The history of the troubles and tryal of the Most Reverend Father in God and blessed martyr, William Laud, Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. vol. 1 wrote by himself during his imprisonment in the Tower ; to which is prefixed the diary of his own life, faithfully and entirely published from the original copy ; and subjoined, a supplement to the preceding history, the Arch-Bishop's last will, his large answer to the Lord Say's speech concerning liturgies, his annual accounts of his province delivered to the king, and some other things relating to the history.

THE HISTORY OF THE TROUBLES OF WILLIAM LAUD LORD Arch-Bishop of Canterbury: Which began to fall upon him, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 18: 1640.

CAP. I.

DEcemb. 18. 1640. being Friday. Upon this day, Mr. Den∣sell * 1.1 Hollis, second Son to John Earl of Clare, by Order from the House of Commons, came up to the Lords, and Accused me of High Treason; and told the Lords, they would make proof thereof in convenient time: But desired in the mean time, that I might be committed to safe Custody. This was strange News to my Innocency: For this I can say of my self, without falshood or vanity, that to the utter∣most of my Understanding, I served the King, my Gracious Master, with all Duty and Faithfulness; and without any known or wilful Disservice to the State there-while. And this I did, with as true and free a Heart, as ever any Man did, that served a King. And I thank God, my care was such for the Publick, that it is well known, I much neglected my own private Fortunes there-while. The more was I amazed at the first apprehension of this heavy and unde∣served Charge.

Upon this Charge, I was commanded to withdraw. But I first desired leave to speak a few words: And I spake to this effect; That I was heartily sorry for the Offence taken against me; and that I was most unhappy, to have my Eyes open to see that day, and mine Ears to hear such a Charge: But humbly desired their Lordships, to look upon the whole course of my Life, which was such, as that I

did verily perswade my self, not one Man in the House of Commons did believe in his Heart, that I was a Traytor. Here my Lord the Earl of Essex interrupted me, and said, That Speech of mine, was a Scandal put upon the whole House of Commons, that they should * 1.2 bring me up charged with so high a Crime, which themselves did not believe. I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 desired then, that I might be proceeded with in the Anti∣ent Parliamentary way of England. This the Lord Say excepted against; as if I would prescribe them, how they should proceed. So I withdrew, as I was commanded, and was presently called in again to the Bar; and thence delivered to Mr. James Maxwell, the Officer * 1.3 of the Black Rod, to be kept in safe Custody, till the House of Commons should farther Impeach me.

Here I humbly desired leave, that I might go home to fetch some Papers, necessary for my Defence. This was granted me with some difficulty; and Mr. Maxwell was commanded to Attend me all the while I should stay. When I was gone to Lambeth, after some little discourse (and sad enough) with my Steward, and some private Friends, I went into my Chappel to Evening Prayer. The Psalms * 1.4 for that day gave me much comfort, and were observed by some Friends then present, as well as by my self. And upon the Comfort I then received, I have every day since (unless some urgent Business prevented me) Read over both these Psalms, and, God willing, pur∣pose so to do every day of my Life. Prayers being ended, I went with Mr. Maxwell, as I was commanded; Hundreds of my Poor Neighbours standing at my Gates to see me go, and Praying 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for my safe return to my House: For which, I blessed God, and them.

CAP. II.

AND because here I am sure to find my self, being now Impri∣soned; I will begin farther off, and shew briefly why, and how, this Malignity pursued, and overtook me.

When I was first Bishop of London, His Majesty expressed a great desire, which he had, to settle a Liturgy in the Church of Scotland; and this continued in agitation many Years. And what my part was therein, I shall clearly and ingenuously set down hereafter, when I come to Answer the Scottish Accusations of me in that behalf, or the Articles of the Parliament here, one of which relates to them. In the Year 1633. His Majesty went into Scotland, and was Crowned there; I attended his Majesty in that Service. The Parliament then sitting in Scotland, was very quick about some Church Affairs; and the King was much unsatisfied with some Men, and their Proceed∣ings. At his Majesty's Return, in the same Year, I was, by his special Grace and Favour, made Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, 19 Sep∣tembris. The debate about the Scottish Liturgy was pursued a-fresh; and at last it was resolved by the King, that some Scottish Bishops should draw up a Liturgy, as near that of England as might be; and that then his Majesty would have that Confirmed and Setled for the use of that Kingdom. This Liturgy was carefully considered of, and at last Printed and Published, An. 1637. It seems, the Bi∣shops, which were trusted with this business, went not the right way, by a General Assembly, and other Legal Courses of that Kingdom. But what way soever was taken, or in whomsoever there was a failure; this was certain in the Event: The Bishops were deceived in their expectation of a peaceable admission of that Service-Book; The King lost the Honour and Safety of that Settlement; And that Kingdom such a Form of God's Service, as I fear they will never come near again. And that People, by cunning and factious practi∣ces, both at home and from hence, were heated into such a Phrensie, as will not easily be cured. And 'tis well, if we their Neighbours run not mad for Company.

These violent Distempers continued from the Publishing of this Service-Book, in the Year 1637. till the Year 1638. Then they grew up into a formal Mutiny: And the Scottish Subjects began to Petiti∣on with Arms, in their Mouths first, and soon after in their Hands. His Majesty was often told, that these Northern Commotions had their Root in England. His Majesty's Goodness was confident upon the Fidelity of his Subjects of both Nations, and would not believe that of either, which was most true of a powerful Faction in both: Till at last, after much intercourse and mediation lost, and cast away, the King was so betray'd by some of his own Agents, that the Scots appeared upon their Borders in a formal Army. His Majesty went with an Army to Barwick. There, after some stay, a Pacification was made; and his Majesty returned to White-Hall, Aug. 3. 1639.

Now during all this time, from the Publishing of this Service-Book, to this Pacification, I was voyced by the Faction in both Nati∣ons, to be an Incendiary, a Man that laboured to set the two Nations into a bloody War: Whereas, God knows, I laboured for Peace so long, till I received a great check for my labour. And particularly at the beginning of these Tumults, when the Speech of a War first began in the Year 1638. openly at the Council-Table at Theobalds, my Counsels alone prevailed for Peace, and Forbearance, in hope the * 1.5 Scots would think better of their Obedience. But their Counsels were fomented to another end, as after appeared.

The Pacification being made, was in Terms as followeth.

The Articles of the Pacification.

1.The Forces of Scotland to be disbanded, and dissolved within † 2.1 Eight and Forty Hours after the Publication of his Majesty's Declaration being agreed upon.

2.His Majesty's Castles, Forts, Ammunitions of all sorts, and Royal Honours to be delivered after the Publication, so soon as his Majesty * 2.2 can send to receive them.

3.His Majesty's Ships to depart presently after the delivery of the Castles, with the first fair Wind; and in the mean time no inter∣ruption of Trade or Fishing.

4.His Majesty is Graciously pleased, to cause to be resto∣red, all Persons, Goods, and Ships, detained, and arrested, since the first of November last past.

5.There shall be no Meetings, Treatings, Consultations, or Convocations of his Majesty's Lieges, but such as are warrantable by Act of Parliament.

6.All Fortifications to desist, and no further working therein, and they to be remitted to his Majesty's Pleasure.

7.To restore to every one of his Majesty's Subjects their Liberty, Lands, Houses, Goods, and Means whatsoever, taken and detained from them by whatsoever means, since the aforesaid time.

The Copy of the Act of the Pacification as it passed * 2.3 under his Majesties Hand, and includes these Articles above written, is as follows.

Ch. R.

WE having considered the Papers, and humble Petitions pre∣sented unto us, by those of our Subjects of Scotland, who were admitted to attend our pleasure in the Camp; and after a full Hearing by Our Self of all, that they could say or alledge there∣upon, having communicated the same to Our Council of both Kingdoms; upon mature deliberation, with their unanimous Ad∣vice, We have thought fit, to give them this Just and Gracious Answer: That though We cannot condescend to Ratifie and

Approve the Acts of the pretended General Assembly at Glasgow, for many Grave and Weighty Considerations, which have happened, both before, and since, much importing the Honour, and Security of that true Monarchical Government Lineally descended upon Us from so many of Our Ancestors; Yet such is Our Gracious Pleasure, That notwithstanding the many disorders committed of late, We are pleased, not only to confirm, and make good, what∣soever Our Commissioner hath granted and promised in Our Name; But also, We are further Graciously pleased, to declare and assure, That according to the Petitioner's humble desires, all Matters Ec∣clesiastical shall be determined by the Assemblies of the Kirk, and Matters Civil by the Parliament, and other inferiour Judicatories Established by Law; which accordingly shall be kept once a Year, or as shall be agreed upon * 3.1 at the General Assembly.

And for setling the general distractions of that Our Ancient Kingdom, Our Will and Pleasure is, that a free General Assembly be kept at Edinburgh, the sixth day of August next ensuing, where We intend God willing to be personally present; And for the Legal Indiction whereof, We have given Order and Command to Our Council; and thereafter, a Parliament to be holden at Edinburgh, the 20th day of August next ensuing, for Ratifying of what shall be concluded in the said Assembly, and setling such other things, as may conduce to the Peace and Good of Our Native Kingdom, and therein, an Act of Oblivion to be passed.

And whereas, We are further desired, that Our Ships and Forces by Land, be recalled, and all Persons, Goods, and Ships, restored, and they made safe from Invasion: We are Graciously pleased to Declare, that upon their disarming and disbanding of their Forces, dissolving and discharging all their pretended Tables and Conven∣ticles, and restoring unto Us, all Our Castles, Forts, and Ammu∣nitions of all sorts; as likewise, Our Royal Honours, and to every one of Our Good Subjects, their Liberty, Lands, Houses, Goods, and * 3.2 Means whatsoever, taken and detained from them, since the late pretended General Assembly; We will presently thereafter recall Our Fleet, and retire our Land-Forces, and cause Restitution to be made to all Persons, of their Ships and Goods detained, and arrested, since the aforesaid time: Whereby it may appear, that Our intention in taking up of Arms, was no ways for Invading of Our Native Kingdom, or to Innovate the Religion and Laws, but meerly, for the Maintaining, and Vindicating of Our Royal Authority.

And since that hereby it doth clearly appear, that We neither have, nor do intend any alteration in Religion, or Laws, but that both shall be maintained by Us, in their full integrity: We expect the performance of that Humble and Dutiful Obedience, which becometh Loyal and Dutiful Subjects, and as in their several Peti∣tions they have often professed.

And as We have just Reason to believe, that to Our peaceable, and well-affected Subjects, this will be satisfactory; so We take God and the World to witness, that whatsoever Calamities shall ensue by Our necessitated suppressing of the Insolencies of such, as shall

continue in their disobedient Courses, is not occasioned by us, but by their own procurement.

This Pacification was not much sooner made by the King, than it was broken by the Scots. For whereas it was agreed by the Se∣venth Article, and is repeated in the Body of the Pacification; That every one of his Majesties good Subjects shou'd enjoy their Liberty, Lands, Houses, Goods, and Means whatsoever, taken, and detayned from them since the aforesaid time, The * Lord Lindsay in the Name of the rest made a Protestation either in the Camp at Dunns, or at the Cross in Edin∣burgh, that no Bishop, or Clergyman was included in this Pacificati∣on; which yet in manifest and plain Terms, extended it self to all the Kings good Subjects. And this Protestation was so pursued, as that it obtained; and no Clergyman was relieved in any the Par∣ticulars.

Upon this and other Particulars agitated in Parliament amongst them, his Majesty thought fit to look to himself, and examine their Proceedings farther. To this end he often called his Council; and in particular, made a Committee of eight, more particularly to attend that service. They were the Lord Bishop of London, then Lord Treasurer, the Lord Marquis Hamilton, the Earl of Northumberland Lord Admiral, the Earl of Strafford Lord Deputy of Ireland, the Lord Cottington, Sir Henry Vane, and Sir Francis Windebanck Secretaries, and my self; to which was after added the Earl of Arundel Lord Marshal. And though I spake nothing of these Scottish Businesses, but either o∣penly at Council-Table; or in presence of all, or so many of this Com∣mittee, as occasionally met, and so had Auditors and Witnesses e∣nough of what I did or said; yet it was still cast out among the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that I was a chief Incendiary in the Business: Where yet, had I said or done any thing worse than other, there wanted not Sir Henry Vane to discover it.

At this Committee many things were proposed diversly, for the Aid and Assistance of the King; and many Proposals rejected as Illegal. At last the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland propos'd the calling of a Parliament. Much was not said against this, but much said for it: Nor indeed was it safe for any Man to declare against it, after it was once publickly moved. So a Parliament was resolved on, and called against April 13. 1640. At that time it sat down, and many Tumultuary Complaints were made by the Scots against the Bishops and Church Government in England, and with great vehemency a∣gainst my self. All this while the King could get no Money, to Aid him against the Scottish Rebellion. At last, after many Attempts, Sir Henry Vane told the King plainly, that it was in vain to expect longer, or to make any other overture to them. For no Money wou'd be had against the Scots.

Hereupon his Majesty called all his Lords of Council together; and upon Maij 5. being Tuesday at Six in the Morning they met in the Council-Chamber. I, by the mistake of the Messenger, was warn∣ed to be there at Seven in the Morning (as if need be, I can prove by sufficient Witness) and at that Hour I came. By this accident I

came late, and found a Resolution taken, to Vote the dissolution of that Parliament, and the Votes entred upon; my Lord Cottington being in his Speech, when I came into the Council-Chamber. All Votes concurred to the ending of that Parliament, save two. The Persons dissenting, were the Earls of Northumberland and Holland. I co-operated nothing to this breach, but my single Vote: Yet the very next day, Libels were set up in divers parts of the City, ani∣mating and calling together Apprentices and others, to come and meet in St. George's Fields, for the Hunting of William the Fox, for the Breach of the Parliament. This setting up of Libels, and anima∣tion of the baser People continued. I acquainted his Majesty and the Council with it. But upon Munday night following, being May 11. Five Hundred of them came about my House at Lambeth, to offer it and me violence. By God's Merciful Providence, I had some Jealousie of their intent; and before their coming, left the best Order I could to secure my House; and by the Advice of some Friends, went over the water, and lay at my Chamber in White-Hall that Night, and some other following. So, I praise God, no great hurt was done. One young Fellow only had a little hurt with a Dag, who was after taken and Executed. Thus you see, how the malignity of the Time fastned and continued upon me. For this Libelling, in a very base and most unworthy manner, con∣tinued against me. But not one of them charged me with any one Particular, save the breaking of the Parliament, of which I was not guilty.

During this Parliament, the Clergy had agreed in Convocation, to give his Majesty six Subsidies, payable in six Years: which came to Twenty Thousand Pound a Year, for six Years; but the Act of it was not made up. His Majesty, seeing what lay upon him, and what fears there were of the Scots, was not willing to lose these Subsidies; and therefore thought upon the continuing of the Convocation, though the Parliament were ended; but had not opened those Thoughts of his to me. Now, I had sent to dissolve the Convocation at their next sitting; haste and trouble of these businesses making me forget, that I was to have the King's Writ for the Dismissing, as well as the Con∣vening of it. Word was brought me of this from the Convocation-House, while I was sitting in Council, and his Majesty present. Here∣upon, when the Council rose, I moved his Majesty for a Writ. His Majesty gave me an unlooked for reply: Namely, that he was wil∣ling to have the Subsidies, which we had granted him; and that we should go on with the finishing of those Canons, which he had given us power under the Broad Seal of England to make. And when I replyed, it would be excepted against in all likelyhood by divers, and desired his Majesty to Advise well upon it: The King Answered me presently; That he had spoken with the Lord Keeper, the Lord Finch, about it, and that he assured him it was Legal. I confess, I was a little troubled, both at the difficulties of the Time, and at the An∣swer it self; that after so many Years faithful Service, in a business concerning the Church so nearly, his Majesty would speak with the Lord Keeper, both without me, and before he would move it to me:

And somewhat I said thereupon, which pleased not; but the Parti∣culars I do not well remember. Upon this, I was Commanded to sit, and go on with the Convocation. At first, some little * 3.3 Exception was taken there, by two or three of the Lower House of Convocation, whether we might sit or no. I acquainted his Majesty with this doubt; and humbly besought him, that his Learned Council, and other Persons of Honour, well acquainted with the Laws of the Realm, might deliver their Judgment upon it. This his Majesty Graciously approved; and the Question was put to them. They answer'd, as followeth under their Hands.

The Convocation being called by the King's Writ, under the Great Seal, doth continue, until it be dissolved by Writ, or Com∣mission under the Great Seal, notwithstanding the Parliament be Dissolved.

14. Maij 1640. Jo. Finch. C. S.

H. Manchester. John Bramston. Edward Littleton. Ralph Whitfield. John Bankes. Rob. Heath.

This Judgment of these great Lawyers, setled both Houses of Convo∣cation. So we proceeded according to the Power given us under the Broad-Seal, as is required by the Statute 25 H. 8. Cap. 19. In this Convocation thus continued, we made up our Act perfect for the gift of six Subsidies, according to Ancient Form in that behalf, and de∣livered it under Seal to his Majesty. This passed Nemine Refragante, as may appear apud Acta. And we followed a President in my Lord Arch-Bishop Whitgift's time, An. 1586, who was known to be a Pious and a Prudent Prelate, and a Man not given to do boisterous things against the Laws of the Realm, or the Prerogative of the Crown; but one, that went just and fair ways to both. Nor did this Grant lye dead and useless; for divers Processes are yet to be seen, for the fetching in of that which was so Granted to the Queen's use, in case any Man refused payment.

Together with this Act for Subsidies, we went on in deliberation for certain Canons, thought necessary to be added, for the better Go∣vernment and more setled Peace of the Church, which began to be much disquieted by the proceedings of some Factious Men (which have since more openly and more violently shewed themselves.) In the De∣bates concerning these Canons, I dare be bold to say, never any Synod sate in Christendom, that allowed more freedom either of Speech or Vote. The Canons, which we made, were in number seventeen; and at the time of the Subscription, no Man refused, or so much as checked at any one Canon, or any one Branch in any one of them: Saving

a * 4.1 Canonist or two, who excepted against two or three Clauses in some of the last of the Canons, which concerned their Profit, and their Carriage towards the Clergy; in which, they were publickly, and by joint consent, over-ruled in the House: And excepting * 4.2 Godfrey Goodman Lord Bishop of Glocester, who was startled at the first Canon, about the Proceedings a∣gainst the Papists. This Canon is very express for the use of all good and Christian means, to bring them out of their Superstitious Errors, and to settle them in the Church of England. This Canon would not down with my Lord of Glocester. And the Morning before the Subscription was to be, he came over to Lambeth to me; and after great expressions of his dislike, I gave him the best Counsel I could, that he would keep himself out of that scandal, which his refusing to Sub∣scribe would bring, both upon his Person, his Calling, and the Church of England, in these broken times especially. But I fell so short of prevailing with him; that he told me plainly, He would be torn with wild Horses, before he would Subscribe that Canon: And so we parted.

The hour of Convocation drew on; and we met to Subscribe the Ca∣nons. When it came to the Bishop of Glocester's turn, his Lordship would neither allow the Canons, nor reject them; but pretended, (as he had once done about a week before) that we had no Power to make Canons out of Parliament time, since the Statute of H. 8. It was then told his Lordship, that we had the King's Power according to that Statute; And that his Lordship was formerly satisfied by the Lawyers Hands, as well as we; And that this was but a pretence to disgrace our Proceedings, the better to hide his unwillingness to Sub∣scribe that Canon against the Papists; as appeared by that Speech, which he had privately used to me that Morning, and with which I publickly charged him upon this occasion; and he did as publickly in open Convocation acknowledge, that he spake the words unto me. Besides this, he was further told; that in all Synods the Suffragants were to declare themselves by open Affirmation or denyal of the Ca∣nons agreed upon; and that therefore he ought to express his Consent or his Dissent.

And though at that time I pressed it no further on him, yet it stands with all Reason it should be so. For otherwise it may so fall out, that the Synod may be disappointed, and be able to determine nothing. And it seems, they were bound to declare in Synod. For otherwise, when points of difficulty or danger came, the Fathers might have with more sasety forborn to Vote; which yet they did not. For in the Case of Nestorius in the † 4.3 Ephesine Council, the heats grew very high between Cyril of Alexandria, and John of Antioch; and though most of the Votes went with Cyril for the deposition of Nestorius; yet the rest held with John who was thought to favour Nestorius. So, for matter of Opinion, and point of Faith, when Cyril had set out his twelve Anathematisms, Recorded in the * 4.4 Acts of the Ephesine Synod; The Eastern Bishops in a Body, and Theodoret by

himself, set out their Confutations of them. And this I believe ve∣rily, they had not done, the temper of those Times considered, if they might have sate still as Spectators only, without declaring their Judgment.

But this appears more plainly by the Fourth Coun∣cil of Toledo; where it was Decreed, That no Man * 4.5 should dare to dissolve the Council, till all things were de∣termined and subscribed by the Bishops: For this makes it evident, that every one who had a Voice in Council, was not only to declare his Judgment, but subscribe his Name. Nor can I see, why either the absence of a Bishop being Summon'd thither, or his departure thence be∣fore all things were concluded, should be so penal, as by the Ancient Canons it was; in case they were not bound to declare their Judgments being once come thither; (It being all one upon the mat∣ter, to be absent thence, and to say nothing there:) For by the * 4.6 Council of Arles, it was no less than Excommunication. And though that was after mitigated in the † 4.7 Council of Orleans, to sus∣pension for six Months, in the Year 552. Yet in the * 4.8 Council of Sevil, in the Year 590. upon sight of the Inconveniencies which fell out upon it, it was made Excommunication as it was formerly.

And a President of this, we have in our own Acts of Convocation, An. 1571. And this was not only since the Act of the submission of the Clergy, but since the Reformation too. For there it appears, that * 4.9 Richard Cheyney Bishop of Glocester, for not attending the Convocation, though he were then in Westminster, and going home without leave asked of the Arch-Bishop, was Excommunicated by the joint consent of all his Brethren. Yet I may not deny, that in the Question of King Hen. 8th's Marri∣age with his Brother's Wife, when the business came to Voting in the lower House of Convocation, * 4.10 fourteen affirmed, that the Law, De non ducendâ fratris Relictâ, for a Man's not Marry∣ing the Widow of his Brother, was indispensable; and seven denied; and one doubted. As also in the Act of the Submission of the Clergy, consisting of three Articles, when it came to Voting in that † 4.11 House, the first Article was denied by eighteen, and referred by eight: The two other were denied by nineteen, and referred by seven; the residue consenting unto all.

But neither of these, had they then been thought on, could have relieved the Bishop of Glocester: Because he neither doubted, nor referred; but peremptorily said to me that Morning, that he would be torn with wild Horses, before he would subscribe that Canon against the Papists: And yet when it came to the Subscription, he would neither affirm, nor deny the Canon; but would have turn'd it off, as if we had not Power to make those Canons. Therefore when his Lordship would not do either, I with the consent of the Synod suspended him. Divers of my Lords the Bishops were very tender of him, and the Scandal given by him. And John Davenant then Lord Bishop of Salisbury, and Joseph Hall then Lord Bishop of Exe∣ter, desired leave of the House, (and had it) to speak with my Lord

of Glocester, to see if they could prevail with him. They did pre∣vail; and he came back and Subscribed the Canons, in open Convo∣cation. But I told him: Considering his Lordship's Words, I did not know with what Mind he Subscribed; and would therefore ac∣cording to my Duty acquaint his Majesty with all the Proceedings, and there leave it. The Subscription to the Canons went on, no one man else checking at any thing. And that work ended, the Convo∣cation was dissolved Maij 29. being Friday.

The Convocation thus ended, I did acquaint his Majesty with my Lord of Glocester's Carriage, and with that which was done upon it. His Majesty having other Jealousies of this Bishop besides this, resolved to put him to it. So his Lordship was brought before the King, and the Lords in Council; and restrained to his Lodging, and a Writ Ne exeat Regnum sent him. But this Writ proceeded not for any thing said or done by his Lordship in the Convocation, but up∣on other information which his Majesty had received from some Agents of his beyond the Seas; As shall appear hereafter, if this be ob∣jected against me. In the mean time let this Bishop rest for me.

The Canons, thus Freely and Unanimously Subscribed, were Print∣ed. And at their first Publication they were generally approved in all Parts of the Kingdom; and I had Letters from the remotest Parts of it, full of Approbation: Insomuch, that not my self only, but my Breth'ren which lived near these Parts, and which were not yet gone down, were very much Joyed at it. But about a Month after their Printing, there began some Whisperings against them by some Ministers in London; and their Exceptions were spread in writing against them: And this set others on work both in the Western, and the Northern Parts: Till at last, by the practice of the Faction, there was suddenly a great alteration, and nothing so much cryed down as the Canons. The comfort is, Christ himself had his Osanna turned into a Crucifige in far less Time. By this means the Malice of the Time took another occasion to whet it self against me.

The Synod thus ended, and the Canons having this Success; but especially the Parliament ending so unhappily; The King was very hardly put to it, and sought all other means, as well as he could, to get supply against the Scots. But all that he could get, pro∣ved too little, or came too late for that service. For the averse party in the late Parliament, or by and by after, before they part∣ed, ordered things so, and filled Mens Minds with such strange Jealousies; that the King's good People were almost generally possest, that his Majesty had a purpose to alter the ancient Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom, and to bring in Slavery upon his People: A thing (which for ought I know) his Majesty never intend∣ed. But the Parliament-men, which would not relieve the King, by their meeting in that Assembly, came to understand and inform one another; and at their return, were able to possess their seve∣ral Countries with the Apprehensions themselves had; and so they did. Upon this, some Lords and others, who had by this time made an underhand solemn Confederacy with a strong faction of the Scots, brought an Army of them into the Kingdom. For all

Men know, and it hath been in a manner confessed; that the Scots durst not have come into England at that Time, if they had not been sure of a Party here, and a strong one; and that the King should be betrayed on all hands, as shall after appear.

By these, and the like means, the King being not assisted by his Parliament, nor having Means enough to proceed with his Forces in due Time, the Scots were brought in (as is aforesaid) upon both King and Kingdom. They under the Conduct of Sir Alexander Lesh∣ley their General, passed the Tyne at Newborne, † 4.12 Aug. .... 1640. and took New-castle the next Day after. And all this gross Treason, though it had no other end than to Confirm a Parliament in Scot∣land, and to make the King call another in England, that so they might in a way of Power extort from him what they pleased in both Kingdoms; yet Religion was made almost all the pretence both here, and there; and so in pursuance of that pretence, Hatred spread and increased against me, for the Service-Book.

The King hearing that the Scots were moving, Posted away to York, Aug. 20. being Thursday. There he soon found, in what Straights he was; and thereupon called his Great Council of all his Lords and Prelates to York to be there by September 24. But in re∣gard the Summons was short and suddain, he was Graciously plea∣sed to dispense with the Absence of divers, both Lords, and Bi∣shops, and with mine among the rest. How things in Particular succeeded there, I know not; nor belongs it much to the Scope of this short History, intended only for my self. But the Result of all, was a present Nomination of some Lords Commissioners, to treat at Rippon about this Great Affair with other Commissioners from the Scotch Army.

But before this Treaty at Rippon, one Melborne, or Meldrum, Se∣cretary to general Leshly (as he was commonly said to be) at the Shire-House in Durham, when the Country-Gentlemen met with the chief of the Scottish Army, about a composition to be made for Payment of Three Hundred and Fifty Pounds a Day for that Coun∣ty, expressed himself in this Manner, Septemb. 10. 1640. I won∣der, that you are so Ignorant, that you cannot see what is good for your selves. For they in the South are sensible of the good that will ensue, and that we came not unsent for, and that oftner than once, or twice, by your own Great Ones. There being a Doubt made at these words Great Ones: He reply'd, your own Lords; with farther Discourse. These Words were complained of, during the Treaty at Rippon, to the English Lords Commissioners, by two Gentlemen of the Bi∣shoprick of Durham; to whom the Words were spoken by Meldrum. The Gentlemen were Mr. John Killinghall, and Mr. Nicholas Chay∣tor; and they offer'd to Testify the Words upon Oath: But the Lords required them only to Write down those Words, and set their Hands to them; which they did very readily. The Lords acquaint∣ed the Scotch Commissioners with the Words. They sent to New∣castle to make them known to General Leshly. He called his Secre∣tary before him, questioned him about the Words. Meldrum deny∣ed them: (was that enough, against two such Witnesses?) This Denyal was put in Writing, and sent to Rippon. Hereupon some

of the English Lords Commissioners required, that the two Gentlemen should go to Newcastle to the Scotch Camp, and there give in their Testimony before General Leshly. The two Gentlemen replyed (as they had great reason to do) that they had rather testify it in a∣ny Court of England, and could do it with more safety: Yet they would go and testify it there, so they might have a safe Conduct from the Scottish Commissioners, there being as yet no Cessation of Arms. Answer was made by some English Lords, that they should have a safe Conduct. Hereupon one of the Kings Messen∣gers attendant there, was sent to the Scotch Commissioners for a safe Conduct for the Two Gentlemen. He brought back Word from the Earl of Dumfermling (to whom it was directed) that the Two Gentlemen were unwise, if they went to give such Testimony at the Camp. And then speaking with the Lord Lowdon, he came again to the Messenger, and told him, that such a safe Conduct could not be granted, and that he would satisfy the Earl that sent for it (who was Francis Earl of Bedford.) The Messenger return∣ing with this Answer, the Gentlemen were dismissed. So the busi∣ness dyed; it being not for somebody's safety, that this Examina∣tion should have proceeded; for it is well enough known since, that many had their hands in this Treason, [for Gross Treason it was by the express Words of the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. c. 2.] The Truth of all this will be sworn to by both the Gentlemen yet living, and by a very honest grave Divine, who was present at all these Passages at Rippon, and gave them to me in Writing.

In this Great Council, while the Treaty was proceeding slowly e∣nough; it was agreed on, that a Parliament should begin at London Nov. 3. following: And thither the Commissioners and the Treaty were to follow; and they did so. After this how things proceeded in Parliament, and how long the Scotch Army was continued, and at how great a charge to the Kingdom, appears olsewhere upon Record; for I shall hasten to my own particular, and take in no more of the Publick, than Necessity shall inforce me, to make my sad Story hang together.

After they had continued at York till Octob. 28. the King and the Lords returned, and the Parliament sate down Novemb. 3. Great Heats appear'd in the very beginning. On Wednesday † 4.13 Novemb. 10. Tho. L. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Earl of Strafford was accused by the House of Commons of High Treason, and Committed by the Lords to Mr. James Maxwell the Officer of the House: And upon general Arti∣cles * 4.14 sent up, He was upon Wednesday Novemb. 25. committed to the Tower. It is thought, (and upon good Grounds) that the Earl of Strafford had got Knowledge of the Treason of some Men, and that he was preparing to accuse them. And this Fear both hastned and heated the proceedings against him. And upon Dec. 4. being Friday, his Majesty, at the great Importunity of some Lords of his Council, gave way that his Council should be exami∣ned upon Oath in the Earl of Strafford's Case; and I (with others) was examined that very Day. There were great Thoughts of Heart upon this Business, and somewhat vapoured out at Mens Tongues; but the thing was done.

Now at, and after the breaking up of, the late Parliament, Sir Hen. Vane, at the private Committee concerning the Scotch Affairs (before mentioned) instead of setting down the Heads of the seve∣ral Businesses then Treated of, Writ down what every Man said at the Committee, though it were but Matter of deliberation and de∣bate. Afterwards by a cunning conveyance between his Son (who had been Governour in New-England) and himself, this Paper, or a Copy of it, was delivered to some Members of the House of Commons; and in all probability, was the Ground of that which was after done against the Lord Strafford, my self, and others, and the Cause, why the King was so hard pressed to have the Lords and others of his Council examined, was, that so Sir Henry Vane might upon Oath avow the Paper which his Son had seen and shewed; and others be brought to witness as much (had Truth, and their Memories been able to say as much) as his Paper.

After * 4.15 the examination of me and others, concerning these Par∣ticulars; there arose great and violent Debates in the House of Com∣mons against the Bishops, and particularly their Votes in Parliament. After that, Decemb. 16. 1640. they Voted against the late Canons, as containing in them many Matters contrary to the fundamental Laws, and Statutes of the Realm, to the Rights of Parliaments, to the Pro∣perty, * 4.16 and Liberty of the Subject; and matters tending to Sedition, and of dangerous Consequences. I was made the Author of all, and pre∣sently a Committee put upon me to inquire into my Actions, and prepare a Charge. The same Morning in the Upper-House, I was * 4.17 Named as an Incendiary, in an Accusation put in by the Scottish Commissioners: For now by this Time they were come to that Ar∣ticle of the Treaty, which reflected upon me. And this was done with great noise, to bring me yet further into Hatred with the Peo∣ple, especially the Londoners; who approved too well the Pro∣ceedings * 4.18 of their Brethren the Scots, and debased the Bishops and the Church Government in England. The Articles, which the Scots put into the Upper House (by the Hands of their Lords Commissi∣oners against me Decemb. 15.) were read there Decemb. 16. I took out a true Copy as it follows here. And though I was to make no an∣swer * 4.19 then, till the House of Commons had digested them, and taken as much out of them as as they pleased, to fill my intended Charge withall; yet because I after found, that the House * 4.20 of Commons insisted upon very few of these parti∣culars (if any) I thought my self bound to vindi∣cate my Innocency even in these Particulars; which shall now appear in their full strength against me, if they have any in Wise and Learned Mens Judgments.

CAP. III

THe Novations in Religion (which are universally acknowledged to be the main Cause of Commotions in Kingdoms and States, and are known to be the true Cause of our present Troubles) were many and great; besides the * 4.21 Books of Ordination and Homilies. First, some particular alterations in matters of Religion pressed upon us without Order, and against Law, contrary to the Form established in our Kirk. Secondly, a new Book of Canons [| 4.22 and Constitutions Ecclesiastical.] Thirdly, a Liturgy, or Book of Common-Prayer; which did also carry with them many dangerous Errours in matters of Doctrine. Of all † 4.23 these we challenge the Prelate of Canterbury * 4.24 as the prime Cause on Earth.

I shall easily grant; that Novations in Religion are a main Cause of Distempers in Commonwealths. And I hope it will be as easily granted to me (I am sure it should) that when great Distempers fall into Kingdoms, and Common-wealths; the only way to ingage at home and get Credit abroad, is to pretend Religion; which in all Ages hath been a Cloak large enough to cover (at least from the Eyes of the Many) even Treasons themselves. And For the present Trou∣bles in Scotland, Novations in Religion are so far from being known to be the true Cause, as that it is manifest to any Man, that will look upon it with a single Eye, that Temporal Discontents, and several Ambitions of the great Men, which had been long a working, were the true cause of these Troubles: And that Religion was call'd in upon the bye, to gain the Clergy, and by them the Multitude.

For besides that which was openly spoken by the right Honou∣rable James then Earl of Carlile, that somewhat was a brewing in Scotland among some discontented there, which wou'd break out to the Trouble of this Kingdom; 'tis most apparent, there were many discontents among them: Some whereof, had no relation at all to Religion, and were far antienter than the Troubles now began, and were all Legally proved against the a 4.25 Lord Balmerino, who was con∣demned of high Treason before any of these Stirs began. For there were Grievances (as they said) propounded in the Convention, An∣no 1628. about Coyning, and their black Money; which (they say) were slighted again in the Parliament held 1633. Murmuring also there was, as if the Articles and Parliament were not free. Great Clamour likewise was there against the Bishops Power in choosing the Lords of the Articles; though that Power belonged unto them by the fun∣damental Laws of that Kingdom. As much against the Act of Revo∣cation, and the Taxations (which yet were voluntarily offer'd, and mis∣called on purpose to edge the People:) As also for Applying (as they said) these Taxations to wrong uses: With all which, and more, Religion had nothing to do. Nay, this discontented Party grew so High and so Bold; that a very Base and Dishonourable Libel was made and spread against the King, Anno 1633. by these and the like Pretences to alienate the Hearts of the People from him. Of this Libel if one * 4.26 Hagg were the Authour, Balmerino was the Divulger, and so prov'd. And though it be true, that then also some things were to be done against the Church-government; yet their Novations now spoken of were

not then on Foot. So that it is evident enough to any Man that will see, that these Commotions had another, and a higher cause, than the present pretended Innovations. And if his Majesty had played the King then, he needed not have suffered now. Besides, they are no Fools who have spoken it freely (since the Act of Oblivion for the Scottish Business was passed) that this great League before mentioned, between the discontented Party of both Kingdoms, was Consulted on in the Year 1632. and after the King's being in Scotland, Anno 1633. it went on, till they took occasion ano∣ther way to hatch the Cockatrice Egg, which was laid so long before.

But they say, these Novations were great, besides the Books of Ordina∣tion, and Homilies. So the Books of Ordination, and Homilies, were great Novations. Had they then in Scotland no set Form of Ordi∣nation? I promise you, that's next Neighbour to no Ordination; and no Ordination to no Church, formal at least. And therefore if this be a Novation among them, its high time they had it. And for the Homilies, if they taught no other Doctrine than was estab∣lished and current in the Church of Scotland, they were no No∣vations; and if they did contain other Doctrine, they might have Condemned them, and there had been an end. Howsoever, if these Books be among them in Scotland; they were sent thither in King James his Time, when the Prelate of Canterbury neither was, nor could be, the prime cause on Earth of that Novation.

The other Novations, which they proceed unto, are first, some particular Alterations in matters of Religion, pressed upon them without Order, and against Law. To this I can say nothing, till the parti∣cular Alterations be named. Only this in the general; be they what they will, the Scottish Bishops were to blame, if they pressed any thing without Order, or against Law. And sure I am, the Prelate of Canterbury caused them not, nor would have consented to the cau∣sing of them, had he known them to be such. The two other No∣vations, in which they instance, are the Book of Canons, and the Liturgy; which (they say) contain in them many dangerous Errours in Matter of Doctrine. To these, how dangerous soever they seem, I shall give (I hope) a very sufficient, and clear answer; and shall ingenuously set down whatsoever I did, either in or to the Book of Canons, and the Liturgy; and then leave the ingenuous Reader to judge, how far the Prelate of Canterbury is the prime cause on Earth of these Things.

ART. I. (Book 1)

AND first, that this Prelate was the Author and Vrger of some particular * 5.1 Things which made great disturbance amongst us, we [† 5.2 make] manifest, first by Fourteen Letters Subscribed W. Cant. in the space of two Years, to one of our pre∣tended Bishops, Ballatine; wherein he often enjoyns him, and our other pretended Bishops, to appear in the Chappel in their Whites, contrary to the Custom of our Kirk, and to his [* 5.3 own] Promise made to the pretended Bishop of Edinburgh at the Coronation; That none of them after that Time should be more pressed to wear those Garments; thereby moving him against his Will, to put them on for that time.

