords and Peeres alone; who AS JUDGES OF THE LAW by the Kings consent gave judgement of death against them; as the Parliament Rolls more largely relate.

It is true indeed, that after these Judgements given the LORDS the same Parliament, num. 6. entred this Protestation; See Cooke, 2. Instit. p. 50. That alboit the Lords, and Peers of the Realme, AS JUD­GES OF THE PARLIAMENT, in the presence of the King had taken upon them to give Judgement of such who were NO PEERS OF THE REALM, that he eafter NO PEERS should be compelled to give Judgement ON ANY OTHERS WHO WERE NOT THEIR PEERS, according to the Law.

From this Protestation of the Lord (which Lilburne princi­pally insists on) hee andCooke, 2. In­stit. p. 50. some others conolude; that the Peers in Parliament have no right at all to imprison, fine, judge, or passe sentence of death against any Commoner for any offence, no, not for breach of their own Priviledges) but only the Commons.

To which objection I answer; First, that this is no Act of Par­liament, as Sir Edwards Cooke mistakes, but a bare Protestation of the Lords, without Kings or Common [...] assent and that nei­ther the House of Commons nor the Commoners then attain­ted of Treason and judged to death by the Lords, ever demur­red or excepted against their Jurisdiction, as Lilburne and O­verton doe, but acknowledged and submitted to it. Secondly, That in this very Protestation the Lords professe and justifie their right of BEING JVDGES in Parliament without ad­mitting or acknowledging any joynt or sole right of Judicature with them in Parliament in the Commons. Thirdly, That this Protestation was meerly voluntary, not in derogation, but pre­servation of their own Honour and Peerage, and the Parliaments too; and the substance of it no more, then this; That the Lords in Parliament should not bee constrained against their [Page 36] wills by the Kings command, and in his presence, to give judge­ment of death in ordinary cases of treason or Felony in the high Court of Parliament, against such who were no Peers, who in such case [...] Magn. Ch. c. 29. 25. E. 3. c. 2. 4. 28. E. 3. c. 3. 37. E. 3. c. 8. 42. E. 3. c. 3. Cooke 2. Instit. p. 50, 51. by the Law might, and ought to be tried in the Kings Courts at VVestminster, or before the Iustices of Oyer and Termi­ner by a Iury of their equalls; but onely in such cases which could not well be tried else-where, and were proper for their Judgement in Parliament, This is the whole summe and sence of their protestation. To argue therefore from hence, That they cannot passe sentence, or judgement against any Commoners in any case proper for their Judicature in Parliament, because they protested only against being COMPELLED to g [...]ve Judgement against such as were no Peers, in cases triable else-where, and not proper for their tribunall (as the Objectors hence conclude) is quite to mistake their meaning, and to speak rather non-sence, then reason or Law. Fourthly, This Protestation was made on­ly against the Lords giving sentence in Felony and Treason, and that in the Kings own presence in Parliament (who usually pro­nounced the Judgement himself, with the Lords assent and did not charge the Lords to pronounce it, as here hee did) not against sentencing, fining and imprisoning any Commoner for rayling and Lybelling against their Persons. Jurisdiction, and proceed­ings; refusing to answer, and contemning their Authority to their faces at the Barre; and appealing from their Judicature in case of breach of Priviledge of which themselves alone and no others are or can be Judges; the case of Lilburne and Over­ton; whose commitments are warranted by hundreds of Presi­dents, in this and former Parliaments. Therefore for them to apply this Protestation to their cases with which it hath no Ana­logy, is a manifestation of their injudiciousnesse and folly rather then a justification of their Libellous Invectives against the Lords injustice. Lastly, this Protestation did not foreclose the Lords in this or future Parliaments to give Judgement against Commo­ners in other cases of Felony and Treason, even without the Commons: To prove this by some instances.

In the Parliament of 1. H. 4. Placita Coronae, num. 11. to 17. Iohn Hall being in custody of the Marshall of England, and brought by him before the Lords in Parliament and there char­ged by him, by VValter Cl [...]pton, Lord chiefe Justice, by the Kings command, with having a hand in the murther of the Duke of [Page 37] Glocester who was smothered to death with a featherbed at Calayes by King Richard the seconds command, the whole relation whereof he confessed at large, and put in writing before James Billing ford, Clerk of the Crown, which was read before the Lords, upon read­ing whereof, the King and ALL THE TEMPORALL LORDS IN PARLIAM [...]NT resolved that the said Iohn Hall by his own confession deserved to have as hard a death as they could adjudge him to, because the Duke of Glocester was so high a Person, and thereupon TOVTE LES SEIGNEIURS TEMPORELZ per assent du ROY ADJVGGER [...]N [...] all the temporall Lords by assent of the King AJVDGED that the said Joh. Hall should be drawn from Tower hill unto the Gallows at Tiburn, & there kenelled; & his bowels laid before him; and after he should be hanged, beheaded, and quartered, and his head sent to Calayes where the murther was committed, and his quarters sent to other places where the King should please; and thereupon command was given to the Marshall of England to make execution accordingly; and it was so done the same day.

Lo here the Lords in Parliament g [...]ve judgement against a Com­moner in case of a murther done at Calayes, (and so not triable at the Kings Bench, but in Parliament) and passe a judgement of High treason on him, for murthering of a great Peere only.

And which is most remarkable, all the Commons In this very Parliaments of 1 H. 4. nu. 70. Nov 3. made their Protestation, and fur­ther remonstrated to the King,Nota. Com: LES JVGGEMENTS DV PARLEMENT APEIRTEIGNENT SOVLEMENT AV ROY ET AS SEIGNEIVRS, ET NIENT AS COMMVNES: how the judgement of the Parl. appertained ONLY TO THE KING and TO THE LORDS, and NOT VNTO THE COMMONS; except in case it should please the King OF HIS SPECIALL GRACE to shew unto them the said JVDGEMENTS: purcase de eux, que null record soit fait in Parlement, encoutreles ditz Communes quill soit ou serront parties ascunes juggements donez ouadoues en Apres in Parlement. Whereunto it was answered by the Archbish. of Canter­bury by the Kings command, how the said Commoners are petitioners, and demanders, and that THE KING & THE LORDS de tont temps ont eves et aueront DE DROIT LES JVGGEMENT EN PARLEMENT, en manere come me me les communes ount monstres. HAVE ALVVAYES HAD AND SHALL HAVE OF RIGHT THE JVDGEMENTS IN PARLIAMENT, in manner as the Commons themselves have declared, except in making Statutes or in [Page 38] making Grants and Subsidies, or such things for the common profit of the Realm, wherein the King will have especially their advice, and as­sent; and that this order of proceeding shall be held and kept IN ALL TIMES TO COME.

By which record in Parliament it is apparent, by the House of Commons own confession, First that the Judgements in Parliament even in cases of Commoners appertain ONLY TO THE KING and LORDS, in the affirmative. Secondly, that they appertain NOT TO THE COMMONS in the negative. Thirdly that the King and LORDS HAVE ALWAYES HAD and ENJOYED THE RIGHT of Judgements in Parliament. Fourthly, that they should alwayes hold and enjoy this Right, IN ALL TIMES TO COME. Fifthly that the Commons speciall advise and assent was and is required by the King in Parliament, only in making of Statutes, Grants and Subsidies, and such like things for the common profit of the Realm.

So full and punctuall a Parliamentary decision of the present controversie, as is uncapable of any answer or evasion.

In the Parliament Roll of 17.See Cook 3. Instit. c. 2. p. 22. R. 2. num. 20. 21. John Duke of Gayen and of Lancaster, Steward of England, and Thomas Duke of Glocester, Constable of England, the Kings Uncles, complained to the King, that Thomas Talbot Knight, (a Commoner and no Peere) with other his adherents, conspired the death of the said Duke in di­vers parts of Cheshire, as the same was confessed and well known, and prayed that the Parliament might judge of the faul [...], (to wit, whether it were treason according to the clause of the Statute of 25, E. 3. c. 2. It is accorded that if any other case supposed Treason which is not above specified, doth happen before any Justices, the Justices shall tarry without any going to judgement of the Treason till the cause be shewed and declared before the King and His Parliament, whether it ought to be judged Treason or Felony) whereupon the KING and THE LORDS IN THE PARLIAMEN [...] (without the Commons though in case of a Commoner) ADJVDGED THE SAME FACT TO BE OPEN and HIGH TREASON; and thereupon they award two writs, the one to the Sheriffes of Darby, to take the body of the said Sir Thomas, retornable in the Kings Bench, in the moneth of Easter then next following; and open Proclamation was made in Westminster Hall, upon the Sheriffes return, and the next coming in of the said Sir Thomas that the same Thomas SHOVLD BE CONVICTED OF TREASON, and incurre the [Page 39] losse and pain of the same; and that all such as should receive him after the same Proclamation, should incurre the same losse and paine. Sir3. Instit. p. 22. Edward Cooke; relating this Judgement, addes his own o­pinion at the end: That this judgement wanting the assent of the Commons was no Declaration, (of Treason, within the Act of 25. E. [...]. because it was not by the King and his Parliament according to this Act, but by the King and Lords ONLY.

But the record of Parliament, and the Judges and Commons then admitted it to be good; and processe issued out, and judgement was given accordingly: the parties concerned taking no such excep­tions to it.See 21. R. 2. n. 15. 16. So that this Record is a pregnant evidence. That the King and Lords are the sole Judges in Parliament, in the case of Com­moners, even in declaring and judging, what is or what is not treason, within the Statute of 25. E. 3. because the Commons are no Iudges in Parliament, and so cannot Iudge or declare (unles in a legislative way by Act of Parliament) what is Treason or Pelony, but the King and Lords alone.

