The annals of King James and King Charles the First ... containing a faithful history and impartial account of the great affairs of state, and transactions of parliaments in England from the tenth of King James MDCXII to the eighteenth of King Charles MDCXLII : wherein several material passages relating to the late civil wars (omitted in former histories) are made known.

This Declaration, ingross'd in Parlia∣ment, being read, Mr. Pym ad∣dressed himself to the Lords in this manner.

THat he should speak to this Cause with more confidence, because he saw nothing * 1.1 out of himself that might discourage him: If he considered the matter, the offences were of an high nature, of easie proof; if he considered their Lordships, who were the Judges of their own Interest, their own Honour, the example of their Ancestors, the care of their Posterity, would all be Advocates with him in this cause on the be∣half of the Commonwealth; if he considered the King our Sovereign (the pretence of whose Service and Prerogative might perchance be sought unto as a Defence and Shelter for this Delinquent) he could not but remember that part of his Majesties Answer to the Petition of Right of both Houses, that he held himself bound in Conscience to preserve those Liberties: which this man would perswade him to impeach, He said further, That he could not but remem∣ber his Majesties Love to Piety and Justice, mani∣fested upon all occasions; and he knew Love to be the root and spring of all other passions and af∣fections. A man therefore hates, because he sees somewhat in that which he hates contrary to that which he loves; a man therefore is angry, because he sees somewhat in that wherewith he is angry, that gives impediment and interruption to the accomplishment of that which he loves.

If this be so, by the same Act of his Appre∣hension, by which he believes his Majesties love to Piety and Justice, he must needs believe his hate and destation of this man, who went about to withdraw him from the exercise of both.

Then he proceeded to that which, he said, was the Task enjoyned him, to make good every Clause of that which had been read unto them: which that he might the more clearly perform, he propounded to observe that order of parts, unto which the said Declaration was naturally dissolved.

1. Of the Preamble.

2. The Body of the Charge.

3. The Conclusion, or Prayer of the Com∣mons.

'The Preamble consisted altogether of recital;

First, of the Inducements upon which the Com|'mons undertook this complaint.

The second, of those Laws and Liberties, a∣gainst which the offence was committed.

The third, of the violation of those Laws which have relation to that offence.

From the connexion of all those recitals (he said) there did result three Positions, which he was to maintain as the ground-work and founda∣tion of the whole Cause.

The first, That the form of Government in any State could not be altered without apparent danger of ruin to that State.

The second, the Law of England, whereby the Subject was exempted from Taxes and Loans, not granted by common consent of Parliament, was not introduced by any Statute, or by any Charter or Sanction of Princes, but was the an∣cient and fundamental Law, issuing from the first frame and constitution of the Kingdom.

The third, that this Liberty of the Subject is not only most convenient and profitable for the People, but most honourable, most necessa∣ry for the King; yea, in that point of Supply for which it was endeavoured to be bro∣ken.

The form of Government is that which doth actuate and dispose every part and member of a State to the common good; and as those parts give strength and ornament to the whole, so they receive from it again strength and protection in their several stations and degrees.

If this mutual relation and entercourse be bro∣ken, the whole frame will quickly be dissolved, and fall in pieces, and instead of this concord and interchange of support, whilst one part seeks to uphold the old form of Government, and the other part to introduce a new, they will misera∣bly consume and devour one another. Histories are full of the calamities of whole States and Na∣tions in such cases. It is true, that time must needs bring some alterations, and every alteration is a step and degree towards a dissolution; those things only are eternal which are constant and u∣niform: Therefore it is observed by the best Writers upon this Subject, that those Common∣wealths have been most durable and perpetual,

which have often reformed and recomposed themselves according to their first Institution and Ordinance; for by this means they repair the breaches, and counterwork the ordinary and na∣tural effects of time.