Here begins the first Charge about the Particular Alterations. And first, they Charge me with Fourteen Letters written by me to Bishop Ballantyne. He was then Bishop of Dunblain, and Dean of His Majesties Chappel Royal there. He was a Learned and a Grave Man; and I did write divers Letters to him, as well as to some other Bishops, and some by Command; but whether just fourteen or no, I know not. But sure I am, their Love to me is such; that were any thing worse than other, in any of these Letters, I should be sure to hear of it.

First then, They say, I injoyned wearing of Whites, &c. surely I understand my self a great deal better, than to injoyn where I have no Power. Perhaps I might express that, which His Majesty Com∣manded me, when I was Dean of his Majesty's Chappel here; as this Reverend Bishop was in Scotland: And His Majesty's Express Com∣mand was, that I should take that care upon me; that the Chappel there, and the Service, should be kept answerable to this, as much as might be; And that the Dean should come to Prayers in his Form, as likewise other Bishops when they came thither. And let my Let∣ters be shewed; whether there be any Injoyning, other than this; and this way. And I am confident, His Majesty would never have laid this Task upon me; had he known it to be, either without Or∣der, or against Law.

Next I am Charged; that concerning these Whites, I brake my Promise to the Bishop of Edinburgh. Truly to the uttermost of my Memory, I cannot recall any such Passage, or Promise, made to that Reverend and Learned Prelate. And I must have bin very ill advised, had I made any such Promise; having no Warrant from his Ma∣jesty to ingage for any such thing. As for that which follows; that he was moved against his will to put on those Garments: Truly he expres∣sed nothing at that time to me, that might signifie it was against his Will. And his Learning and Judgment were too great, to stumble at such External Things: Especial∣ly such having been the Ancient Habits of the most Reverend Bishops from the descent of many Hundred Years; as may appear in the Life of St. * 5.4 Cyprian. And therefore the Novation was in the (Church) of Scotland, when her Bishops left them off, not when they put them on.

In these Letters, he (the Prelate of Canterbury) directs (Bishop Ballantine) to give Order for saying the English Service in the Chappel twice a day: For his neglect, shewing him that he was disappointed of the Bishoprick of Edinburgh, pro∣mising him upon his greater care of these Nova∣tions, advancement to a better Bishoprick.

For the direction for Reading the English Service, it was no other than His Majesty Commanded me to give. And I hope, it is no Crime for a Bishop of England, by His Majesties Command, to signifie to a Bishop in Scotland, what his pleasure is for Divine Service in his own Chappel. Nor was the Reading of the English Liturgy any

Novation at all in that place. For in the Year 1617. I had the Honour, as a Chaplain in Ordinary, to wait upon King James of Blessed Memory into Scotland; and then the English Service was Read in that Chappel, and twice a Day. And I had the Honour again to wait upon King Charles, as Dean of His Majesties Chappel Royal here, at his Coronation in Scotland, in the Year 1633: And then also was the English Service Read twice a Day in that Chappel. And a strict Command was given them by His Majesty, that it should be so continued; and Allowance was made for it. And none of the Scots found any fault with it at that time, or after, till these Tumults began. And for Bishop Ballantyn's missing the Bishoprick of Edinburgh, and my promising him another upon his better Care of his Majesties Com∣mands; I gave him both the Answers, and the Reason, and the Promise, which His Majesty gave me, and Commanded me to write to him. It follows—

That I taxed him (that is, Bishop Ballantine) for his boldness in Preaching the sound Doctrine of the Reformed Kirks against Mr. Michell; who had taught the Error of Arminius in the Point of the Extent of the † 5.5 Merit of Christ.

They should do well to shew my Letter; and then I will an∣swer punctually to any thing in it. In the mean time I do not know, that ever Mr. Michell Preached Armi∣nianism. For that Christ died for all Men, is a 5.6 the Universal and constant Doctrine of the Ca∣tholick Church in all Ages, and no Error of Ar∣minius: And are the b 5.7 express words of Scrip∣ture it self, in more places than one. And the c 5.8 Synod of Dort, called purposely about the Er∣rours of Arminius, allows this for Orthodox; Christum Mortuum esse pro omnibus. And for my part, I wish with all my heart, that this had been the greatest Error of Arminius. But yet whether I taxed that worthy Prelate for this or no, I know not: This I know, that if I did tax him, he deserved it. And for Bishops, even of divers Churches, to write one to another about Points of Divinity, yea, and sometimes to tax one another too, as their Judgments lead them, hath been usual in all Times and Places. The next Charge is—

That I bid him send up a List of the Names of the Counsellors, and Senators of the Colledge of Justice, who did not Com∣municate in the Chappel, in a Form which was not received in our Kirk: And that I commended him, when I found him Obse∣quious to these my Commandments; telling him, that I had moved the King the Se∣cond time, for the Punishment of such as had not received in the Chappel.

Here I must desire again, that this Letter of mine may be pro∣duced. For I have cause enough to suspect some material Change in the Matter or Form of my Words. Howsoever, if they be just∣ly set down, I answer; That if this be one of the Things which made great Disturbance amongst them, they would be greatly disturbed with a very little. For first, I writ nothing in this, but what I was ex∣presly Commanded by His Majesty: And I have His Majesties War∣rant under His Hand to keep a Correspondence with that Bishop of Dunblain; that from time to time he might receive His Majesties Direction by me, for the Ordering of all those Things. And how∣soever, the thing it self is no more than as if His Majesty should Command all his Counsellors and Judges here, once in the Year at least to receive the Communion in his Chappel at White-Hall.

And if you say 'tis more, because it was to Communicate in such a Form as was not received in the Church of Scotland; under Favour, that is not so neither. For this Form here spoken against, was to receive it Kneeling: And to receive the Sacrament Kneeling, was an * 5.9 Arti∣cle of the Synod of Perth, made in a General Assembly, and Confirmed by Act of Parliament; Both then in force, when my Letters were written. And therefore either this Form was received in their Kirk, (which is here denied;) Or else there was little Obedience in their Kirk, and Kirk-Men, either to General Assembly, or Parliament. * 5.10

As for that which comes fluttering after, That I commended him, when I found him Obsequious; I had reason to do it: For (whatsoever is said here) it was to the Kings Commands, not to mine. And the Reason why I writ, that I had moved the King a Second time for the Punishment of such as disobeyed, was, because the Bishop had written unto me, that if some were not Checked, or Punished, none would obey. And 'tis true too; that I took occasion, once, and a second time, (but upon Second Letters of his to the same effect) to move the King: But only by shewing His Majesty, what was written by him, that was upon the place, and trusted with the Office. Nor did I ever meddle farther in those Businesses, than by laying before His Majesty what was written to me to that end: Leaving the King (as it became me) to Judge both of the Motion, and the Person that made it, as in his Princely Wisdom he thought fit. The next thing is, that in these Letters,

I did upbraid him (Bishop Ballantine, that is) that in his First Synod at Aberdeen, he had only disputed against our Custom in Scotland, of Fasting sometimes on the Lord's Day: And that I did Pre∣sumptuously Censure their Kirk, that in this we were opposite to Christianity it self, and that amongst us there † 5.11 was no Canon at all. More of this stuff may be seen in the Letters them∣selves.

And my humble desire is, that the Letters may be seen. For what∣soever account is made of this Stuff, it was once, (and in far better times of the Church) valued at a better rate. And I shall not be a∣shamed of any Stuff, contained in any of my Letters to this Bishop, or any other; let them be produced when they please. But what then is this Stuff? 'Tis, that I upbraid this worthy Prelate about their Custom in Scotland of Fasting sometimes on the Lord's Day: And censure

their Church presumptuously, as opposite herein to Christianity. Surely I do not use to upbraid meaner Men than the Bishop is; much less presumptuously to censure a Church. If I thought (as I do) that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in an Errour for only disputing against that which he should have reformed; I conceive, it was no upbraiding.

As for the Custom in Scotland, of Fasting on the Lord's-Day; It is not only sometimes, as is here expressed; but continually, when they have any Solemn Fast, the Lord's-Day is the Day for it. And if I did Write, that that was opposite to Christianity it self; I doubt it is too true. For it is against the Practice of the whole Church of Christ: And that which is so, must oppose Christianity it self. And this I find: That as Apostolical Universal Tradition settled the Lord's-Day for Holy and Publick Worship; So from the ve∣ry Apostles times, the same general Tradition hath in all times accounted it unlawful to Fast upon that Day. And if an Ordi∣nary Fast were not Lawful upon that Day, much less was a So∣lemn. Nor is there any thing more clear in all Antiquity. For in the a 5.12 Canons of the Apostles (which if they be not theirs, are very antient) If a Priest did fast upon the Lord's day, he was to be deposed; and if a Layman, he was to be Excommunicated. And b 5.13 S. Ignatius tells us, if any Man fast upon the Lords Day, he is Christ's Interfector, a Murtherer of Christ: And that I am sure is against Christiani∣ty it self. c 5.14 Tertullian professes 'tis altogether unlaw∣ful. The d 5.15 Council of Gangra, held An. 324. de∣creed against it, and set an Anathema upon it; and that not only when it is done in contempt of the Day: but also though it be done as a help to Continency. And e 5.16 S. Hilary agrees with this; and calls it not a Cu∣stom, but a Constitution; such a Constitution, as that if any Man shall advisedly, and of set purpose, Fast on the Lord's Day, by the Decree of the Fourth f 5.17 Council of Carthage, he should not be accounted a Catho∣lick: And they must needs do it advisedly, and of set purpose, who appoint a publick solemn Fast upon that Day, and then keep it. And this was so strictly observed in g 5.18 S. Ambrose his time; that it was not held Lawful to Fast upon that Day, no not in Lent. Nay he goes farther: For h 5.19 he says expresly, If a∣ny Man make a Law, or give a Command for Fasting on the Lord's Day; he believes not in the Re∣surrection of Christ. And is not this opposite to Christianity it self? And is not that Legem indicere, when they Proclaim, or Command a Publick Fast? With him k 5.20 S. Augustin joyns very fully; and first says, it is a great Scandal: Then he gives the reason of it; Because Christ joyned Mourning with Fasting, which becomes not this Day; unless Men think 'tis fit to be sorry, that Christ is risen from the Dead. And this I am sure, is opposite to Christianity it self. For

if Christ be not Risen, then is our Preaching vain, and your Faith is also vain. l 5.21 1. Cor. 15. After this m 5.22 he asks this Question, Who doth not offend God, if with the Scandal of the whole Church of Christ, he will Fast upon the Lord's Day? I will not go lower down: This is enough if any thing be. Yet this I will add, that as this Fasting on Sunday was antiently prohi∣bited; so was it never practised of old, but by no∣torious and professed Hereticks; as by the Manichees, who appointed that Day for fasting, (so n 5.23 S. Aug.) and were justly condemned for it; (so o 5.24 S. Ambrose) And by Aerians, who Fasted on Sunday, and Feasted on Fridays; (so p 5.25 Epiphanius:) And by the Priscilia∣nists, whom q 5.26 S. Aug. therefore calls the Imita∣tors of the Manichees; and so they were indeed: For neither of them believed, that our Blessed Saviour was a true Man; and therefore disregarded the Day of his Re∣surrection, as appears in r 5.27 S. Leo. And as against these the Council held at s 5.28 Caesar-Augusta, An. 381. provid∣ed; so before An. 324. the Council t 5.29 at Gangra, made their Canon against Eutactus the Armenian Monk, and his Ground was pretence of Abstinence, as if he could never Fast enough. This is enough; and all this is with∣in the compass of the Primitive Church; which certainly if these Men did not scorn, they would never have urged this against me. Well! This is (they say) drawn out of my fourteen Letters. Next they will prove me the Author of many Disturbances a∣mong them.

2. By two Papers of Memoirs and Instructions from the Pre∣tended Bishop of St. Andrews, to the pretended Bishop of Ross * 5.30 [coming] to this Prelate (that is, of Canterbury) for ordering the Affairs of the Kirk, and Kingdom of Scotland.

It is manifest here by their own Words, that these Memorials, and Instructions, whatsoever they were, had not me the Prelate of Canterbury for their prime cause on Earth; for they came from the Reverend and Prudent Arch-Bishop of St. Andrews, to the Reve∣rend * 5.31 Bishop of Ross, by him to deliver to me, for the ordering of the Affairs of the Kirk and Kingdom of Scotland. Surely, I think no Man will judge it to be a Crime in me, to give my Brethe∣ren the Bishops of Scotland the Best Counsel, and with that Counsel the best Assistance to his Majesty, that I could in their Church-Affairs; considering their absence, and remoteness from him, and the Place that I bear about him. And for my own part, had I been defective therein; I should have thought my self not only unkind to them, but faulty otherwise in my Duty, both to his Majesty, and that Church. But for the Affairs of that Kingdom (though I had the Honour to be a Sworn Counsellor of that State as well as this) yet I never medled with them, but at such time, and in such a way, as I was called and commanded to, by his Majesty. Let us therefore see the Particulars, which are Named.

As not only to obtain Warrants to order the Exchequer, the Pri∣vy-Council, the great Commission of Surrenders, The matter of Balmerinoe's Process, as might please our Prelates; but Warrants also for the sitting of the High-Commission-Court once a Week in Edinburgh; and to gain from the Noble-Men, for the Benefit of the Prelates and their Adhaerents, the Abbacies of Kelsoe, Arbroth, St. Andrews and Lindores.

For the first of these, my obtaining Warrants to order the Exche∣quer there; that is indeed an Affair of the Kingdom, and a great one. But all or most that I did herein, was at the earnest entreaty of the Earl of Traquair, Treasurer Depute, and after that Lord Trea∣surer; who avowed to me, that if the Orders were setled for the Exchequer, he would not only bring the King out of Debt, but raise him some Revenue also; with a Protestation farther, that for that, and some such like particulars, he could trust no hand but mine in his absence to get them done, and kept private. And at so great an Officers intreaty, and for Matters under his own Charge, I could not refuse so much Service for the King, as was pretended by him.

As for Orders to the Privy-Council, I remember not any procu∣red by me. And sure I am, if I did any thing to that Honoura∣ble Body, it was by his Majesty's Command, and in relation to Church Affairs there. And for the Great Commission of Surrenders, in which both the Bishops, and the inferiour Clergy, were deeply in∣teressed, and did much fear the loss of their Tythes, and to be made Stipendiaries; I conceive, I had all the reason in the World to give them my best assistance; and yet I undertook not this Care, till his Majesty gave me a special Command to do what I did. And if the Bishops were in any thing mistaken in this Com∣mission; that cannot * 5.32 charge upon me, who followed it no farther than I received special directions from his Majesty for the publick good. For the Lord Balmerinoe's Process, I heard much discourse of it at Court, but I medled nothing with it, one way or other, sa∣ving that at the intreaty of some Men of Honour of that Nation, I did twice (if not thrice) adventure to become an humble Suitor to his Majesty in that Lord's behalf. And this was all the Harm I did him.

As for the High-Commission-Court, if there were no fault in it, as such a Court, then I am sure, there could be none in the Sit∣ting of it once a Week. If the having of such a Court be a Fault (as it seems 'tis now accounted, as well here, as there) yet for my own part, with all humble Submission to better Judgment, I can∣not think it is; and I must still pray, that both Nations have not Cause to Repent the Abolishing of it. But howsoever, this was not of my procuring. A Scotchman of good Place was imployed about it from the Bishops, and effected it; and I could name him; but since it is here charged as a Fault, I shall accuse no Man else, but defend my self. And this for the Sitting of it once a Week. But for the establishing of that Court in that King∣dom; that was done long before I was a Bishop, or had any thing to

do in the Publick. For it appears by one of the great∣est * 5.33 Factionists in that Kingdom; that the Hich-Commission-Court was setled, and in full Execution in the Year 1610. when all Men know I led a pri∣vate Life in Oxford; by which it is more than ma∣nifest, that I neither was, nor could be, Author of this pretended Novation, or any disturbance that fol∣lowed from it.

The next is a great Charge indeed, were there a∣ny Truth in it: That I laboured to gain from the Noblemen, for the Benefit of the Prelates, and their Ad∣haerents, the Abbacies of Kelsoe, Arbroth, S. Andrews, and Lindores. To begin at the last; The Man that followed that, was Mr. Andrew Lermot. He came recommended to me very highly, and with assu∣rance that the Title which he laid to Lindores was Just and Legal. But notwithstanding all this, my Answer was, That I knew not the Laws of that King∣dom, nor would meddle with any thing of that nature. And though he made great means to me, yet he could never get me to meddle in it; and which is more, I told him and his Friends; that for so much as I did understand, I did much fear this way, taken by him, would do Mischief. And tho' Mr. Lermot have the general repute of an Honest and a Learned Man; yet for this very business sake, I have made my self a Stranger to him, ever since; and that all this is Truth, he and his Friends yet living are able to Testify.

For St. Andrews, his Majesty took a resolution to Rebuild the Cathedral there; which he found he could no way so well do, as by annexing that Abby to the Arch-Bishoprick of St. Andrews, with a Legal Caution for so much Yearly to be laid out upon that Building. My Lord Duke of Richmond and Lenox, who was ow∣ner of it; had for it ....... Thousand Pounds. The Earl of Tar∣quair (who then managed the Lord Duke's Affairs) made the Bar∣gain with the King; and that which I did in it, was meerly to consider, how security might be given, that the Money, which the King intended for so good and great a Work, as the rebuilding of that Cathedral, might be imployed to the right use, and no other.

For Arbroth, my Lord Marquis Hamilton, without any the least Thought of mine that way, made his earnest Suit to me; that his Majesty would take Arbroth, and joyn it to the very poor Bi∣shoprick of Brechen, close to which it lay, and give him for it * 5.34 a Suit here in England. At his Lordship's intreaty I obtained this: And he very Nobly conveyed Arbroth, as he promised. But things were so carried by the Earl of Traquair the Lord Treasurer of Scot∣land, that the poor Bishop of Brechen could never get that setled upon his See: which was not the only thing, in which that Lord played fast and loose with me.

For Kelsoe, the like earnest Suit did my Lord the Earl of Rox∣borough make to me of himself for an Exchange, and pressed me

three or four times, before he could get me to move his Majesty. In∣deed, I was fearful, least the King should grow weary of such Ex∣changes; (for sure I was, whatsoever was pretended, none of these Lords meant to lose by their Bargain:) Till at last, my Lord of Roxborough was so Honourable, as that he would needs leave Kelsoe to the King's disposing, and stay for such Recompence, as he should think fit to give him, till his Majesty found his own time. This (at his earnest intreaty still) I acquainted the King with: And so that bu∣siness setled for a small time; but how 'tis now, I know not. And this was all, that ever I did about Arbroth and Kelsoe. And these two Honourable Lords are yet living, and will witness this Truth. But the Charge says farther—

That in the smallest Matters, they (the Prelates) received his Com∣mandments: As for taking down Galleries, and stone Walls, in the Kirks of Edinburgh, and St. Andrews, for no other end, but to make way for Altars, and Adoration towards the East: which (beside other Evils) made no small noise and disturbance amongst the People, deprived hereby of their ordinary accommodation for Publick Worship.

This Charge is like the rest. Is it probable, that such Grave and Learned Men, as those of the Scottish Bishops were, which held in∣tercourse with me, should not resolve in the smallest Matters, till they received my Commandments; who never sent Command to any of them in my Life, but what I received expresly from the King? And they certainly were not for the smallest Matters.

As for the taking down of Galleries in St. Andrews; to the utter∣most of my Memory, I never gave either Command or Direction. Nor can it stand with any shew of probability, that I should com∣mand the taking down of Galleries in St. Andrews, where I had no∣thing to do, and let Galleries stand in so many Churches in London, and other parts of my Province, where I had Power. The Truth is; I did never like Galleries in any Church. They utterly deface the grave Beauty and Decency of those Sacred Places; and make them look more like a Theater, than a Church. Nor in my Judgment, do they make any great accomodation for the Auditory: For in most places, they hinder as much room beneath, as they make above; rendring all, or most of, those places useless, by the noise and trampling of them, which stand above in the Galleries. And if I be mistaken in this, 'tis nothing to the business in hand: For be Galleries what they will for the use, I commanded not the taking of them down at St. Andrews.

At Edinburgh the King's Command took down the stone Walls and Galleries, which were there removed, and not mine. For his Majesty having in a Christian and Princely way, Erected and Indow∣ed a Bishoprick in Edinburgh; he resolved to make the great Church of St. Giles in that City, a Cathedral: And to this end, gave Order to have the Galleries in the lesser Church, and the Stone-wall which di∣vided them, taken down. For of old, they were both one Church, and made two by a Wall, built up at the West end of the Chancel; So

that that which was called the lesser Church, was but the Chancel of St. Giles, with Galleries round about it; And was for all the World like a square Theater, without any shew of a Church: As is also the Church at Brunt-Iland over-against it. And I remember, when I pas∣sed over at the Frith, I took it, at first sight, for a large square Pigeon-House: So free was it from all suspition of being so much as built like an Antient Church. Now, since his Majesty took down these Galle∣ries, and the Stone-wall, to make St. Giles's Church a Cathedral there; certainly my Command took them not down, to make way for Altars, and Adoration towards the East; which I never commanded in that, or any other Church in Scotland. The Charge goes on.

ART. II. (Book 2)

The second Novation which troubled our Peace, was a Book of Ca∣nons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical obtruded upon our Kirk, found by our General Assembly to be devised for Establishing a Tyrannical Power in the Persons of our Prelates, over the Worship of God, and over the Consciences, Liberties, and Goods of the People, and for Abolishing the whole Discipline and Government of our Kirk, by General and Provincial Assemblies, Presbyteries, and Kirk-Sessions; which was setled by Law, and in continual pra∣ctice from the time of Reformation.

This Charge begins with a General, and will come to Particulars after. And first, it seems they are angry with a Book of Canons. Ex∣cellent Church-Government, it seems, they would have, that will admit of no Canons, to direct or controul their Liberty. And if they mean by obtruding upon their Church, that the Canons were unduly thrust upon them, because that Book was Confirmed by the King's Anthority; then 'tis a bold Phrase to call it Obtruding. For if His Majesty that now is, did by his Sole Authority Command the present Book of Canons to the Church of Scotland; he did but Exercise that Power which King James challenged did in the right of his Crown belong to him: As appears manifestly by a Letter of his to the Pre∣lates of Scotland then Assembled at Perth. That Royal Letter is large, but very worthy any Mans Reading, and is to be seen in the * 6.1 Rela∣tion of those Proceedings. But because they speak of my Novations, if they mean that this Book of Canons was Obtruded upon their Church by me; Or if it were found in a Just Synod, and upon fair Proceed∣ings, to Establish a Tyrannical Power of the Prelates over the Worship of God, or the Consciences, Liberties, or Goods of the People; Or for Abo∣lishing any thing that was setled by Laws; they had Reason both to be troubled, and to seek in a Dutiful manner, first rightly to inform His Majesty, and then to desire a Remedy from him. But if the Book of Canons did really none of these things, as (for ought I yet know) it did not, and as I hope will appear, when they come to Particulars; then this will be no longer a Charge, but a Slander. And howsoever, if any thing in those Canons were Ordered against their Laws; it was by our invincible Ignorance, and their Bishops fault,

that would not tell us, wherein we went against their Laws, if so we did. And for my own part; I did ever advise them to make sure in the whole Business, that they attempted nothing against Law. But if their late General Assembly, in which (they say) these things were found to be against Law, did proceed Unwarrantably, or Factiously, (as the most Learned Men of that Kingdom avow it did;) the less heed must, and will in future times, be given to their Proceedings. But before they come to Particulars, they think fit to lay Load on me, and say—

That Canterbury was Master of this Work, is manifest, by a Book of Canons sent to him, written upon the one side only, with the other side blank, for Corrections, Additions, and putting all in better Order, at his pleasure: Which accordingly was done; as may appear by the Interlinings, Marginals, and filling up of the Blank Pages, with Directions sent to our Prelates.

I was no Master of this Work, but a Servant to it, and Command∣ed thereunto by His Sacred Majesty (as I have to shew under his Hand.) And the Work it self was begun in His Majesties Blessed Fathers Time: For the Bishops of Scotland were gathering their Canons then. And this is most manifest by a Passage in the Sermon, which my Lord the Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews Preached before the General Assembly at Perth, An. 1618, when I was a private Man, and had nothing to do with these things. The words are these: And when I least expected, these Articles (that is, the five Articles of Perth) were sent unto me; not to be proponed to the Church, but to be * 6.2 inserted amongst the Canons thereof, which were then in gathering, touch∣ing which Point I humbly excused my self, &c. So this Work was be∣gun, and known to that Church, long before I had any thing to do with it. And now, when it came to be Perfected, I did nothing but as I was Commanded, and Warranted, by His Majesty. But indeed according to this Command, I took a great deal more pains than I have thanks for; as it too often falls out with the best Church-Men. To this end, 'tis true, a Book of Canons was not sent me, but brought by my Lord the Bishop of Ross, and delivered to me: And if it were written on one side only, and left Blank on the other for Corrections, or Additions; I hope there's no sin in that, to leave room and space for me to do that, for which the Book was brought to me. As for that which follows, it hath less fault in it. For they say, it was for my putting all in better Order. And I hope, to put all in better Order, is no Crime Censurable in this Court. And whate∣ver they of Scotland think; that Church did then need many things to be put in better Order, and at this Day need many more.

Yea, but they say, this should not be done at my pleasure. I say so too; Neither was it. For whatsoever I thought fit to correct, or add in the Copy brought to me, I did very humbly and fairly submit to the Church of Scotland: And under those Terms delivered it back to the Bishop which brought it, with all the Interlinings, Mar∣ginals, and fillings up of Blank Pages, and the best Directions I was able to give them. And all this was in me, Obedience to His Majesty, and no Wrong, that I know, to the Church of Scotland; I am sure not

intended by me. Neither are these Interlinings, or Additions, so many, as they are here insinuated to be; for the Bishops of Scotland had been very careful in this Work. All which would clearly ap∣pear, were the Book produced. Yet the Charge goes on against me still.

And that it was done by no other than Canterbury, is evident by his Magisterial way of Prescribing; and by a new Copy of these Canons, all written with S. Andrews own hand precisely to a Letter, according to the former Castigations and Directions, sent back to procure the King's Warrant unto it; which accordingly was obtained.

By no other Hand than Canterburies, is very roundly affirmed. How is it proved? Why, by two Reasons. First they say, 'tis evi∣dent, by his Magisterial way of Prescribing. An Excellent Argument! The Book of Canons was delivered to me ready made. That which was mine, is here confessed to be but Interlinings, and Marginals, and Corrections; and at most some Additions: And they would be found a very small Some, were the Original Book seen. And yet it must be Evident, that no Hand but mine did this, by my Magi∣sterial way of Prescribing, in an Interlining, or a Marginal. Excellent Evidence! Secondly, they have another great Evidence of this. But because that is so nervous and strong; I will be bold to reduce it to some Form, that it may appear the clearer, though it be against my self. There was (they say) a new Copy of these Canons all written with S. Andrews own Hand, and according to the former Ca∣stigations and Directions, sent to have the King's Warrant to it, which was obtained: Therefore these Interlinings and Marginals, &c. were done by no other than Canterbury. Most Excellent Evidence, and clear as Mid-Night!

The plain Truth is contrary to all this Evidence. For by the same Command of His Majesty, the Reverend Bishop of London was joyned with me in all the view, and Consideration, which I had ei∣ther upon the Book of Canons, or upon the Service-Book after. So it is utterly untrue; that these Interlinings, or Marginals, or Corrections, or call them what you will, were done by no other than Canterbury. For my Lord of London's both Head and Hand were as deep in them as mine. And this I avow for well known Truth, both to the King, and those Scottish Bishops which were then imployed; and this notwithstanding all the Evidences of a Magisterial way, and a New Copy. And yet this General Charge pursues me yet farther, and says,

The Kings Warrant was obtained (as is said) to these Canons, but with an Addition of some other Canons, and a Page of † 6.3 New Corrections, according to which the Book of Canons thus Com∣posed, was Published in Print. The inspection of the Books, Instructions, and his Letters of Joy for the success of the Work, and of other Letters * 6.4 from the Prelate of London, and the Lord Sterling, to the same purpose, (all which we are ready to exhibit,) will put the Matter out of all debate.

Yet more ado about nothing? Yet more noise of Proof to put that out of all debate, which need never enter into any? For if no more be intended, than that I had a view of the Book of Canons, and did make some Interlinings, and Marginals, and the like; I have freely acknowledged it, and by whose Command I did it, and who was joyned with me in the Work. So there will need no Proof of this, either by my Letters, or the Prelate of Londons, or the Lord Ster∣lings. Yet let them be exhibited, if you please. But if it be inten∣ded (as 'tis laid) that this was done by no other than Canterbury; then I utterly deny it; and no Proof here named, or any other shall e∣ver be able to make it good.

As for the Addition of some other Canons, and Pages of New Cor∣rections, according to which the Book of Canons is said to be Composed and Published: Truly, to the utmost of my Memory, I know of none such; but that the Copy written by my Lord of S. Andrews own Hand, and sent up, (as is before mentioned) was the very Copy which was Warranted by His Majesty, and Published without any further Alteration. But if any further Alteration were; it was by the same Authority, and with the same Consent. And for my Letters of Joy for the Success of the Work; let them be exhibited, when you please. I will never deny that Joy, while I live, that I conceived of the Church of Scotland's coming nearer, both in the Canons, and the Liturgy, to the Church of England. But our gross unthankfulness both to our God, and King, and our other many and great Sins, have hindred this great Blessing. And I pray God, that the loss of this. which was now almost effected, do not in short time prove one of the greatest Mischiefs which ever befel this Kingdom, and that too. This is the General Charge about the Canons; Now follow the Particulars.

Beside this General Charge; there be some things more special, wor∣thy to be adverted unto, for discovering his Spirit. First, the Fourth Canon of Cap 8. For as much as no Reformation in Doctrine or Discipline can be made perfect at once in any Church: Therefore it shall and may be Lawful for the Kirk of Scotland, at any time, to make Remonstrances to His Majesty, or his Successours, &c. Because this Canon holds the Door open to more Innovations; he writes to the Prelate of Ross, his Prime Agent in all this Work, of his great Gladness, that this Canon did stand behind the Curtain; And his great desire, that this Canon might be Printed fully, as one that was to be most useful.

Now come the Particulars, worthy to be adverted unto for the disco∣very of my Spirit. And the first is taken out of the Fourth Canon of Cap. 8. The Charge is, that this Canon holds the Door open to more In∣novations. First I conceive, this Accusation is vain. For that Canon restrains all Power from private Men, Clergy or Laye; nay, from Bishops in a Synod, or otherwise, to alter any thing in Doctrine or Discipline, with∣out Authority from His Majesty or his Successours. Now all Innova∣tions come from private assumption of Authority, not from Autho∣rity it self. For in Civil Affairs, when the King and the State, upon Emergent Occasions, shall abrogate some Old Laws, and make other

New, that cannot be counted an Innovation. And in Church-Af∣fairs, every Synod, that hath sate in all times, and all places of Christendom, have with leave of Superiour Authority, declared some Points of Doctrine, condemned other-some; Altered some Ce∣remonials, made new Constitutions for better assisting the Govern∣ment. And none of these have ever been accounted Innovations, the Foundations of Religion still remaining firm and unmoved. Nay, under favour, I conceive it most necessary, that thus it ought to be. And therefore, this Canon is far from holding a Door open for more Innovations; since it shuts it upon all, and leaves no Power to alter any thing, but by making a Remonstrance to the Supream Autho∣rity, that in a Church-way approbation may be given when there is Cause.

And therefore, if I did write to the Prelate of Ross, that this Ca∣non might be Printed fully, as one that was to be most useful: I writ no more then, than I believe now. For certainly it is a Canon, that in a well-governed Church may be of great use: And the more, because in Truth, it is but Declaratory of that Power, which a Na∣tional Church hath, with leave and approbation of the Supream Power, to alter, and change, any alterable thing pertaining to Doctrine or Discipline in the Church. And as for that Phrase, said to be in my Letter, that this Canon did stand behind the Curtain: it was thus occa∣sioned. My Lord, the Bishop of Ross, writ unto me, from the Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews, that no words might be made of this Canon; (what their Reason was, they best know:) I returned Answer be∣like in this sort; That the Canon stood behind the Curtain, and would not be throughly understood by every Man; yet advised the Print∣ing, in regard of the necessary use of it. For let this Canon be in force, and right use made of it; and a National Church may ride safe by God's Ordinary Blessing, through any Storm; which without this Latitude it can never do. The next Charge is in—

2. The Title prefixed to these Canons by our Prelates. For there 'tis thus: Canons agreed on to be proponed to the several Sy∣nods of the Kirk of Scotland; And is thus changed by Canter∣bury; Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical, &c. Ordained to be observed by the Clergy. He will not have Canons to come from the Authority of Synods, but from the Power of Pre∣lates, or from the Kings Prerogative.

I perceive, they mean to sift narrowly, when the Title cannot scape. But truly in this Charge, I am to seek, which is greater in my Accusers, their Ignorance, or their Malice: Their Ignorance in the Charge; or their Malice in the Inference upon it. The Title was, Canons agreed upon to be proponed to the Synods of the Kirk of Scotland. And this was very fit, to express the Prelates intendment, which (for ought I know) was to propose them so. But this Book, which was brought to me, was to be Printed: And then that Title could not stand with any Congruity of Sense. For no Church uses to Print Canons, which are to be proponed to their Synods; but such as have been proposed, and agreed on. Nor did this altering of the

Title, in any the least thing hinder those worthy Prelates from Com∣municating them with their Synods, before they Printed them. And therefore the Inference must needs be extream full of Malice, to force from hence, that I would not have Canons come from the Authority of Synods, but from the Power of Prelates, or the King's Prerogative: Whereas most manifest it is, that the fitting of this Title for the Press, doth neither give any Power to Prelates, nor add to the King's Prerogative more than is his due, nor doth it detract any thing from the Authority of Synods. For I hope, the Bishops had no purpose but to Ordain them in Synod to be observed by the Clergy, &c. and Approved and Published by the King's Consent and Authority. After this, comes—

3. The formidable Canon, Cap. 1. 3. threatning no less than Ex∣communication, against all such Persons whatsoever shall open their Mouths against any of these Books; proceeded not from our Pre∣lates, nor is to be found in * 6.5 Copies sent from them, but is a Thunderbolt forged in Canterbury's own Fire.

First, whether this Canon be to be found in the Copies sent from your Prelates, or not, I cannot tell; but sure it was in the Copy brought to me, or else my Memory forsakes me very strangely. Secondly, after all this Noise made of a Formidable Canon, because no less is threatned than Excommunication; I would fain know, what the Church can do less upon Contempt of her Canons, Liturgy, and Ordinations, than to Excommunicate the Offenders; or what Church, in any Age, laid less upon a Crime so great. Thirdly, suppose this Thunderbolt (as 'tis called) were forged in Canterbury's Fire; yet that Fire was not outragious. For this Canon contains as much as the 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Canons of the Church of England, made in the beginning of the gracious Reign of King James: And yet to eve∣ry one of those Canons there is an Excommunication in Facto affix∣ed, for every one of these Crimes single: Whereas this Canon shoots this one Thunderbolt but once against them all. And this I would my Accusers should know; that if no more Thunderbolts had been forged in their Fire, than have been in mine; nor State, nor Church would have Flamed, as of late they have done.

4 Our Prelates in divers Places witness their dislike of Papists. A Minister shall be deposed, if he shall [Rushw.] be found negligent to convert Papists. Cap. 8. 15. The Adoration of the Bread is a Superstition to be condemned. Cap. 6. 6. They call the * 6.6 Absoluteness of Baptism, an Errour of Popery. Cap. 6. 2. But in Canterbury's Edition the Name of Papists and Popery † 6.7 are not so much as mentioned.

Here's a great general Accusation, offered to be made good by three Particulars. The general is, that in the Copy of the Canons, which their Prelates sent, there's a dislike of Papists: But none in the Edition, as it was alter'd by me. Now this is utterly untrue; for it is manifest cap. 1. 1. There is express care taken for the King's

Majesty's Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical, and abolishing all Foreign Power repugnant to it. And again in the same Canon, That no Foreign Power hath (in his Majesty's Dominions) any Esta∣blishment by the Law of God: And this with an Addition, That the Exclusion of all such Power is just. And, Cap. 2. 9. 'tis Ordained, that every Ecclesiastical Person shall take the Oath of Supremacy. And, Cap. 10. 3. All Readers in any Colledge or Schools, shall take the Oaths of Al∣legiance and Supremacy. And sure, I think, 'tis no great matter, whe∣ther Papists, or Popery be Named; so long as the Canons go so di∣rectly against them. This for the General. Now for the three Particulars.

And first, That which was in Cap. 8. 15. That a Minister shall be deposed, if he be found negligent to convert Papists; I did think fit to leave out, upon these two Grounds. The one, that the Word Negligent is too general an Expression, and of too large an extent, to lay a Minister open to Deposition. And if Church-Governours, to whom the execution of the Canons is committed, should forget Christian Moderation (as they may Pati humana) a very worthy Minister might sometimes be undone for a very little Negligence; for Negligence is Negligence, be it never so little. Besides, I have learned out of the Canons of the Church of England, that e∣ven * 6.8 gross Negligence, in a matter as great as this is, is punished but with Suspension for three Months. The other Ground, why I omit∣ted this clause, is; Because I do not think the Church of Scotland, or any other particular Church, is so blessed in her Priests, as that every of her Ministers is for Learning, and Judgment, and Temper, Able and Fit to convert Papists. And therefore I did think then, and do think yet; that it is not so easie a work, or to be made so common; but that it is, and may be much fitter for some able selected Men to undertake. And if any Man think God's Gifts in him to be neglected (as Men are apt to overva∣lue themselves;) let them try their Gifts, and labour their Con∣version in God's Name: But let not the Church by a Canon set every Man on work; lest their Weak or Indiscreet Performance hurt the Cause, and blemish the Church.

The second Particular is an excellent one. 'Tis about the Ado∣ration of the Bread in the Blessed Sacrament, Cap. 6. 6. And 'tis im∣plyed, as if this Superstition were condemned in the Copies sent by their Prelates, but left out by me. Good God! how shameless are these Church-Men! for they drew up these Articles against me, though the Lay-Commissioners delivered them. And was there neither Clergy nor Lay-Man among them so careful, as to compare the words of the Charge, with the words of the Canon, before they would ven∣ture to deliver them into so great a Court as the Parliament of Eng∣land? Would not Mr. Alexander Henderson, who was the Prime Lea∣der in these Church-Affairs, be so careful for himself, and his own Reputation, as not publickly to deliver in a most Notorious Un∣truth? For most manifest it is, that these words, As therefore the Adoration of the Bread is condemned, &c. stand still in the Copy Re∣vised by me, as is to be seen in the Printed Copy of those Canons; and in the same place by them quoted; and in a different Character;

that I wonder how any Man's Eye could miss them. So here I am accused for putting that out, which I left in.