To put this out of question, I shall cite one notable record more to this purpose. (a) Cooke. 3. Instit. p. 22. &c. 1. p. 10. In the Parliament of 5. H. 4. 11. 12. on the 8. of February the Earle of Northumberland came before the King Lords and Commons in Parliament, and by his Petition to the King acknowledged that he had done against his Lawes and alegiance, and especially for gather of power and giving of Liveries, for which he put himselfe upon the Kings grace and prayed pardon; the rather, for that upon the Kings Letters, he yielded himselfe, and came to the King at Yorke; whereas he might have kept himselfe a­way. Which Petition by the Kings command was delivered to the Justices to be examined, and to have their counsell and advice therein: Whereupon the LORDS made a Protestation que le Juggement appertient aeux tout soulement THAT THE JUDGE­MENT APPERTAINED ONLY TO THEM. And after the said Petition being read and considered before the King and the said Lords as Peers of Parliament, a queux tells [...]uggementz apperteig­nent DE DROIT. TO WHOM SUCH JUDGEMENT AP­PERTAINED OF RIGHT, having had by the Kings command, competent deliberation thereupon: and having also heard and conside­red as well the Statute made in the 25. yeare of King Edward the Kings Grand-father that now is, concerning the Declaration of trea­son, as the Statutes of Liveries made in this Kings raigne, ADJUD­GED, that that which was done by the said Earle contained within [Page 40] his Petition, was neither Treason, nor Felony, but Trespas; for which the said Earle ought to make fine and ransome at the will of the King. Whereupon the said Earle most humbly thanked our Lord the King, and the sayd Lords his Peers of Parliament FOR THEIR RIGHT­FULL JUDGEMENT, and the Commoners for their good affecti­ous and diligence used and shewen in this behalfe; And the said Earle further prayed the King, that in assurance of these matters, to remove all jealousies and evill suspitions, that he might be sworn a new in the presence of the King, the Lords and Commons in Parliament; and the said Earle tooke an Oath upon the Crosier of the Archbishop of Can­terbury, to be a faithfull and loyall lige to our Lord the King, the Prince his sonne, and to the heires of his body inheritable to the Crown according to the Lawes of England: Whereupon the King out of his grace pardoned him his fine and rausome for the trespas aforesaid. After which num. 17. the Lords spirituall and temporall, humbly thanked the King sitting in his royall Throne in the white Chamber, for his grace and pardon to the said Earle of his fine and ransome: and likewise the Commons thanked THE LORDS SPIRITUALL and TEMPORALL FOR THE GOOD and JUST JUDGEMENT THEY HAD GIVEN AS PEERS OF PARLIAMENT TO THE SAID EARLE.

From this memorable record I shall observe, First that though this Declaration of this Earles case was made by his Petition in the presence of the King, Lords and Commons in Parliament accor­ding to the Statnte of 25. E. 3. yet the Lords only by Protestation in presence of the King and Commons, claimed to be THE SOLE JUDGES OF IT as Peers of Parliament, and belonging to them OF RIGHT. S [...]condly, That this claime of theirs in this case was acknowledged and submitted to both by the King and Commons: and thereupon the Lords only, after serious consideration of the case and Statutes, whereon it depended gave the definitive sentence and judgement in this case, that it was neither Treason nor Felony, but Trespas only &c. Thirdly, That the Earle thanked the King, only for his grace, the Lords FOR THEIR JUST JUDGE­MENT and the Commons only for their good hearts and diligence, having no share in the judgement though given by the Lords both in the Kings and their presence; and that the Commons them­selves returned speciall thanks to the Lords spirituall and temporall on Parliament for their good and just judgement. Fourthly, That this judgement of the Lords only, was finall and conclusive, both [Page 41] to the King and Commons, who aquiesced in it.

All that can be objected to evade this President,Object. is that this Judgement was given in case of a Peer, wherein the Lords only are the Judges, by Magna Charta, c. 29. but not of a Commoner, which is the question.

I answer,Answ. that though this judgement of theirs was in case only of an Earle, who was a Peer, & triableSee Cooke 2. Inslit on Ma [...]na Charta, c. 29. only by his Peers, yet the King & Lords in this Parliament, the very same day gave Judge­ment of High Treason against Henry and Thomw Peircy (one of them no Peer) and OTHERS who were in their companie (who were but Commoners and no Peers) for levying warre against the King, and that without the Commons, as is evident by the Par­liament Roll of 5. H. 4. nu. 15. Et anxy mesme le vendreay AIVGGES PAR LE ROY ET SEIGNEIURS EN PARLEMENT, que levier de guerre fait per les ditz Mounsieur Henry, & Mounsieur Thomas▪ furont tenuz pur treason: & ceo si bien de eux mesmes come DE AUTERS qui fueront en lour compaigne, au temps de dit lever; which quite takes off this Objection.Se [...] Mr. Prynnes Doome of Co­wardice and Treacherie. p. 2. 3. 4. 5. &c. where these records are ci­ted at large verbatim.

To put all out of question, I shall instance in some few anci­ent prefidents more, which are full and punctuall.

In the Parliament of 1. R. 2. num. 38. 39. 40. The Commons prayed, that all those Captaines who had rendred or lost Castles or Townes through default might be put to answer it in this Parliament, and severely punished according to their deserts BY AWARD (or Judgement) OF THE LORDS and BARONS, to eschew the evill examples they had given to other Governours of Townes and Castles. Whereupon Sir Alexander de Buxton, Constable of the Tower, was commanded to bring BEFORE THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT, William de Weston, and Lord of Gomynes, (both of them Commoners) on Friday the 27. of November, to answer such Articles as should be surmised against them on the Kings behalfe. Being brought BEFORE THE LORDS in full Parlia­ment, they were severally articled against, at the command of THE LORDS, by Sir Richard le Scrop, Knight, Steward of the Kings House, and their severall Articles, and answers to them in writing, being read before THE LORDS; Which done, the Constable was commanded to bring them againe before THE LORDS on Saturday next ensuing, being the 20. of No­vember; on which day, it was shewed unto them severally by the [Page 42] said Steward, by THE LORDS COMMAND, That THE LORDS OF THE PARLIAMENT (whose names are par­ticularly mentioned in the Roll) had met together, and conside­red of their respective answers, and that IT SEEMED TO THE LORDS AFORESAID, that the said William had delive­red up the Castle of Outherwycke to the Kings enemies without any duresse▪ or want of victuals, contrary to his alleagiance, and undertaking safely to keep it; and therefore THE LORDS A­BOVE NAMED SITTING IN FUL PARLIAMENT AD­JVDGE you TO DEATH, & THAT you SHAL BE DRAWN and HANGED. But because our Lord the King is not informed of the manner of the Judgement the ex [...]cution of it shall be re­spited till the King be thereof in [...]ormed.

A [...]ter which Judgeme [...]t given it was shewed to the said John Lord of Gomynes by the [...] Steward how the said LORDS had assembled and considered of his answer: and THAT [...]EEMED TO THE LORD sitting in full Parliament, that without du­resse or default of victualls or other necessaries for the defence of the Town or Castle of Arde, and without the Kings command, hee had evilly delivered and [...]urrendred them to the Kings Enemies by his own default against all apparance of right or reason, against his undertaking safely to keep the same. Wherefore THE LORDS aforesaid here in full Parliament ADJUDE YOU TO DEATH. And because you are a Gentleman and a Baronet, and have served the Kings Grandfather in his Warrs, and are no Leige [...]man of our Lord the King▪ you shall be beheaded without having OTHER JUDGEMENT. And because that our Lord the King is not yet informed of the manner of this Judgement, the execution thereof shall be put in respite, untill our Lord the King be informed thereof.

Loe here two expresse Judgements given in Parliament by the Lords alone, without King or Commons, in case of Treason, even against Commoners themselves. And an expresse acknow­ledgement of the Commons of the Lords right to award Judge­ment in these cases, without the King or them; then which a ful­ler and clearer proofe cannot be desired.

In the self-same Parliament, 1. R. [...]. num. 41 42, 43. Dame Alice Piers was brought before THE LORDS, and charged by Sir Richard le Scrope, with sundry misdemeanors which she denied; hereupon divers Witnesses were examined against her: Where­upon [Page 43] JVDGEMENT WAS GIVEN BY THE LORDS A­GAINST HER, that she should be banished, and forfeit all her lands, goods, and tenements whatsoevèr. To this Judgement, neither King nor Commons were parties, but the Lords only.

To these I might adde the cases of See the doom of [...] and treachery. [...] 14 15. where the record is tran­scribed. Sir William de Eleuham, Sir Thomas Trivet, Sir Henry de Ferriers, and Sir William Farnden, Knights; and Robert Fitz Ralph, Esquire; Rot. Parl. 7. R. 2. num. 24. sentenced and condemned by judgement of the Lords in Parlia­ment, pronounced by the Chancellour, for selling the Castle of Bur­bugh, with the armes and amm [...]nition in it, to the Kings enemies with­out the Kings license. 21. R. 2. Parl. Rot. Plac. Coronae num. 27. where Sir Robert Pleasington is adjudged a Traytor after his death, by the King, by [...]SSENT OF THE LORDS, and num. 15. 16. Sir Tho­mas Mortimers case, num. 17. Sir John Cobhams case, 31. H. 6. n. 45. 64. 65. [...]. 3. n. 16. to [...]8. and num. 28. Henry Bonoits case, condemned in like manner of treason by the Lords, with hundreds of Presidents more.

I shall only cite three more at large which are punctuall.