The second question is as manifest, there are plain footsteps of those Laws in the Government of the Saxons, they were of that vigour and force, as to over-live the Conquest, nay, to give bounds and limits to the Conqueror, whose Vi∣ctory gave him first hope; but the assurance and possession of the Crown he obtained by composi∣tion, in which he bound himself to observe these, and the other ancient Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom, which afterwards he likewise confirm∣ed by Oath at his Coronation: from him the said Obligation descended to his Successors. It is true, they have been often broken, they have been often confirmed by Charters of Kings, by Acts of Parliaments; but the Petitions of the Subjects, upon which those Charters and Acts were founded, were ever Petitions of Right, de∣manding their ancient and due Liberties, not suing for any new.

To clear the third Position (he said) may seem to some men more a Paradox, That those Liberties of the Subject should be so Honourable, so profitable for the King, and most necessary for the supply of his Majesty. It hath been upon another occasion declared, that if those Liberties were taken away, there should remain no more industry, no more justice, no more courage; who will contend, who will endanger himself for that which is not his own?

But, he said, he would not insist upon any of those points, nor yet upon others very impor∣tant; he said, that if those Liberties were taken away, there would remain no means for the Sub∣jects, by any Act of Bounty or Benevolence, to ingratiate themselves to their Sovereign.

And he desired their Lordships to remember what profitable Prerogatives the Laws had ap∣pointed for the support of Sovereignty; as Ward∣ships, Treasures-trove, Felons goods, Fines, Amercem••nts, and other Issues of Courts, Wrecks, Escheats, and many more, too long to be enumerated; which for the most part are now by Charters and Grants of several Princes di∣spersed into the hands of private persons; and that besides the ancient Demesns of the Crown of England, William the Conqueror did annex, for the better maintenance of his Estate, great proportions of those Lands, which were confis∣cate from those English which persisted to with∣stand him; and of these, very few remain at this day in the King's possession: And that since that time, the Revenue of the Crown had been sup∣plied and augmented by Attainders, and other Casualties, in the Age of our Fathers, by the dissolution of Monasteries and Chantries near a third part of the whole Land being come into the King's possession. He remembred further, that constant and profitable Grant of the Subjects in the Act of Tunnage and Poundage. And all these, he said, were so alienated, anticipated, over-charged with Annuities and Assignments, that no means were left for the pressing and im∣portant occasions of this time, but the voluntary and free gift of the Subjects in Parliament.

The hearts of the People, and their bounty in Parliament, is the only constant Treasure and Revenue of the Crown, which cannot be ex∣hausted, alienated, anticipated, or otherwise charged and incumbred.

In his entrance into the second part, he pro∣pounded these steps, by which he meant to pro∣ceed.

1. To shew the state of the Cause, as it stood both in the Charge and in the Proof, that so their Lordships might the better compare them both together.

2. To take away the pretensions of mitigations and limitations of his opinions, which the Doctor had provided for his own defence.

3. To observe those circumstances of Aggra∣vation, which might properly be annexed to his Charge.

4. To propound some Precedents of former times, wherein, though he could not match the offence now in question (for he thought the like before had never been committed) yet he should produce such as should sufficiently declare, how forward our Ancestors would have been in the prosecution and condemning of such offences, if they had been then committed.

The Offence was prescribed in a double man∣ner; First, by the general scope and intention, and by the matter and particulars of the Fact, whereby that intention was expressed.

In the description of the intention he observed six points, every one of which was a character of extream malice and wickedness.

1. His attempt to misguide and seduce the Conscience of the King.

2. To incense his Royal displeasure against his Subjects.

3. To scandalize, impeach, and subvert the good Laws and Government of the Kingdom, and authority of Parliaments.

4. To avert his Majesties mind from calling of Parliaments.

5. To alienate his Royal Heart from his Peo∣ple.

6. To cause Jealousies, Sedition, and Division in the Kingdom.

Of these Particulars (he said) he would forbear to speak further, till he should come to those parts of the Fact, to which they were most pro∣perly to be applied.

The Materials of the Charge were contrived into three distinct Articles; the first of these comprehended two Clauses.

1. That his Majesty is not bound to keep and observe the good Laws and Customs of the Realm, concerning the Right and Liberty of the Subject to be exempted from all Loans, Taxes, and other Aids laid upon them, without com∣mon consent in Parliament.