The third Particular is, That their Prelates call the Absoluteness of Baptism an Error of Popery, Cap. 6. 2. Which is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 out too (they say) in my Edition (as they will needs call the Printed Copy.) The Truth is, this we did think fit to leave out: Because the Absolute necessity of Baptism (in the Ordinary way of the Church, leaving God (as he is) most free to save with Baptism, or without, as him∣self pleases) is no Popish Error, but the true Tenet of the Catholick Church of Christ; and was, by their good leave, an Error in your Pre∣lates to call it so: And I provided both for Truth, and their Credit, by keeping it from the view of Christendom. Nor could you expect other from me in this Point, being an Arch-Bishop of the Church of England, which maintains the Necessity of Baptism, such as is above mentioned: As appears in the Rubrick before Publick Baptism in the Service-Book, confirmed by Act of Parliament. The Words are these: Though it be fittest to Administer Baptism on Sundays and other Holy∣days, &c. Nevertheless, if Necessity so require, Children may at all times be Baptised at Home. And again, in the Rubrick before private Baptism, thus; When great need shall compel them to Baptise their Children at Home, it shall be Administred on this fashion. And farther, the Church * 6.9 of England takes care to have such Ministers Punished, as shall de∣fer Baptism, if the Child be in Danger. So that I could not let this Clause stand in the Scottish Canons, but I must Charge my Mother the Church of England, as guilty of maintaining an Error of Popery, and the Parliament of England for confirming it.

5. Our Prelates have not the boldness to trouble us in their Canons, with Altars, Fonts, Chancels, Reading of a long Liturgy before † 6.10 Sermons, &c. But Canterbury is Punctual and Peremptory in all these.

When I met so often with this Phrase; Our Prelates do not this, and that, in which Canterbury is Punctual and Peremptory: It made me hope at first, these Men had some good Opinion of their own Prelates. But so soon as they had once gotten the Power into their own Hands; they made it presently appear, that though their Pre∣lates had not the boldness to trouble them; yet they had the Impudence to cast the Prelates out of all the Means they had, and without any the least Mercy to themselves, their Wives, and Children: And that in a most Ignorant, and Barbarous manner, calling them the Limbs and Members of Antichrist.

But what's the Crime, which your Prelates had not the boldness to trouble you with, and in which Canterbury (that strange Man,) is so Punctual and Peremptory? O! Grave Crimen Caie Caesar! 'Tis a Charge indeed; A mighty Charge! A Novation of above Thirteen Hundred Years old. For after the Church was once formally setled under the Christian Emperours; (nay, and for some Years before) I challenge these Men to shew any Church under Heaven, with∣out that which was promiscuously called, The Holy Table, or Altar; Or without a Font, or a Chancel, or a formal set Liturgy before Ser∣mon,

&c. And therefore if I were punctual in these, I did but my Duty. But Peremptory I am sure I was not, as well knowing the difference between things of Decency and Uniformity, and things of Necessity to Salvation. But the Charge must go on for all this.

6. For although the words of the 10 Canon, Cap. 3. be fair; yet the wicked Intentions of Canterbury and Ross may be seen in the point of Justification of a Sinner before God, by comparing the Canon as it came from our Prelates, and as it was returned from Canterbury, and Printed.

Here's a Confession, that the words of the 10 Canon, Cap. 3. are fair; And so they are indeed. The Canon runs thus; It is manifest, that the Superstition of former Ages is turned into great Prophaneness; and that People, for the most part, are grown cold for doing any good; esteeming that Good Works are not necessary. Therefore shall all Presbyters, as their Text gives occasion, urge the necessity of Good Works to their Hearers. These words they say are fair; and sure they are so. What's amiss then? What? Why, the wicked Intentions of Canterbury and Ross. God bless us! Wicked Intentions under such fair words? Now God forbid. I hope Ross had none; I am sure Canterbury had not. But how come they to be Judges of our Intentions? How? Why, they say, they may be seen in the point of the Justification of a Sinner before God. That's a high Point, and a dangerous, for any Man to have Wicked Intentions about it. How then may our Wicked Intentions be seen? Why, by comparing the Canons; so they say. And I desire nothing more, than that the Book, which I perused, may be produced: And upon sight of it, I will acknowledge and make good whatsoever I did; or humbly crave Pardon for what I cannot make good. And though I cannot get to see the Book, yet you shall hear the Comparison.

Our Prelates say thus: It is manifest, that the Superstitions of for∣mer Ages, are turned into a great Prophaneness, and that People are grown cold, for the most part, in doing any good; thinking there is no place for Good Works, because they are excluded from Justification. Therefore shall all Ministers, as their Text gives occasion, urge the necessity of Good Works, as they would be Saved; and remember that they are, Via Regni, the Way to the Kingdom of Heaven, quam∣vis non sint Causa Regnandi, howbeit they be not the Cause of our Salvation.

How the Canon goes now, is manifest in the words preceeding: How it went before in the Copy which their Prelates sent, is now ex∣pressed. And if it be fairly related, here are two things Charged to be left out. The one is this passage, Because they are Excluded from Justification. And the other is, that known place of St. Bernard, That Good Works are Via Regni, non Causa Regnandi. Now I con∣ceive, both these Passages may be left out of this Canon, without any Wicked Intentions in either Canterbury or Ross against the point of Justification. But let the Charge proceed.

Here Ross gives his Judgment, that he would have this Canon simply commanding Good Works to be Preached, and no mention made what place they have or have not in Justification. Vpon this motion so agreeable to Canterbury's mind, the Canon is set down, as it stands, without the distinction of Via Regni, & Causa Regnan∣di, or any word sounding that way, urging only the Necessity of Good Works.

Well! now at last I see the bottom of this Charge: And I see too, that too many Men are shye of Good Works; and for fear more should be attributed to them, than is fit, refuse to acknowledge that which is due unto them. But sure I am, there is a Command, and more than one, expresly, in the Text, for the doing of Good Works, and that without any distinction. And so I conceive the Scripture is war∣rant enough for this Canon, to command the Preaching of Good Works, even without any distinction at all whatsoever; since God hath so absolutely and so expresly commanded, that we should serve him in Good Works: To which a 6.11 Moses and b 6.12 Christ, The c 6.13 Pro∣phets, and d 6.14 Apostles, do sufficiently bear witness.

But it seems, these Men have very good Intelligence, that when I looked over these Canons (which I protest I did alone by my self, and then sent them to my Lord the Bishop of London, for him to do the like) can yet tell, that here Ross gave his Judgment, and would have the Canon go absolutely, and that this being according to Canterbury's mind, so it went. Where yet I shall humbly crave leave to observe two Things. The one is; That if this be true, that Ross would have these things out: Then one of their own Prelates, and he trusted from the rest, was the Cause of this omission: And so Canterbury was nei∣ther Master of the Work, nor were all things in it done by him, and no other; as is before affirmed in the beginning of the second Novation. The other thing is, the omission it self: Of which, I shall say two things. The one is; That if Ross did give that Reason, That it was fit that Canon should command the Preaching of Good Works in general, because it was a time of such Prophaneness, as is mentioned in the beginning of the Canon; I for my part, cannot but approve it. The other is, That the leaving out of that known saying of St. Ber∣nard's, I humbly conceive is no fault, either in my self, or any other. For though the Speech be good, and though the Sayings of private Men, Eminent in their times, were some-times put into the Canons of National Churches; yet usually it was not so. And since themselves confess, the words of the Canon, as it now is, are fair; were any Charity in them, they would not make so foul an Interpretation of other Mens Intentions.

7. By comparing Canon 9. Cap. 18. as it was sent in Writing from our Prelates, and as it is Printed at Canterbury's Command, may be also manifest; that he went about to Establish Auricular Confessi∣on, and Popish Absolution.

I have shew'd before, that this Book of Canons was not Printed by

my Command. But I have a long time found by sad experience, that whatsoever some Men disliked, was presently my doing. God forgive them. But to the present Charge, I shall answer nothing; but only Transcribe that Canon, and leave it to the Judgment of all Orthodox and Moderate Christians, whether I have therein gone about to establish Auricular Confession, and Popish Absolution. The Canon is as follows.

Albeit Sacramental Confession, and Absolution, have been in some Places very much abused; yet if any of the People be Grieved in Mind, for any Delict or Offence committed, and for the un∣burdening of his Conscience, Confess the same to the Bishop, or Presbyter; they shall, as they are bound, Minister to the Per∣son so Confessing, all Spiritual Consolations out of the Word of God; and shall not deny him the Benefit of Absolution, after the manner which is prescribed * 6.15 in the Visitation of the Sick, if the Party shew himself truly Penitent, and humbly desire to be Absolved. And he shall not make known or reveal what hath been opened to him in Confession, at any time, or to any Person whatsoever; except the Crime be such, as by the Laws of the Realm his own Life may be called in question for con∣cealing the same.

This is the Canon word for word; where first give me leave to observe the Care that I had of the Laws of the Kingdom. For I believe, it will hardly be found that such a Clause is inserted in a∣ny Canon, concerning the Seal of Confession, as is expressed in this Canon, in relation to the Laws of the Realm, from the time that Confession came into solemn use, till our English Canon was made Anno 1603. with which this agrees. And then for the mat∣ter * 6.16 of the Canon; if here be any thing to establish Popish Con∣fession, or Absolution, I humbly submit it to the Learned of the Reformed Churches thorough Christendom: All Men (for ought I yet know) allowing Confession; and Absolution, as most useful for the good of Christians, and condemning only the binding of all Men to confess all Sins, upon absolute danger of Salvation. And this indeed * 6.17 some call Carnificinam Conscientiae, the Rack or Tor∣turing of the Conscience; but impose no other Necessity of Con∣fessing, than the weight of their own Sin shall lay upon them; nor no other inforcement to receive Absolution, than their Chri∣stian Care to ease their own Conscience shall lead them unto: And in that way Calvin commends Confession exceedingly; and, if you mark it, you shall find that our Saviour Christ, who gives the Priest full Power of the Keys to Bind and Loose; that is, to receive Confession, and to Absolve or not Absolve; as he sees Cause in the Delinquent; yet you shall not find any Command of his to inforce Men to come to the Priest, to receive this Benefit. 'Tis enough, that he hath left Power in the Ministery of the Church to give Penitent Christians this Ease, Safety, and Com∣fort, if they will receive it when they need. If they need, and will not come; or if they need, and will not believe they do so, let them bear their own Burden. But yet they have not done with our Prelates; one Charge more comes.

8. Our Prelates were not acquainted with Canons for inflicting of Arbitrary Penalties: But in Canterbury's Book, wheresoe∣ver there is no Penalty expresly set down, it is provided, that it shall be Arbitrary, as the Ordinary shall think fittest. By these and many other † 6.18 like it is apparent, what Tyranical Pow∣er he went about to establish in the Hands of our Prelates over the Worship of God, and the Souls, and Goods of Men, over∣turning from the Foundation the whole Order of our * 6.19 Kirk; and how large an entry he did make for the grossest Novations afterward; which hath been a main Cause of this Combustion.

This is the last Shot against these Canons, and me for them: And I conceive, this is no great thing. For Arbitrary Go∣vernment is one thing: And 'tis quite another, that whereso∣ever there is no Penalty expresly set down, it is provided, that it shall be Arbitrary, as the Ordinary shall think fittest, which are the words of the Canon. For since no Law can meet with all par∣ticulars; some things must of necessity be left Arbitrary in all Go∣vernment, though that be perfectest and happiest that leaves least. Nor is it an unheard of thing, to find something Arbitrary in some Canons of the Church, which are very antient. As in the a 6.20 Council of Eliberis the Punishment of him who was absent from the Church three Sundays, was that he should be Abstentus, and barred from the Church for some small time; that his negligence in the Service of God may seem to be punished. But this small Time being not limited, is left to Arbitrary Discretion. So likewise in the b 6.21 Council of Valence, An. 374. The giving of the Sacrament to such as had vowed Vir∣ginity, and did afterwards Marry, was to be deferr'd, as the Priest saw Reason and Cause for it; and that sure is Arbitrary. The like we find in the third c 6.22 Council of Carthage; where the Time of Pe∣nance, according to the quality of the Sin, is left to the Discretion of the Bishop. And these Councils were all within the fourth Century. By all which it is ap∣parent, that in Church as well as in State, some things may be left Arbitrary; and have been in Better and Wiser Times, than these of ours. Nay 'tis confest by d 6.23 one that Writes almost as well as Junius Brutus, that there is an Arbitrary Power in every State, somewhere, and that no Inconvenience follows upon it. And the e 6.24 Council of Ancyra, inflict∣ing Censures upon Presbyters first, and then Deacons, which had fallen in time of Persecution, yet gives leave to the Bishop to mitigate the Penance at his Discretion.

Again, 'tis manifest by the care taken in the preceeding Canons, that here's little or nothing of moment left Arbitrary: And then the Ordinary will fall into an Excess more dangerous to himself, than his Arbitrary Punishment can be to him that suffers it, if he

offer to Tyrannize. For this Clause, wheresoever it is inserted in Canon or Statute, (as it is in the Statutes of very many Colledges) stands but for a Proviso, that Disorderly persons may not think they shall escape Punishment, if they can cunningly keep off the Letter of the Law: And yet so, that the Arbitrary Punishment be Regulated by that, which is expressed in the Canons or the Sta∣tutes, for Omissions or Commissions of like nature.

And therefore that which is inferred upon all this Charge, and the Particulars in it; Namely, That I went about to establish a Tyra∣nical Power in the Hands of their Prelates, either over the Worship of God, or the Souls and Goods of Men, is utterly false, and can∣not be proved to follow out of any of the Premises. Not o∣ver the Goods of the People; For no Prelate, not invested with Temporal Power, can meddle with them; so that were there any Canon made for that, it would be void of it self. Nor over the Souls of Men; for they are left free in all things, save to com∣mit Sin and Disorder; which to repress by Canons is, and hath been, the Church way. Much less over the Worship of God: For these Canons have laboured nothing so much, as to Honour, and Establish that in Decency and Uniformity. And as for that which follows, That these Canons over-turn from the Foundati∣on, the whole Order of their Kirk; 'Tis more than I believe will be proved, that they have over-turned any good Order in their Church, much less Foundations: Though it may be thought by some, (and perhaps justly,) that there is so little Order in their Church, and that so weakly founded, that it may be over-turned with no great stress. And for the large Entry made for the Gross Novations af∣terwards, you see what it is: And when you have considered the Gross Novations, which are said to come after; I hope you will not find them very Gross, nor any way fit to be alledged as a main Cause of this Combustion. Now follows

ART. III. (Book 3)

The third, and great Novation, which was the Book of Common-Prayer, Administration of Sacraments, and other parts of Divine † 7.1 Service, brought in without Warrant from our Kirk; to be Vniversally received as the only Form of Divine-Service, under the highest pains, both Civil and Ecclesiastical.

Now we are come to the Arraignment of the Liturgy, and the Book of Common-Prayer; and this (they say) was brought in without Warrant from their Kirk. If this be true; it was the fault of your own Prelates, and theirs only, for ought I know. For though I like the Book exceeding well, and hope I shall be able to maintain any thing that is in it, and wish with all my Heart, that it had been entertained there; yet I did ever desire, it might come to them with their own liking and approbation. Nay, I did ever, upon all Occa∣sions, call upon the Scottish Bishops, to do nothing in this Particular, but by Warrant of Law. And farther, I professed unto them be∣fore

His Majesty, that though I had obeyed his Commands in help∣ing to Order that Book; yet since I was ignorant of the Laws of that Kingdom, I would have nothing at all to do with the manner of introducing it; but left that wholly to them, who do, or should, understand both that Church, and their Laws. And I am sure, they told me, they would adventure it no way but that which was Legal. But they go on; And say, this Book

Is found by our National Assembly, besides the Popish Frame, and Forms in Divine Worship, to contain many Popish Errors and Ceremonies, and the Seeds of manifold and gross Superstitions, and Idolatries; and to be repugnant to the Doctrine, Discipline, and Order of our Reformation, to the Confession of Faith, Con∣stitutions of General Assemblies, and Acts of Parliament Esta∣blishing the true Religion. That this was also Canterbury's Work, we make manifest.

This is a great Charge upon the Service-Book indeed: But it is in Generals, and those only affirmed, not proved. And therefore may with the same case, and as justly, be denied by me, as they are affirmed by them. And this is all I shall say, till they bring their Proofs. And though this be no more Canterbury's Work, than the Canons were; yet, by their good will, I shall bear the burden of all. And therefore, before they go to prove this great Charge a∣gainst the Service-Book; they go on to make it manifest, that this was my * 7.2 Work: And so far as it was mine, I shall ingenuously and freely acknowledge in each Particular, as occasion shall be offer∣ed me. But how do they make it manifest, it was my Work? Why;

1. By the † 7.3 Memoirs and Instructions, sent unto him by our Pre∣lates; wherein they give special account of the Diligence they * 7.4 have used to do all which herein they were enjoyed.

This Proof comes very short. For considering the Scottish Bishops were Commanded by His Majesty to let me see, from time to time, what they did in that Service-Book; they had good reason (as I con∣ceive) to give me some Account of their Diligence and Care in that behalf: And yet this will never conclude the Work to be mine. Why, but if this Proof come not home, yet it will be Manifest

2. By the approbation of the Service-Book sent unto them, and of all the Marginal Corrections, wherein it varies from the English-Book; shewing their desire to have some few things changed in it, which notwithstanding was not granted. This we find written by S. Andrews own Hand, and subscribed by him and Nine other of our Prelates.

This Argument is as loose as the former. For I hope, though I had had nothing at all to do with that Book; yet I might have ap∣proved both the Book it self, and all the Marginal (or other) Corrections,

wherein it differs from, (so it be not contrary to) the English Book: Therefore my approving it will not make me the Author of it. As for that which follows, that their Prelates did desire to have some few things changed in it, which was not granted: First you see, they say be∣fore, that the Popish Errors in that Book be many; and yet the change of a few things would serve their turn. And if this Change were not granted, that was not my fault, but their own; who might have changed what they pleased, whether I would or no. But they should do well, to shew this Paper under St. Andrews Hand, and nine other Bishops. For my part, as I remember it not, so I believe it not. But they hope to prove it better—

3. By Canterbury's own Letters, witnesses of his Joy, when the Book was ready for the Press; of his Prayers that God would speed the work; of his hope to see that Service set up in Scotland; of his diligence in sending for the Printer, and directing him to prepare a Black Letter, and to send it to his Servants at Edinburgh for Printing this Book; of his Approbation of the Proofs sent from the Press; of his fear of delay * 7.5 for bringing this work speedily to an end, for the great good (not of that Church) but of the Church; of his incouraging Ross, who was intrusted with the Press, to go on † 7.6 with this piece of Service, without fear of Enemies. All which may be seen in the Autographs.

This Argument is as weak as any of the former. Indeed, it is nothing but a heap of Non Sequiturs. My Letters express my Joy, when the Book was ready for the Press: Therefore I made the Book. As if I might not be glad, that a Good Book was ready for the Press; but I must be the Author of it. Next, I prayed, that God would speed the Work: I did indeed, and heartily: but may not I humbly desire God to bless a Good Work, though I be not the Author of it? Yea, but I hoped to see that Service set up in Scotland. I did indeed, and was heartily sorry when my hopes failed: And that Nation will one day have more cause to be sorry for it, than I. But what then? It fol∣lows not thence, that the Work was mine. Again, I was diligent with the Printer to prepare Letters, and send to his Servants. I was indeed di∣ligent herein; but it was at the intreaty of my Brethren the Scottish Bishops. And truly I could do little for them, the Printer being then in England, If I would not send to him, and desire him to be diligent. Yea, but I Approved the Proofs that were sent from the Press. And there was good Reason I should, if they were well done. But I hope, many a Man takes care of the Proofs from the Press, though the Work be not his.

The next they would fain have seem something; but 'tis no better than the rest. For they would prove this Book was my work, because I feared delay; whereas, I would have a speedy end for the Good of (not that Church, but) the Church. Fear of delay, is no proof that the work was mine. But do you not mark the subtlety? For the good of the Church, not that Church. They would fain have some Mystery hid here; but sure there is none. For if I writ any such thing, The Church, and That Church, were the same Church of Scotland. For when a Man writes to a Learned Man of another Nation, and desires

any thing to be done for the good of the Church; he is to be under∣stood, of the good of that Church; unless some circumstance sway his meaning another way; which is not here. Yea, but I incouraged Ross, who was intrusted with the Press, to go on without fear of Enemies: There∣fore the work was mine. Will not young Novices laugh at this Logick? Well, they say all this appears in the Autographo. Let them shew the Autographon: And if all this be there, then you see all is nothing; they have shewed but their Weakness to collect so poorly. And if it be not there, then they have shewed their Falshood, with which some of them are too well acquainted. But prove it good, or bad; another proof they have. And that is,

4. By Letters sent from the Prelate of London, [to Ross:] wherein, * 7.7 as he rejoyceth at the sight of the Scottish Canons, which although they should make some noise in the beginning, yet they would be more for the good of the Kirk, than the Canons at Edinburgh for the good of the Kingdom: So concerning the Liturgy, he sheweth, that Ross had sent to him, to have from Canterbury an Explanation of some passages of the Service-Book, and that the Press behoved to stand, till the Explanations came to Edinburgh; which therefore he had in haste obtained from his Grace, and sent the dispatch by Cant. his own conveyance.

This Argument is much ado about nothing: In which, notwithstand∣ing, I shall observe some passages, and then come to the force of the Argument, such as it is. And first, though the business of the Ca∣nons be over, yet a Merriment in the Bishop of London's Letter must be brought in. Secondly, Though by this Letter of the Prelate of London, it be manifest, he had to do with those Canons as well as I; and though he past as full and as Honourable a Censure upon them, as I do in any Letter of mine; yet against their Knowledge, and their Conscience, they avouch peremptorily before, that this was done by Cant. and no other; and all this, to heap all the Envy they could upon me alone. Thirdly, Here's the same Phrase used by my Lord of London, that was used a little before by me: Namely, that these Canons would be for the good of the Kirk. And yet here's never a wise Observation upon it, as was upon me; that they would be for the good (not of that Church, but) of the Church.

Now for the force of Mr. Henderson's Logick (for these Arguments out of doubt are his:) Ross writ to the Prelate of London, to have from Canterbury an Explanation of some passages of the Service-Book, because the Press staid; and he obtained them; Therefore this Book was Canterbu∣ry's work, as is before asserted. Certainly, if Mr. Henderson had any Learning in him, he would be ashamed of this stuff. Ross sent to me for the Explanation of some things, which perhaps were my Ad∣ditions or Alterations in that Book, and used the Prelate of London for his means, and the Press staid, and I know not what? As if any of this could make me Author of that Book: Which yet if I were, I would neither deny, nor be ashamed of. Howsoever, he should do well to let Canterbury alone, and answer the Learned Divines of Aberdeen; who have laid him and all that Faction, open enough to

the Christian World, to make the Memory of them, and their Cause, stink to all Posterity.

5. But (say they) the Book it self, as it standeth interlined, margined, and patched up, is much more than all that is expressed in his Let∣ters; and the Changes and Supplements themselves, taken from the Mass-Book, and other Romish Rituals, by which he makes it to vary from the Book of England, are more pregnant Testi∣monies of his Popish Spirit, and Wicked Intentions, which he would have put in Execution upon us, than can be denyed.

In the next place, the Book it self is brought in Evidence; and that's a greater Evidence, than all that is expressed in my Letters. A greater Evidence! But of what? Not that the Book was of my sole making, which they have hitherto gone about to prove, and which the former part of this Argument would seem to make good. But now, these Interlinings, and Margins, and Changes, and Supplements, are pregnant proofs of my Popish Spirit, and Wicked Intentions. First, I Praise God for it, I have no Popish Spirit: And, God bless me, as (to the utmost of my knowledge) I had no Wicked Intentions in any thing, which I did in, or about, that Service-Book.

For the other stuff, which fills up this Argument, That these Changes and Supplements are taken from the Mass-Book, and other Romish Rituals; and that by these the Book is made to vary from the Book of Eng∣land; I cannot hold it worth an Answer, till I see some particulars named. For in this I could retort many things, could I think it fit to put but half so much Gall into my Ink, as hath made theirs black. In the mean time, I would have them remember, that we live in a Church Reformed; not in one made New. Now all Reformation, that is good and orderly, takes away nothing from the old, but that which is Faulty and Erroneous. If any thing be good, it leaves that standing. So that if these Changes from the Book of England be good, 'tis no matter whence they be taken. For every line in the Mass-Book, or other Popish Rituals, are not all Evil and Corruptions. There are many good Prayers in them; nor is any thing Evil in them, only because 'tis there. Nay, the less alteration is made in the Publick Ancient Service of the Church, the better it is; provided that nothing Superstitious or Evil in it self, be admitted or retained. And this is enough, till I see particulars charged: Yet with this; That these Variations were taken, either from the first Book of Edw. 6. which was not Popery; or from some Antient Liturgies, which savour'd not of Popery.

The Large Declaration professeth, that all * 7.8 the variation of our Book from the Book of England, that ever the King understood, was in such things as the Scottish Humours would better comply with, than with that which stood in the English Service.

That which the Large Declaration professeth, I leave the Author of it to make good. Yet whosoever was the Author, thus much I can say, and truly; That the Scottish Bishops (some of them) did often

say to me, that the People wou'd be better satisfied by much, to have a Liturgy composed by their own Bishops, (as this was) than to have the Service-Book of England put upon them. But to what end is this added out of the Large Declaration? Why, 'tis to cast more hatred upon me. For thus they infer:

These Popish Innovations therefore have been surreptitiously inserted by him, without the King's knowledge, and against his Purpose.

This is as false, as 'tis bold: For let them prove, that any one particular, be it the least, was so added by me to that Book; and let no Justice spare me. In the mean time, here I take it upon my Salvation, that I inserted nothing without his Majesties Knowledge, nor any thing against his Purpose.

Our Scottish Prelates do Petition, that somewhat may be abated of the English Ceremonies; as the Cross * 7.9 in Baptism, the Ring in Marriage, and some other Things. But Canterbury will not only have those kept, but a great many more, and worse, super added; which was nothing else but the adding of Fuel unto the Fire. * 7.10

I cannot remember, that ever any such Petition was shewed to me. This I remember well; that when a deliberation was held, whether it were better to keep close to the English Liturgy, or venture upon some additions; some of your Scottish Bishops were ve∣ry earnest to have some Alterations, and some Additions. And they gave this for their Reason: Because, if they did not then make that Book as perfect as they could, they should never be able to get it perfected after. Canterbury therefore was not the Man, that added this Fuel to your Fire. And whereas, to heap on farther ha∣tred, it is said, That I did not only add more, but worse Ceremonies; I can say nothing to that: Because I know no one Ceremony in the one Book, or the other, that is Bad. And when they give an Instance in the Ceremonies, which they say are worse in their Book than in ours; I shall give such answer as is fitting, and such as I doubt not shall be sufficient. And now it seems, they'll come to particulars: For they say—

1. This Book inverteth the Order of the Communion, in the Book of England, as may be seen by the numbers setting down the Or∣der of this new Communion, 1. 5. 2. 6. 7. 3. 4. 8. 9. 10. 11. Of the divers secret Reasons of this Change, we mention one only; injoyn∣ing the Spiritual † 7.11 Sacrifice, and Thanksgiving, which is in the Book of England pertinently after the Communion, with the Prayer of Consecration, before the Communion; and that under the Name of Memorial, or Oblation; for no other end, but that the Memorial and Sacrifice of Praise mentioned in it, may be un∣derstood according to the Popish meaning: (Bellarm. de Missa.

l. 2. c. 21.) not of the Spiritual Sacrifice, but of the Oblation of the Body of the Lord.

This Book, (they say) Inverts the Order of the Communion in the Book of England. Well, and what then? To Invert the Order of some Prayers, in the Communion, or any other part of the Ser∣vice; doth neither pervert the Prayers, nor corrupt the Worship of God. For I hope, they are not yet grown to be such super∣stitious Cabbalists, as to think that Numbers work any thing. For so, the Prayers be all good (as 'tis most manifest these are) it can∣not make them ill to be read in 5. 7. or 3. place, or the like; un∣less it be in such Prayers only, where the Order is essential to the Service then in hand. As for Example, to read the Absolution first, and the Confession after; and in the Communion to give the Sa∣crament to the People first, and read the Prayer of Consecration after. In these Cases to Invert the Order, is to Pervert the Service; but in all other ordinary Prayers, which have not such a ne∣cessary dependence upon Order, first, second, or third work no great effect. And though I shall not find fault with the Order of the Prayers, as they stand in the Communion-Book of England, (for, God be thanked, 'tis well;) yet, if a Comparison must be made, I do think, the Order of the Prayers, as now they stand in the Scot∣tish Liturgy, to be the better, and more agreeable to use in the Primitive Church; and I believe, they which are Learned, will ac∣knowledge it. And therefore these Men do bewray a great deal of Will and Weakness, to call this a New-Communion; only because all the Prayers stand not in the same Order.

But they say; there are divers secret Reasons of this Change, in the Order. Surely there was Reason for it, else why a Change? But that there was any hidden secret Reason for it (more than that the Scottish Prelates thought fit that Book should differ in some things from ours in England; and yet that no differences could be more safe, than those which were in the Order of the Prayers; especially since both they, and we, were of Opinion, that of the two this Order came nearest to the Primitive Church) truly I neither know, nor believe.

As for the only Reason given of this Change, 'tis in my Judg∣ment a strange one. 'Tis, forsooth, for no other end (they say) but that the Memorial and Sacrifice of Praise mentioned in it may be un∣derstood according to the Popish meaning, not of the Spiritual Sacrifice, but of the Oblation of the Body of the Lord. Now Ignorance, and Jealousie, whither will you? For the Sacrifice of Praise and Thanks∣giving, no Man doubts, but that is to be Offer'd up: Nor doth a∣ny Man of Learning question it, that I know, but that according to our Saviour's own Command, we are to do, whatsoever is done in this Office, as a Memorial of his Body and Blood Offered up and shed for us. S. Luc. 22. Now 'tis one thing to Offer up his Body, * 7.12 and another to Offer up the Memorial of his Body, with our Praise, and Thanks, for that infinite Blessing: So that were that Change of Order made for this end, (which is more than I know) I do not yet see, how any Popish Meaning, so much feared, can be fastned

upon it. And the Words in that Prayer are plain, (as they are also in the Book of England) That we offer and present unto God, our Selves, our Souls and Bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively Sacrifice unto him. What is there here, that can be drawn to a Popish Meaning, unless it be with the cords of these Mens Vanity? Yet thus much we have gain∣ed from them; That this Prayer comes in the Book of England perti∣nently after the Communion. Any approbation is well of that Anti∣christian Service-Book (as 'tis often called:) And I verily believe, we should not have gained this Testimony of them for it, but only that they are content to approve that, to make the greater hatred against their own. Next they tell us—

2. It seems to be no great matter, that without warrant of the Book of England, the Presbyter going from the North end of the Table, shall stand during the time of Consecration, at such a part of the Table, where he may with the more ease and decency use both his Hands; Yet being tryed, it importeth much: As that he must stand with his hinder parts to the People; representing (saith Durand) that which the Lord said to Moses, Thou shalt see my hinder parts.

Truly, this Charge is, as it seems, no great matter. And yet here again they are offended, that this is done without warrant of the Book of England. How comes this Book of England to be so much in their esteem, that nothing must be done without warrant from it? Why, 'tis not that they approve that Book, for they will none of that nei∣ther: But 'tis only, to make their Complaint more acceptable in England. Yet they say, this very remove of the Presbyter during the time of Consecration, upon tryal imports much. The Rubrick professes, that nothing is meant by it, but that he may use both his Hands with more ease and decency about that work. And I protest in the presence of Almighty God, I know of no other Intention herein, than this. But these Men can tell more. They are sure it is, that he may turn his hinder parts to the People, representing that which the Lord said to Moses. And what Warrant have they for this? Why Durand says so. Now truly the more Fool he. And they shall do well to ask their own Bishops, what acquaintance they have with Durand? For as for my self, I was so poorly satisfied with the first Leaf I Read in him, that I never medled with him since. Nor indeed, do I spend any time in such Authors as he is. So I have nothing to do with this. Yea, but they find fault with the Reason given in the Rubrick. For they say—

He must have the use of both his Hands, not for any thing he hath to do about the Bread and the Wine; (for that * 7.13 may be done at the North end of the Table, and be better seen of the People.) But (as we are taught by the Rationalists) That he may be stretching † 7.14 out his Arms, represent the extension of Christ on the Cross.

But the Reason given in the Rubrick doth not satisfie them: For they say plainly, They have no use of both their Hands, for any thing that

is to be done about the Bread and the Wine. Surely these Men Consecrate these Elements in a very loose and mean way, if they can say truly, that they have not use of both their Hands in this work. Or, that what∣soever is done, may as well be done at the North end of the Table; which in most places is too narrow, and wants room, to lay the Service-Book open before him that Officiates, and to place the Bread and Wine within his reach. So that in that place 'tis hard for the Presbyter to a∣void the unseemly disordering of something, or other, that is be∣fore him, perhaps the very Elements themselves; which may give Scandal to them which come to Communicate: Especially, since in the Margin of the Prayer of Consecration, he is ordered to lay his Hand upon the Bread and the Wine, which he Consecrates. As for his being better seen of the People; that varies according to the Nature of the Place, and the Position of the Table: So that in some Pla∣ces he may be better seen, and in some not. Though I am not of Opinion, that it is any End of the Administration of the Sacra∣ment to have the Priest better seen of the People. Thus much a∣gainst the * 7.15 Reason given in the Rubrick.

Next, they produce other Reasons of this Position of his at the Holy-Table. And first, they say, 'tis not for the more conveni∣ent use of both his Hands, in the Celebration of that Work: But it is (say they) that he may, by stretching out his Arms, represent the Extension of Christ on the Cross. Why, but I say not this; nor is there any such thing Ordered or Required in the Book; nor doth any English Divine practise this that I know. Why then is this Charged upon me? Nor is it sufficient for them to say, they are taught thus by the Rationalists; unless I did affirm, or practise, as those Rationalists do. Here's a great deal of Charity want∣ing. But they bring another Reason, as good as this is: And that is—

That he may the more conveniently lift up the Bread and Wine † 7.16 over his Head to be seen, and adored, of the People; who, in the Ru∣brick of General Confession a little before, are directed to kneel humbly on their Knees, that the Priests Elevation, so magnified in the Mass, and the Peoples Adoration may go together.

Good God! whither tends this Malice? There is not a Word in the Book of this neither: Not of lifting the Bread and Wine over his Head; much less is there any thing, to have it Adored by the Peo∣ple. And as there is nothing in the Book, so nothing hath ever been said, or done, by me, that tends this way. Now, if none of this hath been said, or done by me; what means this? Sure they mean to charge the Rationalists with this, and not me; unless I did by Word, or Deed, approve them herein. Yea, but a little before, in the Rubrick of General Confession, the People are directed to kneel humbly on their Knees. That's true: And what Posture so fit, as that which is Humble, when Men are making Confession of their Sins to God? But that which follows, namely, that the Priest's Elevation, and the Peoples Adoration, may go together, is utterly false. There is not one Word of it in the Rubrick, nor ever was there

one Thought of it in my self, or (as I verily believe) in any of the Compilers of that Book. And 'tis well known, that through the whole Church of England, the Form is to receive that Blessed Sacra∣ment Kneeling; and yet without any Adoration at all of the Bread and Wine. So this Charge, which way soever it look, cannot hit me. However, God forgive this Malice. For are the People directed to Kneel, to the end the Priest's Elevation, and the Peoples Adoration, may go together? why then so let them go: For the Priest with us makes no Elevation; nor therefore the People any Adoration, of those Elements. But there is yet more behind: For they say—

That in this Posture, speaking with a low Voice, and muttering (for at some times he is Commanded to speak with a loud voice, and di∣stinctly) he be not heard by the People; which is no less a mocking of God and his People, than if the Words were spoken in an unknown Language.

This again, by my Accusers good leave, is utterly false. For there is no Rubrick in the whole Book, that commands the Priest to use a muttering or low Voice. This therefore is drawn in only by consequence, and that an ill one. As if, because he is sometimes commanded to speak aloud, he were thereby enjoyned, in other parts of the Service, to speak with a low Voice; which is not so. In the Book of England, in some places the Minister is directed before he begins the Prayer, to say, Let us Pray; which is but to keep their Attention waking; and to put them in mind what they are doing, or ought to do. And shall any Man infer upon this, Let us Pray; therefore they were not at Prayer before? So here, if in some principal part of the Service, there be a Caveat given, that the Presbyter shall speak with a loud Voice, and Distinctly: (I say [If] for I do not yet find the Rubrick where it is) It implies, That he be very careful in that place, that his Voice be Audible and Distinct; but it imports not, that therefore in other parts of the Service, it may be low, or confused, or unheard. And yet, if such a Consequence were to be drawn; 'tis no new thing in the Church of Christ, that the Minister did Pray sometimes in the Pub∣lick Assembly, in a very low Voice, if at all Audible. For it was or∣dered in the * 7.17 Council of Laodicea, That among the Prayers which were made by the Faithful, after the Hearers and the Penitents were gone out, that the first should be in Silence: Perhaps for the Presbyter to commend himself, and his Office which he was then to execute, privately to God. But howsoever, in the Publick Ser∣vice, that all should be Publick, I rather approve.

As for that which follows; That to utter the Common Service of the Church in a low voice, not heard by the People, is no less a mocking of God, and his People, than if the Words were spoken in an Unknown Tongue: This were well Charged, if any Man did command that the Publick Service should be Read in so low a voice, that the People might not hear it. But since no Man, that I know, approves it, and since there is nothing in the Book that requires it; I know not to what end 'tis

urged here. And yet this by their leave too; were Prayers Read in so low a voice, it were a mocking of the People I confess, to call them to Church, and not let them hear. But how either Prayer in a low voice, or a Tongue unknown to the People, should be a mocking of God, I cannot conceive; unless these Men think (as Elias put it upon the Prophets of Baal) That their God is talking, or journeying, or perhaps sleeping, and must be awaked before he can hear; or, that any Tongue unknown to the People, is unknown to God also. But this I presume they will not dare to say, if it be but for that of St. Paul; He that speaks in the Church in an unknown tongue, speaks not unto Men, for they understand him not; yet he speaks to God, and doubtless doth not mock him; for he edifies himself; and in the Spirit speaks Mysteries: neither of which can stand with the mocking of God. Now say they—

As there is no word of all this in the English Service; so doth the Book in King Edward's Time, give to every Presbyter his liber∣ty of Gesture: which yet gave such offence to Bucer (the Censurer of the Book, and even in Cassander his own Judgment, a Man of great Moderation in Matters of this kind) that he calleth them, Nunquam-satis-execrandos Missae gestus; and would have them to be abhorred, because they confirm to the Simple and Superstitious, ter-impiam & exitialem Missae fiduciam.