In the Parliament of 8. R. 2. n. 12. Walter Sybell of London was ar­rested and brought into the Parliament before the Lords, at the suit of Robert de Veer Earl of Oxford, for slandering him to the Duke of Lancaster, and other Nobles, for maintenance: Walter denied not but that he said that certain there named, recovered against him the said Walter, and that by maintenance of the said Earl as he thought. The Earl there present protested himself to be innocent, and put himself upon the triall. Walter thereupon was committed to Prison by the Lords, and the next day he submitted himself, and desired the Lords to be a mean for him, saying, he could not accuse him: where­upon THE LORDS CONVICTED and FINED HIM FIVE HVNDRED MARKS TO THE SAID EARL; for the which, and for his fine and ransome, he was committed to prison BY THE LORDS. A direct case in point.

In the second Parliament in 7. R. 2. num. 13. to 19. Iohn Caven­dish a Fishmonger of London accused Michael de la Pool Knight, Lord Cha [...]cellour of England, first before the Commons, and after­ward before the Lords, for bribery and injustice; and that he enter­e [...] [...]nto a Bond of x. l. to Iohn Ottard, a Clerk to the said Chan­cellour, which he was to give for his good successe in the businesse, in part of payment w [...]eof, he br [...]ught Herring and Sturgeon to Ot­tard and ye was delayed a [...]d could have no justice at the Chan­cellours h [...]nds, and upon hearing he cause and examining wi [...] o [...] ­fes upon Oath before THE LORDS, the Chancellour was cleared; [Page 44] The Chancellour thereupon required reparation for so great a slander: the Lords being then troubled with other weighty matters, let the Fish-monger to Bail, and referred the matter to be ordered by the Judges; who upon hearing the whole matter, condemned Caven­dish in three thousand marks for his slanderous complaint against the said Chancellour, and adjudged him to prison till he had paid the same to the Chancellour, and made fine and ransome to the King also: which the Lords confirmed.

In the Parliament of 15. R. 2. nu. 21. Iohn Stradwell of Begsteed in the County of Sussex, was committed to the fleet by JVDGE­MENT OF THE LORDS, there to remain during the Kings pleasure, for that he informed the Parliament, that the Archbishop of Canterbury had excommunicated him and his neighbours wrongful­ly for a temporall cause appertaining to the Crown and Common Law, wh [...]ch was ADIVDGED BY THE LORDS upon examination and hearing to BE VNTRVE.

These three eminent Presidents (to which many more might be added) of the Lords fining and imprisoning meere Commons, only for slandering Peeres of Parliament, even by false accusations against them in Parliament by way of complaint, will [...]stify the Lords pro­ceedings against Lilburn and Ov [...]rton for their professed Libells both against their Persons and Jurisdictions too.

To proceed to latter times in Parliaments of 18. and 21. Jacobi, and 3. Car. not only the LordCook 4. Instit. p. 23. Chancellour Bacon, and the Earl of Middlesex, Lord Treasurer▪ upon complaint of the Commons, were censured and judged by the Lords alone, but likewise Sir Giles Mom­pesson, Sir Iohn Michell, and Dr Manwering, (all Commoners) JUDICIALLY SENTENCED & Doctor Pocklinton, and Doctor Bray, even for erroneous Books and Sermons, were sentenced this Parliament by the Lords alone; since these Master Clement Wal­ker Esquire was imprisoned in the Tower, and fined by the Lords, for some words pretended to be spoken against the Lord Say; and within these few moneths on [...] Morrice, and foure or five more of his confederates, were censured, fined and impr [...]soned, by the Lords alone, for forging an Act of Parliament upon Sir Adam Littletons complaint, with all the Commons privity or consents; and above one hundred Commoner: more have been imprisoned by them or fined this very Session of Parliament for breach of Priviledge, con­tempts or misdemeanours, by the Lords alone, without the Com­mons; yet no demurrer nor exceptions were taken by them or the [Page 45] Commons to their Iurisdiction, who applauded this their Justice in some of these cases.

From all these cleare confessions of the Commons themselves in Parliament, and punctuall presidents in print in former, late Parliaments, and in this now sitting, it is undeniable, That the King and Lords joyntly, and the Lords severally without the King, have an indubitable right of Judicature, without the Common [...], vested in them, not only of Peers themselves, but likewise of C [...]mmoners, in all extraordinary cases of Treason, Felony, Tres­passe, and other Misdemeanors▪ triable only in Parliament, which hath been constantly acknowledged, practised, and submitted to, without dispute: much more then have they such a just and rightfull power, in case of breach of their owne priviledges, of Cooke, 4 Instit. p. 15. which none are, or can be Judges but themselves alone. And to deny them such a power, is to make the Highest Court of Iu­dicature in the Realme inferiour to the Kings Bench, and all other Courts of Justice▪ who have power to judge and try the persons and causes of Commoners, and to commit and fine them for con­tempts and breaches of Priviledges as ourSee Brooke and Ashes Ta­bles, Tit. Con­tempts; Fines pur Contempt & Imprisonment. Law bookes resolve, and every mans experience can testifie.

The Lords right of Judicature being thus fully evicted against the false and ignorant pretences of illiterate Sectaries, altogether unacquainted with our Histories and Records of Parliament, which they never yet read nor understood, there remaines no­thing but to answer some Presidents and Objections.

The Principall president insisted on by Lilburne, Object. 1. is the Prote­station of the Lords, in the case ofCooke, 2. In­stit. p. 50. Sir Simon Beresford, 4. E. 3. nu. 6. which I have already fully answered, retorted, and shall therefore here pretermit.

The second is Sir Edward Cookes Authority,Object. 2. and the presidents cited by him, in his 4. Institutes, p. 23. 24. of Judicature in Par­liament, where thus he writes; It is to be knowne, THAT THE LORDS IN THEIR HOUSE HAVE POWER OF JUDI­CATURE; And, the Commons in their House have power of Ju­dicature▪ and both Houses together have power of Judicature. But the handling thereof according to the weight and worth of the mat­ter would require a whole Treatise of it selfe▪ and to say the truth, it is best understood by reading the Judgements and Records of Par­liament at large, and the Journalls of the House of the Lords, and the Booke of the Clerke of the House of Commons, which is a Re­cord, [Page 46] as it is affirmed by Act of Parliament in An. 6. H. 8. c. 16. To which he addes these marginall Notes Vide Placita in Parlians Anno 33. E. 1. rot. 33. Nicholas Seagrave adjudg [...]. Par Praelatos, COMITES, BARONES ET ALIOS DE CONCILIO. At the Parliament at Yorke, Ap. 12. E. 3. Consideratum est per Prae­latos, Comites, BARONES, ET COMMVNITATEM AN­GLIAE; the Lord Audleys care. At the Parliament at Westm. 15. E. 2 Hugh le pier adjuge per les SEIGNIEURS, & COM­MONS. Rot. Parl. 50. E. 3. n. 34. Lord Nevils case. Then he a [...]des. See Rot. Claus. 1 R. 2. n. 5. 8. 38. [...]0. A tresage Councell le Roy Les SEIGNIORS, & COMMONS, &c. Rot. Parl. 2. H. 5. nu. 1 [...]. Err [...]ra sinned, THAT THE LORDS gave Judgement WIT [...]OVT PETITION OR AS [...]NT OF THE COM­MONS, Rot. Parl. 28. H. 6. nu. 10. and many others in the Reigne of King H. 6. and Kin, E. 4. And of later times see divers notable Judgements, at the prosecution of the Commons, By THE LORDS, at the Parliaments [...]den 18. and 21. Iac. Regis, against Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michell, Viscount St. Albon, Lord Chancellor of England, the Earle of Middlesex, Lord Treasurer of England, whereby the due proceedings of Iudicature in such Ca­ces doth appeare. Then hee cites the cases of 8. Eliz. Thomas Long, 23 Eliz. Arthur Hall,2. A [...]l, 1. Ma [...]. and Muncton, censured by the House of Com­mons only and by them fined and imprisoned, without the Lords; A [...]d concludes thus; If any Lord of Parliament, spirituall or temporall, have committed any Oppression, Bribery, extortion, or the like, the HOUSE OF COMMONS, BEING THE GENE­RALL INQUISITORS OF THE REALME, (comming out of all parts thereof) may examine the same, and if they find by the Vote of the House, the charge to be true, then they TRANS­MIT THE SAME TO THE LORDS WITH THE WIT­NESSES and PROOFES. From which passages of his some ignorantly have concluded. That the Lords have no power of Ju­dicature without, but only joyntly with the Commons: That all Com­moners ought to be judged only by the Commons, not by the Lords: and That the Commons have a sole power of Judicature in cases of Commoners; and the Lords no power but joyntly with them, or upon their preceding Petitions and impeachments, neither in case of Com­moners; nor Peers.