That his Majesties Will and Command in im∣posing any Charges upon his Subjects without such consent, doth so far bind them in their Con∣sciences, that they cannot refuse the same with∣out peril of eternal damnation.

Two kinds of proof were produced upon this Article.

The first was from some assertions of the Do∣ctors, concerning the Power of Kings in general, but by the necessary consequence to be applied to the King of England.

The next kind of Proof was from his Censures, and determinations upon the particular Case of the late Loan, which by necessity and parity of reason, were likewise applicable to all Cases of the like nature. And lest by frailty of memory he might mistake the words, or invert the sense, he desired leave to resort to his Paper, wherein the places were carefully extracted out of the Book it self. And then he read each particular

Clause by it self, pointing to the page for proof, which we here forbear to mention, referring the Reader to the Book it self.

Then he proceeded and said, That from this Evidence of the Fact doth issue a clear evidence of his wicked intention to misguide and seduce the King's Conscience, touching the observation of the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom, to scandalize and impeach the good Laws and Go∣vernment of the Realm, and the Authority of Parliaments, which are two of those Characters of Malice which he formerly noted, and now in∣forced thus: If to give the King ill Council, in some one particular Action, hath heretofore been heavily punished in this high Court; how much more heinous must it needs be thought, by ill Counsel to pervert and seduce his Majesties Con∣science, which is the Sovereign Principle of all moral actions, from which they are to receive Warrant for their direction before they be acted, and Judgment for their reformation afterwards? If Scandalum Magnatum, Slander and Infamy cast upon great Lords and Officers of the Kingdom, have been always most severely censured, how much more tender ought we to be of that Slan∣der and Infamy which is here cast upon the Laws and Government, from whence is derived all the Honour and Reverence due to those great Lords and Magistrates?

All men (and so the greatest and highest Ma∣gistrates) are subject to passions and partialities, whereby they may be transported into over-hard injurious crosses: Which considerations may sometimes excuse, though never justifie the rail∣ing and evil speeches of men, who have been so provoked; it being a true rule, That whatsoe∣ver gives strength and inforcement to the temp∣tation in any sin, doth necessarily imply an abate∣ment and diminution of guilt in that sin. But to slander and disgrace the Laws and Govern∣ment, is without possibility of any such excuse, it being a simple act of a Malignant Will, not in∣duced nor excited by any outward provocation: the Laws carrying an equal and constant respect to all, ought to be reverenced equally by all. And thus he derived the proofs and Inforcements, up∣on the first Article of the Charge.

The second Article he said contained three Clauses:

1. That these Refusers had offended against the Law of God.

2. Against the Supream Authority.

3. By so doing, were become guilty of Impie∣ty, Disloyalty, Rebellion, Disobedience, and liable to many other Taxes.

For proof of all these (he said) he needed no other evidence than what might be easily drawn from those places which he had read already; for what impiety can be greater, than to contemn the Law of God, and to prefer human Laws be∣fore it? what greater Disloyalty, Rebellion, and Disobedience, than to depress Supream Authori∣ty, to tie the hands and clip the wings of Sove∣reign Princes? yet he desired their Lordships pa∣tience in hearing some few other places, wherein the Stains and Taint, which the Doctor endea∣voured to lay upon the Refusers, might appear by the odiousness of their comparisons, in which he doth labour to rank them.

The first Comparison is with Popish Recusants; yet he makes them the worst of the two, and for the better resemblance, gives them a new name of Temporal Recusants.

For this he alledgeth the first Sermon, pag. 31, 32. and part of the fifth Consideration, by which he would perswade them to yield to this Loan.

Fifthly, If they would consider what advan∣tage this their Recusancy in Temporals, gives to the common Adversary, who for disobedience in Spirituals, have hitherto alone inherited that name: for that which we our selves condemn in them for so doing, and profess to hate that Re∣ligion which teacheth them so to do; that is, to refuse subjection unto Princes in Spirituals; the same, if not worse, some of our side now (if ours they be) dare to practise.