As there is no word of all this in the English Service; so neither is there, in the Book for Scotland, more, or other, or to other purpose, than I have above expressed. For the Book under Edw. 6. * 7.18 at the end of it, there are some Rules concerning Ceremonies; and it doth give liberty of Gesture to every Presbyter. But it is only of some Gestures, such as are there named, & Similes, not of all. But if any will extend it unto all, then I humbly desire, it may be Piously and Prudently considered; whether this confusion, which will follow upon every Presbyters Liberty and Choice, be not like to prove worse, than any Rule that is given in either Book for Decent Uni∣formity.

And yet (say they) these Gestures, for all this Liberty given, gave such offence to Bucer the Censurer of the Book, that he calls them Nun∣quam-satis-execrandos Missae gestus, the never sufficiently execrable Gestures of the Mass. First 'tis true; Bucer did make some Observati∣ons upon that Common-Prayer-Book under Edw. 6. And he did it at the intreaty of Arch-Bishop Cranmer: And after he had made such Obser∣vations upon it, as he thought fit, he writ thus to the Arch-Bishop. a 7.19 Being mindful how much I owe to your most Reverend Father-Hood and the English Churches, that which is given me to see and discern in this business, I will subscribe: This done, your most Reve∣verend Father-hood, and the rest of your Order (that is, the rest of the Bishops) may judge of what I write. Where we see, both the care of Bucer to do what was required of him, and his Christian Humility, to leave what he had done, to the judgment of the then Go∣vernours

of this Church. By which it appears, that he gave his Judg∣ment upon that Book, not as being the Censurer of it, (as these Men call him) but as delivering up his Animadversions upon it, to that Authority which required it of him. Much less was it such a Cen∣sure, as must bind all other Men to his Judgment, which he very modestly submits to the Church. Howsoever, this has been the com∣mon Error (as I humbly conceive) of the English Nation, to enter∣tain and value Strangers in all Professions of Learning beyond their desert, and to the contempt, or passing by at least, of Men of equal worth of their own Nation; which I have observed, ever since I was of ability to judge of these things.

But be this as it may. These Men have Notoriously corrupted Bucer. For they say, he calls them Nunquam-satis-execrandos Missae gestus, referring the Execration to the Ceremonial Gestures. But Bucer's words are, Nunquam-satis-execrandae Missae gestus, referring the Execration to the Mass it self, not to the Gestures in it, of bowing the Knee, or beating the Breast, or the like, which in themselves, (and undoubtedly in Bucer's Judgment also) are far enough from being * 7.20 Execrable.

As for that which follows, (and which are Bucer's words indeed) That, These Gestures, or any other which confirm to the simple, ter impiam & exitialem Missae fiduciam (as he there calls it) the thrice impious and deadly Confidence of the Mass, are to be abhorred, there's no doubt to be made of that: Unless, (as Cassander infers well out of Luther and Bucer both,) they be such Ceremonies, as Impeach not the free Justification * 7.21 of a Sinner by Faith in Christ, and that the People may be well instructed concerning the true use of them. Now all this at the most, is but Bu∣cer's Speech against such Ceremonies (and in such time and place, must be understood too) as are apt to confirm the simple People in their Opinion of the Mass. But such Ceremonies are neither maintained by me, nor are any such Ordered or Established in that Book. Therefore this Charge falls away quite from me, and Bucer must make his own * 7.22 Speeches good. For my own part, I am in this point of Ceremonies of the same Mind with Cassander, (that Man of great Moderation in Matters of this kind, as my Accusers here call him:) And he says plainly a little after, in the same place, concerning Luther's and Bu∣cer's Judgment in these things, Quanquam est, quod in istis viris desi∣derem; though I approve them in many things, yet there is some∣what which * 7.23 I want in these Men. But the Charge goes on.—

3. The † 7.24 Corporal Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament, is also to be found here. For the Words of the Mass-Book, serving to that purpose, are sharply censured by Bucer in King Edward's Lyturgy, and are not to be found in the Book of England, and yet are taken in here. Almighty God is in called, that of his Almighty Goodness he may vouchsafe so to Bless and Sanctifie with his Word and his Spirit these gifts of Bread and Wine, that they may be unto us the Body and Blood of Christ. The change here, is made a work of God's Omnipotency: The words of the Mass, ut fiant nobis, are Tran∣slated in King Edward's Book, that they may be unto us; which | 7.25 is again turned into Latin by Alesius, ut fiant nobis.

They say, the Corporal Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament, is to be found in this Service-Book. But they must pardon me; I know it is not there. I cannot be my self of a contrary Judgment, and yet suffer that to pass. But let's see their proof. The words of the Mass-Book, serving to that purpose, which are sharply censured by Bucer, in King Edward's Liturgy, and are not to be found in the Book of England, yet are taken into this Service-Book. I know no words tending to this purpose in King Edard's Liturgy, fit for Bucer to censure sharply; and there∣fore not tending to that purpose: For did they tend to that, they could not be censured too sharply. The words it seems are these. * 7.26 O Merciful Father, of thy Almighty Goodness, vouchsafe so to Bless and San∣ctifie with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy Gifts and Creatures of Bread and Wine, that they may be unto us the Body and Blood of thy most dearly beloved Son. Well; if these be the words, how will they squeeze Corporal Presence out of them? Why, first the Charge here, is made a work of God's Omnipotency. Well, and a work of Omnipotency it is, what ever the Change be. For less than Omnipotence cannot Change those Elements, either in Nature, or Vse, to so high a Service as they are put in that great Sacrament. And therefore the Invocating of God's Almighty Goodness to effect this by them, is no proof at all, of intending the Corporal Presence of Christ in this Sacrament. 'Tis true, this passage is not in the Prayer of Consecration in the Service-Book of England; but I wish with all my Heart it were. For though the Consecration of the Elements may be without it; yet is it much more solemn and full by that Invocation.

Secondly, these words (they say) intend the Corporal Presence of Christ in the Sacrament, because the Words in the Mass are * 7.27 ut fiant nobis, that they may be unto us, the Body and the Blood of Christ. Now for the good of Christendom, I would with all my Heart, that these words, ut fiant nobis; That these Elements might be, To us, worthy Receivers, the blessed Body and Blood of our Saviour; were the worst Error in the Mass. For then I would hope, that this great Controversie, which to all Men that are out of the Church, is the shame, and among all that are within the Church, is the divi∣sion of Christendom, might have some good Accommodation. For if it be only, ut fiant nobis, that they may be to us, the Body and the Blood of Christ; it implies clearly, that they are to us, but are not Transubstantiated in themselves, into the Body and Blood of Christ, nor that there is any Corporal Presence, in, or under the Elements. And then nothing can more cross the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome, than their own Service. For as the Elements after the Be∣nediction, or Consecration, are, and may be called, the Body and Blood of Christ, without any addition, in that real and true Sense in which they are so called in Scripture: So, when they are said to be∣come the Body and the Blood of Christ, nobis, to us that Communi∣cate as we ought; there is by this addition, fiant nobis, an allay in the proper signification of the Body and Blood: And the true Sense, so well signified and expressed, that the words cannot well be under∣stood otherwise, than to imply not the Corporal Substance, but the Real, and yet the Spiritual use of them. And so the words, ut fiant

nobis, import quite contrary to that which they are brought to prove. And I hope, that which follows, will have no better success.

On the other side, the Expressions of the Book of England, at the de∣livery of the Elements; of feeding on Christ by Faith; and of eating and drinking in remembrance that Christ died for thee, are utterly deleted.

Before, they went about to prove an intendment to establish the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence of Christ in the Sacrament, by some positive words: And here they go about to prove the same by the omission of some other words of the Book of England. For they say (and 'tis true) that those words are expressed in the English Liturgy, at the delivery of the Elements, and are left out of the Book prepared for Scotland. But it is altogether false, either that this omission was intended to help to make good a Corporal Presence; or that a Corporal Presence can by any good consequence be proved out of it. For the first, of feeding on Christ by Faith, if that omission be thought to ad∣vantage any thing toward a Corporal Presence; surely, neither the Scottish Bishops, nor my self, were so simple to leave it out here, and keep these words in * 7.28 immediately after; that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us, which have duly received those Holy Mysteries, with the Spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son. For the feeding on Christ by Faith, and the Spiritual Food of the Body and Blood of Christ, are all one; and 'tis hard, that the asserting of a Spiritual Food, should be made the proof a Corporal Presence; or, that the omitting of it in one place, should be of greater force, than the affirming it in another. The like is to be said of the second omission, of eating and drinking in remembrance that Christ died for us. For that remembrance of his Death and Passion, is expressed almost immediately † 7.29 before. And would not this have been omitted as well as the other; had there been an intention to forget this remembrance, and to introduce a Corporal Presence? Besides, St. Paul himself, in the 1 Cor. 11. adds this, in * 7.30 remembrance of me: But in the 1. Cor. 10. The Cup of blessing, which we bless, is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ? The Bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ? Which Interro∣gation there, is a pressing Affirmation; and these words in remem∣brance of Christ, are omitted. And what then will these my Learned Adversaries say, that St. Paul omitted this to establish a Corporal Pre∣sence? I hope they will not.

But whatsoever this omission may be thought to work; it cannot re∣flect upon me. For when I shall come to set down, (as I purpose God willing to do) the brief Story, what hand I had in this Liturgy for Scotland; it shall then appear, that I laboured to have the English Liturgy sent them, without any Omission or Addition at all, this or any other; that so the Publick Divine Service might, in all his Majesty's Dominions, have been one and the same. But some of the Scottish Bishops prevail'd herein against me; and some Alterations they would have from the Book of England, and this was one; as I have to shew under the then Bishop of Dunblain's Hand, Dr. Wetherborne, whose

Notes I have yet by me, concerning the Alterations in that Service-Book. And concerning this particular, his words are these:

The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy Body and Soul unto Everlasting Life: And so, The Blood of, &c. whereunto every Receiver answer'd, Amen. There is no more in King Edw. 6. his first Book. And if there be no more in ours, the Action will be much the shorter. Besides, the words which are added since, take, eat in remembrance, &c. may seem to relish some∣what of the Zuinglian Tenet, That the Sacrament is a bare Sign taken in remembrance of Christ's Passion.

So that for my part, First, I see no hurt in the omission of those latter words, none at all: And next, if there be any, it proceeded not from me. That which follows, is a meer flourish in the general: For they say—

Many Evidences there be in this part of the Communion of the Bodi∣ly presence of Christ, very agreeable to the Doctrine taught by his * 7.31 Sectaries; which this Paper cannot contain. They teach us, that Christ is received in the Sacrament Corporaliter, both Ob∣jectivè, & Subjectivé. Corpus Christi est objectum, quod recipitur; at Corpus nostrum est subjectum, quo recipitur.

Many weak Collections and Inferences are made by these Men out of this part of the Communion of the Bodily Presence of Christ; but not one Evidence is, or can be shewed. As for Sectaries, I have none, nor none can have in this Point. For no Men can be Sect∣aries, or Followers of me in that, which I never held or maintain∣ed. And 'tis well known, I have maintained the contrary, and * 7.32 perhaps, as strongly, as any my Opposits, and upon Grounds more agreeable to the Doctrine of the Primitive Church. Among these Sectaries, which they will needs call mine; they say there are, which teach them, that Christ is received in the Sacrament Corporaliter, both Objectivè, & Subjectivé. For this Opinion, be it whose it will, I for my part do utterly condemn it, as grosly Superstitious. And for the Person that affirms it, they should have done well to name him, and the place where he delivers this Opinion. Had this been done, it had been fair: And I would then have clearly acknowledged what Relation (if any) the Person had to me; and more fully have spoken to the Opinion it self, when I might have seen the full scope together, of all that he delivered. But I doubt, there is some ill Cause, or other, why this Author is not named by them. Yet the Charge goes on—

4. The Book of England, abolishes all that may import the Obla∣tion of † an unbloody Sacrifice: but here we have, besides the * 7.33 preparatory Oblation of the Elements, which is neither to be found in the Book of England now, nor in King Edward's Book of old; The Oblation of the Body, and the Blood of Christ, which Bellarmin calls, Sacrificium Laudis, quia Deus per illud magnoperè laudatur. This also agrees [| 7.34 well] with their late Doctrine.

First, I think no Man doubts, but that there is, and ought to be offered up to God at the Consecration and Reception of this Sa∣crament, Sacrificium Laudis, the Sacrifice of Praise: And that this ought to be expressed in the Liturgy, for the Instruction of the People. And these Words, We entirely desire thy Fatherly Goodness, Mercifully to accept this our Sacrifice of Praise, and Thanksgiving, &c. are both in the Book of England, and in that which was prepared for Scotland. And if Bellarmin do call the Oblation of the Body, and the Blood of Christ a Sacrifice of Praise, sure he doth well in it; (for so it is) if Bellarmin mean no more, by the Oblation of the Body, and the Blood of Christ, than a Commemoration, and a Representation of that great Sacrifice offered up by Christ himself: As Bishop Jewel very Learnedly, and fully acknowledges. * 7.35 But if Bellarmin go farther than this; and by the Oblation of the Body and the Blood of Christ, † 7.36 mean, that the Priest Offers up that, which Christ himself did, and not a Commemoration of it only; he is Erroneous in that, and can never make it good. But what Bellarmin's Opinion and Meaning is, when he calls it Sacrificium Laudis, a Sacrifice of Praise, I cannot tell; till they be pleased to cite the place, that I may see, and consider of it. In the mean time there is as little said in the Liturgy for Scotland, which may import an Oblation of an unbloody Sacrifice, as is in the Book of England. As for the * 7.37 Oblation of the Elements; that's fit, and pro∣per: And I am sorry for my part, that it is not in the Book of England. But they say farther.

We are ready (when it shall be judged convenient, and we shall be desired) to discover much more of Matters in this kind, as Grounds laid for Missa Sicca, or the Half Mass; for Private Mass without the People; of Communicating in one kind; of the Consumption by the Priest, and Consummation of the Sacrifice; of receiving the Sacrament in the Mouth, and not in the Hand, &c.

Here's a Conclusion of this Charge against me concerning the Service-Book: And these charitable Men, which have sought no less than my Life, now say, they are ready, when it shall be convenient, and that they shall be desired, to deliver much more in this kind. Sure the time can never be more convenient for them than now, when any thing they will say shall be believed, even against apparent Evidence, or most full Proof to the contrary. And I do desire them, that notwithstanding this is Hora vestra, & Potestas Tene∣brarum, their most convenient time; that they will discover any thing which they have more to say. But the Truth is; here's nothing in this threatned Heap, but Cunning and Malice. For they would seem to reckon up many things; but divers of them are little different, as Missa Sicca, and Communicating in one kind. And neither these, nor any of the rest, offered with any Proof; nor indeed are they able to prove, that any Grounds are laid for any one of them, in that Service-Book. And for my own part, I have

expressed my self as fully against these particulars, as any Protest∣ant that hath Written. Yet they say—

Our Supplications were many against these Books: But Canterbury procured them to be Answered with † 7.38 Horrible Proclamations. We were constrained to use the Remedy of Protestation: But for our Protestations, and other Lawful Means, which were used for our Deliverance, Canterbury procured us to be declared Rebells and Traytors to all the Parish-Kirks of England * 7.39 where we were seeking to possess our Religion in Peace, against those Devices, and Novations; Canterbury * 7.40 kindles War against us. In all these it is known, that he was, although not thes ole, yet the prin∣cipal, Agent and Adviser.

Their Supplications against these Books of the Canons and the Service, were many indeed: But how well qualified, (the matter duly considered) I leave to them, who shall take the pains to look into them. And howsoever, most untrue it is, that I caused them to be answered with Horrible Proclamations. Nor were they con∣strained by any thing that I know, but their own wilfulness, to use the Churlish Remedy of Protestation against their Sovereigns Lawful Power in Lawful Things. They add, that for their Pro∣testations, and other Lawful Means, which they used for their Delive∣rance, Canterbury procured them to be proclaimed Rebels. Now tru∣ly I know no other Lawful means, that they used, but taking up of Arms professedly against the King: And I for my part do not conceive, that Lawful for Subjects to do, in any Cause, of Religion, or otherwise; and this I am sure, was the Ancient Christian Doctrine

And yet when they had taken up Arms, I did not procure them to be declarered Rebels, and Traytors. The Proclamation for that went out by Common Advise of the Lords of the Council; and their carriage at that time deserv'd it plentifully; let them paint over that Action how they can. And let the World, and future Ages judge; whether to take Arms against their Sovereign were a Chri∣stian, and an orderly, seeking to possess their Religion in Peace; espe∣cially being against no worse Devices, or no greater Novations, than they have quarelled at, in these Books. Yet for all this, I shall after make it appear, that I kindled no War against them, but kept it off from them, as much, and as long as I could. And as themselves confess, I was not the Sole; so neither they, nor any man else, shall ever be able to prove, I was the Principal, Agent or Adviser of that War. Yea but—

When by the Pacification at Barwick, both Kingdoms looked for Peace and Quietness; he spared not openly in the hearing of many, often before the King, and privately at the Council-Table, and the Privy Junto, to speak of us, as of Rebels and Traytors; and to speak against the Pacification, as dishonourable, and meet to be broke. Neither did his malignancy and bitterness ever suffer him to rest; till a new War was entred upon, and all things prepared for our destruction.

This Article about the breach of the Pacification, the Parliament of England have thought fit to make a part of their Charge against me: And therefore I shall put off the main of my Answer, till I come to those Articles. In the mean time thus much in brief I shall say to some circumstantial things in this Charge. And first, I do not think, that any thing can be said to be Privately spoken at the Council-Table, that is openly delivered there, in the hearing of his Majesty and all the Lords present: And so was all which I spake there. Se∣condly, they say, I did openly, and often speak of them (the Scots) as of Rebels and Traytors. That indeed is true; I did so: And I spake as I then thought, and as I think still. For it was as desperate a plotted Treason, as ever was in any Nation. And if they did not think so themselves, what needed their Act of Oblivion in Scotland? or the like in England, to secure their Abetters here? Thirdly, For the Pacification at Barwick, whatever I said touching the Dishonour of it (as shall after appear) yet no Man can truly Charge me, that I said, it was meet to be broken. Fourthly, I had no Malignity answerable to their bitterness against the Church of England; nor did the entring upon a new War proceed from my Counsels; nor did I give farther way to it, than all the Lords of the Junto did. Lastly, it is manifest here, how truly the King was dealt with on all Hands. For here ye see, they take on them to know, not only what was done at the Council-Table, but what was said also at the private Junto: When in all that time his Majesty could get no information of any thing, that proceed∣ed in Scotland. But they proceed yet farther against me.

By him was it, that our Covenant, approven by National Assemblies, Subscribed by his Majesty's Commissioner, and by the Lords of his Majesty's Council, and by them commanded to be Subscribed by all the Subjects of the Kingdom, as a Testimony of our Duty to God and the King: By him was it still called, Ungodly, Damnable, Treasonable: By him were Oaths invented, and pressed upon divers of our poor Countrymen, upon the pain of Imprisonment, and many [ * 7.41 other] Miseries, which were unwarranted by Law, and con∣trary to their National Oath.

This their Covenant indeed, as it was made at first, without at least, if not against, the King, I did utterly dislike. And if I did say, it was Vngodly, Damnable, and Treasonable; I said no more than it deserved. Nor was it any thing the better, but much the worse, if (as it was so made at first) it were approved by National Assemblies: For that was but the greater sign, that the Rebellious Faction grew stronger. But I ne∣ver * 7.42 found fault with their Covenant, after they were pleased to take in the King, and by his Authority, signified by the Subscription of his Commissioner, to do what was fit to be done. Nor was there any Oath invented or pressed by me upon their Countrymen, unwarrantable by Law; for I neither invented nor pressed any: But whatsoever was done in this kind, was done by Publick Authority at the Council Table. And if any Oath, tendred to them there, were contrary to their National Oath; I doubt it will easily be found, that their National Oath (if such it be)

was contrary to their due and Natural Allegiance. But what's next? Why, this:

When our Commissioners did appear to render the Reasons of our de∣mands; he spared not, in the presence of the King and the Com∣mittee, to rail against our National Assembly, as not daring to ap∣pear before the World and Kirks abroad; where himself and his Actions were able to indure tryal: And against our just and necessa∣ry Defence, as the most malicious and treasonable Contempt of Mo∣narchical Government, that any by-gone Age had heard of. His hand also was at the Warrant of Restraint and Imprisonment of our Commissioners, sent from the Parliament, warranted by the King, and seeking the Peace of the Kingdom.

There are divers things in this part of the Charge. And the first is, that I railed at their National Assembly, in the presence of the King and the Committee. But that under favour is not so. Nor is it my fashion to rail at any body, much less in such a Presence. I was then openly taxed, and by Name, by the L. Lowdon, one of the Commissioners; and that which I said in answer to him, was in my own defence: And it was to this effect. That whatsoever their Assembly had concluded, did not much move me. For I did assure my self, nothing they could say or do, could sink my Credit in Christendom; going upon grounds, which would every where abide tryal: And I somewhat doubted, whether the Acts of their Assembly would do so; since even at home, not the Bishops only, but the Learned Divines of Aberdeen, opposed di∣vers of them. This was not railing against their Assembly. And if it shall be thought too much to be spoken by (though for) my self; I humbly desire the Christian Reader to remember, That even S. Paul * 7.43 was forced to commend himself, when false Brethren accused him, 2 Cor. 12.

Next, they say, I spake against their just and necessary defence. Truly not I: That which I spake, was against their defence, as being nei∣ther Just nor Necessary. And if I then said (speaking of things, as they stood then) that they were Treasonable Contempts of Monarchical Government; then, being such, their defence of them could neither be Just, nor Necessary. And truly, as they stood then I held them very desperate, against the Honour and just Power of the King. I say, as they stood then. For since his Majesty hath referred them to Ho∣nourable Commissioners of both Nations, and out of his Clemency and Goodness, hath admitted all, or most of them, (which I believe few Kings would have done;) I have spoken nothing of them, but in Prayer, that God will graciously be pleased to turn all these things, to the Good and Peace of both Kingdoms; which must be little less than a Miracle, if he do.

As for my Hand, that it was at the Warrant of Restraint of the Com∣missioners, sent from the Parliament, &c. This also is but a meer clamour, to bring me into further hatred, which hath been their aim all along. For why else, is my Hand picked out alone; whereas, the Hands of all (for ought I know) that were then present at the Com∣mittee, were subscribed to that Warrant? And yet it seems, no Hand

hath troubled them but mine. And for these Commissioners, seeking the Peace of the Kingdom, I will not offer to enter upon their Thoughts, what they sought; but leave it to future times, that will discover the success of things, and by it open the aim of the Agents, how they sought the Peace of these Kingdoms. But yet they go on—

For when we had (say they) by our Declarations, Remonstrances, and Representations, manifested the Truth of our Intentions, and Lawfulness of our Actions to all the good Subjects of the Kingdom of England; when the late Parliament * 7.44 would not be moved to assist, or enter into a War against us, maintaining our Religion and our Liberties; Canterbury did not only advise the breaking up of that High and Honourable Court, to the great grief and hazard of the Kingdom; but (which is without Example) did sit still in the Convocation, and make Canons and Constitutions, against us, and our Just and Necessary defence.

They did indeed offer by many Pamphlets, Printed and sent into England, to manifest the Truth of their Intentions; which was to join close with their Party here, and come and gain some good Booty in England: And this end they have obtained. But the lawfulness of their Actions, they neither have, nor can make good, to any Impartial and Judicious Reader of them. And whereas they say, they have made the lawfulness of them manifest, to all the good Subjects of the Kingdom of England; you must know, that they are only such English as joyn with them in their Plot, or at least † 7.45 in Affection to Religion: And 'tis easie, to make any thing that fits their Humour, and comes from their Associats, manifest enough. But God forbid, these should be all the good Subjects of England, which (it may too justly be feared) are none of them. And yet it cannot be denied, but that England hath, at this day, much too many of these good Subjects.

They add further; that the late Parliament would not assist, nor enter into a War against them. I believe that is true; and I leave the Par∣liament to give their own Reasons, why they would not. But I am sure, that which follows is most untrue, That I gave Advice for the breaking of it up; as appears, by that which I have formerly set down, and will not repeat. And I shall ever wish from my Heart, that the Kingdom may never be hazarded more than it hath been by my Counsels; and then, by God's Blessing, it shall be a happier King∣dom, than the youngest now alive are like to see it, if things go on in the Track they now are.

Next they say; that without all Example, I sat still in Convocation, though the Parliament were risen: Without Example: What is that to them, if it were so? But the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury have sate in Convocation, and made Canons too, when no Parliament hath been sitting; as is most manifest by the Records of that See. Yea, but there is no Example of it since the Reformation. Be it so: Nor is it, for all that, forbidden in the Statute of the submission of the Cler∣gy, 25 H. 8. so they sit by the King's Writ. And yet here I was so careful, as that I caused the great Lawyers of the Kingdom to be

consulted abaut it, and followed their Judgments, as is before ex∣pressed. And for the Canons which were made, they were not against them. One branch indeed of the first Canon, is against Sub∣jects bearing Arms against their King, offensive, or defensive, under any pretence whatsoever. But this, as it is the Antient Doctrine, which the Church of Christ hath ever Taught in all times and places: So is it not against them at all, unless they, against † 7.46 Christian Religion, and Natural All giance, bear Arms against their King. But if they do, or have done so; the Canon, that was not made against them, hits them full. And in this Case, let them pretend what they list, their De∣fence can neither be Just nor Necessary. Yea, but they say farther, that I—

Ordained under all highest pains, That hereafter the Clergy shall * 7.47 Preach four times in the Year, such Doctrine, as is contrary not only to our Proceedings, but to the Doctrine * 7.48 of other Refor∣med Kirks, to the Judgment of all sound Divines and Politicks, and tending to the utter Slavery and Ruine of all States and King∣doms, and to the dishonour of Kings and Monarchs.

This goes high indeed; if it were as full in proof, as 'tis loud in expression. But here is not one shew of Proof added, either from Reason or Authority, Divine or Humane, more than their bare word; And therefore I must answer it in the same Key. First then, 'tis true, that in the Preface of the first Canon, every Minister is in∣joyned, under a Penalty, to Publish to his People the Exposition of Regal Power contained in that Canon; and this once every quarter of a Year. So then, if the Doctrine contained in that Canon be true, (and it was approved for Truth, by the whole National Synod of England;) then all this high Charge falls low enough. Besides, it will concern them to consider well, what their Proceedings have been. For as for this Canon, it is according to the Doctrine and Practice of the Primitive Church: And they, surely, were both Pious and Sound Divines that lived in it; and I, for my part, shall hold no Man a Sound Divine, that runs contrary to it.

Now, that the Primitive Christians were of Opinion, that Subjects ought not to take Arms against their Kings, Offensive or Defensive, upon any pretence whatsoever (which are the words in our a 7.49 Canon, which they are so angry with) no, not for, or under, pretence of Religi∣on, see the Proofs in the Margin. b 7.50 For in the most bitter Times of Persecution, for the very highest points of Religion, what∣ever Miseries they indured, they still con∣tained themselves within the bounds of their Obedience: And that too, not out of any want of Power, but will, to hurt. And if the Do∣ctrine of other Reformed Churches be con∣trary to this, they shall do well to shew it; and then I'll give such farther Answer as is fit.

But if the Canon be contrary to the Judg∣ment of sound Politiques; I know not which they call sound. For if they mean such as are of their Feather, I think their Judg∣ments are alike Sound; that is, neither. And if they mean Learned and well expe∣rienced Politiques, I believe they will be a∣ble to shew none of their Opinion; unless they be such, as have been bred up either in their Faction, or in the Opposite at Rome. For a 7.51 Bodin is clear, That Arms may not be taken up against the Prince, be he never so Impious and Wicked: And instances in Saul, and b 7.52 Nebuchadnezzar. And Grotius doth not only say as much as Bodin, but Censures them which hold the contrary, to be Men which serve Time and Place, more than Truth. Nor is it any whit more Lawful for Inferiour Magistrates, to make this resist∣ance against the King, than it is for private Men. c 7.53 And this is universally true, where the Princes are free, and have not under∣taken the Government, under that or the like Condition; or being free, seek with a Hostile Mind to ruine their People, which is scarce possible. And a great Civilian d 7.54 tells us, that he is properly a Rebel, that resists the Emperor or his Officers, in things belonging to the State of the Empire. Some Cases he lays down indeed, in which the pleasure of a Prince may not be obeyed, but none, in which his * 7.55 Power is to be resisted.

Nor is it any marvel, that Christians do disallow the taking up of Arms against the Prince; since even the soundest Politicks a∣mong the Heathen, have declared so likewise. e 7.56 Aristotle was of this Opinion, that if the Magistrate strike, yet he is not to be struck again: And f 7.57 Seneca; that Men are to bear the unjust, as well as the just Commands of Princes. And g 7.58 Tacitus, that good Emperours are to be desi∣red, but whatever they be, to be born with. And h 7.59 Plutarch, that it is not Lawful to * 7.60 offer any Violence to the Person of the King. And k 7.61 Cicero, That no Force is to be offer∣ed either to a Man's Parent, or to his Coun∣try: And therefore (in his Judgment) not to the Prince, who is Pater Patriae, the Fa∣ther of his Country. And the truth is, where-ever the contrary Opinion is maintained, the Prince can never be safe, nor the Government setled. But so soon as a Facti∣on

can get a fit Head, and gather sufficient strength; all is torn in pieces, and the Prince lost for no considerable Errour, or perhaps none at all. For a strong Party, once Heated, can as easily make Faults, as find them, either in Church or Common-wealth: And make the King say, as Zedekiah sometimes did to his potent No∣bles, Behold Jeremiah is in your Hands; for the King is not he, that can do any thing against you. Jerem. 38. * 7.62

But whereas they say; it is a Doctrine, that tends to the utter Sla∣very and ruin of all States and Kingdoms: That will appear most untrue by the very Letter of the Canon it self; which gives way to no Tyranny, but expresses only the true Power of a King given by God, and to be exercised according to God's Law, and the se∣veral Laws of Kingdoms respectively. And, I hope, there will ever be a real difference found in Christian Kingdoms, between the Doctrine that tends to Slavery and Ruine, and that which forbids taking up of Arms against their Sovereign; which is all that this Canon doth. And in the mean time, I pray God this, not Doctrine only, but Practice also, of taking up Arms against the Lord's Anoint∣ed, under meer pretence of Religion, do not in a shorter time, than is fear'd, bring all to Confusion, where-ever 'tis Practised. For howsoever it bears a shew of Liberty, yet this way of maintain∣ing it is not only dishonourable to Kings, but the ready way to make them study ways of Force, and to use Power, when-ever they get it, to abridge the Liberties of such over-daring Subjects. And in all times it hath sown the Seeds of Civil Combustions, which have ended in Slavery and Ruine of flourishing Kingdoms. And I pray God, these do not end so in this. But they go on—

And as if this had not been sufficient, he * 7.63 procures six Sub∣sidies to be lifted of the Clergy, under pain of Deprivation to all who should refuse.

The giving of the King Subsidies is no new thing. The Cler∣gy have bin ever willing to the uttermost of their Power; But what I and my Brethren of the Clergy did at this time therein, is * 7.64 before set down: And I hold it not fit to lengthen this Tract with the needless Repetition of any thing.

And which is yet † 7.65 more, and above which Malice it self cannot ascend; by his means a Prayer is framed, Printed, and sent through all the Parishes of England, to be said in all Churches in time of Divine Service, next after the Prayer for the Queen and Royal Progeny, against our Nation by Name, as Trayte∣rous Subjects, having cast off all Obedience to our Anointed So∣vereign, and coming in a Rebellious manner to Invade Eng∣land; that shame may cover our Faces, as Enemies to God and the King.

We are now come to the last part of their Charge; and that's the Prayer, which was made and sent to be used in all Churches when the Scots came into England. But this Prayer was made not

by my means, or procurement, but by his Majesties special Command to me to see it done. And it hath bin ever usual in England, upon great and urgent occasions, to have one or more Prayers made by some Bishop or Bishops, nearest hand, to fit the Present business. And this may appear by divers Forms and Prayers so made, and publickly used in all times since the Reformation. And since this Prayer was made by his Majesties own Command; I am sorry they should say of it, that Malice it self cannot ascend above it. Though I perswade my self they thought to hit me, not him in this Speech.

Now, what I pray is that, above which Malice it self cannot ascend? Why, first it is, That they were called in that Prayer, trayterous Subjects, which had cast off all Obedience to their Anointed Sovereign. Why, but Truth spake this, not Malice? For Trayterous Subjects they were then, if ever a King had any: And the Kings Procla∣mation called them so before that Prayer came forth. And what Title soever it is fit to give them now, since his Majesty hath bin graciously pleased to treat with them, and pass by their Offence, that's another thing; but as the case stood then, they had shaken off all Obedience, and were as they were then called, Trayterous Sub∣jects. And I had a special Charge from the King, not to spare that Name.

Secondly, They except against this, that 'tis there said, that they came in a Rebellious manner to Invade this Kingdom. And that is most true too; for whereas they said, they came in a peaceable manner to deliver their Petitions to the King, for the Liberty of their Re∣ligion and Laws: Is it a peaceable way to come two or three and twenty Thousand Men strong, and Armed, to deliver a Petition? Let the whole World judge, whether this were not a Rebellious Invasion.

Thirdly, They say 'tis desir'd in the Prayer, that God would with shame cover the Faces of his, and the King's Enemies. Out of doubt, this Petition proceeds from Devotion, not from Malice. And if the Scots (when they Invaded England, upon a Treacherous Plot, and * 7.66 Conjuncture with the like Faction here, that so both might have their Ends against the King, and the Church,) were not God's Ene∣mies, and the Kings, the Prayer meddles not with them: If they were (as for my part I must believe, if I judge by their Actions) they deserve all that can be prayed against them, so long as they continue in that Disobedience. And yet the Prayer was not (as 'tis said) against their Nation by Name: No, God forbid; their Nation hath I doubt not very many devout Servants to God, and Loyal Subjects to their King. But it was aginst that prevailing Faction a∣mong them, which in that great Rebellious Action became Ene∣mies both to God, and the King. Now follows the Conclusion.

Whosoever † 7.67 will Impartially Examin what hath proceeded from him∣self in these two Books of Canons, and Common Prayer; what Doctrine hath bin Published and Printed these Years * 7.68 past in England, by his Disciples and Emissaries; What gross Popery in the most material Points we have found, and are ready to shew in the Posthume Writings of the Prelates of Edinburgh and

Dunblaine, his own Creatures, his nearest Familiars, and most willing Instruments to advance his Counsels and Projects; shall perceive, that his Intentions were deep and large against all the Reformed Kirks, and Reformation of Religion, which in his Ma∣jesties Dominions was Panting, and had by this time rendred up the Ghost, if God had not in a wonderful way of Mercy prevent∣ed † 7.69 us.

The Conclusion is like the rest; much said in it, and nothing proved. Where first I desire no favour, but an Impartial Exami∣nation of a Discreet, Pious, and Judicious Reader, of all things done by me in the one Book or the other. Next, for the Doctrine which hath been Printed these Years past; (though little or none hath been Published by any Disciple or Emissary of mine:) I perswade my self, the Intelligent, and Impartial Reader will find it to be as sound and Orthodox, as any that hath been Printed in any so many Years since the Reformation. And if they, whom I was ne∣cessarily to trust in that Business, have slipped any thing; they are subject to answer the Laws in that behalf. Thirdly, what gross Po∣pery they have found in the Posthume Writings of the Prelates of Edin∣burgh and Dunblaine, I know not. This I know; 'tis an Easie, but a base thing, to abuse the Dead, who cannot answer for themselves: And they which are so over-bold with the Living, may easily and justly enough be suspected not to hold over-fair quarter with the Grave.

But whereas it is said, that these worthy Men (for such they were) were my Creatures, my nearest Familiars, my willing Instruments, and the like: This I do here avow for truth; I was a meer Stranger to Dr. Forbys, * 7.70 late Prelate of Edinburgh. The first time that ever I saw him, was when I attended as a Chaplain in Ordinary up∣on King James of blessed Memory, in the Year 1617. At which time I heard him Preach very learnedly before his Majesty. After that time I never saw him, till I attended his Majesty, that now is, as Dean of his Chappel, into Scotland, in the Year 1633. In the mean time I had contracted no Friendship; no Letters had passed between us. Then he Preached again very Learnedly, and his Majesty re∣solved to make him Bishop of Edinburgh; which was done ac∣cordingly; and to my Remembrance, he lived not above a Year after, or very little more. And this was all the near Familiarity that was between him and me.

With the Bp. of Dunblaine, Dr. Wedderborne; I confess, I had more, and longer Acquaintance; for he lived some Years in Eng∣land, and was recommended unto me, as a Man that had very good parts and Learning in him. He lived long with Mr. Isaac Casaubon, who was not like to teach him any Popery, and who certainly would not have retained him so long, or so near unto him, had he not found him a deserver. After I came acquainted with him, I wished him very well for his worth sake, and did what I could for him to enable him to live. But sure if my In∣tentions were so deep, as they are after said to be, he could be no fit Instrument for me; he being a meer Scholar, and a Book-Man,

and as unfit for, as unacquainted with, such Counsels and Projects, as these Men would make me Author of. And if my Intentions were so deep; out of doubt I had Brains enough to make a wiser Choice of Instruments to advance them. This for the Men.

But for the Matter, if any posthume Papers of theirs be other than they ought; their Credit must answer for them to the World, as their Conscience hath already done to God. And for my own part, I protest I do not, nor ever did, know of any such Papers which they had, or left behind; nor do I believe, they left any behind them, but such as were worthy their Learning and In∣tegrity.

But my Intentions (they say) were deep and large against all the Reformed Kirks. Surely the deeper, the worse, if they were so ill. But as I cannot be so vain, to assume to my self any such depth: So I humbly thank God for it, I am free from all such wickedness. The worst thought I had of any Reformed Church in Christendom, was to wish it like the Church of England; and so much better, as it should please God to make it. And the deep∣est intention I had concerning all or any of them, was how they might not only be wished, but made so: As for the Reformation of Religion in his Majesties Dominions, which (they say) was panting, and had given up the Ghost, if God had not in a wonderful way of Mercy prevented them. First, this is, under Favour, most untrue, and a base and most undeserved Scandal put upon his Majesty's Government. Secondly, I shall take leave to Prophesy, that unless after all this Tumbling the People can be 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that all stand for matters of Religion, both Doctrine, and Discipline (and that rather with addition to the Churches Power, than detracting from it) as they then did, when these Men say the Reformation was pant∣ting, and giving up the Ghost: I much doubt, that neither they, nor their Childrens Children after, shall see such Happy Days a∣gain for all things, as these were, which they so unthankfully to God and their King, murmured against, and as these Men yet snarl at. And for the Spirit which prevented them in this Acti∣on, in such a wonderful way of Mercy, if ever they awake out of this Lethargy (for better it is not) they will then see whence he is, and whither he tends. They add to this—

That if the Pope himself had been in his place, he could not have been more Popish; nor could he more Zealously have Negotiated for Rome against the Reformed Kirks, to reduce them to the Heresies in Doctrine, the * 7.71 Superstition, and Idolatry in Wor∣ship, and the Tyranny in Government, which are in that See, and for which the Reformed Kirks did separate from it, and came forth of Babel. From him certainly hath issued all this Deluge, which almost hath overturned all.