I answer, that Sir Edward Cookes words are much mistaken▪ and rightly understood warrant no such inferences, but the con­trary. [Page 47] For first, he clearely confesseth in direct termes, That the Lords in their House have a power of judicature, even without the Commons; ha he de [...]med particularly in whose, and in what cases out of the Judgements Records and Journals of Parliament at large (to which he refers the Reader a being best understood by reading them; which warrant the Lords judging, fining impri­soning and condemning to death not only of Peers, but of Commo­ners themselves without the Commons; as I have fully manife­sted; their could no such inference have been made. Secondly, [...]e adde [...], That the Commons in their House have a power of Judica­ture. From whence Lilburne and others inferre. That they are and ought to be the sole Judges of all Commoners, and not the Lords, in all cases triable in Parliament. But this is a most grosse mistake, Sir Edward Cooke confining this Judicature of theirs, only to these three c [...]ses. First, to matters and abuse concerning elections of Knights, Citizens and Burgesses, being Members of the Com­mons House, the judgment and determination whereof the Commons alone (of late times only) have usually taken upon them without the Lords, which he proves by Thomas Longs case, 8. Eliz. and no greater antiquities, of which elections the King and Lords in former times have been sole Judges: for which I shall cite some memorable records worthy the Lords and [...]mmons consideration, who now take upon them to suspend e­je [...] & Judge their own Members elections without the Kings or Lords concurrence or privity, a practice not heard of in former ages and of late originall. In the Parliament holden at Westmin­ster. 5. H. 4. Rot. Parl. num. 38. Thomas Thorpe his case. Item, because that the writ of summons of Parliament returned by the Sheriffe of Roteland was not sufficiently nor duely returned as the Commons conceived; the said Commons prayed our Lord THE KING, and THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT that this mat­ter might be duly examined in Parliament, and that in case their shall be default found in this matter that such a punishment might be inflicted, which might become exemplary to others to offend againe in the like manner: Whereupon our said Lord the King IN FULL PARLIAMENT, commanded THE LORDS IN PARLIA­MENT TO EXAMINE THE SAID MATTER, and to doe therein AS TO THEM SHOULD SEEME BEST IN THEIR DISCRETIONS. And thereupon the SAID LORDS caused to come BEFORE THEM IN PARLIAMENT, as well the said [Page 48] Sheriffe, as William One by who was returned by the said Sheriffe for one of the Knights of the said County, and Thomas Thorpe, who was elected in full Countie to be one of the Knights of the said Shire, for the said Parliament and not returned by the said Sheriffe. And the said parties being duely examined, and their reasons well conside­red, in the said Parliament, IT WAS AGREED BY THE SAID LORDS, that because the said Sheriffe had not made a sufficient re­turne of the said writ THAT HE SHALL AMEND THE SAID RETURN, and THAT HE SHALL RETURN THE SAID THOMAS FOR ONE OF THE SAID KNIGHTS, as he was elected in the said Countie for the Parliament: and moreover that the said Sheriffe for this default SHALL BE DISCHARGED OF HIS OFFICE, and COMMITTED PRISONER TO THE FLEET, and that he should MAKE FINE and RANSOME AT THE KINGS PLEASURE. Loe here the Lords in Parlia­ment at the Commons request, and by the Kings command, exa­mining and giving judgement in case of undue election, even without the Commons. An attendent on Sir Tho. Brooke cho­sen one of the Knights to serve in Parliament for the County of Somerset, being grievously beaten by one Iohn Savage, was upon a petition of the Commons relieved against this breach of Pri­viledge by * Ordinance or Act of Parliament, 8. H. 4. 23. 14. made by consent of the King and Lords, which is printed in 5. H. 4. c. 6. And in like maner Richard Strode Burgesse of Plimton was relieved a­gainst breaches of his priviledges as a Parliament man, by a spe­ciall act of Parliament assented unto by the King and Lords upon the Commons petition, An. 4. H. 8. c. 6. the Commons alone being then unable to relieve them, or punish these breaches, by their owne authority, as of late they presume to doe without King or Lords; Quo Jure (having not the power of Judicature vested in them) I am yet to learne, being contrary to the practice and presidents of all ancient Parliaments before our present age; and the Statute of 11. H. 6. c. 11. provided for this very purpose, which presents another remedy out of Parliament, and not in only the Commons house.

In the Parliament of 16. R. 2. n. 6. The Wednesday after the Parliament began Sir Philip Courtenay returned by the Sheriffe of Devon for one of the Knights for that County▪ came before the King in full Parliament and sayd, that he understood how certaine people had accused and slandered him to the King and [Page 49] Lords, as well by Bill as by mouth, of heinous matters; and therefore prayed TO BE DISCHARGED OF THE SAID IM­PLOYMENT, untill the said accusations and complaints were tried, and found true, or not true: and because his said prayer seemed honest TO THE KING and THE LORDS, THE KING GRANTED HIM HIS REQUEST, and DISCHARGED HIM IN FULL PARLIAMENT. AND the Monday follow­ing, at the instance and prayer of the COMMONS the KING GRANTED THAT HE SHOULD BE RESTORED and RE­MITTED TO HIS PLACE according to the returne of the said Sheriffe, for to counsell and doe that which belonged unto his office; and after because he had been good and treatable with those who had complained upon him, and condescended to a good treaty, he was restored in full Parliament to his good same. The charge against him is expressed in the same Parliament rol. num. 13. 14. where two Petitions preferred against him to THE KING and LORDS IN PARLIAMENT, for putting Thomas Peutyngdon forcibly out of possession of the Manor of Bygelog [...] without just cause, & Richard Somestre out of other lands & detai­ning them from them, he being so powerfull in the County, that no poore man durst to sue him. Which Petitions were referred by consent in Parliament to certaine Arbitrators to determine.

From which record it is evident, First, that Members of the Commons house may be complained and petitioned against for misdeameanours, and put to answer before the King and Lords in Parliament, and there fined and judged (not before the Commons house) and that this was the antient way of procee­ding. Secondly, that the Commons cannot suspend or discharge any of their fellow-Commoners or Knights from sitting in Par­liament, but only the King and Lords in full Parliament, in whom the power of Judicature rests: much lesse then can they expell or eject any of their members by their owne au­thority without the Kings and Lords concurrence and consents. Thirdly, that the power of restoring and readmitting a suspen­ded Member of the Commons house belongs not to the Com­mons themselves, but to the King and Lords, to whom the Com­mons themselves in this case addressed themselves by petitinn for Courtneys readmission unto his office, after his submission of the complaints against him to the arbitriment of those Mem­bers to whom the King and Lords referred the same.

[Page 50] In the Parliament of 17. R. 2. n. 23. It was accorded by the King and Lords at the request of the Commons, that Roger Swinerton who was endited of the death of one of their companions, John de Ipstones, Knight of the said Parliament for the County of Stafford, slain in coming towards the said Parliament by the said Roger, should not be delivered out of prison wherein he was detained for this cause, by bail mainprise, or any other manner, untill he had made answer thereunto, and should be delivered by the Law, the Commons alone by their own power having no authority to make such an order even for the murther of one of their own Members, without the King and Lords who made this order at their request.

In the Parliament of 35. Eliz. when Sir Edward Cook was Speaker of the Commons House, there fell out some questions in the Com­mons House about the Amendment of a mistake in the return of the Burgesse of Southwark,* 5. R. 2. c. 4 8. H. 4. c. 14. 11. H. 4. c. 16. H. 6 c. 4. 8. H. 6. c. 7. 32. H. 6. c. 15 Ploud. tol. 11. 8 &c. and after long debate it was resolved that the House could not amend it, but the Lord Keeper in Chancery, where the return was of Record, if he thought it amendable by Law; and that Masten Speaker should wait upon the Lord Keeper about it, which he did; who advised with the Iudges concerning it, as appeares by the Journall. And the Statutes made for redresse of abuse of Elections of Knights and Burgesses were made by the King and Lords upon the Commons petitions, as appeares by 8. H. 4. n 83 1 9. 11. H. 4. n. 54. Neither of all which statutes gives the House of Commons alone any power of Iudicature to judge the right of Elections, or punish abuses committed in them, but leaves them to the Lords judicature as at first, and gives the party injured an action at Law against the Sheriffe and [...] ­others for false returns.

Secondly, Sir Edmund Cooks words extend only matters of misde­meanor of any Members of the House of Commons committed in or a­gainst the House it self, of which the [...] now, though not anciently, are the sole judges; without the Lords: which he proves by Arthur, Halls case. Thirdly to breaches of Priviledges of the Commons House alone, in striking or arresting any of the Members, or their priviledged servants, which he proves by Munctons case, and 11. H. 6. c. 11. 5. H. 4. c. 6. the two latter proving the contrary.

Yet in this case of breach of priviledge even in arresting the Commons Members and servants, the Commons house were no [...] anciently the sole Judges, as now. In the Parliament of H. 6. n. 25. 26. 27. 28. Thomas Thorp chief Baron was chosen Speaker of the Parliament, and after his election, and before the Parliament, (which was pro­roged) [Page 51] he was arrested and taken in execution at the suit of the Duke of York: whereupon some of the Commons were sent up by the House to the King, and Lords spirituall and temporall sitting in Parliament, desiring that they might enjoy all their ancient and accustomed Priviledges in being free from arrests, and propounded the case of Thomas Thorp th [...]r Speaker to them, desiring his in­largement, whereupon the said Lords spirituall and temporall, not in­tending to hurt or impeach the priviledge of the Commons but equal­ly after the Courts of law to administer Justice, and to have know­ledge what the Law will weigh in that behalf, declared to the Ju­stices, the premises, and asked of them, whether the said Thomas ought to be delivered from prison by force and vertue of the said priviledge of Parliament or not? To the which question the chief Justices in the name of all the Justices aforesaid communication and mature deli­beration had among them, answered and said, that they ought not to answer to that question, for it hath not been used aforetime that the Iustices should in any wise determine the priviledge of this high Court of Parliam. for it is so high and mighty in his nature that it may make that law which is not and that that is law, it may make no law, and the determination and knowledge of that priviledge belongeth to the Lords of the Parliament, and not to the Iustices; but as for declara­tion of proceedings in the lower Courts in such cases as writs of Supersedeas of Priviledge of Parliament be brought and delivered, the said chief Iustice said, that there be many and divers Supersedeas of priviledges of Parliament brought into the Courts, but there is no generall Supersedeas [...]rought to sur [...]e [...]se all Processes, for if there should be, it should seem that this High Court of Parliament, that ministreth all Justice and equitity should let the processe of the common Lawes, and so it should put the party plainant without remedy, for so much asVpon this ground 1. R. 2. n. 20. 87. 114. 2. R. 2. n. 8. 49. 5. R. 2. n. 44. 13 R. 2. n. 10. 30. 33. 15. R. 2. n. 9. 17. R. 2. n. 10 We find the Commons and Parliament ve­ry zealous to maintain the Common Law; and referring causes and pe­titions to it when proper for it, and un­proper for the Parliament. actions at Common Law be not determined in this High Court of Parliament. And if any Person that is a Member of this High Court of Parliament, be arrested in such cases as be not for Treason or Felony or surety of the Peace, or for condemnation be­fore the Parliament, it is used that all such persons should be relea­sed of all such arrests, and make an Attorney, so that they may have the freedome and Liberty freely to attend upon the Parliament. After which answer and Declaration it was throughly agreed, assent­ted and concluded by the Lords spirituall and temporall, that the said [Page 52] Thomas, according to the law, should remain still in Prison for the causes abovesaid, the priviledge of the Parliament, or that the same Sir Thomas was Speaker of the Parliament, notwithstanding, And that the premises should be opened and declared to them that were com [...] for the Commons of this land, and they should be char­ged and commanded in the Kings name that they with all goodly hast and speed proceed to the election of another Speaker. The which premises, for as much as they were matters of Law, by the comman­dements of the Lords, were opened and declared to the Commons, by the mouth of Walter M [...]yle one of the Kings Sergeants at Law, in the presence of the Bishop of Ely, accompanied with other Lords in notable number: and there it was commanded and charged to the said Commons by the said Bishop of Ely in the Kings name, that they should proceed to the election of another Speaker with all goodly hast and speed, so that the matters for which the King called this his Parli­ament might be proceeded in: and this Parliament took good and ef­fectuall conclusion and end. VVhereupon th [...] Commons accordingly elected Thomas Charlton Knight, for their Speaker the next day, and acquainted the Lords therewith, and desired the Kings approbation of their choice, which was accorded unto by the King.