We must needs be argued of less Conscience, and more Ingratitude, both to God and the King, if in Temporal things we obey not: They in Spirituals deny subjection, wherein they may perhaps frame unto themselves some reasons of probability, that the offence is not so heinous: if we in Temporals shall be so refractory, what co∣lour of reason can we possibly find to make our defence withal, without the utter shaming of our selves, and laying a stain which cannot easily be washed out, upon that Religion which his Ma∣jesty doth so graciously maintain, and our selves profess?

The second comparison is with Turks and Jews, in the second Sermon, pag. 47. What a Paradox is, &c. What a Turk will do for a Christian, and a Christian for a Turk, and a Jew for both, &c. the same, and much less Christian men, should deny to a Christian King.

The third comparison is with Corah, Dathan and Abiram, Theudas and Judas, which is taken out of the second Sermon, pag. 49. where he la∣bours to deprive those Refusers of all merit in the sufferings for this Cause.

Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, whom for their mur∣murings God suddenly sunk into Hell-fire, might as well alledge their sufferings had some resem∣blance with that of the three Children in the Babylonian Furnace; and Theudas and Judas, the two Incendiaries of the People, in the days of Caesar's Tribute, might as well pretend their Cause to be like the Maccabees.

Thus he ended the second Article of the Charge, upon which, he said, were imprinted other two of these six Characters of Malice for∣merly vented: That is, a wicked intention to in∣crease his Majesties displeasure against his good Subjects so refusing, and to alienate his heart from the rest of his People: Both which were points so odious, that he needed not to add any further in∣forcement or illustration.

The third Article contained three Clauses.

1. That Authority of Parliament is not neces∣sary for the raising of Aids and Subsidies.

2. That the slow proceedings of such Assem∣blies, are not fit to supply the urgent necessity of the State.

3. That Parliaments are apt to produce sundry impediments to the just designs of Princes, and give them occasion of displeasure and discontent.

For proof of all which he alledged two places▪ containing the two first of those six Considerati∣ons, which are propounded by the Doctor, to in∣duce the refusers to yield to the Loan, in the first Sermon, page 26, 27.

First, If they would please to consider, that though such Assemblies as are the highest and greatest Representations of a Kingdom, be most Sacred and Honourable, and necessary also to those ends to which they were at first instituted; yet know we must, that ordained they were not to this end, to contribute any Right to Kings,

whereby to challenge tributary Aids and subsi∣diary Helps; but for the more equal imposing, and more easie exacting of that which unto Kings doth appertain by natural and original Law and Justice, as their proper Inheritance annexed to their Imperial Crowns from their Birth. And therefore if by a Magistrate that is Supream, if upon necessity, extream and urgent, such Subsi∣diary helps be required, a proportion being held respectively to the ability of the persons charged, and the sum and quantity so required surmount not too remarkably the use and charge for which it was levied, very hard would it be for any man in the world, that should not accordingly satisfie such demands, to defend his Conscience from that heavy prejudice of resisting the Ordinance of God, and receiving to himself damnation; though e∣very of those Circumstances be not observed, which by the Municipal Law is required.

Secondly, If they would consider the impor∣tunities that often may be urgent, and pressing necessaries of State, that cannot stay without cer∣tain and apparent danger, for the motion and re∣volution of so great and vast a Body as such As∣semblies are, nor yet abide their long and pausing deliberation when they are assembled, nor stand upon the answering of those jealous and over∣wary Cautions and Objections made by some, who wedded over-much to the love of epidemi∣cal and popular Errors, and bent to cross the most just and lawful designs of their wise and gracious Sovereign; and that under the plausible shews of singular liberty and freedom, which, if their Con∣science might speak, would appear nothing more than the satisfying either of private humours, passions, or purposes.

He said, he needed not draw any Arguments or Conclusions from these places; the substance of the Charge appeared sufficiently in the words themselves: and to this third Article he fixed two other of these six Characters of Malice, That it is his wicked intention to avert his Majesties mind from calling of Parliaments, and to cause Jealousies, Seditions, and Divisions in the King∣dom; which he shortly enforced thus: If Par∣liaments be taken way, mischiefs and disorders must needs abound, without any possibility of good Laws to reform them; Grievances will daily increase, without opportunities or means to redre••s them; and what readier way can there be to distractions betwixt the King and People, to tumults and distempers in the State, than this?