What, not the Pope himself? now surely he could do little then. For (as I told you in the very last Passage) I never intended more to the Reformed Churches, than to wish them in Doctrine and Discipline, like the Church of England. And I hope, that was nei∣ther

to Negotiate for Rome, nor to reduce them to Heresie in Doctrine, nor to Superstition and Idolatry in Worship, no, nor to Tyranny in Government. All which are here most wrongfully imputed to me. And this comparing of me with the Pope himself, I could bear with more ease, had I not Written more against Popish Superstition, than any Presbyter in Scotland hath done. And for my part I wou'd be contented to lay down my Life to Morrow, upon Condition the Pope and Church of Rome would admit and confirm that Service-Book, which hath been here so eagerly charged against me: For were that done, it would give a greater blow to Popery; which is but the Corruption of the Church of Rome, than any hath yet been given: And that they know full well. And whereas they say, that for these things the Reformed Churches did separate from it, and came forth of Babel. That is true, that they did separate; and for these things: But not till for the maintaining of the contra∣ry to these things, they were Excommunicated, and Thrust out. Then indeed they separated, but not till they were forced by a double necessity; of Truth, from which they might not depart; and of that Punishment, which would not suffer them to enter. And yet the Reformed Churches, all and every of them, had need look well to themselves: For if they came out of Babel to run down into Egypt, they'll get little by the Bargain. Now they end in Confi∣dence.

We are therefore confident, that your Lordships (this they speak to the English Commissioners, who were to deliver this their Charge against me into the Lords House;) will by your means deal effectually [with the Parliament] that this great Fire-brand * 8.1 may be presently removed from his Majesties Presence; and that he may be put to Tryal, and † 8.2 have his deserved Censure, accord∣ing to the Laws of the Kingdom: Which shall be good Service to God, Honour to the King and Parliament; Terror to the Wicked, and Comfort to all good Men; and to us in special, who, by his means principally, have been put to so many and grie∣vous Afflictions; wherein we had Perished, if God had not been with us.

Decemb. 14. 1640.

Ad. Blayer.* 8.3

They were, and they might well be confident upon their Lordships: For all, or some chief of that Committee were in league with them: And some of them the principal Men which brought the Scots in, to have their ends upon the King. And they did deal effectually with the Par∣liament: For (as appears by the Date) this Charge was delivered to the English Commissioners, Decemb. 14. It was Read in the upper House, * 8.4 and transmitted to the House of Commons; and such haste made of it there, that they, though they had no Articles drawn, yet came up in haste, and accused me to the Lords of High Treason, desiring my Commitment, and Promising the bringing up of their Articles and Proof

against me in convenient time. So upon this Accusation only, I was, upon Decemb. 18. committed to Mr. James Maxwell, the Officer * 8.5 of the House, and so removed from his Majesty's Presence; which was the great aim against me. For they conceiv'd I wou'd speak my Con∣science, if I came near him: And they could not with any Colour of Justice take me from him, but by an Accusation of High Treason; of which I would not for all the World be as Guilty as some of them are, which Accused me. This was their desire for my Commitment.

Their next desire was, That I might be brought to Tryal, and re∣ceive my Censure according to the Laws. And this hath been, and yet is my desire, as well as theirs. For I long for nothing more than a Tryal; and I can fear no Censure that is according to Law; and am as free from the Breach of any Law, that can make me guilty of Treason, as I was when my Mother bare me into the World. And when I was thus far on upon my An∣swer, I had remained at Mr. Maxwell's, and in the Tower Eleven Months (so many it was when I writ this) But before I came to my Hearing I had been Thirteen Months in Prison, and neither brought to Tryal, no nor so much as a Particular Charge brought up against me, that I might prepare for an Answer, in so heavy a Business. And I am somewhat farther of my Accusers Mind; That to bring me to a just Tryal according to Law, would be good Service to God, Honour to the King, and the Parliament, who cannot but suffer in the Judgment of Moderate Men, for laying a Man of my Place and Calling so long in Prison, (a thing without all Pre∣cedent) and yet charging me with no particular. Nay, and I think, in a good Sense too, it would be a Terrour to the Wicked, to see an Innocent Man brought to such a Tryal. Yea, and yet a Comfort to all Good Men too, when they see, that an Innocent Man shall not be let lye, and languish to Death in Prison, (which may be my Case for ought I see) but that in some time they may hope for Tryal: Yea, and to them, the Scots in special. For this Bold, and most true Word I'll speak: The Scottish Nation in general, the City of Edinburgh in special, and very many particular Men of good Worth, and some Men of Honour, besides Clergy-men of all sorts, during the time I had Interest in Court, have been more beholding to me, than to any ten English Subjects of what rank and condition soever: And this his Majesty knows, and I dare say will Witness. And for their present Afflictions which they speak of, the Current of this Discourse will shew to the indifferent Rea∣der, what a Principal means I have been of them. In the mean time, I little deserved from them the Name of This great Firebrand; for many of them have warmed themselves at me, but yet I ne∣ver Fired any of them. Nor can I make any doubt but that God * 8.6 will deliver me out of the midst of this Fire, which he knows I kindled not. Howsoever letthem take heed, for as sure as they now make themselves in the † 8.7 Conjuncture of a great Party, in which one Wave seconds, and keeps up another; yet though these Waves of the Sea are mighty, and rage horribly, the Lord that dwelleth on High is Mightier. And * 8.8 under him I rest, and I hope shall, till their Waves be broken a∣gainst some Rock or other.

CAP. IV.

NOW follows Adam Blair the second, with a Codicil, or a Corolla∣ry to this Charge. And this though it concerns my Brethren, the Bishops, as much as me; yet because it charges upon the Call∣ing, and was delivered in with the Charge against me, though * 8.9 under another date, of December 15. I shall express what I think of that too. For I think the Scotch Commissioners took another day in upon advice, that they might have a fling at the whole Calling. And I cannot but think, it was upon design among them, when I consider, how eagerly the House of Commons hath followed Episco∣pacy ever since. This Codicil to their last Will and Testament con∣cerning me begins thus:

We do indeed confess, that the Prelates of England have been of very different humours, some of them of a more hot, and others of them Men of a moderate Temper; some of them more, and some less inclinable to Popery: yet what known Truth, and constant Experience, hath made undeniable, we must at this Opportunity * 8.10 express.

And so must we: For we as ingenuously confess, that the Presby∣ters of Scotland have been of very different humours; some of them of a more hot, and others of them Men of a moderate Temper. And the more moderate for Temper, and the more able for Learning among them, have ever declared for the Episcopacy of England. But whereas they say, some of the Bishops of England, are more, and some less inclinable to Popery; that may seem to imply, that all of them are more or less inclinable to Popery: which I dare say is a loud un∣truth. Perhaps that which some of them call Popery, is Orthodox Christianity, and not one whit the worse for their miscalling it, though they much the worse for disbelieving it. But now you shall hear, what that known truth is, which constant experience (they say) hath made undeniable.

That from the first time of the Reformation of the Kirk of Scot∣land, not only after the coming of King James of Happy Me∣mory into England, but before, the Prelates of England have been by all means uncessantly working the overthrow of our Disci∣pline and Government.

A little change in the words answers this. For from the very first of the Reformation of the Church of England, as well before, as after, the coming in of King James of Happy Memory, the Presbyters of Scotland have been by all means uncessantly working the overthrow of Episcopacy, our Discipline and Government: As appears most manifestly in † 8.11 Archbishop Bancroft's Works. So then, either this is a loud untruth, if our Prelates did not so practise a∣gainst

them: Or if it be truth, our Bishops had altogether as much reason, (if not more, the justice of the Cause considered) to work the overthrow of their Discipline, than they had of Episcopacy. But they tell us:

It hath come to pass of late, that the Prelates of England having prevailed and brought Vs to Subjection in point of Government, and finding their long-waited-for Opportunity, and a rare Congrui∣ty of many Spirits and Powers ready to co-operate for their Ends, have made a strong Assault upon the whole External Worship and Doctrine of our Kirk.

Surely for their Doctrine, 'tis too large a Field to beat over at this time. Yet many Doctrines are on foot amongst them, which are fitter to be weighed, than swallowed, would they permit them to be brought to the Sanctuary and Balanced there. And for the whole External Worship which they speak of, I have heard it said, they have none at all; and out of doubt, 'tis very little they have, if any. And therefore if the Prelates of England had gotten an Op∣portunity, and a Congruity of Spirits and Powers to co-operate, (which yet is not so) they had been much to blame, if they had not pur∣sued it, till they had brought both the one and the other to a better Condition than they stand in at present. And if they had such an Opportunity, they were much to blame that deserted it; And if they had not, these Men are unworthy for asserting it. But what End had the Prelates of England in this? Why sure—

By this their doing they did not aim to make us conform to Eng∣land; but to make Scotland first (whose weakness in resisting they had before experienced in Novations of Government, and of some Points of Worship) and * 8.12 therefore England, conform to Rome, even in those matters wherein England had separated from Rome, ever since the time of Reformation.

These Men out of doubt have, or take on them to have, a great insight into the Hearts and Souls of the Prelates of England. They know that we did not aim to make them conformable to England, but to make Scotland first, and then England, conformable to Rome. But I know the contrary; and will leave the Book it self to be judg∣ed by the Learned in all parts of Christendom, (for it is carefully Translated into Latin;) whether it teach, or practise Conformity with Rome, or not: which trial is far beyond their unlearned, and uncharitable † 8.13 Assertion. And if any other of my Brethren have had this aim, they should do well to name them. But they are so void of Charity; that they cannot forbear to say, that we aim to make them Conformable to Rome, even in those things wherein England had separated from Rome, ever since the Reformation. Which is so monstrous an untruth that I wonder how Impudence it self dare utter it; considering what the Bishops of England have writ∣ten in defence of their Reformation against Rome, and how far be∣yond any thing which the Presbyters of Scotland have written a∣gainst it.

As for the Reason, which is given, why we began with Scotland, namely, because we had experience of their weakness in resisting Nova∣tions of Government, and of some Points of Worship: I know not what they mean by their weakness in resisting, unless it be, That they did not prevail against King James of Blessed Memory, (for resist they did to their power;) when he brought in Bishops, (which it seems they call Novations in Government,) and the Articles of Perth, which they stile Novations in some Points of Worship. And if this be that which they mean; there is no Novation in the one, or the other. And for their weakness in resisting, you may see what it is. For no sooner have they gotten the Opportunity, which they speak of in the beginning of this Codicil, but they cast out all their Bi∣shops; reversed all the Articles of Perth; all the Acts of Parlia∣ment, which confirmed both; brought back all to the rude draught of Knox and Buchanan; saving that they have made it much worse, by admitting so many Lay-Elders with Votes in their General Assem∣blies, as may inable the Lay-men to make themselves what Religi∣on they please: A thing which the Church of Christ never knew in any part of it. Nor have they stayed here; but made use of the same Opportunity, to cry down the Bishops, and Church-Govern∣ment in England: As you will see by that which comes next.

An Evil therefore, which hath issued, not so much from the Per∣sonal Disposition of the Prelates themselves, as from the innate Quality and Nature of their Office, and Prelatical Hierarchy, which did bring forth the Pope in Ancient times, and never † 8.14 ceaseth till it * 8.15 bring forth Popish Doctrine and Worship, where it is once rooted, and the Principles thereof fomented, and con∣stantly followed.

They tell us here, that this Conformity with Rome, is an Evil that issues not so much from the Personal Disposition of the Prelates them∣selves, as from the innate Quality and Nature of their Office. Confor∣mity with Rome in any Error, or Superstition, is doubtless an Evil; but that it issues from the Nature of a Bishop's Office, cannot be. For that Office is to Preach Christ, and to govern the Church of Christ, according to his Laws. If any Bishop break this, 'tis his Personal Error, and most unnatural to his Office; to which if he adhere, he can neither teach, nor practise, Superstition. Therefore certainly, what Error soever comes, is from his Person, not his Office. And 'tis great Ignorance to call this Evil an innate Quality of the Office; when the Office is a thing of Institution, not of Nature; and there∣fore cannot possibly have any innate Quality in it.

But since they will needs have it thus; let us invert it a little, and see how it will fit them, against their King; more than it can fit the Bishops for the Pope. For if we should say (as perhaps we may too truly) that the dangerous Positions, which too many of the Presbyterian Faction publickly maintain, and in Print, proceed not so much from the Personal Disposition of the Presbyterians themselves, as from the innate Quality and Nature of their Presbyteries, and their An∣timonarchical Party; I believe it would trouble them to shape a good

Answer to it, unless they will admit of that which I before have given. But then, if they do this, they Charge themselves with fal∣shood in that which they lay upon the Bishops Office.

Next they tell you, that this Prelatical Hierarchy did bring forth the Pope in Ancient times. But truly I think they are thus far deceived; The Hierarchy cannot be said to bring forth the chief parts of it self. Now the Patriarchs, (of which the Bishop of Rome was one, if not Prime in Order,) were the Principal parts of the Hierarchy: Therefore the Hierarchy cannot well be said to bring them forth. But suppose it be so, that the Pope were brought forth by the Bi∣shops; what fault is there in it? For the Pope was good, both Nomine & Re, in name, and in being, as they were at first. For thirty of them together were Martyrs for Christ * 8.16: And the Church of Rome was famous for her Faith over the World in the very Apostles times. Rom. 1. And if either the Popes, or that Church, have degenerated since; that is a Personal Crime, and not to be imputed to the Office. And therefore these Men do very ill, or very ignorantly, to affirm, that this Office (of Episcopacy) never ceases till it bring forth Popish Doctrine and Worship. For in all the time of these thirty Popes, there was no Doctrine brought forth, which may justly be ac∣counted Superstitious, or called Popery. For the last of those thirty died in the Year 309. ..... And they cannot be ignorant that a 8.17 Bishop Jewell, on the behalf of the Church of England, challenged the Current of the Fathers, for full Six Hundred Years, to be for it, against Rome, in very many and main Points of Popery. And there∣fore I may well say, there was no Popery in the World, when the Thirtieth Pope died. Well, if this Evil do not arise from the Hie∣rarchy; yet it doth—

From the Antipathy and Inconsistence of the two Forms of the Ec∣clesiastical Government, which they conceived, and not without Cause, one Island, * 8.18 joyned also under one Head and Monarch, was not able to bear: The one being [† 8.19 the same] in all the Parts and Powers which it was in the time of Popery, and still is in the Roman Kirk: The other being the Form of Government re∣ceived, maintained, and practised by all the Reformed Kirks; wherein, by their own Testimonies and Confessions, the Kirk of Scotland had amongst them no small Eminency.

Sure these Men have forgotten themselves. For they tell us immediatly before, that this Evil of bringing forth Popish Doctrine and Worship, proceeds from the very Office of a Bishop: And now they add, and from the Antipathy of these two Forms of Church Go∣vernment. Doth the Bishops Office produce Popery? And doth the Antipathy between the Presbytery and Episcopacy produce Popery too? So then belike in these Men's Judgments both Bishops, and they which oppose Bishops, produce Popery. And if that be true, Popery must needs increase, that is produced on all sides.

An Evil then there is, though perhaps not this, which issues from that Antipathy and Inconsistence of these two Forms of Ecclesiastical Go∣vernment, which (they say) we Prelates of England conceived, and not

without Cause, one Island, joyned also under one Head and Monarch, was not able to bear: And that Evil was (as I conceive) the continual Jarrs and Oppositions, which would daily arise among His Majesties Subjects of both Kingdoms, concerning these different Forms of Government: And these would bring forth such Heart-burnings and Divisions among the People, that the King might never be secure at home, nor presume upon united Forces against a Foreign Enemy. And this is Evil enough to any Monarch of two divided King∣doms; especially lying so near in one Island. Now, if the Bishops of England did conceive thus, and, as our Adversaries here confess, not without Cause; Then certainly by their own Confession, the Prelates of England had Reason to use all just endeavours to re∣move, and take away this Inconsistence, that the Form of the Eccle∣siastical Government might be one, in one Island, and under one Monarch, that so Faction and Schism might cease; which else, when they get Opportunity, find a way to rent the Peace of Kingdoms, if not Kingdoms themselves. And this Island (God of his Mercy preserve it) is at this * 8.20 time in great hazard to undergo the fata∣lity of it in a great measure.

The next is a manifest untruth. For though there be (as is said) an Inconsistence between the Governments, which makes one Island under one King unable to bear both, in the different parts of the Island; or at least unsafe, while it bears them: Yet neither is Episcopacy in all the Parts and Powers of it, that which it was in time of Popery, and still is in the Roman Church. And this is most manifest to any Man, that will but look upon what Power the Prelates had before, and what they have since the Statute of the Submission of the Clergy in Hen. 8. time: Beside all those Statutes which have since been made in divers Particulars, to weaken their Power. Nor is the other Form of Government received, maintained, and Practised in all other Reformed Churches; unless these Men be so strait Laced, as not to admit the Churches of Sweden, and Denmark, and indeed, all, or most of the Lutherans, to be Reformed Churches. For in Sweden they retain both the Thing and the Name; and the Go∣vernours of their Churches are, and are call∣ed Bishops. And among the other * 8.21 Lutherans the Thing is retained, though not the Name. For instead of Bishops they are called Super∣intendents, and instead of Archbishops, General Superintendents. And yet even here too, these Names differ more in sound, than in sense. For Bishop is the same in Greek, that Super∣intendent is in Latin. Nor is this change very well liked by the Learned. Howsoever Lu∣ther, since he would change the Name, did yet very wisely, that he would leave the Thing, and make choice of such a name as was not altogether unknown to the Ancient Church. For a 8.22 St. Augustine mentions it as plainly and as fully as any of these. As for the Eminency which (they say) their Kirk of Scotland had amongst them; I envy it not; but God bless it so, that it may deserve Emi∣nence, and have it. And now we are come to the close of all, in which their desire is expressed.

This also we represent to your Lordships most serious Consideration: That not only the Fire-brands may be removed, but the Fire may be provided against; that there be no more * 9.1 Combustion after∣wards.

Decemb. 15. 1640.

Ad. Blayer.

Their request is, That not only the Bishops, whom they are plea∣sed to call the Fire-brands (which indeed themselves and their Ad∣herents are) but the Office, or Episcopacy it self, (which they call the Fire) may be provided against; That there may be no combustion after. This I as heartily wish, as any Man can; but see as little cause to hope for. For what hope can there be against after-Combustion, while the Fire, which they themselves have kindled, while they call other Men Incendiaries, burns on still, and is like to fasten up∣on the very Foundations, to the eating of them out?

Yet I desire here that the Justice, and the Indifferency of these Men may be well considered, and that in two things. The one in the Cause it self: For Episcopacy is settled by Law here; Nay it is many ways woven into the Laws and Customs of this Realm. And their great Complaint is, that their Presbyteries (which they say are established by their Law) were offer'd to be supprest: So they are angry that their Presbyteries should be touch'd against their Law; but Episcopacy must be destroyed, though it be never so much against our Law. The other piece of their Justice, is Personal to me. For here, at one and the same time, and in this one and the same Charge, they do by Consequences lay load on me, as if I had invaded their Laws: while they invade ours avowedly, and dare present this their Invasion, as well as that by Arms, in full and open Parliament of England, to have their Will in the one, and their Reward for the other.

Now if these two Forms of Ecclesiastical Government, by Epis∣copacy, and by Presbyteries, be inconsistent under one Monarch (as they themselves here confess) then I (were I at liberty) would humbly beseech the Lords to consider, First, whether these men have any shew, or colour of Justice in this their demand. Secondly, whe∣ther that Form of Church-Government, which hath come down from the Apostles, continued to this Day, is established by the Laws, and usage of this Kingdom, ever since it was Christian, be not fitter for them to embrace and settle; than that Form which is but of Yesterday, and hath no acquaintance at all with our Laws, nor is agreeable with Monarchy? And lastly, when the Bishops are taken away, and a Parity (the Mother of confusion) made in the Church, and the Church-Lands Sacrilegiously made a Prey (which I have long feared is not the least Aim of too many) whe∣ther then the Temporal Lords shall not follow after? And whether their Honour will not then soon appear too great, and their Means too full, till a Lex Agraria will pass upon them, and lay them level

with them, whom some of them Favour too much? And when these things are considered, God Bless them, whom it most con∣cerns, to lay it to Heart betimes, if Time be not slipped al∣ready.

Here (having answer'd to all, which the Scots have laid in against me) I would have the Scotch Service inserted and Printed. The Book lyes by me, very exactly translated into Latin: And so I hope, this Tract shall be.

CAP. V.

AND now having answered (and I hope sufficiently) to all the Particulars in the Charge of the Scots against me; I must return to the History again, as I left it: Where I told you, the House of Commons were very angry with the late Canons; and joyn∣ing this Accusation of the Scots to such Articles, as they in their Committee had framed against me, upon Decemb. 18. 1640. they ac∣cused me of High Treason († as is before expressed) and I was committed to Custody to Mr. James Maxwell, the Officer of the Vpper House. When they had lodg'd me here, I was follow'd with sharpness in both Houses, upon all Occasions of any Complaint made against the proceedings at Council-Table, Star-Chamber, High-Commission, * 9.2 or any place, or thing, in which I had ought to do. Nothing omitted by some cunning Agents, which might increase the Rage and Hatred of the People against me. The chief In∣struments herein were the Brownists, and they which adhered unto them; who were highly offended with me, because I hindred, and Punished (as by Law I might) their Conventicles, and Separation from the Church of England. And though I pitied them (as God knows) from my very Heart; yet because necessity of Government forc'd me to some Punishment, their Malignity never gave me over.

Among, and above the rest, there were three Men, Mr. Henry * 9.3 Burton, a Minister Benificed in Friday-street in London, Dr. John Bastwick, a Phisician, and Mr. William Pryn, a Common Lawyer, who were censured Junii 14. 1637. in the Star-Chamber, for noto∣rious Libels, Printed, and Published by them against the Hierarchy of the Church. They were then and there Sentenced to stand in the Pillory, and lose their Ears; and because they should not stay farther to infect London, they were sent away by Order of that Court; Mr. Burton to Garnsey, Dr. Bastwick to Silly, and Mr. Pryn to Jersy. In the giving of this Sentence I spake my Conscience; and was after commanded to Print my Speech. But I gave no Vote; because they had fallen so personally upon me, that I doubted ma∣ny Men might think Spleen, and not Justice, led me to it. Nor was it my Counsel that advised their sending into those remote Parts. The Brownists, and the preciser Part of the Kingdom, were netled at this; and the Anger turned upon me, tho' I were the Patient all along. For they had published most venomous Libels against me; and I did but shew such as came to my Hands to the State, and there left them to do what they pleased in it. But that for which they were Sentenced, was a Book Written by Mr. Burton, and Printed and sent by himself to the Lords sitting in Council; and a Letany, and other Scandalous things, scattered, and avowed by Dr. 〈◊〉〈◊〉; and things of like nature by Mr. Pryn. And he was thought to deserve less Favour than the rest; because he had been censured before in that great Court, for gross abuses of the Queens Gracious Majesty, and the Government, in his Book Intituled Histriomastix.

This Censure being past upon these Men, though I did no more than is before mentioned, yet they, and that Faction continued all manner of Malice against me: And I had Libel upon Libel, scattered in the Streets, and pasted upon Posts. And upon Friday July 7. 1637. a Note was brought to me of a short Libel, pasted on the Cross in Cheapside, that the Arch-Wolf of Canterbury had his Hand in persecuting the Saints, and shedding the Blood of the Martyrs. Now what kind of Saints and Martyrs these were, may appear by their Libellous Writings; Courses, with which Saints and Mar∣tyrs were never acquainted. And most certain it is, that howsoe∣ver the Times went then, or go now, yet in Queen Elizabeth's Time, Penry was Hanged, and Vdal Condemned, and Dyed in Prison for less than is contained in Mr. Burton's Book; as will be evident to any Man that compares their Writings together. And these Saints would have lost their Lives, had they done that a∣gainst any other State Christian, which they did against this. And I have yet one of the desperatest * 9.4 Libels by me, that hath ordinarily been seen, which was sealed up in form of a Letter, and sent to me by Mr. Pryn, with his Name to it: And but that it is exceeding long, and from the present business, I would here have inserted it.

To return then: The Faction of the Brownists, and these three Saints, with their Adherents, (for they were now set at Liberty by the House of Commons, and brought into London in great Triumph) filled the Press almost Daily, with Ballads and Libels, full of all manner of Scurrility, and more Untruth, both against my Person, and my Calling. These were cried about London-streets, and brought (many of them) to Westminster, and given into divers Lords Hands, and into the Hands of the Gentlemen of the House of Commons: And yet no Order ta∣ken by either House to suppress the Printing of such known and shame∣less Lyes, as most of them contained: A thing which many sober Men found much fault withall, and which (I believe) hath hardly been seen, or suffered, in any Civil Common-wealth, Christian or o∣ther. But when I saw the Houses of Parliament so regardless of their own Honour, to suffer these base and Barbarous Courses a∣gainst an Innocent Man, and as then not so much as Charged in general; I thought fit to arm my self with Patience, and endure that which I could not help. And by God's Blessing I did so; though it grieved me much more for my Calling, than for my Person. And this spreading of Libellous, Base Pamphlets continues † 9.5 to this Day without controul; and how long it will continue to the Shame of the Nation, I cannot tell.

While I was thus committed to Mr. Maxwell, I found I was, by the course of the House, to pay in Fees for my Dyet and Custody, Twenty Nobles a day: This grew very heavy. For I was stayed there full ten weeks, before so much as any General Charge was brought up by the House of Commons against me; which in that time came to Four Hundred Sixty Six Pound Thirteen Shillings and Four Pence: And Mr. Maxwell had it all, without any Abate∣ment. * 9.6 In the mean time, on Munday December 21. upon a Petition

of Sir Robert Howard, I was Condemned to pay Five Hundred Pounds unto him for false Imprisonment. And the Lords Order was so strict; that I was commanded to pay him the Money presently, or give Security to pay it in a very short time. I payed it, to satisfie the Command of the House; but was not therein so well advised as I might have been, being Committed for Treason.

Now, the Cause of Sir Robert Howard was this. He fell in League with the Lady Viscountess Purbeck. The Lord Viscount Purbeck being in some weakness and distemper, the Lady used him at her pleasure, and betook her self in a manner, wholly to Sir Robert Howard, and had a Son by him. She was delivered of this Child in a Clandestine way, under the Name of Mistress Wright. These things came to be known, and she was brought into the High-Commission; and there, after a Legal Proceeding, was found guilty of Adultery, and Sen∣tenced to do Pennance: Many of the great Lords of the Kingdom being present in Court, and agreeing in the Sentence. * 9.7 Upon this Sentence she with∣drew her self, to avoid the Penance. This Sentence passed at London-House, in Bishop Mountain's time, Novemb. 19. An. Dom. 1627. I was then present, as Bishop of Bath and Wells. After this, when the Storm was somewhat over, Sir Robert Howard conveyed her to his House at ....... in Shropshire, where she Lived avowedly with him some Years, and had by him ... Children. At last, they grew to that open boldness; that he brought her up to London, and lodg∣ed her in Westminster. This was so near the Court, and in so open view; that the King and the Lords took notice of it, as a thing full of Impudence, that they should so publickly adventure to outface the Justice of the Realm, in so fowl a business. And one day, as I came of course to wait on his Majesty, he took me a∣side, and told me of it, being then Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; and added, that it was a great Reproach to the Church and Nation; and that I neglected my Duty, in case I did not take order for it. I made answer, she was the Wife of a Peer of the Realm; and that without his leave I could not attach her; but that now I knew his Majesty's pleasure, I would do my best to have her taken, and brought to Penance, according to the Sentence against her. The next day I had the good hap to apprehend both Her and Sir Robert; and by Order of the High-Commission-Court, Imprisoned her in the Gate-House, and him in the Fleet.

This was (as far as I remember) upon a Wednesday; and the Sunday sevennight after, was thought upon her to bring to Penance. She was much troubled at it, and so was he. And therefore in the mid∣dle of the week following, Sir Robert dealt with some of his Friends, and among the rest, with one Sir ....... of Hampshire; who with Mony, corrupted the Turn-Key of the Prison (so they call him) and conveyed the Lady forth, and after that into France in Man's Appa∣rel

(as that Knight himself hath since made his boast.) This was told me the Morning after the escape: And you must think, the good Fel∣lowship of the Town was glad of it. In the mean time, I could not but know, though not perhaps prove as then, that Sir Robert Howard laboured and contrived this conveyance. And thereupon, in the next sitting of the High-Commission, Ordered him to be * 9.8 close Prisoner, till he brought the Lady forth. So he continued close Prisoner about some two or three Months. For this the Fine above mentioned was imposed upon me, as being a most Unjust and Illegal Imprisonment. Whereas the Parliament (to the great Honour of their Justice be it spoken) have kept me in Prison now † 9.9 full thirteen Months, and upward, and have not so much as brought up a particular Charge against me; and how much longer they will keep me, God knows. Now say that all Forms of Law were not observed by me; yet somewhat was to be indulged, in regard I did it to vindicate such a crying Impiety. But yet, I do here solemnly protest, I observed the Order of the Court in which I sat, and that Court setled by an Act of Parliament, 1. Eliz. And I did not knowingly err in any particular. More I could say in these my sufferings; but I will blast no Family of Honour for one Man's fault.

On Thursday, Januar. 21. 1640. A Parliament-Man, of Good Note † 9.10 in the House of Commons, and well interessed in divers Lords, gave me to understand; that some Lords were very well pleased with my pati∣ent and moderate carriage since my Commitment: And that four Earls, of great power in the House, should say, that the Lords were not now so sharp against me, as they were at first; and that now they were resolved, only to Sequester me from the King's Counsels, and to put me from my Arch-Bishoprick. I was glad to hear of any favour, considering the Times; but considering my Innocency, I could not hold this for favour. And I could not but observe to my self, what Justice I was to expect; since here was a Resolution taken among the Leading Men of the House, what Censure should be laid upon me, before any Charge, so much as in general, was brought up a∣gainst me.

CAP. VI.

UPon Friday, Feb. 26. I had been full ten weeks in restraint, * 9.11 at Mr. Maxwell's House: And this day, being St. Augustine's day, my Charge in general Articles was brought up from the House of Commons to the Lords, by Sir Hen. Vane the Younger. It consisted of Fourteen Ar∣ticles. * 9.12 These Generals they craved time to prove in Particular; and that I in the mean time might be kept safe. Upon this I was presently sent for to the House, and the Ar∣ticles were Read to me at the Bar. When the Clark of the Parliament had done Reading, I humbly craved leave of the Lords, to speak a few words; which were to this effect.

My Lords; This is a great and a heavy Charge; and I must be un∣worthy to live, if it can be made good against me: For it makes me against God, in point of Religion; Against the King, in point of Allegiance; And against the Publick, in point of Safety, under the Ju∣stice and Protection of Law. And though the King be little, if at all mentioned; yet I am bold to Name him, because I have ever been of Opinion, that the King and his People are so joyned to∣gether, in one Civil and Politick Body, as that it is not possible for any Man to be true to the King, as King, that shall be found Treacherous to the State Established by Law, and work to the Sub∣version of the People: Though perhaps every one, that is so, is not able to see thorough all the Consequences, by which one depends upon the other. So my Charge, my Lords, is exceeding heavy in it self; though I as yet, do not altogether feel the weight of it. For 'tis yet (as your Lordships see) but in Generals; And Generals make a great noise, but no Proof: Whereas, 'tis Proof upon Par∣ticulars, that makes the weight of a Charge sit close upon any Man. Now, my Lords, 'tis an old and a true Rule, Errare contingit descendendo, Error doth most often happen, and best appear, when Men descend to Particulars: And with them when I shall be Charged, I hope my Innocence will furnish me with a sufficient Answer to any Error of mine, that shall be thought Criminal, or any way worthy the Cognizance of this High and Honourable Court. As for Hu∣mane Frailties, as I cannot acquit my self of them, so I presume your Lordships will be favourable Judges of them: Since in the Trans∣action of so many businesses as passed my Hands, Men, far abler than ever I can be, have been subject to them, and, perhaps, to as many, and as great. But for Corruption in the least degree (I humbly praise God for it) I fear no Accuser, that will speak Truth. But (my Lords) that which goes nearest unto me among these Arti∣cles, is, that I should be thought foul and false in the profession of my Religion: As if I should profess with the Church of England, and have my Heart at Rome, and labour by all cunning ways to

bring Romish Superstition in upon the Kingdom. This (my Lords) I confess, troubles me exceedingly; and if I should forget my self, and fall into passion upon it; I should but be in that case which St. Jerome confessed he was in; when he knew not how to be pa∣tient, when Falshood in Religion was charged upon him. And yet that was nothing so high a Charge as this which is laid against me: Which is not only to be basely false my self; but withal, to labour to spread the same Falshood over the whole Kingdom.

And here I humbly besought their Lordships, that I might a little inlarge my self, and I did so. But because I purpose here to set down the general Articles, that were brought up against me, and that one of them comes home to this point of Religion; I shall put it off till I come to * 9.13 that Article, and there set it down at large, what I now said. And this I do, to avoid an useless and a tedious Repetition. Here then follow the Articles themselves, as they were that day Charged upon me, with my general Answer to each of them. And more I cannot give, till Particulars shall be put up against me.

CAP. VII.

ARticles of the Commons assembled in Parliament, in maintenance * 10.1 of their Accusation against William Laud Archbishop of Canter∣bury, whereby he stands Charged with High Treason, and other High Crimes and Misdemeanours † 10.2.

1. That he hath Trayterously endeavoured to subvert the Fundamental Laws and Government of * 10.3 the Kingdom: And instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government against Law: And to that end hath wickedly and Trayterously advised His Majesty, that he might at his own Will and Pleasure Levy and take Money of his Subjects without their consent in Parliament. And this he affirmed, was warrantable by the Law of God.

I did never endeavour to subvert the Fundamental Laws of this * 10.4 Kingdom of England; nor to introduce an Arbitrary or Tyrannical Go∣vernment, contrary to Law. I could not endeavour this; my know∣ledge and judgment going ever against an Arbitrary Government, in comparison of that which is settled by Law. I learned so much long ago, out of * 10.5 Aristotle; and his Reasons are too good to be gone against. And ever since I had the honour to sit at the Coun∣cil Table, I kept my self as much to the Law as I could; and fol∣lowed the Judgment of those great Lawyers which then sat at the Board. And upon all References which came from His Majesty, if I were one, I left those freely to the Law, who were not willing to have their business ended any other way. And this the Lord Keeper, the Lord Privy Seal, and the Councel Learned, which atten∣ded their Clients Causes, can plentifully witness.

I did never advise His Majesty, that he might at his own Will and Pleasure levy Money of his Subjects without their Consent in Parliament. Nor do I remember that ever I affirmed any such thing, as is Charged in the Article. But I do believe, that I may have said something to this effect following: That howsoever it stands by the Law of God, for a King, in the just and necessary defence of himself and his Kingdom, to levy Money of his Sub∣jects; yet where a particular National Law doth intervene in any Kingdom, and is settled by mutual consent between the King and his People, there Moneys ought to be Levied by and according to that Law. And by God's Law, and the same Law of the Land, I humbly conceive, the Subjects, so met in Parliament ought to sup∣ply their Prince, when there is just and necessary cause. And if an Absolute necessity do happen by Invasion, or otherwise, which gives no time for Counsel or Law; such a Necessity (but no pre∣tended one) is above all Law. And I have heard the greatest Lawyers in this Kingdom confess; that in times of such a Neces∣sity, The King's Legal Prerogative is as great as this.

And since here is of late such a noise made about the Subversi∣on of the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom, and Mens Lives called this way in question; 'tis very requisite, that these Fundamental Laws were known to all Men: That so they may see the danger, be∣fore they run upon it: Whereas now, the Common Laws of England have no Text at all. In so much, that many, who would think themselves wronged, if they were not accounted good Lawyers, can∣not in many points assure a Man what the Law is. And by this means, the Judges have liberty to retain more in Scrinio Pectoris, than is fitting; and which comes a little too near that Arbitrary Govern∣ment, so much and so justly found fault with: Whereas there is no Kingdom (that I know) that hath a setled Government, but it hath also a Text, or a Corpus Juris of the Laws written, save England. So here shall be as great a punishment, as is any where, for the breach of the Laws, and no Text of them for a Man's direction. And under favour, I think it were a work worthy a Parliament, to Command some prime Lawyers, to draw up a Body of the Common Law, and then have it carefully Examined by all the Judges of the Realm, and thoroughly weighed by both Houses, and then have this Book Declared and Confirmed by an Act of Parliament, as contain∣ing the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom. And then let any Man go to Subvert them at his Peril.

2. He hath for the better accomplishment of that his Trayterous Design, advised and procured, divers Sermons and other Discourses, to be Preached, Printed, and Published, in which the Authority of Par∣liaments, and the force of the Laws of this Kingdom are denied, and an Absolute and Vnlimited Power over the Persons and Estates of his Majesties Subjects is maintained and defended, not only in the King, but also in himself, and other Bishops, above and against the Law. And he hath been a great Protector, Favourer, and Promoter of the Publishers of such false and pernicious Opinions.

I have neither advised nor procured the Preaching, Printing, or * 10.6 Publishing of any Sermons, or other Discourses, in which the Au∣thority of Parliaments, and the force of the Laws of this Kingdom are denied, and an Absolute and Unlimited Power over the Per∣sons and Estates of his Majesty's Subjects maintained and defended. Nay, I have been so far from this, that I have, since I came into place, made stay of divers Books, purposely written to maintain an Absolute Power in the † 10.7 Kingdom, and have not suffered them to be Printed, as was earnestly desired. And were it fit to bring other Mens Names in question, and expose their Persons to danger, I have some of those Tracts by me at this present.

And as I have not maintained this Power in the King's Majesty; so much less have I defended this, or any other Power against Law, ei∣ther in my self, or other Bishops, or any other Person whatsoever: Nor have I been a Protector, Favourer, or Promoter of any the Publishers of such false and pernicious Opinions, knowing them to be such Men.

3. He hath by Letters, Messages, Threats, Promises, and divers other ways, to Judges and other Ministers of Justice, interrupted and perverted; and at other times by the means aforesaid, hath indea∣voured to interrupt and pervert, the course of Justice, in his Ma∣jesty's Courts at Westminster, and other Courts, to the Subversion of the Laws of this Kingdom; whereby, sundry of his Majesty's Subjects have been stopped in their Just Suits, and deprived of their Lawful Rights, and subjected to his Tyrannical Will, to their utter Ruin and Destruction.