In the Parliament of 39. H. 6. n. 9. Walter Clerke, one of the Burgesses of Parliament for Chippenham, was arrested and im­prisoned in the Fleet for divers debts to the King and others, upon a Capias U [...]lagat [...]m; whereupon the Commons complai­ned thereof to the King and Lords, and desired his release, and tendred them an Act of Parliament ready drawn for that pur­pose to which Petition and Bi [...] of theirs, the King by the AS­SENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITUALL and TEMPO­RALL assented; And thereupon hee was freed. In like maner, Richard Chedder.

In the Parliament of 35. Eliz. Thomas Fitz-Herbert of Staf­fordshire was elected a Burgesse of Parliament, and two houres after, before the Indenture returned, the Sheriffe tooke him in upon a Capi [...] Utlagatum; Whereupon he petitioned the House, that he might have a Writ of Priviledge and be enlarged. After many dayes debate and Argument of this case in the House by sundry Lawyers, and Sir Edward Cooke, then Speaker, it was a­greed; [Page 53] That no Writ of Priviledge could in this case be returned in­to the House of Commons, being but a Member of Parliament, and no Court of Record, but only into the Chancery or House of Peers; And that this being a point of Law it was meet the Iudges should be advised with, and determine it, not the House: And at last he was outed of his Priviledge by the Houses resolution. In 28. H. 8. Dyer 60. The case of Trewinnerd a Commoner, in point of Pri­viledge of Parliament concerning an arrest, was argued and debated before the Judges in the Kings Bench: And so was Ched­ders case in 8. H. 4. 12. 13. So as the Commons only are not the sole Judges of such Priviledge (as many now concerve) but the House of Peers, and Kings Councell, and Judges as well as they. In these three cases only, and no other that I find, Sir Edward Cooke admits the Commons to be sole Iudges now (though not anciently) without the Lords. Therefore to extend it generally to all, or any other cases of Commoners, but these is to pervert his words, and extend them farre beyond his meaning. Now Lil­burnes & Overtons Cases are none of these, but directly under the Lords sole Iudicature, because infringements of their Priviledges, of which the Lords only are the Iudges, as the Commons pretend they are of their Priviledges; as his following passages manifest. Thirdly▪ hee addes; that both Houses together have power of Indi­cature, but determines not in what cases, nor in what way of Judicature, which hath caused the Object [...]rs mistake. But the Judgements, Records and Iournals of Parliament to which he refers, and the cases he cites in the Margin, will affoyle this doubt, and cleare his meaning, which is this.

First, That in attainders and judgements of High Treason, Fe­lony, or other Misdemeaners in Parliament, where the proceed­ings are not by way of tryall and ordinary Judicature, but by See 31. H 6. n. 45. 64. 38. H. 6. n. 9. to 36. Bill or Act of Parliament, there both Houses together (and the King too joyntly with them) have the power of Iudicature: and this is all which is proved by 15. E. 2. Hugh Spencers case, who was judged and banished by an Act of Parliament, intituled Exilium Hugonis le Spencer (printed in old Magna Chartaes) as Sir Edward Cooke himselfe reports in Calvins case, 7. Report, f. 11. b. and the Lord Audlyes case, 12. E. 2. is the same: the Commons having no right to judge them being Peers by [Page 54] the verySee Cooke 2. Instit. f. 49. 50. 51. Statute of Magna Charta, c. 29. but only the Peer, except in a Legislative way, by Act or Bill.

2 Secondly, That in all cases of difficultie where the King shall please to demand the advise and opinions of both Houses of Par­liament joyntly, there both of them may, and ought to joyne in delivering their opinions and Judgements of the case or thing propounded: and this is all thatCooke, 3. I [...] ­q [...]. p 7. where is Case of [...]grave is ci­ted at large. Sir Nicholas de Seagraves case proves 31. E. 1. rot. 33. Who being charged in Parliament in presence of the King, Earles, Barons and OTHERS OF THE KINGS COUNCEL, (not the Commons or Burgesses, but the Iudges, and Kings learned Councell at Law See the Free-holders Grand In­quest. 2. 39. 40. 41. 42. and Privy Councell, who were assistants to the Lords, as I conceive, and others of his Privy Councell, which Sir Edward Cooke would have to ex­presse the Commons in Parliament) then and there present; that the King in the wars of Scotland, being among his enemies, Nicho­las Seagrave, his leigman, who held of the King by Homage and fealty, and served him for his ayd in that warre, did maliciously move discord and contention without cause with John de Crombe­well, charging him with many enormous crimes, and offered to prove it upon his body. To whom the said John answered, that hee would answer him in the Kings Court, &c. and thereupon gave him his faith. After which Nicholas withdrew himselfe from the Kings host and ayd, leaving the King in danger of his enemies and adjour­ned the said John to defend himselfe in the Court of the King of France, and prefixed him a certaine day: and so as much as in him was, subjected, and submitted the Dominion of the King and King­dome, to the subjection of the King of France: and to effect this hee tooke his journey towards Dover to passe over into France. All which he confessed and submitted himselfe therein de alto et basso to the Kings pleasure. And hereupon the King willing HABERE AVISAMENIUM to have the advise of the EARLES, BA­RONS, LORDS (magnatum) and OTHERS OF HIS COUNCELL enjoyned them upon the Homage, fealty and allegi­ance wherewith they were obliged to him, quod ipsi fideliter CON­SVLERENT, they should faithfully ADVISE HIM, what pu­nishment should be inflicted for such a fact thus confessed: Qui om­nes, habito super hoc diligenti tractatu, & avisamento, &c. Who [Page 55] all having had thereupon diligent debate and advise, having consi­dered and understood all things contained in the said fact, DI­CVNT (not by way of Iudgement judicially pronounced but of answer to the Kings question propounded, and as their opinion of the cause) Said, that this fact DESERVES losse of life and mem­bers, &c. So as this offence (notes Sir Edward Cooke) was then adjudged in Parliament to be High Treason. But under his fa­vour, First, here was no Judgement at all given against the party himselfe, but only an opinion and advise touching his case (not pending judicially in Parliament by way of Inditement or Impeachment, but voluntarily proposed by the King) in answer to the Kings question; and so it can be no proofe of any actuall proper Judicature vested in both Houses. Secondly, For ought appeares, this question was only propounded to the Earles, Lords, Barons, and the Kings Councell that assisted them; and so only to the House of Peers, not to the commons: and answered, resolved only by them;See the Free­holders grand In­quest. p. 39. 40. 41. 42. aliorum de Concilio suo; not expressing nor including the Commons, as I apprehend, being never so intitled in any Parliament Records for ought I can find. And then it followes, that the LORDS ONLY IN THAT AGE were the Judges even of Commoners cases. Thirdly, Admit the Commons were included yet it proves only a right of advising and delivering their opinions with the Lords, when required by the King, not of judging or pronouncing sentence. Fourthly, Sir Edward Cooke citing this president, to prove That both Houses together have power of Iudicature; must grant that even in 33. E. 1. there were two distinct Houses of Parliament, who upon speci­all occasions (as now at conferences, &c.) met and advised toge­ther; and therefore the division of the Houses was before Edward the third his raigne, and very probable as ancient as this summo­ning of Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses of the Parliament, which some make no ancienter then King Henry the first, or King Henry the third, In the 40. yeare of his reigne, Father to King Edward the first. So as this president makes quite against the Levellers and Lilburnians designes, The Free­holders Garnd In­quest. p. 13. 14. 15. and opinions.

Fourthly, Sir Iohn at Lees case 42. E. 3. num. 20. (said to be adjudged by the Lords and Commons) is somewhat mistaken. For [Page 56] the record only mentions, That the 21 day of May, the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and ayd granted; on which day ALL THE LORDS & SVNDRY OF THE COM­MONS dined with the [...]ing. After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee, was brought before the King, LORDS & COMMONS next afore­said (who dined with the King) to answer certaine objections made against him by William Latymer, about the wardship of Robert La­tymer, that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London, where by duresse of imprisonment he inforced the said William to sur­render his estate unto him; which done, some other Articles were ob [...]ected against the said Sir Iohn, Of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himselfe, HE was committed to the Tower of London, there to remaine till he had made fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure, and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly. And then the said Lords and Commons de­parted: After which he was brought before the Kings Councell at Westminster, which COVNSELL ORDERED the said ward to be released into the Kings hands: So as this record proves not this judgement was given in the Parliament house, nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn, but rather the King and his Councell in the presence of the Lords and Commons.