And so he concluded this third Article of the Charge.

The Limitations whereby the Doctor had pro∣vided to justifie (or at least to excuse) himself, were propounded to be three.

That he did not attribute to the King any such absolute Power as might be exercised at all times, or upon all occasions, according to his own plea∣sure, but only upon necessity, extream and ur∣gent.

2. That the sum required, must be propor∣tionable to the ability of the party, and to the use and occasion.

3. That he did not say, That the substance of the Municipal or National Laws might be omit∣ted or neglected, but the Circumstances only.

To these were offered three Answers, the first general, the other two particular. The general Answer was this, That it is all one to leave the Power absolute, and to leave the Judgment ar∣bitrary, when to execute that Power; for al∣though these limitat••••••s should be admitted, yet it is left to the King alone to determine, what is an urgent and pressing necessity, what is a just proportion, both in respect of the ability, and of the use and occasion; and what shall be said to be a Circumstance, and what of the substance of the Law; and the Subject is left without remedy: the Legal bounds being taken away, no private person shall be allowed to oppose his own parti∣cular opinion in any of these points to the King's resolution; so that all these limitations, though specious in shew, are in effect fruitless and vain.

The first particular Answer applied to that limitation of urgent necessity, was taken from the case of Normandy, as it appears in the Com∣mentaries of Guilme Jeremie, upon the customary Laws of that Dutchy: they having been opprest with some Grievances, contrary to this Franchise, made their complaint to Lewis the Tenth, which by his Charter, in the year 1314. acknowledging the Right and Custom of the Countrey, and that they had been unjustly grieved, did grant and provide, that from thenceforward they should be free from all Subsidies and Exactions to be imposed by him and his Successors; yet with this Clause, Si necessitie grand ne le requiret: Which small Exception hath devoured all these Immuni∣ties; for though these States meet every year, yet they have little or no power left, but to agree to such Levies as the King will please to make upon them.

The second particular Answer applied to the limitation and diminution of this Power, which may be pretended to be made by this word, Cir∣cumstance, as if he did acknowledge the King to be bound to the substance of the Law, and free only in regard of the manner; whereas, if the places be observed, it will appear, that he intends by that word, The Assembly of Parliaments, and Assent of the People, such Contribution, which is the very substance of the Right and Liberty now in question.

The Circumstances of Aggravation observed to be annexed to this Cause, were these:

The first from the place where these Sermons were preached; the Court, the King's own Fa∣mily, where such Doctrine was before so well be∣lieved, that no man needed to be converted. Of this there could be no end, but either Simoniacal, by flattery and soothing to make way for his own preferment, or else extream malicious, to add new afflictions to those who lay under his Maje∣sties wrath, disgraced and imprisoned, and to enlarge the wound which had been given to the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom.

The second was from the consideration of his holy Function: He is a Preacher of Gods Word; and yet he had endeavoured to make that which was the only Rule of Justice and Goodness, to be the Warrant for violence and oppression. He is a Messenger of Peace, but he had endeavoured to sow strife and dissention, not only amongst private persons, but even betwixt the King and his People, to the disturbance and danger of the whole state: He is a Spiritual Father, but like that evil Father in the Gospel, he hath given his Children Stones instead of Bread; instead of Flesh he hath given them Scorpions.

Lastly, he is a Minister of the Church of England, but he hath acted the part of a Romish Jesuite; they labour our destruction, by dissolving the Oath of Allegiance taken by the People; he doth the same work, by dissolving the Oath of Protecti∣on and Justice taken by the King.

A third point of Aggravation was drawn from the quality of these Authors, upon whose Au∣thority he doth principally rely, being for the most part Friers and Jesuits, and from his fraud and shifting in citing those Authors to purposes quite different from their own meanings.

Touching which it was performed, that most of his places are such as were intended by the Au∣thors concerning absolute Monarchies, not regu∣lated by Laws or Contracts betwixt the King and his People; and in Answer to all Authorities of this kind, were alledged certain passages of a Speech from our late Sovereign King James, to the Lords and Commons in Parliament, 1609.