I have neither by Letters, Messages, Threats, nor Promises, nor * 10.8 by any other Means, endeavoured to interrupt or pervert the course of Justice in his Majesty's Judges, or other Ministers of Justice, either to the Subversion of the Law, or the stopping of the Subjects in their Just Suits: Much less, to the ruin or destruction of any one; which God forbid I should ever be guilty of. The most that ever I have done in this kind, is this. When some poor Clergy-Men, which have been held in long Suits, some Seven, Nine, Twelve Years, and one for Nineteen Years together, have come and be∣sought me with Tears, and have scarce had convenient Clothing about them to come and make their address; I have sometimes un∣derwritten their Petitions to those Reverend Judges, in whose Courts their Suits were, and have fairly desired Expedition for them. But I did never desire, by any Letter, or Subscription, or Message, any thing for any of them, but that which was according to the Law and Justice of the Realm. And in this particular, I do refer my self to the Testimony of the Reverend Judges of the Common Law.

4. That the said Arch-Bishop hath Traiterously and Corruptly sold Justice to those that have had Causes depending before him, by Colour of his Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, as Arch-Bishop, High-Commissioner, Referree, or otherwise; and hath taken unlawful Gifts and Bribes of his Majesty's Subjects: And hath, as much as in him lyeth, indeavoured to corrupt other Courts of Justice, by advising [and procuring] his Majesty to sell places of Judicature, * 10.9 and other Offices, [and procuring the Sale of them] contrary to the * 10.10 Laws and Statutes in that behalf.

I did least of all expect this Charge. For I have not corruptly * 10.11 sold Justice, either as Arch-Bishop, High-Commissioner, Referree, or otherwise: Nor have I taken any unlawful Gift or Bribe, of any his Majesty's Subjects. And though in this Article, there is no par∣ticular mentioned, more than in the rest; yet I am not ignorant, that I have been Charged in the House of Commons, for taking two Pipes of Sack, from one Mr. Tho. * 10.12 Stone, as a Bribe for the abarement of a Fine, imposed upon some Men of Chester, by the High-Commission at York: Which power of Abatement was in me, by vertue of a Broad-Seal granted me to that purpose, bearing

Date ..... Now, because there is no Particular known to me but this, belonging to this or any other Article; and because I know not what course the Parliament will hold with me; namely, whe∣ther they will produce Particulars, or proceed by Bill of Attainder, I will take opportunity here to unfold all that is true in this odious Accusation of Stone. And the Case is thus,

Mr. Stone, knowing that these Fines with other were given by his Majesty towards the repair of St. Pauls in London; and that the Trust of that Business, with Power to abate any Fine, was com∣mitted to me, under the Broad Seal of England; became a very earnest Suiter to me in the behalf of these Chester-Men, fined at York. And he set divers of his Friends and mine upon me, for abatement of this Fine: And among others, his own Son-in-Law, Mr. William Wheat, Barrister at Law, who had been bred under me in St. John's Colledge in Oxford; and Mr. Wheat's Brother, Doctor Baylie, then Dean of Salisbury. In this Suit Stone pretended and protested too, that these Men ought him two or three Thousand Pound, (I well remember not whether) and that he should lose it all, if these Mens Fines were not abated. For they would hide their Heads, and ne∣ver appear again. During this Suit, he came twice, if not thrice, to my Steward, and told him, he had at present excellent Sack, and that he would send in two Pipes for me. My Steward at each time refused his motion, and acquainted me with it (as my Command ever was he should do in Cases of receiving any thing into my House.) I at every of these times commanded it should not be received. Mr. Stone then protested to my Steward, that he did not offer this as any Bribe or Gratuity for the business of the Chester-Men; but meerly as a Token of his Thankfulness for many and great Kindnesses done by me to himself, his Son-in-Law, and his Friend Doctor Baylie. Not∣withstanding this, I gave absolute Command the Sack should not be received: When Mr. Stone saw this, he found a time to send in the Sack when my Steward was not in the House, and told my Under-Servants that my Steward was acquainted with it. The next time Mr. Stone came to the House, which (as far as I remember) was the very next day: My Steward told him, he would send back the Sack, and was about to do it (as he after assured me.) Then Mr. Stone was very earnest with him, that he would save his Credit, and not send the Wine back to his disgrace; renewing his former deep Protestations, that he had in this no relation at all to the Chester-Mens business. Upon this, my Steward being acquainted with him, and his fore-named Friends, trusted him, and let the Wine stay, contrary to my former Commands. After all this, this unworthy Man put the price of this Wine upon the Chester-Mens Account; as if for that Gift I had abated their Fine; and so gave them an occasion to com∣plain of me to the Parliament. Whereas both the Chester-Men, and Mr. Stone himself, had before acknowledged, I had used them kindly in the Composition for their Fine, and wished they had been referred to me for the whole Cause. And for my whole carriage in this busi∣ness, I dare refer my self to the Testimony of Mr. Stone's own Son∣in-Law, and Doctor Baylie, who were the chief Men whom Mr. Stone imployed to me.

Besides, after all this cunning, it will appear by my Servants their Accounts, that the Wine was not brought into my House, in the cunning manner before mentioned, till divers days after I had com∣pounded with the Chester-Men for their Fine; so a Bribe for doing a business it could not be. And upon the whole matter, I am verily perswaded, considering Stone's Profession in Religion, (for he is a Brownist, or next Neighbour to him) that he did this of set purpose, to see if he could insnare me in this way. Lastly, I desire the Lords, and all Men, that have had any thing to do with me, to look upon me in the whole course of my Life; wherein they shall find me untainted with so much as the value of Six-pence in this base way. And it is not unknown to the World, that for many Years together I had opportunities enough to inrich my self by such a way, had I been minded to take that course: Whereas now, it is well known, my Estate is the meanest of any Arch-Bishop's of Canterbury that hath sate for many Years. And having carried it thus along for all my Life, I presume no Man can be so injurious to me, as to think I would now in mine Old Age (being Sixty Eight when this was Charged upon me) sell either my Conscience, or my Honour, for a Morsel of Bread, or a Cup of Wine.

And for the other part of this Article. I did never advise his Majesty, to sell Places of Judicature, or other Offices, or procure the Sale of them contrary to Law.

5. He hath Traiterousty caused a Book of Canons to be Composed and Published, [and those Canons to be put in Execution] without * 10.13 any lawful Warrant and Authority in that behalf. In which pre∣tended Canons, many Matters are contained contrary to the King's Prerogative, to the Fundamental Laws and Statutes of this Realm, to the Right of Parliament, to the Propriety and Liberty of the Subjects, and Matters tending to Sedition, and of dangerous Con∣sequence; and to the Establishment of a vast, unlawful, and pre∣sumptuous Power in himself and his Successors: Many of the which Canons, by the practice of the said Arch-Bishop, were sur∣reptitiously passed in the last Convocation, without due Considera∣tion and Debate; others by fear and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were Subscribed to by the Prelates and Clerks there 〈◊〉〈◊〉; which had never been Voted and passed in the Convocation, as they ought to have been. And the said Arch-Bishop hath contrived and endeavou∣red, to assure and confirm the Vnlawful and Exorbitant Power, which he hath Vsurped and Exercised over his Majesty's Subjects, by a Wicked and Vngodly Oath, in one of the said pretended Ca∣nons, enjoyned to be taken by all the Clergy, and many of the Laity of this Kingdom.

I Composed no Book of Canons: The whole Convocation did it, with * 10.14 unanimous Consent. So, either I must be free, or that whole Body must be guilty of High-Treason. For in that Crime all are Princi∣pals, that are guilty; Accessory there is none.

Neither did I publish, or put in Execution those Canons, or any of them, but by Lawful Authority. And I do humbly conceive, and

verily believe, there is nothing in those Canons contrary either to the King's Prerogative, the Fundamental Laws of the Realm, the Rights of Paliament, the Propriety and Liberty of the Subjects, or any matter tending to Sedition, or of dangerous consequence, or to the esta∣blishment of any vast or unlawful Power in my self and my Sucessors.

Neither was there any Canon in that Convocation surreptitiously passed by any practice of mine, or without due Consideration and Debate. Neither was there any thing in that Convocation, but what was voted first, and subscribed after, without fear or com∣pulsion in any kind. And I am verily perswaded, there never sate any Synod in Christendom, wherein the Votes passed with more freedom, or less practice, than they did in this. And for the Oath injoyned in the sixth Canon, as it was never made to confirm any unlawful or exorbitant Power over his Majesty's Subjects; so I do humbly conceive, that it is no Wicked or Ungodly Oath in any respect. And I hope I am able to make it good in any learned Assembly in Christendom, that this Oath, and all those Canons (then made and here before recited) and every Branch in them, are Just and Orthodox, and Moderate, and most necessary for the present Condition of the Church of England; how unwelcom soever to the present Distemper.

6. He hath traiterously assumed to himself a Papal and Tyrannical Power, both in Ecclesiastical and Temporal Matters, over his Majesty's Subjects in this Realm of England, and other places; to the Disinherison of the Crown, Dishonour of his Majesty, and Derogation of his Supreme Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters. And the said Arch-Bishop claims the King's Ecclesiastical Juris∣diction, as incident to his Episcopal and Archiepiscopal Office in this Kingdom; and doth deny the same to be derived from the Crown of England; which he hath accordingly exercised, to the high contempt of his Royal Majesty, and to the destruction of [* 10.15 divers of] the King's Liege-People in their Persons and Estates.

I have not assumed Papal or Tyrannicl Power, in matters Eccle∣siastical * 10.16 or Temporal; to the least Disinherison, Dishonour, or Derogation of his Majesty's Supream Authority in matters Ecclesi∣astical or Temporal. I never claimed the King's Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, as incident to my Episcopal or Archiepiscopal Office in this Kingdom: Nor did I ever deny, that the exercise of my Ju∣risdiction was derived from the Crown of England. But that which I have said, and do still say, concerning my Office and Calling, is this, That my Order, as a Bishop, and my Power of Jurisdiction, is by Divine Apostolical Right, and unalterable (for ought I know) in the Church of Christ. But all the Power I, or any other Bishop hath to exercise any the least Power, either of Order or Jurisdiction, within this Realm of England, is derived wholly from the Crown: And I conceive it were Treasonable to derive it from any other Power, Foreign or Domestick. And for the Exercise of this Power under his Majesty, I have not used it to the Contempt, but to the great Advantage of his Royal Per∣son,

and to the Preservation, not the Destruction of his People: Both which appear already by the great Distractions, Fears, and Troubles, which all Men are in since my Restraint; and which (for ought I yet see) are like to increase, if God be not exceeding Merci∣ful above our Deserts.

7. That he hath traiterously endeavoured to alter and subvert God's true Religion by Law established in this Realm; and instead thereof to set up Popish Superstition and Idolatry; and to that end hath declared and maintained in Speeches and Printed Books divers Popish Doctrines and Opinions, contrary to the Arti∣cles of Religion established [* 10.17 by Law.] He hath urged and injoyn∣ed divers Popish and Superstitious Ceremonies, without any war∣rant of Law, and hath cruelly persecuted those who have opposed the same, by Corporal Punishment and Imprisonment; and most unjustly vexed others who refused to conform thereto, by Ecclesi∣astical Censures of Excommunication, Suspension, Deprivation, and Degradation; contrary to the Law of the Kingdom.

I never endeavoured to alter or subvert God's true Religion e∣stablished * 10.18 by Law in this Kingdom; or to bring in Romish Super∣stition. Neither have I declared, maintained, or Printed any Po∣pish Doctrine, or Opinion, contrary to the Articles of Religion esta∣blished, or any one of them, either to the end mentioned in this Article, or any other. I have neither urged nor injoyned any Po∣pish or Superstitious Ceremonies without warrant of Law; nor have I cruelly persecuted any Opposers of them. But all that I labour∣ed for in this particular was, that the external Worship of God in this Church, might be kept up in Uniformity and Decency, and in some Beauty of Holiness. And this the rather, because first I found that with the Contempt of the Outward Worship of God, the Inward fell away apace, and Profaneness began boldly to shew it self. And secondly, because I could speak with no conscientious Persons almost, that were wavering in Religion, but the great mo∣tive which wrought upon them to disaffect, or think meanly of the Church of England, was, that the external Worship of God was so lost in the Church (as they conceived it;) and the Churches themselves, and all things in them, suffered to lye in such a base and slovenly Fashion in most places of the Kingdom. These, and no other Considerations, moved me to take so much care as I did of it; which was with a single Eye, and most free from any Ro∣mish Superstition in any thing. As for Ceremonies; all that I in∣joyned, were according to Law. And if any were Superstitious, I injoyned them not. As for those which are so called by some Men, they are no Innovations, but Restaurations of the ancient ap∣proved Ceremonies, in, and from the beginning of the Reforma∣tion, and setled either by Law or Custom; till the Faction of such as now openly and avowedly separate from the Church of England, did oppose them, and cry them down. And for the Censures which I put upon any, I presume they will to all indifferent Men,

which will Understandingly and Patiently hear the Cause, ap∣pear to be Just, Moderate, and according to Law.

8. That for the better advancing of his Traiterous Purpose and Designs, he did abuse the great Power and Trust his Majesty reposed in him; and did intrude upon the Places of divers great Officers, and upon the Right of * 10.19 divers his Majesty's Subjects; where∣by he did procure to himself the Nomination of sundry Persons to Ecclesiastical Dignities, Promotions and Benefices, belonging to his Majesty, and divers of the Nobility, Clergy, and others; and hath taken upon him the † 10.20 Nomination of Chaplains to the King; by which means he hath preferred to his Majesty's Ser∣vice, and to other great Promotions in the Church, such as have been Popishly affected, or other wise Vnsound and Corrupt both in Doctrine and Manners.

I did never wittingly abuse the Power or Trust, which His Ma∣jesty * 10.21 reposed in me. Nor did I ever intrude upon the Places of a∣ny great Officers, or others, to procure to my self the Nomination of Persons Ecclesiastical, to Dignities, Promotions, and Benefices, belonging to His Majesty, the Nobility, or any other. And though here be no Particular named; yet I guess at that which is meant, and will clearly set down the Truth.

His Majesty, some few Years since, assumed to himself, from the Right Honourable the Lord Coventry, the Lord Keeper that then was, and from my Lord Cottington, then Master of the Court of Wards, the disposing of all such Benefices, as came to the King's Gift by Title of Wardship, of what value soever they were. The Reason, which moved His Majesty to do this, was; The Lord Keeper and the Lord Cottington became humble Suitors to him, to end a Contention between them, about the giving of those Benefices, both for their own Quiet, and the Peace of other His Majesties Subjects. For the Course was, when any thing fell void in the Gift of a Ward, he of these two great Officers, which came first to know of the avoidance, gave the Living. This caused great, and oft-times undue, Practising among them which were Suitors for the Bene∣fices. And many times the Broad-Seal, and the Seal of the Court of Wards, bore Date the same Day: And then the Bishop, which Clerk soever he Instituted, was sure to offend the other Lord. And these Lords too many times, by the earnest putting on of Friends, were not well pleased one with another in the Business. Upon this Suit of their own, His Majesty gave a Hearing to these Lords; and in Conclusion of it, took the Disposal of all such Benefices into his own Hands, and (for ought I know) with both their liking and con∣tent. In the disposing of these Benefices to such Men, as had served His Majesty at Sea, or otherwise, I was trusted by the King; and I served him in it faithfully; but proceeded no farther, nor otherwise, than he directed, and commanded me. But I never took the Nomination of any one to my self, or my own disposing. And the Truth of this, as His Majesty knows; so I am Confident, my Lord Cottington, who is yet living, will Witness.

For the Nomination of Chaplains to the King, if I had done it, I think the work was as proper for the Arch-Bishop, as for any Man: Yet because by Ancient Custom it was conceived to be∣long in a great part to the Lord Chamberlain (who was then the Right Honourable the Earl of Pembrook;) I never Named any to His Majesty, but I did fairly acquaint the Lord Chamberlain with it, and desired his favour. But in all my time I never was the means to prefer any Man to His Majesties Service, as a Chaplain, or to any Promotion, whom I knew to be Popishly affected, or any way Cor∣rupt in Doctrine or Manners.

9. He hath for the same Trayterous and Wicked intent, chosen and employed such Men to be his [ * 10.22 own Domestical] Chaplains, whom he knew to be Notoriously disaffected to the Reformed Religion; grosly addicted to Popish Superstition; and Erroneous, and un∣sound both in Judgment and Practice: And to them, or some of them, he hath committed Licensing of Books to be Printed; By which means divers false and Superstitious Books have been Pub∣lished, to the great Scandal of Religion, and to the seducing of many of His Majesties Subjects.

I never chose any Man to be my Chaplain, who I knew, or had * 10.23 good Cause to suspect, was Popishly affected: Nor any that was un∣sound in Judgment or Practice. Nor did I commit the Licensing of Books to any such; but to those only, who I then did, and do still believe, are Orthodox and Religious Divines, and Men of very good Judgment, for that Necessary and great Service. And if they, or any of them, have by negligence, or otherwise suffered any Er∣roneous and Dangerous Books to pass the Press; they must answer both the Church and the State, for whatsoever they have done amiss in that kind; for it is not possible for the Archbishop to perform all those Services in Person: And in the committing of them to my Chaplains, and other Divines of Note, I have done no new thing, but that which my Predecessors have done before me. This I am sure of: I gave often, and express and strict Command to all and every of them, that they should License nothing that was contrary to the Doctrine and Discipline Established in the Church of England, or might Personally or otherwise give Offence or Distaste. And I hope they have Obeyed my Directions: If not, they must Answer for themselves.

10. He hath Trayterously and Wickedly endeavoured to reconcile the Church of England with the Church of Rome: And for the effecting thereof hath Consorted, and Confederated with divers Popish Priests and Jesuits, and hath kept secret intelligence with the Pope of Rome; And by himself, his Agents and Instruments, treated with such as have from thence received Authority and In∣struction. He hath permitted and countenanced a Popish Hie∣rarchy or Ecclesiastical Government to be Established in this Kingdom. By all which Trayterous and Malicious Practices this

Church and Kingdom have been exceedingly indangered, and like to fall under the Tyranny of the Roman See.

The Article is now come, of which I spake before; and in my * 10.24 Answer to which I promised to set down the substance of that which I spake in the Parliament House, to the Lords, when this General Charge was brought up against me; and I shall some∣what inlarge it, yet without any Change of the Grounds upon which I then stood. And now I shall perform that Promise. And I shall be of all other least afraid to answer all that is here said con∣cerning Religion. For my Heart (I bless God for it) is sound that way, to the uttermost of my Knowledge; and I think I do well understand my Principles. And my Old Master Aristotle hath taught me long since, that † 10.25 Qui se bene habent ad divina, audaci∣ores sunt; they which are well and setledly composed in things pertaining to God, (that is, in Religion) are much the bolder by it: And this not only against Slanders and Imputations cast upon Men for this, but in all other Accidents of the World, what ever they be.

And surely I may not deny it: I have ever wished, and hearti∣ly Prayed for, the Unity of the whole Church of Christ, and the Peace and Reconciliation of torn and divided Christendom. But I did never desire a Reconciliation, but such as might stand with Truth, and preserve all the Foundations of Religion en∣tire. For I have Learned from a | 10.26 Prime School-Man of their own; That every Vnion doth not perfect the true Reason, or Defini∣tion of that which is good; but that only, upon which depends, Esse perfectum Rei, the perfect Essence of that thing. So that in this particular, if the substance of Christian Religion be not perfected by any Vnion; that Vnion it self cannot have in it Rationem boni, the true Being and Nature of Good. And therefore I did never desire, that England and Rome should meet together, but with for∣saking of Errour and Superstition; especially such as grate upon and frett the Foundations of Religion. But were this done, God forbid, but I should Labour for a Re∣conciliation; if some Tenets of the Roman Party on the one side, and some deep and imbittered Disaffecti∣ons on the other, have not made it impossible; as I much doubt they have. But that I shou'd practice with Rome, as now it stands, and to that end should confederate with Priests and Jesuits; or hold secret in∣telligence with the Pope, or treat with him, or any * 10.27 Instruments Authorised by him, or by any Agents, is utterly untrue: As I hope may fully appear by that which follows. * 10.28 vid. init. libri.

And First, (in hope that they which have observed my Life in times past, will give me Credit in this time of my Affliction) I do here make my solemn Protestation, in the Presence of God, and this great Court, that I am Innocent of any thing, greater or less, that is charged in this Article, or any part of it. And I do here offer my Corporal Oath (Please it the Lords to give it me) in the strictest form that any Oath can be conceived; that I

am wholly Innocent of this Charge. And let nothing be tendred against me but Truth, and I do challenge whatsoever is between Heaven and Hell to come in and Witness whatsoever they can against me in this Particular. For all that I have feared in all this Charge against me, is not Guilt, but Subornation of Perjury: Against which Innocency it self cannot be safe. And I have found the deadly Hatred of some Men against me to be such, as that, though I cannot suspect the House of Commons of such an Irreligious Baseness, yet I have great Cause to suspect some par∣ticular Men, which I see make no Conscience of the Way, so they may compass their End.

Secondly; Should I practice (be it with whom you will) to su∣perinduce Romish Tyranny and Superstition over the true Religion * 10.29 established in England, I have taken a very wrong way to it. For I have hindred as many from going to the Roman Party, and have reduced as many from it; and some of great Quality, and some of great Learning and Judgment; as I believe any Divine in England hath done. And is this the way to bring in Romish Superstition, to reduce Men from it? Or is this the Reward from the State, which Men must look for, that have done these Services?

Thirdly; The Book, which I have Written against Mr. Fisher the Jesuit, must of Necessity either acquit me of this Calumny, or proclaim me a Villain to the World. And I hope, I have so * 10.30 lived, as that Men have not that Opinion of me; sure I am, I have not deserved it. And had this Book of mine been written accord∣ing to the Garb of the Time, fuller of Railing than Reason; a Learned Jesuit would have Laughed at it and me; and a Learn∣ed Protestant might have thought I had Written it only to con∣ceal my self and my Judgment in those Difficulties. But being Written in the way it is, I believe no Romanist will have much Cause to Joy at it, or to think me a Favourer of their Cause. And since I am thus put to it, I will say thus much more. This Book of mine is so Written (by God's great blessing upon me) as that whensoever the Church of England (as they are growing towards it apace) shall depart from the Grounds which I have therein laid, she shall never be able, before any Learned and dis∣ingaged Christian, to make good her Difference with, and her Se∣paration from, the Church of Rome. And let no Man think I speak Pride or Vanity in this. For the Outrages, which have been a∣gainst me, force me to say it; and I am confident, future times will make it good; unless Profaneness break in, and over-run the whole Kingdom; which is not a little to be feared.

Fourthly; I must confess, I am in this Particular most unfortu∣nate. For many Recusants in England, and many of that Party beyond the Seas, think I have done them and their Cause more * 10.31 Harm, than they which have seemed more fierce against them. And I doubt not, but I shall be able to prove, that I have been ac∣counted beyond Sea, the greatest Enemy to them that ever sat in my Place. And shall I suffer on both sides? Shall I be ac∣counted an Enemy by one part for opposing the Papist; and accused for a Traytor by the other for Favouring and Complying with

them? Well; If I do suffer thus, 'tis but because Truth usually lies between two Extreams, and is beaten by both: (As the poor Church of England is, at this day, by the Papist and the Separatist.) But in this, and all things else, in despight of all Malice, Truth shall be either my Protection from Suffering, or my Comfort while I suffer: And by God's gracious assistance I shall never depart from it, but continue at the Apostle's Ward, 2 Cor. 13. Nihil possum contra veritatem, I can do * 10.32 nothing against the Truth; and for it, I hope God will enable me patiently to suffer any thing.

Fifthly; If I had practised with the Pope, or his Agents, for the * 10.33 alteration of Religion in England; surely I must have used many great and dextrous Instruments to compass my end. And in a bu∣siness of so great Consequence, Difficulty and Danger, to all that should have a Hand, nay but a Finger in it, no Man would venture to meddle without good pay. And 'tis well known, that I have filled no Purse, nor laid up any store, to set ill Instruments on work, upon that or any other unworthy design.

Sixthly; I am a Man in Years, great Years for a Man so loaded * 10.34 with business as I have been all my Life: And it cannot be long, be∣fore I must go to give God Almighty an account of all my Actions. And whatsoever the Malignity of the Time may put upon me; yet they which know me and my ways, will easily believe, that I have not so little Conscience, or care of my Soul, as to double with God to my very Death. Nay, could I have doubled thus, I could easily have seen a way through all this difficulty; and how to have been as gracious with the People, as any, even the worst, of my Predecessours. But I have ever held, that the lowest depth of Baseness, to frame Re∣ligion to serve turns; and to be carried about with every wind of vain Doctrine, to serve and please other Mens Fancies, and not a Man's own either Understanding or Conscience.

Seventhly; I think the greatest Enemies I have, are of Opinion, * 10.35 that if I would have turned to the Roman Party, especially if I would have been such an active Instrument for them, as this Article would make me, I might have been welcome to them, and should have been rewarded by them; at least, that I should have been made able to live in Credit, if not in Honour. And this being granted; I would fain know, what could stay me here, save only my Conscience in and to the Truth. Surely, not any care of Wife and Children, for I have them not: And as this Storm drives upon me, I most humbly and heartily bless God for it, that I have not any of these Clogs to hang about me. Not the Greatness of my Place: For if in this pre∣sent Tumble, any thing be put either upon it or me, that a knowing Conscience ought to check at, the World shall soon see, how little I value Canterbury in regard of Conscience. Not the Honour of my place neither: For if I stood upon that, I cannot but see how Malice hath laid that in the Dust, or lower if it may be. And can any Man think then, that I would indure so much hatred, and so many base Libels, as have filled the Streets against me, and such bitter revilings of me in Print, as the Gall of some Pens have cast upon me, when I might go live elsewhere with Content and Reputation? Sure no∣thing but Conscience could stay me here in such a Condition. Not

the Wealth to be gotten in my place: For the Arch-Bishoprick of Canter∣bury is far short of the value put upon it, (according as I have given a faithful Account to his Majesty.) And if it were of never so great a value, I have made it manifest to the World, that Wealth is not my aim. For whatsoever benefit hath accrewed to me, over and above my necessary and decent Expences, I have refunded back upon the Poor, or the Publick, or the Church from whence I had it; as in better times Church-Men were wont to do. So there could be no external motive to work upon me, to make me stay here, if my Con∣science went along with Rome. And my Conscience being not that way set, (as most certainly it is not) no Man can so much as proba∣bly think, I should with hazard of my Life and Honour, and all things, practise the Change of Religion, and that against my Con∣science.

Eighthly; This scandalous false Report, that I should Negotiate * 10.36 with the Pope, and with Rome, for the Change of Religion in this Kingdom, was first spread by the Scots, who * 10.37 shamelesly Printed it in these words; Canterbury did Negotiate with Rome, about the frame of our Service-Book and Canons, &c. Now if this be false, why did they Print it? And if it be true, why do they desert it? It comes a great deal more home, than double all else they have said against me. And yet it seems, when they had considered better of it, and found they could not make it good, they left it quite out of those Articles which they preferred into the Parliament of England against me. And I presume, they would never have left that out which they had published in Print to the World, could they have gotten any shew of Proof. Immediately upon the arrival of this Pamphlet in England, Court, City, and Country grew presently full of it; that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury had Negotiated with Rome about the alteration of Religion. And since they have thus Defamed me, and that in Print, I do challenge Mr. Alexander Henderson, (who doubtless was either sole Author of that Remonstrance, or had a great hand in it) either to make it good against me; or by like Pub∣lick acknowledgment of it in Print, give me satisfaction for so foul a Calumny; or to answer me, when I shall not fail to challenge him for it, at the Bar of Christ.

Lastly; I received Information out of Holland, when his Majesty * 10.38 was last in the North, that there was a Plot laid of a dangerous Trea∣son against his Majesty's Life: That this Treason was plotted here in England, by Signior Con and his Complices; and that these Contrivers took a deep dislike against me, because they could not get within me, nor make me pliable to their Projects about Religion; and that they were so angry with me for it, as that they resolved my Life must be first taken away, before they could hope to get their Will of the King. This Advertisement came to me from one, that professed he was in the Bosom of Con, and knew all the Secrets of his Imploy∣ments hither. This business was first made known under an Oath of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (as I remember) to Sir William Boswell, his Majesty's Agent in Holland; and it was ordered between them, that his Papers should be sent over sealed to me, as they were, and that by an Express; and a Charge to deliver them to no Hand but mine, as he tendred the

King's safety, in regard so many Great Men were (as he said) in the Treason. I sent away these Letters and Papers to his Majesty's own Hands; and received direction, what Answer I should give to Sir William Boswell. At his Majesty's return, at the beginning of this Par∣liament, he named a Committee of Lords to hear this business, and commanded me to bring the Papers thither. This I did, and they were all Read before his Majesty and the Committee. Sir William Boswell's * 10.39 Letters and the other Papers are yet all in my Hands; but it seems, the Particulars could not all be got out. Now this is a hard straight, into which I am cast. The Pope's Agent (as 'tis said) plots my Death on the one side, because I will not be wrought upon to help to bring in the Roman Superstition; and the Parliament on the other side Ar∣ticles to overthrow me, out of a Jealousie that I go about to bring it in. So that I am in the Prophet David's Case, Ps. 31. For I (also) have heard the Blasphemy of the Multitude, and fear is on every side, while they conspire together against me, and take their Counsel to take away my Life. But my hope hath been (and is) in thee, O Lord.

And for the latter part of this Article, it is utterly untrue, that ever I either permitted or countenanced any Popish Hierarchy or Ecclesiastical Government to be Established in this Kingdom: And if any such be Established, it is more than I know, to this Instant. But this I am sure of, and can prove, that when the Queen's Almoner was to be made a Bishop, I laboured as much against it as I could: Whereupon he delayed the taking of his Bishoprick upon him, for a good time. And when divers Offers were made on his behalf, and the Queen grew earnest for his Preferment; I was called again by his Majesty, in the presence of a Secretary of State, and commanded to speak my Judgment and my Conscience. And I did so: And de∣clared clearly against any Bishops of the Roman Party his coming into the Kingdom, to reside, or exercise any Jurisdiction here. And I gave then for my Reason, the very self-same which is since Pub∣lished by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Commons in their Remonstrance; A different and * 10.40 inconsistent Church within a Church, which ever brought hazard upon the State. And in this Judgment I persisted, and never per∣mitted, much less countenanced, any Popish Hierarchy to settle in this Kingdom; but hindred it, by all the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and means I could.

11. He in his own Person, and his Suffragans, Visitors, Surrogats, Chancellors, or other Officers, by his Command, have caused di∣vers Learned, Pious, and Orthodox * 10.41 Preachers of Gods Word, to be Silenced, Suspended, Deprived, Degraded, Excommunicated, or otherwise grieved and vexed, without any just and lawful Cause; whereby, and by divers other Means, he hath hindred the Preaching of God's Word, caused divers of his Majesty's Loyal Subjects to forsake the Kingdom, and increased and cherished Ignorance and Prophaneness amongst the People: That so he might the better faci∣litate the way to the effecting of his own Wicked and Trayterous † 10.42 Designs, of altering and corrupting the True Religion here Esta∣blished.

I have neither by my self, nor by my Command to my Officers, * 10.43

Silenced, Suspended, Deprived, Degraded, or Excommunicated a∣ny Learned, Pious, and Orthodox Preachers, nor any other, but upon Just Cause Proved in Court, and according to Law. And I think it will appear, that as few (be the Cause never so Just) have been Suspended or Deprived in my Diocess, as in any Diocess in England. Nor have I by these Suspensions, hindred the Preach∣ing of Gods Word, but of Schism and Sedition; as now appears plainly by the Sermons frequently made in London, since the time of Liberty given and taken since this Parliament [first began.] Nor have I caused any of his Majesty's Subjects to forsake the Kingdom; but they forsook it of themselves, being Separatists from the Church of England; as is more than manifest to any Man, that will but consider what kind of Persons went to New-England.

And whereas in their late * 10.44 Remonstrance they say; The high Com∣mission grew to such excess of Sharpness and Severity, as was not much less than the Romish Inquisition; and yet in many Cases by the Arch-Bishops Power was made much more heavy, being assisted and strengthned by Authority of the Council-Table. I was much troubled at it, that such an Imputation from so great a Body should be fastned on me. And therefore first I considered, that my Predecessors were all or most of them strengthned with the same Authority of the Council-Ta∣ble, that I was: And therefore if I did use that Authority to worse ends, or in a worse manner, than they did, I was the more to blame. Therefore to satisfie my self and others in this parti∣cular, I did in the next place cause a diligent search to be made in the Acts of that Court (which can deceive no Man) what Sus∣pensions, Deprivations or other Punishments had past in the Seven Years of my Time before my Commitment. Then I compared them with every of the Three Seven Years of my immediate Predecessor (for so long he sat, and somewhat over, and was in great esteem with the House of Commons all his Time) and I find more by Three Suspended, Deprived, or Degraded, in every Se∣ven Years of his Time, than in the Seven Years of my Time, so cryed out upon (as you see) for Sharpness and Severity, even to the equasling of that Commission almost to the Romish Inquisition. So safe a thing it is for a Man 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Imbarque himself into a Potent Faction; and so hard for any other Man, be he never so intire, to withstand its Violence.

12. He hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 endeavoured to cause Division and Discord be∣tween the Church of England and other Reformed Churches: And to that end hath Suppressed and Abrogated the Priviledges and Immunities, which have been by his Majesty and his Roy∣al Ancestors granted to the French and Dutch Churches in this Kingdom; And divers other ways hath expressed his Malice and Disaffiction to these Churches; that so by such † 10.45 Disunion the Papists might have more advantage for the Overthrow and Extripation of both.

I never endeavoured to set Division between the Church of Eng∣land * 10.46 and other Reformed Churches: And if I had so done, it had

been a very Unchristian and unworthy Act; but yet no Treason, as I conceive. And for the Priviledges and Immunities, grant∣ed by his Majesty, and his Royal Progenitors, to the French and Dutch Churches in this Kingdom; I did not seek to Suppress or Abrogate any of them, which kept Conform to their first Tolera∣tion here; much less did I labour by any Disunion betwixt them and us to advantage the Papists, to the overthrow of both. But this I found, that they did not use their Priviledges with that Gratitude and Fairness to his Majesty, the State, and Church of England, as they ought to have done. And hereupon I acquaint∣ed his Majesty and the Lords, in full and open Council, with what I conceived concerning that business. As Namely,

1. That their living as they did, and standing so strictly to their own Discipline, wrought upon the Party in England, which were addicted to them, and made them more averse, than otherwise they would have been, to the present Government of the Church of England.

2. That by this means they lived in England, as if they were a kind of God's Israel in Egypt, to the great Dishonour of the Church of England, to which at first they fled for Shelter against Persecution. And in that time of their Danger, the Church of England was in their Esteem not only a true but a glorious Church. But by this Favour, which that Church received, it grew up and incroached upon us, till it became a Church within a Church, and a kind of State within a State. And this I ever held dangerous, how small beginning soever it had: And that upon two main Reasons. The one, because I find the Wisdom of God against it. For he says plainly to his prime People, One Law, (and especially for Divine Worship) shall be to him that is home-born, and to the Stranger that Sojourns among you, Exod. 12. And the other, because * 10.47 I find the Wisdom of this State against it. For this Parliament, in their Remonstrance, give the self-same Reason against the Papists, * 10.48 but must hold good against all Sects that labour to make strong and inlarge themselves. The Words are these, † 10.49 Another State moulded within this State, independent in Government, contrary in Interest and Affection, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 corrupting the Ignorant or Negligent Professors of our Religion, and closely Vniting and Combining themselves against such as are sound, in this posture waiting for an Opportunity, &c. And the Words are as true of the one Faction, as the other; and I ever pressed the Argument alike against both; as I can prove by good Witness, if need be. And I pray God, this Faction, too little fear∣ed, and too much nourished among us, have not now found the Opportunity waited for.

3. That they live here, and enjoy all freedom, and yet for the most part scorn so much as to learn the Language, or to converse with any, more than for advantage of Bargaining. And will take no Englishman to be their Apprentice, nor teach them any of their Manufactures: which I did then, and do still, think most unreasonable.

4. That for Religion, if after so many descents of their Children born in the Land, and so Native Subjects, these Children of theirs

should refuse to Pray and Communicate with the Church of England, into whose bosom their Parents fled at first for succour; I thought then, and do still, that no State could with safety, or would in Wis∣dom, endure it. And this concerning their Children, was all that was desired by me: As appears by * 10.50 the Act, which my Vicar Gene∣ral made concerning those Churches at Canterbury, Sandwitch, and Maidstone, in my Diocess, and † 10.51 the Publication of this Act in their Congregations, by their own Ministers, in this Form following.

I am commanded to signifie unto you, that it is not his Majesty's in∣tent, nor of the Council of State, to dissolve our Congregations. And to that end, his Majesty is content to permit the Natives of the first degree, to continue Members of our Congregations, as before. But the Natives in this Church, after the first descent, are injoyned to obey my Lord Arch-Bishop his Injunction; which is to conform themselves to the English Discipline and Liturgy, every one in his Parish; without inhibiting them notwithstanding, from resorting sometimes to our Assemblies. And my Lord Arch-Bishop of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 means notwithstanding; that the said Natives shall conti∣nue to contribute to the Maintenance of the Ministry and Poor of this Church, for the better subsisting thereof: And promiseth to obtain an Order from the Council, if need be, and they require it, to maintain them in their Manufactures, against those which would trouble them by Informations.

Now that which I injoyned the French and Dutch Churches, was to a syllable all one with this, in all parts of my Province where these Churches resided: As at South-hampton, and Norwich. And I have a * 10.52 Letter to shew, full of thanks, from the Ministers and Elders of the French and Walloon-Churches at Norwich. All which is far from an endeavour to suppress any just Priviledges and Immunities, which these Churches had in England, or ought to have in any well-governed Kingdom.

And since this time I have not only seen, but gotten, the very Original Letter of Queen Elizabeth of Happy Memory, written to the Lord Treasurer Pawlet, specifying what Order she would should be taken with, and for, these Churches. The Letter is Signed with her Majesty's own Hand and Signet; and gives them not half so much Liberty, I do not say as they take, but as I have been ever most con∣tent to give them. For the Queen in these Letters allows them nothing contrary to her Laws; and therefore nothing but our Li∣turgy in their own Language, not another Form of Divine Service and Discipline, much different from it. This was the Wisdom of those times, which I pray God we may follow. The Queen's Letter follows in these words.

Elizabeth.

RIght Trusty and right well-beloved Cozen, we greet you well.