Fifthly, The judgement given against the Lord Latymer 15. E. 3. Parl. rot. num. 27. (which was for his default in govern­ment against the profit of the King and Realm, procuring of grants to the destruction of the Staple and Towne of Calayes, and levying Impositions upon woolls) was given in full Parliament BY THE BISHOPS and LORDS who awarded him to the custody of the Marshall, and to make fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure: Whereupon the Commons REQUIRED (by way of pe­tition) that he might lose all his Offices, and no longer be of the Kings Councell, which the King granted. The Commons not joy­ning at all with the Lords in his judgement, neither could they so joyne, he being a Peer.

And for the Lord Nevill in that Parliament: num. 33. he was only accused, not judged by the Commons.

Sixthly, The case of 2. H. 5. rot. Parl. num. 15. that Error is [Page 57] there assigned that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons, is a grosse mistake: For the record only recites, That Thomas Mountague Earle of Salisbury, Sonne and Heire of Iohn Mountague Earle of Salisbury, exhibited his pe­tition in Parliament to reverse a judgement given against his said father in the Parliament at Westminster in the second year of King Henry the fourth. Whereupon he exhibited certaine re­versals of Judgements given in Parliament, as making on his behalfe, to the Lords consideration, reversed for some errors assig­ned in those jadgements; to wit one judgement given against Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster, before King Edward the second at Pomfract, the monday before the feast of the Annun­tiation, in the fifteenth yeare of his reigne; and another Judge­ment against Roger de Mortymer, late Earle of March, in the Parliament of King Edward the third, the Monday after the Feast of St. Katherine, in the fourth yeare of his reigne, at Westminster. Which judgements being distinctly and openly read, and fully understood; Jo seemed TO THE KING and LORDS that the case of the death and execution of the said John late Earle of Sa­rum, and of the judgement aforesaid against him given, is not, nor was like to the case of the executing of the said Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster, nor to the case of the killing of Roger Earle of March, nor to any judgement given against the said Thomas and Roger, as aforesaid; but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said Iohn late Earle of Sarum WERE A GOOD JUST and LEGALL DECLARATION and JUDGE­MENT. Per quod CONSIDERATUM FUIT in praesenti Parlia­mento PER PRAEDICTOS DOMINOS tunc ibidem existentes, DE ASSINSU dicti Domini nostri Regis, quod praefatus nunc CO­MES Sarum. NIHIL CAPIAT PER PETITIONEM aut pro­secutionem suam praedictam, Et ulterius TAM DOMINI SPIRI­TUALES QUAM TEMPORALE supradicti, JUDICIUMET DECLARATIONEM praedicta versus dictum Ioannem quondam Comitem Sarum, ut praem [...]ttitur habita five reddita DE ASSENSU IPSIUS DOMINI REGIS AFFIRMARUNT FORE ET ES­SE BONA, JUSTA ET REGALIA, et ea pro hujusmodi EX A­BUNDANTI DISCREVERUNT, & ADJUDICARUNT [Page] TUNC IBIDEM. This is all that is mentioned in this Parlia­ment Roll concerning this businesse.

It appeares by the Parliament Roll of 2 H. 4. num. 30. That Thomas Holland Earl of Kent, Iohn Holland Earle of hunting­do [...], Iohn Mountagne Earle of Sarum Thomas Lord de Dispencer and Ralph omely Knight were impeached of high treason, before the King and Lords in Parliament, for levying actuall Warre against the King to destroy the King, and his Subjects, and for this taken and beheade and hereupon ALL [...]E LORDS TEMPORALL BE­ING IN PARLIAMENT BY ASSENT OF THE KING DECLARED AND ADJVDGED all the said persons TRAI­TORS for leavying Warre against the King▪ and that as Traytors they should forfeit all the lands they had in fee simple the 5 day of Jannary the first yeare of the raigne of the King or after according to the Law of the Land, with all their goods and chattells, notwith­standing they were slaine upon the said levying of Warre without pro­cesse of Law. So this Record. To reverse this judgement was this Petition of Thomas Earle o [...] Sarisbury in 2. H. 5. exhibited, without the errour assigned, as appeares by the Par [...]iament roll: but if it were, that the Lords only gave Judgement without Petiti­on or assent of the Commons (as Sir Edward Cooke imagins▪) [...] the King and Lords, who upon solemned bate over-ruled the er­rour abuses and Petitions, and found this judg [...]ment and Declara­tion of 2. H. 4. given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent with­out the Commons TO BE GOOD JVST and LEGALL, as they did, ex abund [...]nti, is a most undeniable proofe of the King and Lords sole right of JVDGEING and DECLARING HIGH TREASON in Parliament without the Commons, as well in case of Commoners as Lords. Ralph Lomely being but a Commo­ner and Knight, though the rest were Peers; and yet all joynt­ly adjudged Traytors, and declared such only by the King and Lords without the Commons: and the Judgement assured to be good by the Commons who in the Parliament of 13. H. 4. num. 19. Petitioned, the Iohn Lomley might be restored by act of Parliament, and made capable to inherit his fathers lands thus attainted, to which the King by ASSENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPORALL, consented.

[Page 59] Seventhly, the Parliament Roll of 28. H. 6. num. 18. &c. con­taines onely an Impeachment of High Treason against the King, and other great misdemeanors against the Kingdome, and wrongs to particular persons comprised by way of Articles in two distinct Bills brought up by the Commons, and presented by William Tres­ham their Speaker, to the King in the Lords House, the 7. day of February, against William de la Pole, Duke of Suffolke, to which they desired the Duke might give in his Answer by a certaine day, which he did, absolutly denying the Treason against the King, and denying and excusing himselfe of the rest, without putting himselfe upon the Tryall of his Peeres. The Chiefe Iustice thereupon, the 14. day of March by the Kings command, asked this Question of the LORDS WHAT ADVISE THEY WOULD GIVE THE KING, what is to doe futrher in this matter; which advise was deferred till Monday then next following; where­on nothing was done in that matter. On Tuesday the 17. of March, the King sent for all the Lords Spirituall and Temporall then being in Towne (being 42. in all into his Inner Chamber within his Pa­lace of Westminster, where when they were all assembled▪ hee then sent for the Duke thither, who comming into the Kings presence, kneeled downe, and continued kneeling till the Chancellour of Eng­land had delivered the Kings command to him; and demanded of him, what he said to the Commons Articles, not having put himselfe upon his Peerage? Whereupon the Duke denyed all the Articles tou­ching the Kings Person and state of the Realme, as false and scan­dalous. And so not departing from his said Answers, submitted himselfe wholly to the Kings Rule and Governance, without putting himselfe upon his Peerage. Where thus the Chancellour told him That as touching the great and horrible things contained in the first Bill, the King holdeth him neither declared nor charged. And as touching the second Bill, containing misprisons which are not crimi­nall, the King by force of his submission, by his owne advise, and not reporting him to the advice of the Lords, nor by way of judgement, for he is not in place of judgement, putteth you to his rule and gover­nance, that before the first of May next comming, hee should absent himselfe out of the Kingdome of England, and all other his Domi­nions, in France or elsewhere, for five yeares space; and that hee, nor no man for him, should shew or waite any malice, nor hate, to any per­son of what degree soever of the Commons in the Parliament, in no [Page 60] manner of wise, for any thing done to him in this Parliament or else­where. And forthwith Viscount Peamont in behalfe of the said LORDS both Spirituall and Temporall, and BY THEIR AD­VICE, ASSENT AND DESIRE, said and declared to the Kings Highnesse, that this that so was decreed and done by his Ex­cellencie, concerning the person of the said Duke PROCEEDED NOT BY TH [...]IR ADVICE AND COVNSELS, but was done by the Kings owne demeanour and rule. Wherefore they besought the King that this their saying MIGHT BE ENACTED IN THE PARLIAMENT ROLL FOR THEIR MORE DE­CLARATION HEREAFTER, WITH THIS PROTE­STATION, THAT IT SHOVLD NOT BE, NOR TVRNE IN PREJVDICE NOR DEROGATION OF THEM, THEIR HEYRS, NE OF THEIR SVCCES­SOVRS IN TIME COMMING, but that they may HAVE AND INJOY THEIR LIBERTY, AS THEY OR ANY OF THEIR ANCESTORS, PREDECESSORS HAD AND ENIOYED BEFORE THIS TIME. This is the sum of this large record, which makes nothing to the purpose for which it is cited; that it is errour when both Houses joyne not in [...]udge­ment. For first, here is nothing but an impeachment onely by the Commons of a Peere, who ought to be tryed, judged by his Peerage, not by Commoners Secondly, there was no judgement given in Parliament in this case, but only a private Award made by the King, out of the Parliament House in his owne Chamber in presence of the Lords. Thirdly, the Lords entred a speciall protestation against it, as not made by their advice or consent. Fourthly, they en [...]er a speciall claime in the Parliament Roll, for the preservation of their Right and Freedome of Peerage for here­after, both of being tryed and judged onely by their Peeres in Parliament; and so an expresse resolution, that they in Par­liament are and ought to be Iudges, not the Commons. The last Records I have cited at large, lest Sir Edward Cookes briefe quota­tion and mis-recitall of them should deceive the credulous or ig­norant Reader.

