Obj. But were not Dr. Cowel and Dr. Manwa∣ring censured in Parliament for these Tenents?
Sol. They were censured, and deservedly, but different from our Case: I was a Member in the Parliament, and was in the Lower House when Cowel was sentenced: I tell you what Dr. Cowel did, he wrote a Book, and under the words Pre∣rogatives, Subsidies, and Kings, inferred as though the King might make Laws without consent in Parliament, and wrote against the Common Law, which the King is sworn to maintain; thereupon he was sentenced, and his Sentence was just, and I gave my Voice for it. The other was Dr. Man∣waring, he preached two Sermons, that the King was not bound to observe His Laws, that the Right and Liberty of the Subject are at the Kings Will and Pleasure without Parliament, and that this doth bind the Conscience of the Subject, and that they are bound to pay Loan-Money upon E∣ternal Damnation, and that they that did refuse to pay the Loan-Money did offend against the Law of God, and were guilty of Disloyalty and Disobedience; and the Authority of Parliament was not necessary to the granting of any Subsidy: For this he was sentenced and made his Submission. That was for raising of Moneys for his own Use, but this is to require his Subjects to provide Ships for the Defence of the Kingdom.
Next Objection was Escuage, that by that Te∣nure great profits arise to the King for defence. Shall the Defence of the Kingdom be laid upon them which have a Revenue for their own Main∣tenance? What will you have to maintain the King, with Wife, Children, Intelligencers abroad? will you strip Him of all this? It is true, I hold that the King with the Subjects must joyn together in the Defence. If the King be Rich, you should have pleaded, The King hath sufficient in His Purse.