Whereas in the time of our Brother, and Sister also, the Church of the late Augustine Fryars was appointed to the use of all the Strangers reparing to the City of London, for to have there∣in

Divine Service; considering, that by an Universal Order, all the rest of the Churches have the Divine Service in the English Tongue, for the better edifying of the People, which the Stran∣gers Born understand not. Our Pleasure is, that you shall Assign and Deliver the said Church, and all things thereto belonging, to the Reverend Father in God the Bishop of London, to be ap∣pointed to such Curates and Ministers as he shall think good, to serve from time to time in the same Churches, both for daily Divine Service, and for Administration of the Sacraments, and Preaching of the Gospel: so as no Rite nor Use be therein observ∣ed, contrary or derogatory to our Laws. And these our Letters shall be your sufficient Warrant and Discharge in that behalf.

Given under Our Signet

at Our Palace of Westminster the ...... of February, the Second Year of our Reign.

To our Trusty and right well beloved Cousin and Counsellor, the Marquess of Winchester, High Treasurer of England.

13. He hath maliciously and Trayterously Plotted, and endeavoured to stir up War and Enmity betwixt his Majesty's two Kingdoms of England and Scotland; and to that purpose hath laboured to introduce into the Kingdom of Scotland divers Innovations both in Religion and Government, all or the most part tending to Popery and Superstition; to the great Grievance and Discontent of his Majesty's Subjects of that Nation. And for their refu∣sing to submit to such Innovations, he did trayterously Advise his Majesty to Subdue them by Force of Arms: And by his own Authority and Power, contrary to Law, did procure sun∣dry of his Majesty's Subjects, and inforced the Clergy of this Kingdom, to contribute toward the Maintenance of that War. And when his Majesty with much Wisdom and Justice had made a Pacification betwixt the two Kingdoms; the said Arch-Bishop did presumptuously censure that Pacification, as Dishonou∣rable to his Majesty; and [by his Counsel and Endeavours] so in∣censed * 11.1 his Majesty against his said Subjects of Scotland, that he did thereupon, by Advice of the said Arch-Bishop, enter into an offensive War against them, to the great 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of his Majesty's Per∣son, and his Subjects of both Kingdoms.

I did not Endeavour to stir up War between his Majesty's two * 11.2 Kingdoms of England and Scotland; but my Counsels were for Peace: As may appear by the Counsel which I gave at Theobalds in the beginning of these unhappy Differences. For there my Coun∣sel only put a stay upon the Business, in hope his Majesty might have a better Issue without, than with a War. And if I were mistaken in this Counsel, yet it agreed well with my Profession and with the Cause, which was differences in Religion, which I conceived might better be composed by Ink than by Blood. And

I think it cannot easily be forgotten that I gave this Counsel: For my Lord the Earl of Arundel opposed me openly at the Table then, and said my Grounds would deceive me. And my Lord the Earl of Holland came to me, so soon as we were risen from Counsel, and was pleased to say to me, that I had done my self and my Calling a great deal of Right, and the King my Master the best Service, that ever I did him in my Life. And Mr. Pa∣trick * 11.3 Male, of his Majesty's Bed-chamber, when he heard what I had done, came and gave me a great deal of Thanks in the Name of that Nation.

Nor did I labour to introduce into the Kingdom of Scotland a∣ny Innovations in Religion or Government: Neither do all, or the most part, or indeed any of those pretended Innovations tend to Popery or Superstition, as hath before been sufficiently proved. Neither did I, upon their refusal to submit to these, Advise his Ma∣jesty to Subdue them by force of Arms, but the Counsels which I gave were open, either at the Committee, or the Council-Table. Neither did I by my own Power and Authority, contrary to Law, procure any of his Majesty's Subjects, or inforce the Clergy of Eng∣land to contribute to the maintenance of that War: But the Sub∣sidies which were given to his Majesty at that time, were given freely, and in open Convocation, and without any practice of my self, or any other; as appears by what I have formerly laid down.

But because so much noise hath been made against me both in the Scottish Charge before answered, and in this Article about Po∣pish Innovations in that Service-Book, and that I laboured the in∣troducing both of it and them: I think it fit, if not necessary, to set down briefly the Story what was done, and what I did, and by what Command in all that Business. And it follows.

Dr. John Maxwel, the late Bishop of Ross, came to me from his Majesty, it was during the time of a great and dangerous Fever, under which I then laboured: It was in the Year 1629. in August or September, which come that time is † 11.4 Thirteen Years since. The Cause of his coming was to speak with me about a Liturgy for Scotland. At his coming I was so extream Ill, that I saw him not. And had Death (which I then expected daily, as did my Friends and Physicians also) seized on me, I had not seen this hea∣vy time. After this, when I was able to sit up, he came to me again, and told me it was his Majesty's Pleasure, that I should receive Instructions from some Bishops of Scotland concerning a Liturgy for that Church; and that he was imployed from my Lord the Arch-Bishop of St. Andrews, and other Prelates there a∣bout it. I told him I was clear of Opinion, that if his Majesty would have a Liturgy setled there, it were best to take the Eng∣lish Liturgy without any variation, that so the same Service-Book might be established in all his Majesty's Dominions: Which I did then, and do still think would have been a great Happiness to this State, and a great Honour and Safety to Religion. To this he replyed, that he was of a contrary Opinion, and that not he only, but the Bishops of that Kingdom thought their Country∣men

would be much better satisfied, it a Liturgy were framed by their own Clergy, than to have the English Liturgy put upon them; yet he added, that it might be according to the Form of our Eng∣lish Service-Book. I answered to this, that if this were the Reso∣lution of my Brethren the Bishops of Scotland, I would not en∣tertain so much as Thoughts about it, till I might by God's Bles∣sing have Health and Opportunity to wait upon his Majesty, and receive his farther directions from himself.

When I was able to go abroad, I came to his Majesty, and re∣presented all that had passed. His Majesty avowed the sending of Dr. Maxwell to me, and the Message sent by him. But then he inclined to my Opinion, to have the English Service without any alteration to be established there: And in this Condition I held that Business, for two if not three Years at least. Afterwards, the Scottish Bishops still pressing his Majesty that a Liturgy Framed by themselves, and in some few things different from ours, would re∣lish better with their Countrymen. They at last prevailed with his Majesty, to have it so, and carried it against me, notwith∣standing all I could say or do to the contrary. Then his Majesty Commanded me to give the Bishops of Scotland my best Assist∣ance in this Way and Work. I delayed as much as I could with my Obedience; and when nothing would serve, but it must go on; I confess I was then very serious, and gave them the best help I could. But wheresoever I had any doubt, I did not on∣ly acquaint his Majesty with it, but Writ down most of the A∣mendments or Alterations in his Majesty's Presence. And I do ve∣rily believe, there is no one thing in that Book, which may not stand with the Conscience of a right Good Protestant. Sure I am his Majesty approved them all; and I have his Warrant under his Royal Hand for all that I did about that Book. And to the end the Book may be extant, and come to the view of the Chri∣stian World, and their Judgment of it be known; I have caused it to be exactly Translated into Latin, and, if right be done, it shall be Printed with this History. This was that which I did concerning the Matter and Substance of this Service-Book.

As for the way of Introducing it, I ever advised the Bishops, both in his Majesty's Presence, and at other times, both by Word and by Writing, that they would look carefully to it, and be sure to do nothing about it but what should be agreeable to the Laws of that Kingdom: And that they should at all times be sure to take the Advice of the Lords of his Majesty's Council in that Kingdom, and govern themselves and their Proceedings accord∣ingly. Which Course if they have not followed, that can no way reflect upon me, who have both in this, and all things else, been as careful of their Laws as any Man who is a Stranger to them could be. And in a Letter of mine after my last coming out of Scotland, thus I wrote to the late Reverend Arch-Bishop of S. An∣drews, Septemb. 30. 1633. concerning the Liturgy: That whether that of England, or another were resolved on, yet 〈◊〉〈◊〉 should pro∣ceed Circumspectly; Because his Majesty had no intendment to do any thing, but that which was according to Honour and Justice, and the

Laws of that Kingdom: And a Copy of this Letter I have yet by me to shew: And for the truth of this Narration, I know His Majesty, (and my Lord of Ross) himself will avow it.

And here I take leave to acquaint the Reader, That this was no new Conceit of His Majesty, to have a Liturgy framed, and Canons made for the Church of Scotland: For he followed his Royal Father King James his Example and Care therein, who took Order for both at the * 11.5 Assembly of Perth, An. 1618.

And now to return again to the Article. There is one Charge more in it, and that's concerning the † 11.6 Pacification made the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Year. The Article says I did Censure it as Dishonourable; and Advise for a new War: But I did neither. That which I spake, was openly at the Council-Table, and in His Majesty's presence: And it was this. There arose a debate at the Table, about these Affairs, and the Pacification; and I said that I did often wish from my Heart that His Majesty had kept the Army which he had at Barwick toge∣ther but Eight or Ten Days longer: And that I did not doubt, but that if he had so done, he might have had more Honourable Con∣ditions of his Scottish Subjects. This I said, and more or otherwise I said not; and whosoever shall relate them otherwise, forgets Truth. Now to say, that His Majesty might have had more Honourable Conditions, doth not infer, that the Pacification then made was up∣on Dishonourable Conditions; but only upon less Honourable than it might have been. And I had great Reason to observe my own words, and remember them; because I saw some Lords at the Table touched with them, perhaps in their own Particulars.

Nor was I alone in this Judgment: For my Lord the Earl of Hol∣land, though he then said nothing at the Council-Table; yet at his first return from Barwick, his Lordship did me the Honour to come and see me at Lambeth: And in the Gallery there, while we were dis∣coursing of the Affairs in the North; of himself he used these words to me: That His Majesty did too suddenly dissolve his Army there; indeed so suddenly, that every body wondered at it: And that for his part he was so sorry, especially for the dismissing of all the Horse; (which he said were as good as any were in Christendom:) And farther, that he offer'd His Majesty to keep one Thousand of them for a Year at his own and his Friends Charge, till the King might see all things well setled a∣gain in Scotland. By which it is apparent, that in his Lordships Judg∣ment things might have been better, had not that Army been so sud∣denly dissolved: And I hope it was no Sin in me to wish the best success, and the most Honour to the King's Affairs.

Now that which moved me to say thus at the Council-Table, was this. The last Article in the Pacification was, To restore to every one of His Majesties Subjects their Liberties, Lands, Houses, Goods and Means whatsoever, taken and detained from them by whatsoever means since the aforesaid time: But within two Days (or three at the most) after the Pacification agreed upon, and concluded, the Lord Lindsay made an open and publick Protestation either in the Camp at Dunns, or at the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in Edenburgh, or both, that no Clergy Man, his Goods or Means † 11.7 was included in the Pacification: Which yet expresses every one of His Majesties Subjects. And this, I did then conceive,

(and do still) was a very bold audacious Act of that Lord, very injurious to the Poor Clergy, and not so Honourable for the King. And this made me say, and I say it still, His Majesty might have had more Honourable Conditions, and his Pacification better kept, had he continued his Army but Eight or Ten Days longer: For in all probability the Scots could not so long have continued their Army together. And I did farther conceive, that by this Act of the Lord Lindsay in protesting, and by the Scots making his Protesta∣tion good against the Clergy, there was a direct and manifest Breach of the Pacification on their behalf. And then, though I saw no Reason why the King should be bound to keep that mutual Pacification, which they had broken; (for a Knot must be fast at both ends, or loose at both:) Yet remembring my Calling, I did not Incense His Majesty against his Subjects in Scotland; nor did hereupon advise the undertaking of an Offensive War against them; nor ever give other Counsel in this Particular, than what I openly gave before the Lords, either in the Committee, or at the Board: And there my Concurring in Opinion with all the rest of the Lords, was (I hope) no other, nor no greater fault, than in them, though I be thus singled out.

And for the Pacification, I shall say thus much more: Though I could with all my Heart have wished it more Honourable for the King, and more express and safe for my Brethren of the Clergy; yet all things Considered, which were put unto me, I did approve it. For before the Pacification was fully agreed upon, His Majesty did me the Honour to write unto me all with his own Hand: In this Letter He Commanded me, all delay set apart, to send him my Judg∣ment plainly and freely what I thought of the Pacification; which was then almost ready for conclusion. I in all Humility approved of the Pacification, as it was then put to me; and sent my Answer presently back, and my Reasons why I approved it: Little think∣ing then, but that my Poor Brethren the Bishops of Scotland should have had all restored unto them, according to the Article of the Pa∣cification, before recited; or at least for so long, till they had defend∣ed themselves and their Calling, and their Cause, in a free General Assembly, and as free a Parliament. Now this was ever * 11.8 assumed to me should be done; and to procure this, was all which the Bishops seemed to desire of me. And for the Truth of this I appeal to His Majesty, to whom I writ it: And to my Lord Marquess Hamil∣ton, to whom the King shewed my Letter, (As my Lord Marquess himself told me at his return.) And to Dr. Juxon Lord Bishop of London, then Lord High Treasurer of England; to whom I shewed my Letter before I sent it away. And this is all I did concerning the Pacification.

14. That to preserve himself from being questioned for these and o∣ther his Trayterous Courses, he hath laboured to subvert the Rights of Parliament, and the Ancient Course of Parliamentary proceed∣ings; And by false and malicious Slanders to incense His Majesty against Parliaments. By which Words, Counsels, and Actions, he hath Trayterously, and contrary to his Allegiance, laboured to

alienate the Hearts of the Kings Liege People from his Ma∣jesty, to set a Division between them, and to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and Destroy his Majesty's Kingdoms. For which they do impeach him of High Treason against our Soveraign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity.

I did never Labour to subvert the rights of Parliaments, or the an∣tient * 11.9 Course of their Proceedings: And not doing it at all, I could not do it to keep my self from being questioned. Much less did I by any malitious Slanders, or any other way, incense his Majesty against Parliaments, nor ever thereby labour to alienate the Hearts of the King's Liege People from his Majesty, nor to set any Division between them, or to Ruine and Destroy his Majesty's King∣doms. And am no way Guilty in the least Degree of High Trea∣son against our Soveraign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity.

It is true, I have been much and very often grieved, to see the great distractions which have happened of later Years, both in King James his time, and since, about the Breaches which have been in Parliaments. And I have as heartily wished, and to my Power endeavoured, that all Parliaments which have been call∣ed, might come to their Happy Issue, and end in the Contentment of the King and his People. And I have ever been of Opinion, and I shall Live and Dye in it; That there can be no true and setled Happiness in this or any other Kingdom, but by a fair and Legal, as well as Natural Agreement between the King and his People; and that, according to the Course of England, this A∣greement is in a great proportion founded upon Parliaments. Now Parliaments (as I humbly conceive) can never better preserve their own Rights, than by a free and honourable way, to keep up the Greatness and Power of their King; that so he may be the better able, against all Forreign Practices, to keep up the Honour as well as the Safety of the Nation; both which usually stand or fall to∣gether. And if any particular Mens Miscarriages have distemper∣ed any Parliaments, and caused or occasioned a Breach; I have (upon the Grounds before laid) been as sorry as any Man for it, but never contributed any thing to it. And I hope it is not Criminal to think, that Parliaments may sometimes, in some things, by Mis∣information or otherwise, be mistaken, as well as other Courts.

This in conclusion I clearly think, Parliaments are the best pre∣servers of the Ancient Laws and Rights of this Kingdom. But this I think too, that Corruptio optimi est Pessima; that no Corruption is so bad, so foul, so dangerous, as that which is of the best. And therefore, if Parliaments should at any time be misguided by practice of a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Party; nothing then so dangerous as such a 〈◊〉〈◊〉; because the highest Remedy being Corrupted, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 sure Redress left at all. And we had a lamentable 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of such a Parliament, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hen. 4. was set up. For that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was the Cause of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Civil Wars, and that great 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Blood which followed soon after in this Kingdom. God make us mindful and careful to prevent the like.

The said Commons do farther aver, that the said William Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, during the time, in which the * 11.10 Treasons and Offences afore-named were Committed, hath been a Bishop, or Arch-Bishop in this Realm of England, one of the King's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Matters, and † 11.11 of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council: And that he hath taken an Oath for his Faithful discharge of the said Office of Counsellor, and hath likewise taken the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance. And the said Commons by Protestation, saving to themselves the Liberty of Exhibiting at any time hereafter, any other Ac∣cusation or Impeachment against the said Arch-Bishop, and also of replying to the Answers that the said Arch-Bishop shall make unto the said Articles, or to any of them; and of offering far∣ther Proof also of the Premises, or any of them [| 11.12 or of any other Impeachment or Accusation that shall be exhibited by them] as the Case shall, according to the Course of Parliaments, require; do pray that the said Arch-Bishop may be put to an∣swer to all and every the Premises; and that such Proceedings, Examinations, Tryal and Judgment may be upon every of them had and used, as is agreeable to Law and Justice.

This is the Conclusion of these general Articles then put up a∣gainst me; and is added only for Form, and so requires no Answer from me. But in the Close, they of the House of Commons make two Petitions to the Lords; and both were granted, as 'tis fit they should. The one is, That they may add farther Accusations, or far∣ther Proof of this, as the Course of Parliaments require. And I re∣fuse no such either Accusation or Proof; so the due Course of Par∣liaments be kept. The other is, That there may be such Proceedings, Examinations, Tryal and Judgment, as is agreeable to Law and Justice. And such Proceedings my Innocency can never decline. But whe∣ther the Proceedings hitherto against me, be according to the Antient Proceedings in Parliament, or to Law and Justice, I leave Posterity to judge: Since they which here seem so earnestly to call for Examinations, Tryal and Judgment, have not to * 11.13 this Day proceeded to any Tryal, nay, have not so much as brought up a∣ny particular Charge against me, it being almost a full Year since they brought up this general Charge, and called for Examinati∣ons and Tryal; and yet have kept me in Prison all this while, to the great Weakning of my Aged Body, and Waste of my poor Fortunes: And how much longer they mean to keep me there, God knows. Whereas all that I do desire, is a Just and Fair Tryal, with such an Issue, better or worse, as it shall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 God to give.

CAP. VIII.

WHen these Articles had been Read unto me in the Upper House, and I had spoken to the Lords, in a general Answer to them, what I thought fit, as is before expressed: I humbly de∣sired of the Lords (this being upon Friday Feb. 26.) that my go∣ing * 11.14 to the Tower might be put off till the Monday after, that so I might have time to be the better fitted for my Lodging. This I humbly thank their Lordships was granted. I returned to Mr. * 11.15 Maxwell's Custody, and that Afternoon sent my Steward to Sir William Balfore, then Lieutenant, that a Lodging might be had for me with as much convenience as might be. On Munday March 1. * 11.16 Mr. Maxwell carried me in his Coach to the Tower. St. George's Feast, having been formerly put off, was to begin that Evening. By this means Mr. Maxwell (whose Office tied him to attendance upon that Solemnity) could not possibly go with me to the Tower at Evening, as I desired. Therefore Noon, when the Citizens were at Dinner, was chosen as the next fittest time for Privateness. All was well, till I passed through Newgate Shambles, and entred into Cheapside. There some one Prentice first Hallowed out; † 11.17 more and followed the Coach, (the Number still increasing as they went) till by that time I came to the Exchange, the shouting was exceeding great. And so they followed me with Clamour and Revilings, even beyond Barbarity it self; not giving over, till the Coach was entred in at the Tower-Gate. Mr. Maxwell, out of his Love and Care, was ex∣treamly troubled at it; but I bless God for it, my Patience was not moved: I looked upon a higher Cause, than the Tongues of Shimei and his Children.

The same Day there was a Committee for Religion named in the * 11.18 Upper House of Parliament; Ten Earls, Ten Bishops, and Ten Barons. So the Lay Votes will be double to the Clergy; that they may car∣ry what they will for Truth. This Committee professes to meddle with Doctrine, as well as Ceremonies; and to that end will call some Divines to them, to consider of and prepare Business. This appears by a Letter sent by Dr. Williams, then Lord Bishop of Lincoln, now Lord Arch-Bishop of York, to some Divines, which were nam∣ed to attend this Service. The Copy of the Letter follows.

WIth my best Wishes unto you in Christ Jesus. I am Com∣manded * 12.1 by the Lords of the Committee for Innovations in Matters of Religion, to let you know, that their said Lordships have assigned and appointed you to attend on them as Assistant in that Committee. And to let you know in general, that their Lordships do intend to examine all Innovations in Doctrine or Discipline, introduced into the Church without Law since the Reformation; and (if their Lordships shall in their Judg∣ments find it behoveful for the good of the Church and State)

to Examine after that, the degrees and perfection of the Reforma∣tion it self: Which I am directed to intimate unto you, that you may prepare your Thoughts, Studies and Meditations according∣ly: Expecting their Lordships pleasure for the particular points, as they shall arise; and giving you to understand, that their Lord∣ships next sitting, is upon Friday next in the Afternoon. I recommend you to God's protection, being

Your very loving Friend and Brother, Jo. Lincoln.

West. Coll. 12 Martij 1640.

To my very loving Friends and Brethren, Dr. Brownrig. Mr. Shute. Dr. Featly. Mr. Calamy. Dr. Hacket. Mr. White. Dr. Westfield. Mr. Marshal. Dr. Burges.

What use will be made of this Committee, for the present I shall expect; but what it shall produce in future, I dare not prophesie. But it may be, it will prove in time superiour to the National Synods of England: And what that may work in this Church and State, God knows.

I setled my self in my Lodging in the Tower, where I yet am, and pass my weary time as well as I can. On Saturday, Mar. 13. Divers * 12.2 Lords dined with the Lord Herbert. Son to the Earl of Worcester, at his new House by Fox-Hall in Lambeth. As they came back after Dinner, three young Lords were in a Boat together, and St. Paul's Church was in their Eye. Hereupon one of them said, he was sorry for my Commitment, if it were but for the building of St. Pauls, which would go but slowly on there-while. The Lord Brook, who was one of the three, replyed, I hope one of us shall live to see, no one stone left upon another of that building. This was told and avowed by one of the Lords present: And when I heard it, I said, now the Lord forbid; and bless his poor Church in this Kingdom.

CAP. IX.

ON Munday, Mar. 22. the Earl of Strafford's Tryal began in * 12.3 Westminster-Hall: And it continued with some few Inter∣missions till the end of April. The Earl got all the time a great deal of Reputation by his Patient, yet Stout and clear Answers, and changed many Understanding Mens Minds concerning him: Insomuch, that the great Lawyers of his Council affirmed there open∣ly, That there was no Treason appearing to them by any Law. Up∣on this the House of Commons (who were all the while present in a Body) left the Hall, and instead of leaving the whole Cause to the Judgment of the Lords in the ordinary Way of Parliaments, betook themselves to their Legislative Power, and so passed a Bill of Attainder against him; and having none, made a Law to take away his Life. This Bill was denyed by two or three and fifty, as able Men as any in the House of Commons. But the Fa∣ction grew so hot, that all their Names were Pasted up at the Exchange under the Title of Straffordians, thereby to increase the Hatred of the People, both against him and them; and the Li∣bels multiplyed

This Bill went on with great haste and earnestness; which the King observing, and loth to lose so great and good a Ser∣vant, his Majesty came into the House of Lords, and there upon Saturday Maii 1. Declared unto both Houses how carefully he had * 12.4 heard and observed all the Charge against the Earl of Strafford, * 12.5 (for he was present at every Days Hearing) and found that his Fault, whatever it were, could not amount to Treason: And ad∣ded, That if they meant to proceed by Bill, it must pass by him, and that he could not in his Conscience find him guilty, nor would ever wrong his Honour or his Conscience so far, as to pass such a Bill; or to that Effect. But advised them to proceed by way of Misdemeanour, and he would concur with them in any Sentence. This displeased mightily, and I verily think it hasten∣ed the Earl's Death. And indeed to what end should the King come voluntarily to say this, and there, unless he would have abode by it, whatever came? And it had been far more Regal to reject the Bill when it had been brought to him, (his Consci∣ence standing so as his Majesty openly professed it did) than to make this Honourable Preface, and let the Bill pass after.

The House of Commons, and some Lords too, it seems, eagerly bent against the Earl of Strafford, seeing by this the King's bent, grew more sharp, and pursued the Bill the more violently: In so much that within two or three Days after, some Citizens of London and Prentices came down in Multitudes to the Parliament, called there for Justice, and pretended all Trade was stopp'd, till Justice was done upon the Earl of Strafford. Who brought on

the People to this way, I would not tell you if I did certainly know; but wise Men see that plain enough without telling. These People press upon the Lords in a way unknown in the English Government, yea or in any setled Government in Christendom. In conclusion, they are taught to threaten the King and his Court in a strange Manner, if they may not have speedy Justice. The Bill comes up to the Lords, when the House was none of the ful∣lest, (but what made so many absent I know not) and there it past. And upon Sunday, May 9. the King was so laid at, and so * 12.6 frighted with these Bugbears, that if Justice were not done, and the Bill Passed for the Earl of Strafford's Execution, the Multitude would come the Next Day, and pull down White-Hall, (and God knows what might become of the King himself) that these fears prevailing, his Majesty gave way, and the Bill passed; and that Night late, Sir Dudly Carlton, one of the Clerks of the Council, was sent to the Tower, to give the Earl warning that he must pre∣pare to Dye the Wednesday Morning following.

The Earl of Strafford received the Message of Death with great Courage, yet Sweetness; (as Sir Dudly himself after told me:) On Munday Morning the Earl sent for the Lord Primate of Armagh to come to him. He came; and the same Day visited me, and gave me very high Testimony of the Earl's Sufficiency and Re∣solution: And among the rest this; That he never knew any Lay∣man in all his Life, that so well and fully understood Matters of Divinity, as the Earl did; and that his Resolutions were as firm and as good.

In this Interim before the Day of his Death, he made by his Friends two Suits to his Majesty: The one, that he might Dye privately within the Tower; the other, That his Death might be Respited till the Saturday, that he might have a little more time to settle his Estate. His Majesty sent these Requests to the Houses. Answer was returned to the first, That the People would not be∣satisfied, nor believe he was Dead, unless they saw him Dye pub∣lickly. And to the second, That time enough was given already; and that if any farther delay were used, the People would think Justice should not be done at all, and resort thither again in Multitudes, to the hazzard of Publick Peace.

The Earl made these two Suits; and in the mean time one Of∣fer was made to him. It was this, That if he would employ his Power and Credit with the King, for the taking of Episcopacy out of the Church, he should yet have his Life. His Christian Answer was very Heroical; Namely, That he would not buy his Life at so dear a rate. The Man that sent him this Message was his Bro∣ther-in-Law, Mr. Denzill Hollis, one of the great Leading Men in the House of Commons: And my Lord Primate of Armagh, a∣vowed this from the Earl of Strafford's own Mouth. And as he was of too Generous a Spirit to lye basely, so being in preparing of himself to leave the World, it cannot be thought he would with a Dying-Mouth bely his Brother.

These Answers being returned, the Earl prepared himself: And

upon Wednesday Morning, about Ten of the Clock, being May the Twelfth, he was Beheaded on the Tower-Hill, many Thousands be∣holding * 12.7 him. The Speech which he made at his End, was a great Testimony of his Religion and Piety, and was then Printed: And * 12.8 in their Judgment, who were Men of Worth, and some upon, some near the Scaffold, and saw him Dye, he made a Patient, and Pious, and Couragious end; insomuch, that some doubted whether his Death had more of the Roman or the Christian in it, it was so full of both. And notwithstanding this hard Fate, which fell upon him, he is dead with more Honour, than any of them will gain who hunted after his Life. Thus ended the Wise∣est, the Stoutest, and every way the Ablest Subject, that this Na∣tion hath bred these many Years. The only Imperfections which he had, that were known to me, were his want of Bodily Health, and a Carelesness (or rather Roughness) not to oblige any: And his Mishaps in this last Action were, that he groan'd under the Publick Envy of the Nobles, served a Mild and a Gracious Prince, who knew not how to be, or be made great; and trusted false, perfidious and cowardly Men in the Northern Imployment, though he had many Doubts put to him about it. This Day was after call∣ed by divers, Homicidium Comitis Straffordiae, the Day of the Mur∣der of Strafford: Because when Malice it self could find no Law to put him to Death, they made a Law of purpose for it. God forgive all, and be Merciful.

The Earl being thus laid low, and his great Services done in Ireland made part of his Accusation, I cannot but observe two things: The one, That upon Sunday Morning before, Francis Earl of Bedford (having about a Month before lost his second Son, in whom he most Joyed) Dyed; the Small Pox striking up into his Brain. This Lord was one of the Main Plotters of Strafford's Death: And I know where he, with other Lords, before the Par∣liament Sat down, resolved to have his Blood. But God would not let him Live to take Joy therein, but cut him off in the Morning, whereas the Bill for the Earl of Strafford's Death was not Signed till Night. The other is, That at this time the Par∣liament tender'd two, and but two Bills to the King to Sign. This to cut off Strafford's Head was one, and the other was, that this Parliament should neither be Dissolved, nor Adjourned, but by the consent of both Houses; in which, what he cut off from him∣self, Time will better shew than I can. God Bless the King and his Royal Issue.

I told you before, the People came in a Tumultuous Way to call for Justice: And half an Eye may see how, and by whom they were set on. In the mean time let me tell you farther, that this Art being once begun, without Consideration of the Danger, or Care of the Dishonour of such Proceedings; when∣soever there was any thing proposed in the House of Commons, which it was thought the Lords would stick at, or the King not grant, by and by the Rabble came about the Houses, and called for this and that Justice, as they were prompted. God Bless the Government of this Kingdom, or all is lost.

I must tell you farther, that from the time that the Earl of Strafford was first brought to his Answer in Westminster-Hall, the bitter and fierce Libels of the factious People came daily out, to keep up and increase the Peoples Hate against him. And though they were full of most notorious Untruths, yet coming from that Party, were swallowed and believed by the most. Among di∣vers others, they spread one, in which they delivered to the World, that the Earl of Strafford drawing near to his End, when he saw no Remedy, but he must Dye, fell into great and passionate Expressions against me; That I and my Counsels had been the Ruine of him and his House; and that he cursed me bitterly. Now as this is most false in it self, so am I most able to make it appear so. For his Lordship, being to Suffer on the Wednesday Morning, did upon Tuesday in the Afternoon desire the Lord Pri∣mate of Armagh, then with him, to come to me, and desire me that I would not fail to be in my Chamber Window at the open Casement the next Morning, when he was to pass by it, as he went to Execution; that though he might not speak with me, yet he might see me, and take his last leave of me. I sent him word I would, and did so. And the next Morning as he passed by, he turned towards me, and took the Solemnest leave, that I think was ever by any at distance taken one of another; and this in the sight of the Earl of Newport, then Lord Constable of the Tower, the Lord Primate of Armagh, the Earl of Cleveland, the Lieutenant of the Tower, and divers other Knights and Gentlemen of Worth. Besides, though during the time of both our Re∣straints, and the nearness of our Lodgings, we held no Inter∣course each with other; yet Sir William Balfore, then Lieutenant of the Tower, told me often what frequent and great expressions of Love the Earl made to me: Which cannot stand with that base Slander which the lewd Libel vented. But I leave that Honou∣rable Person in his Grave, and while I live shall Honour his Me∣mory. But must here a little go back.

For May the first, after the King had declared his Conscience * 12.9 and his Judgment concerning the Earl of Strafford's Offences to both Houses (as is before set down) and was gone away, a Let∣ter was read in the Vpper House from the Scots, in which their Army did earnestly desire to be gone. It was moved to have a present Conference with the Commons about it; and the Debate was very short, many Lords being desirous to lay hold of that Opportu∣nity to be rid of the Scots. But so good and so quick was the Intelligence from some of the Lords, that the House of Commons was risen before the Messengers from the Lords could get thither, and so the Conference was not only prevented, but things so or∣dered, that the Scots stayed in England till the middle of August following, at a marvellous great Charge to the Kingdom, and with what Wrong and Dishonour to King and Kingdom, let Posterity Judge.

Before the Death of the Earl of Strafford, the Libels came out thick, and very Malitious against him. And all this to whet the Malice that was against him, and make the People more greedy

for his Death. But no sooner was he gone into his Rest, but the Libellers, which during that time reviled him, fell on me; and no question but to the same end. And the Libels and Ballads against me were frequently spread through the City, and sung up and down the Streets. And (I thank God for it) they were as full of Falshood as Gall. Besides, they made base Pictures of me; putting me into a Cage, and fastning me to a Post by a Chain at my Shoulder, and the like. And divers of these Libels made Men sport in Taverns and Alehouses; where too many were as Drunk with Malice, as with the Liquor they sucked in. Against which my only Comfort was, that I was fallen but into the same Case with the Prophet David, Psal. 69. For they that sat in the Gate * 12.10 spake against me, and I was the Song of the Drunkards. About this time I fell into a Tertian Ague, which was Comfortless in a Pri∣son. But I humbly Praise God for it, after seven or eight Fits he restored me to my Health; the only Comfort which I have under him in this time of my Affliction.

CAP. X.

UPon Wednesday, June 23. I acquainted His Majesty by my Lord * 12.11 of London, that now I had answered all Complaints come a∣gainst me concerning the Vniversity of Oxford, I thought it requisite for me to Resign the Chancellorship of that place: And I gave His Majesty such Reasons, as he approved, for my so doing. And the truth is, I suffered much by the Clamours of the Earl of Pembroke, who thought it long, till he had that place, which he had long ga∣ped for: And after the Cloud was once spread over me, spared me in no Company; though I had in all the time of my Prosperity observed him in Court, more than ever he had deserved of me. And I had reason, notwithstanding all his causless Heat, to keep the place till I had justified my self against the Towns-Mens Peti∣tion to the Lords; wherein they Charged me with no less than Trea∣son, for setting out a Proclamation about Regulating the Market in my own Name: But I made it appear to the Lords, that I did no more therein, than the Earl of Leicester in Queen Elizabeth's time, or the Earl of Dorset in King James his time, did before me, when they were Chancellors of that Vniversity. And I was able to shew the Lords, and did so, the Copies of both their several Proclamations in Print in their own Names. And farther I made appear by the Vniversity Records, that the Chancellors for the time being had fre∣quently done it, ever since the time of King Edward 3: And that the Lord Mayor of London, and other Mayors having the Clark-ship of the Market, (as the Chancellors of Oxford have, and not the Mayor) do it daily. So this great, and most Malicious Complaint of the City of Oxford, vanished, when they, and some body else for them had shewed their Teeth, but could not bite. But having ended this Bu∣siness, and my Vice-Chancellor (whom I was not willing to Expose to anothers * 12.12 hand) had finished his Year, and that according to Duty, I had given His Majesty an Account of the Business, I pur∣sued my Resolution: And upon Friday, June the 25th, I sent down * 12.13 my Resignation of the Chancellorship of Oxford, to be Published in Convocation; which was done accordingly, and the Earl of Pembroke had his desires, and was chosen into it. God bless the Vniversity * 12.14 there-while, and grant they may never have need of me, now un∣able to help them.

On Tuesday, August 10. His Majesty rode away Post into Scotland; * 12.15 the Parliaments Sitting in both Kingdoms, and the Armies not yet dissolved. There was great Scanning about this Journey: And the House of Commons sent some Commissioners thither, as the Scots had some here. Among the Scotch Commissioners the Prime Man was the Earl of Róthes, who also was one of the greatest, and most Zealous Leaders of the Scottish Rebellion under the pretence of Religion, and a deadly Enemy to the Earl of Strafford, and was heard to say more than once, they would have his Head; And they had it. But much about this time, Rothes his Zeal was so hot among the

Ladies, and the Citizens Wives, that he fell very foully into the Pox: And divers of his Friends (as they told me themselves) go∣ing to visit him were not admitted to see him; and at last he was conveyed from London to Richmond by his Aunt the Lady Rox∣borough, where he dyed: But this base and dishonourable End of his in Rottenness, they concealed as much as they could.

What the King did in Scotland, hath no Relation, for ought I yet hear, to this poor Story of mine. And the Parliament here made a Recess † 12.16 Aug. ... till Octob. ..... leaving a considerable Com∣mittee Sitting to prepare Business against the House met again. Du∣ring this Recess there was all silence concerning me; And as is con∣ceived, upon this Ground; Because before the Recess, the Committee appointed for that Business, failed in some Proofs, which they well hoped should have reached me home in Matters of Religion; and thereupon have done little since: And the Libels since that time have neither been so frequent, nor so Malicious against me. God quiet this Storm; though (I praise God) I know not why it was raised so high against me. On Thursday, September: 23: 1641. Mr: Adam Torless, my Ancient, Loving, and Faithful Servant, and then my Steward, after he had served me full Forty and Two Years, dyed, to my great both loss and grief. For all my Accounts since my Commitment, were in his Hands; and had he not been a very Honest and Careful Man, I must have suffered much more than I did; yet I suffered enough besides the loss of his Person, who was now become almost the only Comfort of my Affliction, and my Age. So true it is, that Afflictions seldom come single.

CAP. XI.

DUring the Recess of the Parliament, Sir Hen: Martyn dyed, and I made Dr: Merricke Judge of the Prerogative: Dr: Duck mis∣sing his hopes of this Office, by his own absence and default, and find∣ing me under this thick Cloud, hoped to have wrested this Office out of my Hands, and his to whom I had given it. This was one of the basest, and most ungrateful parts, that ever any Man played me. But he failed in his hopes, and his Petition was cast out of the Lords House, to try his Right at Law; which was all that was asked by Dr: Merricke. Yet upon the earnestness of the then Lord Bishop of Lincoln, and now Arch-Bishop of York, the Lords Sequestred my Jurisdiction, and put it into the Hands of my Inferiour Officers; and added in the Order, that I should dispose of neither Benefice, nor any other thing, but I should first acquaint them with it. The Order follows, in haec verba.

Die Sab. 23. Octob. 1641. * 13.1

IT is Ordered by the Lords in Parliament, that the Jurisdiction of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury shall be Sequestred, until he shall be Convicted or Acquitted of the Charge of High Treason against him; and the same in the mean time to be Executed by his Infe∣riour Officers. And farther, concerning those Ecclesiastical Bene∣fices, Promotions, or Dignities, that are in his disposing, he shall present to this House the Names of such Persons, as shall be No∣minated by him for the same, to be Approved of first by this House, before they be Collated or Instituted.

Jo. Browne, Cler. Parliam. &c.

For my Jurisdiction (I Thank God) I never knowingly abused it. And of the other Restraint about the giving of my Benefices, I can∣not but think it very hard in two respects: The one is, that I should be put to Name to them, before I give that, which by Law is mine to give. In the mean time they cry out of the violation of the Pro∣priety which each Subject hath in his Goods; and yet I must not give my own: So also they condemn Arbitrary Government, and yet press upon me an Arbitrary Order against Law. The other is, that if in Obedience to this Order I shall Nominate any Man to them, be he never so worthy for Life and Learning; yet if upon Misinformation, or otherwise, the House should refuse him, I should not only, not do him the good I intended, but blast him for all the remainder of his Life: And whensoever he shall seek for any other Preferment, that shall be * 13.2 laid unto him, that he was thought unworthy by the High Court of Parliament. Yet how to ease my self against this Or∣der, I know not.