In these our times we are are to distinguish be∣twixt the state of Kings in their first Original, and between the state of settled Kings and Mo∣narchs that do at this time govern in Civil King∣doms, &c.

Every just King in a settled Kingdom is bound to observe the Paction made to his People by his Laws, in framing his Government agreeable thereunto, &c.

All Kings, that are not Tyrants or perjured, will be glad to bound themselves within the li∣mits of their Laws; and they that perswade them to the contrary are Vipers and Pests, both against them and the Commonwealth.

It was secondly observed, that in the 27 page of his first Sermon, he cites these words, Suarez de legibus, lib. 5. cap. 17. Acceptationem populi non esse conditionem necessariam ex vi Juris naturalis aut gen∣tium, neque ex Jure communi: The Jesuit adds, Neque ex Antiquo Jure Hispaniae; which words are left out by the Doctor, lest the Reader might be invited to inquire what was Antiquum Jus Hi∣spaniae; and it might have been learned from the same Author in another place of that Work, that about two hundred years since, this liberty was granted to the People by one of the Kings, that no Tribute should be imposed without their con∣sent. And the Author adds further, That after the Law is introduced and confirmed by Custom, the King is bound to observe it. From this place he took occasion to make this short digression, That the Kings of Spain being powerful and wise Princes, would never have parted with such a mark of absolute Royalty, if they had not found in this course more advantage than in the other, and the success and prosper••••y of that Kingdom, through the valour and industry of the Spanish Nation, so much advanced since that time, do manifest the wisdom of that change.

The third observation of fraud, in perverting his Authors, was this. In the twentieth page of the first Sermon, he cites these words out of the same Suarez, de legibus, lib. 5. cap. 15. fol. 300. Tributa esse maxime naturalia, & prae se ferre Justi∣tiam, qui exiguntur de rebus propriis; this he pro∣duceth in proof of the just Right of Kings to lay Tributes. And no man that reads it doubts, but that in Suarez his opinion, the King's Inter∣est and Propriety in the Goods of his Subjects, is the ground of that Justice; but the truth is, that Suarez in that Chapter had distributed Tributes into divers kinds, of which he calls one sort, Tributum reale, and describes it thus, Solent it a vocari pensiones quaedam quae penduntur regibus & principibus exteris & agris, quae à principio ad susten∣tationem illis applicata fuerunt, ipsi vero in foedum in aliis ea donarunt sub certa pensione annua, quae jure civili Canon appellari solet, quia certa regula & lege praescripta erat; So that the issue is, this which Suarez affirms for justification of one kind of Tribute, which is no more than a Fee-farm of Rent due by reservation in the Grant of Kings own Lands; the Doctor herein, worse than a Jesuit, doth wrest to the justification of all kinds of Tribute exacted by Imposition upon the Goods of the Subjects, wherein the King had no interest or propriety at all.

4. The last aggravation was drawn from his behaviour since these Sermons preached, where∣by he did continue still to multiply and increase his offence, yea, even since the sitting of the Par∣liament, and his being questioned in Parliament; upon the Fourth of May last, he was so bold, as to publish the same Doctrine in his own Parish-Church of St. Giles's; the Points of which Ser∣mons are these:

That the King had right to order all, as to him him should seem good, without any man's consent.

That the King might require, in time of necessity, Aid; and if the Subjects did not supply, the King might justly avenge it.

That the Propriety of Estates and Goods was or∣dinarily in the Subject; but extraordinarily (that is, in case of the King's need) the King hath right to di∣spose them.

These Assertions in that Sermon, he said, would be proved by very good testimony, and therefore desired the Lords that it might be care∣fully examined, because the Commons held it to be a great contempt to the Parliament for him to maintain that so publickly, which was here que∣stioned.

They held it a great presumption for a private Divine to Debate the Right and Power of the King, which is a matter of such a nature, as to be handled only in this High Court, and that with moderation and tenderness. And so he conclu∣ded that point of Aggravation.