Eighthly, the cases of Sir Giles Monpesson, Sir John Michell, Viscount S. Alban, and the Earle of Middlesex, whom the Commons onely impeached; and the Lords alone (without the Commons votes or presence) judged and sentenced, are direct proofes [Page 61] that the power of Iudicature and Censure as well of impeached Commoners as Lords, resides onely in the Lords House; the Commons being but generall Inquisitors, to search out and present both Lords and Commoners publike offences to the Lords, to whom they transmit the charge and witnesses; the Lords the onely Iudges, to heare and determine the charge, examine the witnesses upon oath, and passe and record the sentence, and see it executed; and no more Iudges in the Parliament, then the grand enquest are Iudges at the Assizes or Sessions.

The second and principall objection insisted upon by that Ig­noramu [...], Object. 2. Lilburne, and his disciples the Levellers, is the Statute of Magna Charta, chap. 29. That no Free man shall be imprisoned, outlawed, exiled, or any other way destroyed; Nor we shall not passe upon him, nor condemne him, but BY THE LAWFVLL IVDGMENT OF HIS PEERES, or BY THE LAW OF THE LAND. Whence thus they argue: The Lords in Parlia­ment are not Commoners Peers, but the Commons only, there­fore they cannot be judged in Parliament by the Lords, but by the Commons alone; and if Peers there judge Commoners, it is a tyranny and usurpation even against Magna Charta it selfe, though it be in case of priviledge.

To take away this grand seeming objection,Answ. and give it a sa­tisfactory answer, I say: First, in generall, that there is scarce one Parliament ever since Magna Charta was first confirmed, but the Lords have sentenced and given judgment against some Com­moners capitally or penally in body or purse, or both, without the Commons (and did so doubtlesse before Magna Charta was made, as I have already manifested) yet never did the Commons in any one of those Parliaments till this present, complain of it, as a violation of Magna Charta, or a tyrannicall usurpation, as Lilburne and Overton stile it; but acknowledged it as a just right in the Lords, even in 3. Caroli it selfe when the Petition of Right was passed, in the Lords Iudgment and Sentence against Doctor Manwaring a Commoner, impeached by the Commons. And therefore for this one Ignoramus alone, against the judgements of all the Commons in Parliament, in all ages, to averre this a breach of Magna Charta, for imprisoning and fining him for the highest affront and breach of priviledge over offered to any Parliament, is the extremity of ignorance, malice and singularity.

[Page 62] Secondly, I answer, that the Statute of Magna Charta exten­deth not to, nor was ever intended of the high Court of Parlia­ments Iudgements and Proceedings, but onely to the proceedings and Iudgements in the Kings great Courts of Iustice at Westmin­ster Hall, the Exchequer, his Privy Councell, and other inferiour Courts held before Judges, Iustices of Assize, and other Officers, as is evident by comparing this objected Chapter with c. 11, 12, 13, 14, 18. 28, [...]0, 3 [...], 37. by the Statutes of 25. E. 3. Stat. 5. c. 4. 28. E. 3. c. 3. 37. E. 3. [...]. 18. 38. E. 3. c. 9. 42. E. 3. c. 3. 17. [...]2. c. 6. and the Petition of Right it selfe, 3. Caroli, which so ex­pound it; there being never any complaint against the Parlia­ment it selfe or House of Peeres in any age, for breach of Magna Charta, in censuring or imprisoning Commoners till now. There­fore this misapplying of this Law to the Parliament and House of Peers, is a grosse oversight.

Thirdly, the very literall sence of this Law is much mistaken by the Objectors; For that any Freeman of England is a Peer to another Freeman, quatenus such a one, within this Law, though of an higher degree in point of honour, dignity, office, and estate; and this clause [...] No Freeman shall be imprisoned, and but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers, extends onely to exclude villaines and those who are not Freeholders from being Iudges of Freemen and Freeholders in tryalls by Iury, (whence the Writs to the She­riffes to summon Iurors, require them alwayes to returne Liberos & Legales homines) not to exclude Lords or Peeres (who are Freemen in the higest degree) to be Iudges of Commoners who are Freemen. So as the Argument from the true meaning of this Law can be but this, villaines and those who are no Freemen are not to be Iudges, or impannelled in Iuries to condemne Freemen, because they are not their Peeres, nor Freemen as well as they: Therefore Lords who are Freemen of the higest degree, may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen, very lear­ned nonsence, we all know that the Lord Chancellour of England, Lord Keeper, Lord Treasurer, Master of the Court of Wards, and some of the Iudges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times, with the Chiefe Iustic [...]ar, and Iustices in Eyre were anciently and of late too (as the Earle of Holland and others) Peeres of the Realme, not Commoners; and that all the Peeres of the Realme are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer, and of the [Page 63] Peace, yet did wee never heare of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery, Kings Be [...]ch, the Exchequer Chamber, Eyres, Assises or Sessions; Sir, I am a Commoner, and you are a Peer of the Realme, but no Com­moner as I am; besides, you sit here onely in the Kings right, do­ing all in his name, and representing his person, who is not any Peer, but Soveraigne. Therefore you ought not to judge my cause not condemne my person nor give any sentence for or a­gainst mee, it being contrary to Magna Charta, which enacts, That no freeman should be judged or pressed upon or condemned, but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers. Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish, to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lil­burne; And if Lords and Peers may judge the persons and causes of Commoners in the Cancery, Kings Bench, Exchequer, Court of Wards, Eyre, and at Assises and S [...]ssions, without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta; much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it, who are certainly Peers to Commoners, though Commoners be not Peers to them, within the meaning of Magna Charta, ch. 29.

Forthly, If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners cause, without breach of this clause in Magna Charta, then why didSee his In­nocency and truth justified. Lilburne himselfe sue and petition to the Lords as the onely competent Iudges to reverse his sentence in Star-Chamber, and give him dammages, because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta: If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds with­out expresse violation of this Law; then h [...]mselfe in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Starre Chamber Sentence, because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta, was as great a violation of it as his Starr-Chamber censure, and his sen­tence in Starre-Chamber remaines still unreversed, because the Lords examining and reversing of it, they being no Commo­ners as hee is, but Peers, was Coram non judice, and meerly void, by the Statute of 25. E. 3. St [...]t. 5. [...]. 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it selfe, as hee now expounds it. Let him therefore unrid­dle and assoyle thi [...] his owne Dilemma, or for ever hold his tongue and pen, from publishing such absurdities to seduce poore people, as he hath don [...]; and exa [...]perate them to clamour against the Lords, for being more favourable in their censure of him, then his trans­cendent [Page 64] Libels and contempts against them deserved.

Fifthly, This Statute is in the dis-junctive, by the Lawfull of his Peers, OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND, which this Ignoramus observes not. [...] Now by the [...] Law of the Land, every Inferiour Court of justice may fine and imprison men for contempts and misdemeanors against them and their authority: therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest and supreamed Tribunall, may much more doe it, and have ever done it, even by this ex­pr [...]e clause of Magna Charta; the Law and Custome of Parlia­ment, as well as they may give [...] judgements in writs of Errour a­gainster for Commons, without the Commons consent, as himselfe [...]oth grant.

Fifthly, It is granted by Lilburne, that by this expresse Law, [...]o f [...]eeman of England ought to be judged or censured but onely by his Peers, and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobl [...]men, nor Noble­men Peer [...] to Commoners; Then by what Law of reason dared he to publish to the world, [...] That the House of Commons are the Su [...]reme Power within this Realme and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JVDGES, certainly this is a Note beyond Ela, a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein hee placeth his strength, and subverts his very ground work against the Lords jurisdiction in their censure of him. For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords [...]udges, then by Magna Charta, c. 29. they are and ought to bee their Peers; and if the Commons bee the Lords Peers, then the Lords must bee the Commons Peers too; and if so, then they may lawfully be his judges even by Magna Charta, because here he grants them to bee no other then his Peers; Loe the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers, cut off with his owne sword; and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and [...]ttish contradictory Glosses on it; and to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to bee by right the Lords judges. I might informe him▪ that Magna Charta it selfe [...]. 1. & 20 and Sir Edward Cooke, (his chiefe Authour) in his commentary on them are expresse against him, that in the Par­liament of 15. c. 3. ch. 2. in print, it was enacted. That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and im­prisoned and their Temporalities Lands and Tenements, Goods and [...] seised in the Kings hards, and some put to death, [Page 65] WITHOVT IVDGEMENT OF THEIR PEERS, that NO PEER OF THE LAND, Officer or other by reason of his of­fice, nor of things touching his office, nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement, to lose his Temporalities, Lands, Tenements, Goods, Chattels, nor to bee arrested or imprisoned, outlawed, exiled, nor forejudged, nor put to answer, NOR TO BE IVDGED BVT BY AWARD OF THE SAID PEERS IN PARLIA­MENT. which Priviledge of theirs was both enjoyed and clai­med in Parliament, 4. E. 3. n. 14. 15. E. 3. n. 6. 8. 44. 49. 51. 17. E. 3. n. 22. 28. F. 3. n. 7. [...]0. 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7. 8. &c. and sundry other Parliament RollsSee Cook. 4. Instit. p. 15. [...]7. E. 3. 19. And in 11. R. 2. n. 7. All the Lords in this Parliament as well Spirituall as Temporall, claimed this their liber­ty and franchise that all weighty matters in the same Parliament to be after moved TOVCHING THE PEERS OF THE LAND, ought to bee determined, and judged and discussed BY THE COVRSE OF THE PARLIAMENT, and not by the Civill Law, nor BY THE COMMON LAWES used in other infe­riour Courts of the Relame. The which claime and liberty the King most willingly allowed, and granted thereto IN FVLL PARLI­AMENT. And hereupon in the Parliament of 14. R. 2. n. 13. The King and LORDS (without the Commons) ADIVDGED the Earledome and Seigniory of Richmond to bee forfeited, by reason that Iohn Duke of Br [...]tany then Earle of Richmond adhe­red to the French against his Allegiance. This Paradox therefore of his, is against all Statutes, Law-Books, and Presidents whatso­ever, and Magna Charta it selfe.

There is onely one objection more of moment remaining,Object. 3. which is this, If the House of Peers may without the Commons fine and imprison Commoners; then if their fine and imprison­ment be unjust and illegall, they shall bee remedilesse, there being no superiour Courr to appeale unto, which will bee an intollera­ble slavery and grievance not to bee indured among free-borne people.

I answer,Answ. first, that no injustice shall or ought to be presumed in the highest Court of Iustice, till it bee apparantly manifested. Secondly, If any such censure be given, the party (as in Chance­ry) upon just grounds shewed may Petition the House of Peers for a reveiw and new-hearing of the cause, which they in justice nei­ther will nor can deny; and if they doe, then the party grieved [Page] may petition the House ef Commons to interceed in his behal [...]e to the Peers for a rehearing; but to discharge or free any Commo­ner judicially censured by the Lords, I have hitherto met with no President in former Parliaments, nor power in the House of Com­mons to doe it, who cannot reverse Euro [...]ous judgements in any inferiour Courts by writ of Errour, but the Lords alone; much lesse then the judgements of the Higher House of Peers which is par [...]mount them, Though I conceive the House of Peers, being the Superiour Authority, and onely Iudicatory in Parliament, may relieve or release any Commoners unjustly imprisoned or censured by the Commons house, or any of their Committees, and ought in justice to doe it; or else there will be the same mischiefe or a grea­ter, in admitting the House of Commons to bee judges of Com­moners; if there bee no appeale from them to the Lords, in case their sentences bee illegall or unjust. Thirdly, This mischiefe is but rare,Cook 4. instit p. 21, 22. 4. [...] 3. n. 14. Brook and C [...]nmptons ju­risdiction, and all Statutes for repealing former Parlia­ments Acts, Iudgements, or Attaindors. and you may object the same against a sentence given, or Law made in Parliament, by the King and both Houses, because there is no appeale from it, or redresse of it, but onely in the next Par­liament that shall be summoned by petition. And there is a greater greevance in ill publique Acts which concerne many, then in [...] judgements which concerne but one or two particular persons; which yet cannot be repealed but by another Parliament; as the Errours and decrees of one generall Counsell cannot bee rectified or reversed but by and till another Generall Counsell meets to doe it. The same mischiefe was and is in Errous, Iudgements, and Decrees given in the Kings Bench, Chancery, and illegall com­mitments there; for which there is no reliefe out of Parliament, but towait till a Parliament be called.

Finally, Hee that suffers by and under an unjust censure will have the comfort of a good Conscience to support him till he bee relieved; and therefore heLuk. [...]1. 19. 1 Pet 3. 14. He. [...]0, 32, 33, 34. must possesse his soule with Patience, and rejoyce under his crosse, and not raile, murmur, and play the Bedlam as Lilburne and his Companions, Overton, Lar­ner, and other Sectaries doe, against our [...] Pet. 2. 15. to 21 c. 4. [...]6. I [...]. 53. Saviours owne precept and example, & then God in his due season will Psal. 3 [...]. & 37. & 46. relieve & right them in a legall way; whereas their impatience, raving, and libel­lous railing Pamphlets and Petitions (not savouring of a Christian, meek and humble spirit) will but create them new troubles, expose them unto just and heavy censures, and rob them both of the com­fort [Page 67] and glory of all their former suffrings against Law and Right.

Having answered these Objections I shall now earnestly de­sire all Lilburnes and Overtons seduced Disciples, whether Mem­bers or others, seriously to weigh and consider the premises, that so they may see how grossely they have been deluded, abused, and misled by these two Ignes fatui, or New-lights of the Law, and Circumscribers of the Lords and Parliaments Iurisdictions, which (God knowes) they no more know nor understand then Balams Asse, as the premises demonstrate; and I shall seriously adjure them, (if they have any grace, shame, or remainder of ingenuity left in them) ingeniously to recant, and pub­liquely to retract all their seditiou [...] rayling Libels, and Scurri­lous Invectives against the Lords undoubted Priviledges, Iuris­diction, and Iudicature, which I have here unanswerably made good, by undeniable Testimonies, Histories, Records, and the grounds of policy, and right reason, (which they are unable to gaine say) to undeceive the many ignorant over-credulous poore soules they have corrupted and misled to the publique destrubance of our Kingdomes Peace; Isay. 9. 16. and let all their followers consider well of our Saviours caution, Mat. 15. 14. If the blinde lead the blinde (as these blinde-guides doe you) both of them shall fall into the ditch, and there perish together: O consider therefore what I have here written to undeceive your judgements, and reforme your practise; consider that Dominion, Principality, Regality, Magi­stracy, and Nobility are founded in the very Law of Nature, and Gods owne institution, who subjected not onely all beasts, and li­ving creatures to the soveraigne Lordship of man, to whom hee gave Dominion over them, Gen. 1. 28, 29. c. 9. 2, 3, 5. by vertue where­of men enjoy farre greater Priviledges then beasts; but likewise one man unto another, asGen. 3. 16. Exod. 20. 12. Ephes. 5. 22. to 30. c. 6. 1. to 10. Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3. Tit. 3. 1. Col. 3. 20, 22. 1 Pet. [...]. 13, 14, 18 c. 3. 15. Heb. 13. 17. Iosh. 1. 16, 17, 18. Matth. 8 9. children to their Parents, Wives to their Husbands, Servants to their Masters; Subjects to their Kings, Princes, Magistrates, Souldiers to their Captaines, Mari­ners to their Ship-Masters, Schollers to their Tutors, People to their Ministers; which order, if denied or disturbed, will bring abso­lute and speedy confusion in all Families, Corporations, States, Kingdomes, Armies, Garrisons, Schooles, Churches, and dis­solve all humane Societies, which subsist by order and subordina­tion onely to one another; and seeing Monarchy, Royalty, Princi­pality, [Page 68] Nobility, yea Titles of Honour and Nobility (as Kings, Prin­ces, Dukes, Lords, &c.) are as ancient almost, as the world it selfe, universally received, approved among all Nations whatsoever under heaven, See M [...]st [...]r Seldens Titles of honour, Dr. Hu [...]es and others of Nob [...]l [...]ty. Catane [...]s C [...]o­logus gloriae mundi. and honoured with speciall Priviledges, as not only all k [...] eminent Authours, and experience manitest, but these ensuing Scripture Texts, Gen. 12. 15. c. 14. 1. to 10. c. 17. 6. 16. c. 20. 2. c. 21, 22, 23. c. 25. 16. c. 26. 1. 8. 26. c. 36. 15, 16, 17, 18, 29, 30, 31, to [...]3. c. 9. 1, 2. c. 41. 40, to 47. c. 47. 2 [...], 26. Exod. 1. 8. Numb. 20. 14, &c. c 21, 1, 1 [...], 21, 33. c. 22. 7, 10, 14, 15, 40. c. 23. 17. c. 7. 2, 3, 10. c. 16. 2. c. 27. 2. c. 32. 2. Dent. 17. 14, 15, 16. Iosh. 1. 16, 17, 18. c. 5. 1. c. 8. 9, 10 11, 12. Iudg. 9. 6, 18. 1 Sam. 8. 5, 6. 2 sam 11. 2. 1 Kin. 4. 34. c. 10 15, 28, 29. c. 20. 16. c. 23. 22. Iob. 3. 14. c. 36. 7. Psal. 2. 2. 10. Ps. 62. 12, 14, 29. Ps. 72. 10. Ps. 102. 15. Ps. 136. 17, 18. Ps. 138. 4. Prov. 8. 15, 16. Prov. 30. 31. Eccles. 10, 16, 17. Iudg. 3. 5. c. 16. 8, 1 Sam. 5. 11. c. 29. 2, 6, 7. Dan. 4. 36. c. 5. 9, 10, 23. c. 6. 27. Mat. 8. 9, Mar. 6. 21. c. 10. 42. 1 Cor. 8. 5. Rom. 61. 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. Tit. 3. 1, 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13, 14, 15. Acts 9. 27. (which I wish our Sectaries, Lovellers and Lilburnists to consider and study, with the others forecited; it will be a meer desperate folly and madnesse in any man to prove Antipodes to this instituiion of God, Nature, Nations; to run quite contrary to all meu, and to levell the head, neck, shoulders to the feet; the tallect Cedars to the lowest Shru [...]s; the roofe of every building to the foundation stones, the Su [...]ne, Moone, Starres, Heavens, to the very Earth and center, and even men themselves to the meanest beasts. I shall therefore conclude with Saint Pauls serious admonition, which these refractory persons have quite forgotten, Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3. Let every soul be subject to the higher Power for there is no po [...]er but of God the powers that be are ordained of God; whosoever therfore resisteth (much more oppugneth, abolisheth) the Power, resi­steth (oppugneth, abolisheth) THE ORDINANCE OF GOD, and t [...]ey that resist (oppugne or endeavour to abolish these powers) shall receive to themselves DAMNATION; for Rulers are not a terrour to good workes, but to the evill, and wherefore YE MVST NEEDS BE SVBIECT, NOT ONLY FOR WRATH, but also FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE. And for this cause pay you tribute also, for they are Gods Ministers, attending continual­ly on this very thing. Render therefore to all (such higher Powers) [Page 69] their dues, tribute to whom ribute, custome to whom custome, feare to whom feare, HONOVR to whom HONOVR IS DUE, (which Saint Peter likewise seconds almost in the selfe-same words, which you may doe well to peruse and study, 1 Pet. 2. 12. to 20.) and then you will never dare to question or dispute any more the Power, Iudicatory, Priviledges of the Right Honourable House of Peers, much lesse to Revile and Libell against their per­sons as now you doe, to the infinite Scandall of your Schismaticall faction, and Religion it selfe, which you professe onely in shew, but deny in deed and practise.