In the last place he produced some such Pre∣cedents as might testifie what the opinion of our Ancestors would have been, if this Case had fallen out in their time; and herein, he said, he would confine himself to the Reigns of the first Three Edwards, two of them Princes of great glory: He began with the Eldest, Westm. 1. ca. 33.

By this Statute, 3 Edw. 1. provision was made against those who should tell any false news or de∣vice, by which any discord or scandal may arise betwixt the King, his People, and great Men of the Kingdom.

27 Edw. 3. ••ot. Par. nu. 20. It was declared by the King's Proclamation, sent into all the Coun∣ties of England, That they that reported that he would not observe the great Charter, were mali∣cious people, who desired to put trouble and de∣bate betwixt the King and his Subjects, and to disturb the peace and good estate of the King, the People, and the Realm.

5 Edw. 2. Inter novas ordinationes, Henry de Beamond, for giving the King ill counsel against his Oath, was put from the Council, and re∣strained from coming into the presence of the King, under pain of Confiscation and Banish∣ment.

19 Edw. 2. Clause Minidors. Commissions were granted to inquire upon the Statute of W. ••. touching the spreading of News, whereby dis∣cord and scandal might grow betwixt the King and his People.

10 Edw. Clause M. 26. Proclamation went out to arrest all them who had presumed to report, that the King would lay upon the Wools certain Sums, besides the ancient and due Customs,

where the King calls these Reports, Exquisita mendacia, &c. quae non tantum in publicam laesionem, sed in nostrum ••edunt damnum, & dedecus manife∣stum.

12. Edw. 3. Rot. Almaniae. The King writes to the Archbishop of Canterbury, excusing himself for some Impositions which he had laid, profes∣sing his great sorrow for it, desires the Archbishop by Indulgences and other ways to stir up the Peo∣ple to pray for him, hoping that God would en∣able him by some satisfactory benefit to make a∣mends, and comfort his Subjects for those pres∣sures.

To these temporal Precedents of ancient times which were alledged, he added an Ecclesi∣astical Precedent out of a Book called Pupilla O∣culi, being published for the Instruction of Con∣fessors, in the Title de participantibus cum excom∣municatis, fol. 59. All the Articles of Magna Charta are inserted with this direction, Hos arti∣culos ignorare non debent quibus incumbit confessiones audire infra provinciam Cantuariensem.

He likewise remembred the Proclamation 8 Jac. for the calling in and burning of Dr. Cowel's Book, for which these reasons are given: For mistaking the true state of the Parliament of the Kingdom, and fundamental Constitution and Priviledges thereof: For speaking irreverently of the Common Law, it being a thing utterly unlawful for any Subject to speak or write against that under which he liveth, and which we are sworn and resolved to maintain.

From these Precedents he collected, that if former Parliaments were so careful of false ru∣mors and news, they would have been much more tender of such Doctrines as these, which might produce true occasions of discord betwixt the King and his People.

If those who reported the King would lay Im∣positions, and break his Laws, were thought such hainous Offenders, how much more should the man be condemned, who perswaded the King he is not bound to keep those Laws? If that great King was so far from challenging any right in this kind, that he professed his own sorrow and re∣pentance for grieving his Subjects, with unlawful Charges: If Confessors were enjoyned to frame the Consciences of the People to the observances of these Laws, certainly such Doctrine, and such a Preacher as this, would have been held most strange and abominable in all these times.

The third general part was th•• Conclusion or Prayer of the Commons, which consisted of three Clauses.

First, They reserved to themselves liberty of any other accusation, and for this, he said, there was great reason, that as the Doctor multiplied his Offences, so they may renew their Accusati∣ons.

Secondly, They save to themselves liberty of replying to his Answer; for they had great cause to think that he who would shift so much in of∣fending, would shift much more in answering.

Thirdly, They desire he might be brought to examination and judgment; this they thought would be very important for the comfort of the present Age, for the security of the future a∣gainst such wicked and malicious practices; and so he concluded, that seeing the cause had strength enough to maintain it self, his humble suit to their Lordships was, That they would not observe his infirmities and defects, to the diminution or pre∣judice of that strength.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Mr. Pym's Speech at the delive∣ry of the Charge a∣gainst Dr. Manwa∣ring.