This day, Novemb. 1. News came to the Parliament of the * 13.3 Rebellion in Ireland; The King being then in Scotland, where there were Troubles enough also. The Irish pretended the Scots Exam∣ple, and hoped they should get their Liberties, and the Freedom of their Religion, as well as they. But that Rebellion is grown fierce and strong; and what end that War will have, God knows: A happy one God of his Mercy send. For this Nation is in many difficul∣ties at once; and we have drawn them all upon our selves. But this belongs not to my Story. Only this I shall add (which is the Judg∣ment of all Prudent Men that I speak with, both of Ireland and England) that if the Earl of Strafford had Lived, and not been blasted in his Honour and Service, no Rebellion had been stirring there. And if this be so, 'tis a soar Account must be given for his Blood; If either that Kingdom be upon this occasion quite lost from the Crown of England, or not recover'd without great Expence, both of Trea∣sure and Blood.

On Thursday Novemb. 25. the King returning from Scotland, en∣tred * 13.4 into London, was received with great State and Joy, and Sump∣tuously Entertained. This made divers Men think, there would have been a Turn in the present Business. And what it might have proved, if the King would have presently and vigorously set him∣self to vindicate his own Just Power, and leave them their Antient and Just Priviledges, is not I think hard to judge. But he let it cool, and gave that which is truly the Malignant Faction (but call others so) time to underwork him, and bring the City round, and all ran then stronger in the same Current than ever it did. So God of his Mercy bless all.

On Thursday, Decemb. 30. the Lord Arch-Bishop of York, and * 13.5 Eleven other Bishops, were sent to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for High Treason; and two other Bishops, Duresme, and Coventry and Litchfield, to Mr. * 13.6 Maxwell's; for setting their Hands to a Petition, and delivering of it with a Protestation, that this was not a free Parliament; since they who had Antient Right there, could not come to give their Votes as they ought, without danger of their Lives. For by this time it was grown common, that the Multitude came down in heaps, if ei∣ther the Lords or the King denyed any thing which the House of Commons affected. But how it came to pass that these Multitudes should come down in * 13.7 such disorder, and yet be sent back and dis∣solved so easily, at a word or beck of some Men, let the World judge. The Petition and Protestation, which the Bishops delivered in, was as follows; and perchance it was un∣seasonably delivered; and perhaps some Words in it might have been better spared; but the Treason (and peradventure that's my Ignorance) I cannot find in it.

The Petition and Protestation of Twelve Bishops, for which they were Accused of High-Treason by the House of Com∣mons, and Committed by the Lords to the Black-Rod.

THat whereas the Petitioners are called * 14.1 upon, by several and respective Writs, under great Penalties, to Attend in Parlia∣ment, and have a clear and indubitable Right to Vote in Bills, and all other Matters whatsoever † 14.2 debated in Parliament, by the Antient Customs, Laws and Statutes of this Realm, and are to be protected by your Majesty, quietly to attend [| 14.3 and prosecute] that great Service: They humbly remonstrate and protest before God, your Majesty and the Noble * 14.4 Peers now Assembled in Parliament, that as they have an indubitable Right to Sit and Vote in the House of Lords, so they, if they may be protected from force and violence, are most ready and willing to perform † 14.5 that Duty accordingly; and that they do abominate all Actions and Opinions tending to Popery, * 14.6 or any inclination to the Malignant Party, or any other side and Party whatsoever, to the which their own Reasons and Consciences shall not † 14.7 adhere. But whereas, they have been at several times vio∣lently Menaced, Affronted and Assaulted by multitudes of Peo∣ple, in coming to perform their Service to that Honourable House, and lately chased away and put in danger of their Lives, and * 14.8 find no Redress or Protection, upon sundry Complaints made to both Houses in † 14.9 that particular: They likewise * 14.10 protest before your Majesty and that Noble House of Peers, that saving to them∣selves all their Rights and Interests of Sitting and Voting in † 14.11 your House at other times, they dare not sit * 14.12 to Vote in the House of Peers, † 14.13 unless your Majesty shall further secure them from all Af∣fronts, Indignities and Danger in the Premises. Lastly, whereas their fears are not built upon Fancies and Conceipts, but upon such Grounds and Objects, as may well terrifie Men of * 14.14 great Reso∣lution and much Constancy; they do in all Humility and Duty, protest before your Majesty, and the Peers of † 14.15 this most Honoura∣ble House of Parliament, against all * 14.16 Votes, Resolutions and Determinations; and that they are in themselves null, and of no effect, which in their absence since the Twenty Seventh of [this in∣stant Month] December, 1641. have already passed, and likewise * 14.17 against all such, as shall hereafter pass in that most Honourable * 14.18 Assembly, during † 14.19 such time of * 14.20 their forced and † 14.21 violented absence from the said most Honourable House: Not denying, but if their absenting of themselves, were wilful and voluntary, that most * 14.22 Noble House might proceed in all these Premises, their ab∣sence and † 14.23 Protestation notwithstanding. And humbly beseecheth your Most Excellent Majesty, to command the Clerk of the

House of Peers, to enter this their Petition and Protestation † 14.24 in their Records.

They will ever pray God to bless and preserve, &c.

Jo. Eborac. Williams.

Geo. Hereford, Coke.

Tho. Duresme, Moorton.

Rob. Oxon, Skinner.

Rob. Co. Lich. Wright.

Ma. Ely, Wren.

Jos. Norwich, Hall.

Godfr. Glouc. Goodman.

Jo. Asaphen, Owen.

Jo. Peterburg, Towers.

Guil. Ba. & Wells, Pearce.

Mor. Llandaff, Owen.

On Tuesday January 4. his Majesty went into the House of Com∣mons; * 14.25 some number of Gentlemen accompanyed him to the Door, but no farther. There he demanded the Persons of Mr. Denzil Hollis, Sir Arthur Haselrigge, Mr. Jo. Pymm, Mr. Jo. Hampden, and Mr. William Strode, whom together with the Lord Kimbolton, Sir Ed. Her∣bert, his Majesty's Attorney General, had the day before charged with High Treason, in the Vpper House, upon seven Articles of great consequence; It seems they had information of the King's coming, and were slipt aside. This made a mighty noise on all hands. But the business was so carried, that the House adjourned to sit in a Committee at Guild-Hall, and after at the Grocer's-Hall: Where things were so Ordered, that within two or three days, these Men were with great salutes of the People, brought, and in a manner guarded to the Com∣mittee, and after to the House at Westminster; and great stir made to and fro, about the Accusation of these Men, and the breach of the Priviledges of Parliament, by his Majesty's coming thither in that manner. Things were carried in a higher strain than ever before. The King left the City, and withdrew privately, first to Hampton-Court, after that to Windsor. Many puttings on and puttings off, concerning this and other great Affairs, between the King and the House: All which I leave to publick Records, as not concerning this poor History: Yet could not omit to say thus much in the general; because much of the Church-business, as well as the States, and much of mine, as well as the Churches, will depend upon it.

CAP. XII.

UPon Thursday, January 20. upon no Complaint that I know * 14.26 (for I am sure I never deserved any in that kind) there was an Order made in the Lords House to take away my Arms. They stood me in above Three Hundred Pounds. I provided them for the Service of the State, as Need might require; I never employed a∣ny of them to any the least Disservice of it, nor ever had thought to do. Yet the Order is as follows, both to my Disgrace to have them so taken from me, and to my loss; for though the Sheriffs of London be to take them upon Inventory, yet of whom shall I demand them when they are out of their Office?

Die Jovis, 20. Jan. 1641.

IT is this Day Ordered by the Lords in Parliament, That the She∣riffs of the City of London, or either of them, shall receive by inventory, all such Ordnance and other Arms, as belong to a∣ny private Persons, which are to be kept to their Uses, remaining now at Fox-Hall, Canterbury-House, the Arch-Bishop of York's House in Westminster, and in the Bishop of Winchester's House (a fit pro∣portion of Arms being left at each Place for necessary Security thereof:) The said Sheriffs being to receive their Directions from a Committee lately appointed by the Parliament. But the Intents of the Lords are, and it is farther Ordered, that such Ordnance and Arms as do belong to his Majesty, shall be forthwith sent unto the King's Magazine in the Tower.

Upon Saturday, Feb. 6. the Bill passed, That the Bishops should have * 15.1 no Votes in Parliament, nor have to do in Civil Affairs. This was migh∣tily strugled for, almost all this Session, and now obtained. The Bi∣shops have ever had this in Right and Possession ever since there was any use of Parliaments in England, which the antientest Fami∣ly of the Nobility, which now sit there, and thrust them out, can∣not say. There was great Joy upon the Passing of this Bill in both Houses, and in some Parishes of London Ringing and Bonfires. The King gave way to this Bill, and so that is setled: And if it after prove that the King and Kingdom have Joy in it, it is well. But it may be, that the Effects of this Eclipse may work farther than is yet thought on, and the Blackness of it darken the Temporal Lords Pow∣er, more than is yet feared. And here I must tell you two Things: The one, that for the compassing of their ends in this Bill, the now∣become-usual Art was pursued, and the People came in Multitudes, and Clamour'd for the outing of the Bishops and the Popish Lords Votes (so they were still joyned) out of the House. Insomuch, that not the People of London only, but Petitioners were brought out of

divers Counties with Petitions either sent unto them, or framed rea∣dy for them here against they came; and they in every Petition for preservation of the Priviledges of Parliament, desired the taking a∣way of the Bishops and the Popish Lords Votes out of the House, as if it were a common Grievance: The other, That now the Bishops have their Votes taken away by Act of Parliament, you shall not see in haste any Bill at all Pass for taking away the Votes of the Popish Lords; which will infer this, as well as some other things, That these were joyned together, to make the Bishops more odious to the People, as if they were Popishly affected themselves, and to no other end.

The Court removed from Windsor to Hampton-Court, and on Thurs-Day, Febr. 10. The King and Queen came to Greenwich; and on Friday, * 15.2 Febr. 11. they went from thence toward Dover, the Queen resolving to go into Holland with her young Daughter the Princess Mary, who the Year before was Married to the Prince of Aurange his Son. But the true Cause of this intended Journey, was to be out of the Fears, Dis∣contents and Dangers (as she conceived) of the present Times. And doubtless her Discontents were many, and great; and what her Dangers might have been by staying, or may be by going, God alone knows.

His Majesty, while he was upon that Journey, sent a Message to both Houses. This was Printed Febr. 14. By this the King puts all into * 15.3 the Hands of the Parliament. His Words are

concerning the Go∣vernment * 15.4 and Liturgy of the Church, his Majesty is willing to de∣clare, that he will refer that whole Consideration to the Wisdom of his Parliament, which he desires them to enter into speedily, that the present Distractions about the same may be composed: But de∣sires not to be pressed to any single Act on his part, till the whole be so digested and setled by both Houses, that his Majesty may clearly see, what is fit to be left, as well as what is fit to be taken away.

So here they are made Masters of all, and in a time of great exasperation against the Clergy and the Bishops, and their Votes being newly thrust out of the House. So God bless the poor Church of England, for I very much fear this can bode no good.

The same Day, being Munday, there came an Order from the Lords that the Twelve Bishops which were Committed Decemb. 30. might put in Bayl if they would; and that they should have their Hearing up∣on Friday, Febr. 25. They were glad Men, procured their Bayl, and went out of the Tower, on Wednesday, Febr. 16. This Order of the * 15.5 Lords was known to the House of Commons well enough; yet they would take no Notice of it, nor offer to stay the Bishops. But on * 15.6 Wednesday, after they were sure the Bishops were come forth and gone to their several Lodgings, they sent a Message to the Lords, that they desired the Bishops might be presently remanded to safe Custody, or else they might and would Protest against their Lordships for Breach of the Priviledges of their House: Because being Impeached by them, the Lords had Bayled them, without acquainting them first with it in a Parliamentary way. This Message was very high, and so deliver∣ed by Mr. Denzil Hollis. The Lords yielded: And the poor Bishops were brought back again to the Tower the next Morning, Febr. 17. * 15.7 But with an Order that they should not pay new Fees, and with a Promise that their Cause should be heard on Saturday, Febr. 19. I * 15.8

will not so much as dispute any Priviledge of the House of Commons, and I presume the Lords were not willing to break any. This I am sure of, that as this Business was carried, though the Bishops had a great Indignity and Scorn put upon them; yet that which was put upon the Lords was far greater, and might certainly have been car∣ried in a smoother way on all Hands. On Saturday, Febr. 19. ac∣cording * 15.9 to appointment, the Twelve Bishops were all at the House; and at the Bar Mr. Glin pressed the Charge of High Treason against them in the Name of the House of Commons. The Bishops said not much, but their Counsel were very earnest, that they might be presently Heard: But they were not admitted to speak. And so the Business was put off to Thursday, Febr. 24. That Night, when the Commons were returned into their own House, there was a Motion made to proceed against the Bishops by Bill, and not in the other Ordinary Way.

CAP. XIII.

ON Sunday, Feb. 20. there came a tall Gentleman, by the Name * 15.10 of Mr. Hunt, to my Lodging in the Tower to speak with me: I was then in my Bed-Chamber speaking with Mr. Edward Hide, one of the House of Commons. I went forth to speak with this Mr. Hunt. When I came, he professed, that though he was unknown to me, yet he came to do me service in a great Particular: And Prefaced it farther, that he was not set on to come to me by any States-Man, or by any of the Parliament, nor did expect any Reward, but only was desirous to serve me. I wondred what the matter should be. Then he drew a Paper out of his Pocket, and gave it me to read. It contained four Articles fairly Written, and drawn up against me to the Parliament. All of them were touching my near Conversa∣tion with Priests, and my endeavour by them to subvert Religion in England. He told me (when I had read them) that the Articles were not yet put into the House. They were subscribed by one Willoughby, who he said was a Priest, but now turned, and come a∣way from them. I asked him what Service it was that by this he could do to me? He said, he left me to think on that; but professed he looked for no advantage to himself. I conceived hereupon, this was some piece of Villany, and bad him tell Willoughby from me, that he was a Villain to subscribe such a Paper; and for the Articles, let him put them into the Parliament when he pleased. Mr. Hunt desired me to take nothing ill from him, for he meant me Service. I reply'd, that he came to me Civilly, and used me in Speech like a Gentleman: But Willoughby was in this, as I had called him. I left him and his Paper, and returned to Mr. Hide into my Bed-Chamber. There I told him, and my Servant Mr. Richard Cobb, all that passed: And they were glad I gave him so short and so harsh an Answer, and did think as I my self did, that it was a Plot to in∣trap me. After they were gone, I sat thinking with my self, and was very Sorry that my Indignation at this base Villany had made me so hasty to send Hunt away, and that I did not desire Mr. Lieutenant of the Tower to seize on him, till he brought forth this Willoughby. I am since informed, that this Hunt is a Gentleman that hath spent all or most of his Means; and I verily believe this was a Plot between him and Willoughby to draw Money from me to conceal the Articles; in which way had I complyed with him, I had utterly undone my self. But I thank God for his Mercy to me, I am Innocent, and defy in this Kind what any Man can tru∣ly say against me. On Friday, Mar. 4. the two Bishops which were * 15.11 at Mr. Maxwell's, namely, Thomas Moreton Bishop of Duresme, and Robert Wright Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, having formerly Petitioned, were present in the House of Commons to speak for them∣selves; and they did so. At the same time the Petition of the o∣ther ten Bishops (which were in the Tower) which was sent into

that House upon the Example of the other two was read. After this a Committee was named to draw up a Bill. But what it shall contain is not yet known: So herein they departed not from their former Resolution.

On Sunday, Mar. 6. after I came from Sermon, I walked in a * 15.12 large Room, of which I had the use, before I went to Dinner: And after I had walked a pretty while, expecting some Company, upon the sudden, as I walked on, I heard a great Crack, as loud as the Report of a small Dag, to my thinking. And the Noise being near me, I had a conceit that one of the Boards brake under me; but it was a Tendon of my right Leg which brake asunder, God knows how. For I was upon plain Boards, and had no uneven step nor slip, not so much as a turning of my Foot aside upon any Chink. This Tendon, or part of the main Sinew above my Heel, brake just in the same Place where I had unhappily broken it be∣fore, Febr: 5: 1627. as I was waiting upon King Charles to Hampton-Court. * 15.13 But I recovered of it, and could go strongly upon plain Ground. God be merciful unto me, now that he is pleased to hum∣ble me yet farther, and to take from me the use of my Limbs, the only Comfort under him, in the midst of my Afflictions. And this Lameness continued two whole Months, before I was able to go down Stairs to take any Air to refresh my self; and long after, before I received any competent Measure of Strength.

CAP. XIV.

ST: Leonards Foster-Lane, London, is in the Gift of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster. Mr: William Ward the Incumbent had resigned, and besides was Censured by a Committee in Parliament, for Innovations, and I know not what. One Mr: George Smith was tender'd (it seems) to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster. How things were carried there, I know not; but they let their Living fall in Lapse to the Lord Bishop of London. His six Months likewise were suffered to slide over, and the Benesice was lapsed to me, as Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, about March the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 In all this * 15.14 time Mr: Ward had not the * 15.15 Providence to seek to the King for remedy, or to the Original Patrons, whose Presentation at any time before the Bishop had filled the Church, was (as I am inform'd) good in Law. This Benefice being now in my dispose, the Pre∣cise part of the Parish Petition the Parliament for the aforesaid Mr. George Smith; and by the means of my Lord Kimbolton (a great Patron of such Men) obtain this Order following.

Die Jovis, 17: Martij: 1641.

UPon the reading of the Petition of the Parishioners of St. Leonards Foster-Lane, London, it is Ordered by the Lords in Parliament, that Mr: George Smith, elected and approved by the Dean of Westminster, and the Parishioners of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Leonards Foster-Lane, be especially recommended to the Lord Arch-Bishop of Can∣terbury his Grace from this House, that the said Mr: Smith may be forthwith Presented to the Parish-Church of the said St: Law∣rence.

John Brown Clericus Parliament.

This Order was brought me by the Church-Wardens, and some * 16.1 of the Parish, on Saturday, March 19. I was sorry for the honest In∣cumbent's sake, Mr: Ward; and troubled in my self to have such an Order sent me: Especially, considering that the Lords former Order (though as I was informed against all Law) yet was so mo∣derate, as to suffer me to Nominate to Benefices, so that the Men were without Exception. I put them off till Monday. In the mean time I advised with my Learned Councel, and other Friends. All of them agreed in this; That it was a great and a violent In∣justice put upon me; yet in regard of the Time, and my Conditi∣on, they perswaded me to give way to their Power, and Present their Clerk. On Munday, Mar. 21. they repaired to me again: I * 16.2 sent them to my Register, to draw a Presentation according to the Order of Parliament, and advised them while that was in drawing, to send Mr. Smith to me. One of them told me very boldly, that it was not in the Order of Parliament, that Mr. Smith should come to me; and another told me that Mr. Smith would not come to me. Upon this unworthy Usage of me, I dismissed them again, having first in Obedience to the Order Sealed and set my Hand to the Presentation, ready for delivery when Mr. Smith came

for it. The next Morning these men repair again to the Lords House, and on Wednesday, Mar. 23. procure another Order, strictly command∣ing * 16.3 me forthwith to deliver the Presentation to the Parishioners.

This Order being setled, the Earl of Holland made a Motion, and put the Lords in Mind that I lay under a heavy Charge, and had long lain so: That it would be Honourable for the Parliament to bring my Cause to Hearing, that so I might receive Punishment if I were found to deserve it, or otherwise have some end of my Troubles: There was a great dispute among my Friends, Quo A∣nimo, with what Mind this Lord moved it, especially then, when almost all my Friends in both Houses were absent. Howsoever I took it for the best, desiring nothing more than an end; and there∣fore sent a Gentleman the next Day to give his Lordship Thanks for his Nobleness in remembring me. And if he did it with an Ill Mind, God forgive him, and preserve me. But whatsoever his Lordship's Intent was, his Motion after some Debate, begat a Mes∣sage to the House of Commons, to ripen my Business; but it dyed a∣gain, and nothing done.

The Order last above written, concerning Mr. Smith, the Parishi∣oners brought to me the same Day in the Afternoon. It happened that the Lord Primate of Armagh was then with me. I shewed him the Order, and he blessed himself to see it; yet advised me to obey, as my other Friends had done. I farther desired him to stay and hear my Answer to them, which was this, That I knew not what Report they had made of me and my Obedience to the Lords; and that therefore I would give their Lordships in Write∣ing an Account of my Proceedings; but would deliver the Presen∣tation to Mr. Smith, when he came. The Lord Primate cryed shame of them to their Faces: So they went away. On Thursday, March * 16.4 24. in an humble Petition I informed the Lords how ready I was to obey: Only desired that Mr. Smith might come to me, that I might see his Orders, and examine his Sufficiency; to both which I stood bound both in Conscience, and by Law. Upon reading of this Petition, some Lords said Mr. Smith was an unmannerly Fellow, not to come to me: But the Lord Kimbolton told them he was a very worthy Man, and that he might go to me afterward; but it was fit their Order should be obeyed. And the Earl of War∣wick added, that I desired Mr. Smith might come to me, only that I might pick a Quarrel with him, to frustrate the Order of the House. Upon this there followed Instantly a Peremptory Order, commanding me to present Obedience. So Mr. Smith was left to come to me afterwards, if he pleased; and he came not at all, which was as good as if he had come, to have his Sufficiency examined for that which he had already in possession. But how worthy and fit he proved, I refer to all honest Men that heard him afterwards. Upon this Order (according to the former Advice of my Friends) I delivered the Presentation to the Churchwardens and Parishioners; and if any thing proved amiss in the Man (as after did in a high Measure) or hurtful in the thing it self; I humbly besought God to have Mercy on me, and to call for an Account of them who laid this pressure upon me.

CAP. XV.

BEfore this time the Rectory of Stisted in Essex was fallen void, and in my Gift. The E: of Warwick was an earnest Suitor to me for it, for one Mr: Clark: I delayed, having Six Months time by Law to dispose of my Benefices. During this delay Mr: Richard Howlett, a Batchelour of Divinity, and a Man of very good worth, a Dean in Ireland, was by the Rebels there turned out of all he had, and forced, for safety of his Life, to come with his Wife and Chil∣dren into England: His Wife was my near Kinswoman. At their coming over I was forced to relieve them, else they might have begged. Hereupon I resolved in my self to give Stisted to Mr: Howlett, and to gratifie Mr: Clark with something after. Nothing doubting but that the Parliament would readily give way in such a case of Necessity, for so worthy a Man as Mr: Howlett was known to be.

While these things were in my Thoughts, two other great Bene∣fices fell into my disposal, Bocking, and Lachingdon, both in Essex. Presently the Parishioners Petition me; They of Bocking for Dr: Gawden, a Chaplain of the Earl of Warwick's; They of Lachingdon, that they might chuse their own Minister. I gave a fair Answer to both, but reserved my self. Then I was pressed with Letters from the Earl of Warwick, for Dr: Gawden. My Answer was, I could not gratifie Dr: Gawden with Bocking, and Mr: Clark with Stisted. Then Dr: Gawden brings me a very earnest Letter, but very Honourable, from the Earl of Hertford. When I saw my self thus pressed, I resolved to name fit Men to all three Benefices, presently, and see how the Parliament would be pleased to deal with me. Be∣fore I did this, I thought fit to make a fair Offer to the Earl of Warwick, who by Dr: Gawden's intreaty came to me to the Tower. I freely told his Lordship my Resolution, which was, that at the desire of his Lordship, and my Honourable Friend the Lord Mar∣quess of Hertford, I would give Bocking to Dr: Gawden; Lachingdon to Mr: Howlett, in regard of his Alliance to me, and his present Ne∣cessities; and Stisted to Mr: Newested, to whom I was pre-in∣gaged by Promise to my Ancient worthy Friend Sir Tho: Rowe, whom Mr: Newested had served in his Embassages seven Years; and for Mr: Clark, he should have the next Benefice which fell in my Gift, for his Lordship's sake. His Lordship seemed to be very much taken with this Offer of mine, and promised me, and gave me his Hand upon it, that he would do me all the kindness he could, that these my Nominations might pass with the Lords.

Upon this I rested, and according to my Promise, Petitioned the * 16.5 Lords, as is expressed. Upon the Reading of this Petition, the Lords Order'd me presently to Collate Bocking upon Dr: Gawden; which I did, the Order being brought unto me the next Day. But for the * 16.6 other two the Lords took time to consider. The Earl of Warwick was then present in the House, and (as I am informed) said little

or nothing. This made me fear the worst: And therefore I advised Mr: Howlett to get a full Certificate of the Lord Primate of Armagh, both for Life and Learning, and attend with it at the Parliament, to make the best Friends for himself. The Business stuck still. At last he met with the Lord Kimbolton, who presently made all Wea∣ther fair for him: And upon his Lordships motion to the House, * 16.7 an Order passed for Mr: Howlett to have Lachingdon. The Motive this; Mr: Howlett was Fellow of Sidney College in Cambridge, and Tutor at that time to two Sons of the Lord Mountague, the Lord Kimbolton's Uncle: At which time also the Lord Kimbolton himself was a Student in the same College, and knew the Person and worth of Mr: Howlett. This his Lordship Honourably now remem∣bred; else it might have gone hard with Mr: Howlett's Necessities. So upon the Order thus obtained, I Collated Lachingdon upon him.

After this the Earl of Warwick went Lord Admiral to Sea, by ap∣pointment of the Parliament: And forthwith I was served with an∣other * 16.8 Order to give Stisted to Mr: Clark. Hereupon I Petitioned again, and set forth my Resolutions and Ingagements to Sir Tho: Rowe: And Dr: Gawden having told me, that the Earl of Warwick had left that Business for me in trust with the Lord Roberts, I made bold to write to his Lordship, and intreat his lawful Favour. The Lord Roberts denied that any such Order or Care of that Business was left with him, nor would he meddle in it; but referred me to the Lord Kimbolton, who still followed the Business close for Mr: Clark. By all which it appeared to me, that the Earl of Warwick had forgotten his Promise to me, to say no more. Soon after I received another Order, to give Stisted to Mr: Clark. To this I an∣swered * 16.9 again by Petition, but with like Success: For another Order * 16.10 came forth Peremptorily to Command me to give Stisted to Mr: Clark. But it so fell out, that this Order was not brought to me till Ten Days after the Date; I sent my Councel to attend the Lords, that I might not fall into Contempt. The Business was not then * 16.11 called on, and by the Sixteenth of the same Month, Stisted fell in Lapse to His Majesty: So I lost the giving of the Benefice, and some body else their Ends upon me.

CAP. XVI.

ON May 15. Sunday, I made a shift between my Man and my * 16.12 Staff, to go to Church. There Preached one Mr: * 16.13 Joslin. His Text, Judge 5: 23. Curse ye Meroz, &c. To pass over what was strangely Evil thoroughout his Sermon, his Personal Abuse of me was so foul and so palpable, that Women and Boys stood up in the Church, to see how I could bear it: And this was my first Wel∣come into the Church, after my long Lameness. But I humbly thank God for it, I bare his Virulence patiently, and so it vanished: As did much other of like Nature, which I bare both before and after this. God forgive them.

After this I had some quietness; most Particulars lying dead, out of several respects unknown to me. But all things grew higher and higher between the King and the Parliament, to the great Dammage and Distraction of the Kingdom. God of his Mercy send a speedy and a blessed Issue, and preserve his Majesty, the Kingdom, and this poor Church from Ruin: But I much fear our Sins are ripe for a very great, if not a final Judgment.

Friday, August the 19. Captain Royden and his Company, by Order * 16.14 of Parliament, came about seven of the Clock in the Evening to my House at Lambeth, to take away my Arms. They stayed there all Night, and searched every Room, and where any Key was not ready, brake open Doors: And the next Morning they carried my Arms away in Carts to Guild-Hall, London; and I was sufficiently abused all the way by the People, as my Arms passed. They gave out in London, there were Arms for Ten Thousand Men; whereas there was not enough for Two Hundred. And the Arms I bought of my Predecessor's Executors; only some I was forced to mend, the Fashion of Arms being changed. He left to defend that large House, but six Swords, six Carbines, three Halberds, and two half Pikes: Though the Order formerly made by the Lords, required ne∣cessary defence for the House should be left. But it seems Captain Royden's Order now given was stricter; for he was towards me and my House very Civil in all things.

This day, Sept. 1. 1642. the Bishops were Voted down in the House * 16.15 of Commons: And that Night there was great Ringing and Bonfires in the City; which I conceive was cunningly ordered to be done by Alderman Pennington, the new Lord Mayor, chosen in the room of Sir Richard Gurney, who was then in the Tower, and put out of his Office by the Parliament. And my Mind gives me, that if Bishops do go down, the City will not have cause to joy in it.

About this time the Cathedral Church of Canterbury was grosly Prophaned; yet far worse afterward.

All-Hallows Bredstreet was now fallen void, and in my Gift; and September 9. there came an Order from the House of Peers for me to * 16.16 give it: But having Six Months Respite by Law, I delayed it for that time, which created me much trouble from the Parishioners, who often sollicited me.

About the Tenth of this Month, the Bishops were Voted down in * 16.17 the Vpper House. So it seems I must live to see my Calling fall be∣fore me. Upon Saturday, Octob. 15. it was Resolved upon the Questi∣on, * 16.18 That all Rents and Profits of all Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deans and Chapters, and other Delinquents, should be Sequestred for the Use and Service of the Common-Wealth: According to which Ordinance, all the Profits of my Arch-Bishoprick were taken away from me, and not one Penny allowed me for Maintenance. Nay, whereas this Order was not made till a full Fortnight after Michael∣mas; yet so hard a hand was carried over me, as that my Rents, due at Michaelmas, were seized on to the use of the Parliament: By which means my Estate was as good as Sequestred almost from our Lady∣day before; more * 16.19 than two parts of three of the Rents being paya∣ble only at Michaelmas.

An Order came from the House, Octob. 24. that no Prisoner should * 16.20 keep above two Servants, nor speak with any Man, but in the pre∣sence and hearing of his Warder. My Case for the former Branch of this Order, differ'd from all other Prisoners. For they lay in several Warders Houses, in which they might be fitted by the Servants of the House for Ordering their Dyet; but I was in a Prison-lodging, void of all Comfort and Company. And therefore upon Octob. 27. * 16.21 (which was the very next day after the Order was shewed to me) I humbly besought the Lords for a Cook and Butler, beside the Two which were to attend me in my † 16.22 Prison, by Reason of my Age and Infirmities; which, though with difficulty, yet I humbly thank their Lordships, was granted me, Octob. 28. * 16.23

On Wednesday, Novemb. 2. I Dreamed (that Night) that the Church * 16.24 was undone, and that I went to St: Johns in Oxford, where I found the Roof off from some part of the College, and the Walls ready to fall down. God be merciful.

Upon Wednesday, Novemb. 9. about Five of the Clock in the Morn∣ing, * 16.25 Captain Brown and his Company entred my House at Lambeth, to keep it for Publick Service. Hereupon I Petitioned the Lords the same day, for the safety of the Library, of my own Study, and of such Goods as were in my House: All which was very Honourably granted unto me by a full Order of the Lords that very day; with a strict Charge, that they which were there employed in the Publick Service, should take special care that all the fore-named things should be preserved in safety. Either this day, or the day before, Mr: Holland and Mr: Ashurst, two of the House of Commons, came accompanied with some Musketeers, and entred my House, and searched for Mony; and took away Seventy and Eight Pound, from my Receiver Mr: Walter Dobson, and said it was for the Mainte∣nance of the Kings Children. God of his Mercy look favourably upon the King, and bless his Children from needing any such poor Maintenance.

Novemb. 16. Wednesday, an Order forbidding the Prisoners Men to * 16.26 speak one with another, but in the presence of the Warder, and to bar them the liberty of the Tower: Only this Order was so far in∣larged, Novemb. 22. that any of them might go out of the Tower to * 16.27 buy Provision or other Necessaries.

On the 24th of this Month, the Souldiers at Lambeth-House brake * 16.28 open the Chappel-doors, and offer'd violence to the Organ; but before much hurt was done, the Captain heard of it, and stayed them.

Upon the Death of Sir Charles Caesar, the Mastership of the Fa∣culties fell into my gift; but I could not dispose of it, by Reason of the Order of Parliament, of Octob. 23. 1641. but with their Approba∣tion. * 16.29 Therefore I Petitioned the Lords, that I might give it to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Aylet or Dr: Heath, both then Attendants in that Honourable House; well knowing it would be in vain to Name any other: And the Lords sent me an Order to give it to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Aylet; and I did it accord∣ingly. * 16.30

The Vicaridge of Horsham in Sussex was in my gift, and fell * 16.31 void. At the intreaty of Sir John Conniers then Lieutenant of the Tower, I Petitioned the House that I might give it to Mr. Conniers the Lecturer at Bow. But before my Petition came to be delivered, the House had made an Order against him, upon complaint from Horsham of his disordered Life; so busie were that Party of Men to complain of all Men, who were not theirs in Faction; and such ready admit∣tance had both they and their Complaints in both Houses. For my part the Man was a Stranger to me, and inquiring after him (as well as a poor Prisoner could) I heard no ill of him for his Life. Never∣theless, hearing how the Lords were possessed against him, I forbare the sending of that Petition, and sent another for my own Chaplain, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 William Brackstone. But he was refused; yet no exception taken against him, for Life or Learning; nor indeed could any be.

Upon the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the same Month, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Layton came with a War∣rant * 16.32 from the Honourable House of Commons, for the Keys of my House at Lambeth to be delivered to him, that Prisoners might be brought thither. I referred my self to God, that nothing might trouble me: But then I saw it evident, that all that could, should be done to break my patience. Had it not been so, some body else might have been sent to Lambeth, and not Layton, who had been Censured in the Star-Chamber to lose his Ears, for a base and a most virulent Libel against Bishops and the Church-Government Established by Law: In which Book of his were many things, which in some Times might have cost him dearer. The same day it was Ordered by the Honou∣rable House of Commons, that Mr: Glyn, Mr. Whitlock, Mr. Hill, or any two of them, should take care for the securing of the Publick Library belonging to the See of Canterbury, the Books, Writings, Evidences, and Goods in Lambeth-House, and to take the Keys into their Custody: And a Reference to the Committee, to prepare an Or∣dinance for the regulating of Lambeth-House for a Prison, in the man∣ner as Winchester-House is regulated. And upon Jan. 5. a final Or∣der * 16.33 from both Houses came for the setling of Lambeth Prison: In which Order it was included, that all my Wood and Coal then in the House, should remain there for the use of the Souldiers. And when Motion was made, that I might have some to the Tower for my own necessary use, it would not be hearkned to. There was then in the House, above two hundred pounds worth of Wood and Coal which was mine.

The next day I received a Letter from the Earl of Manchester, com∣manding me, in the Name of the House, to give All-Hallows-Bredstreet to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Seaman. This I was no way moved at; because I had before expressed my self to my Lord of Northumberland, that I would give this Benefice, out of my Respects to his Lordship, to Mr. Seaman his Chaplain. Yet I cannot but observe, that though this was made known to the Earl of Manchester, yet he would not forbear his Letter, that the Benefice might be given by Order, and not seem to come from any Courtesie of mine to that Honourable Person.

CAP. XVII.

ON Thursday, January 26. the Bill passed in the Lords House for * 16.34 abolishing of Episcopacy. God be merciful to this sinking Church.

By this time the Rectory of Chartham in Kent was fallen void, * 16.35 by the Death of the Dean of Canterbury, and in my Gift. It was a very good Benefice, and I saw it would create me much trouble in the Collating of it. The first onset upon me for it was by Dr. Heath; and it was to give it to Mr. Edward Corbet of Merton-College, of which House Dr. Heath had formerly been. Very earnest he was with me, and told me the Lord General was earnest for him, and that it would be carried from me, if I did it not willingly; which I were better do. My Answer was, I could not help that: But Mr. Corbet had many ways disserved me in Oxford, and that cer∣tainly I would never give it him. So we parted: And though I could not be jealous of Dr. Heath, yet neither could I take it well. And on Tuesday, Feb. 14. I received a Letter from his Majesty, bear∣ing * 16.36 Date January 17. in which Letters the King Commands me to give Chartham to one Mr. Reading, a Man of good Note in the Church; or if I were otherwise Commanded by Parliament not to give, then to Lapse it to him, that he might give it. I returned a present Answer by word of Mouth, and by the same Messenger, that I would either give, or Lapse the Benefice, as his Majesties Gracious Letters required of me.

I was now in a fine Case between the King and the Parliament: One I was sure to offend. Yet these Letters of the King's came hap∣pily in one respect: For that very Afternoon, the Earl of Warwick came to me to the Tower, and after a few fair words bestowed on me, drew out an Order of Parliament, to give Chartham to one Mr. Culmer, who his Lordship said was a very worthy Man; and per∣haps I might have believed his Lordship, had I not known the con∣trary: But I well knew him to be ignorant, and with his Igno∣rance, one of the most daring Schismaticks in all that Country. This Order of Parliament bare Date, Febr. 4. but was not shewed me till then. My Answer to my Lord was, that I had received a Letter from his Majesty, which required me to give that Benefice to another Man, or else Lapse it to him; and therefore humbly de∣sired his Lordship to do me good Offices in the Honourable House, considering in what difficulties I was, and how many great Li∣vings I had given by Orders of Parliament, and none at the King's Command till now. So we parted.

After this, Mr. Culmer came to me about the Benefice, and protested his Conformity to the Church. I think the Man forgot that I knew both him and his ways. I told him I had given my Lord of Warwick my Answer. But Mr. Culmer rested not so: But got a Servant of mine down the Stairs to him, and there was very earnest with him to know, whether it were not possible to

work me to give him Chartham. And then out of the abundance of his honesty and worthiness offer'd my Servant a Hundred and Fifty Pound to procure him the Benefice: And added, that he should have no cause to distrust him, for he should have the Money presently paid him. This is as worthy a piece of Symony as need to be: And but that the Earl of Warwick is a Man of Honour, and unfit to stoop to such base Courses, it is enough to make a Man think Mr. Culmer would have been very thankful to his Lordship for so much pains, as to come to the Tower and solicit for him. The Earl of Warwick at his next opportunity in the House, told the Lords, that whereas they had made an Order, that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury should give Chartham to Mr. Culmer, a very worthy Preacher; he had been with me himself about it, and that I pre∣tended Letters from the King, and refused to obey their Order. This was like to have stirred great Heat against me, but that a Lord stood up, and doubted of the Order; Putting them in Mind, that the Lord General was ingaged for this Benefice for Mr. Corbet, and had left the Care of it upon himself, and some other Lords in his absence. Hereupon there was inquiry made, when, and how, that Order passed for Culmer, and it was found to be slipped out at a very empty House. So the Earl of Warwick excused the Matter, that he knew not of the Lord General's purpose; and so the Business slept, and never awaked more for Culmer.

The Lord Brook was now in Action. A bitter Enemy he was to the Church, and her Government by Bishops. On March: 2: he * 16.37 was going to give Onset upon the Close of the Cathedral at Lich∣field: And as he was taking view of the place, from a Window in a House opposite to the Close, and his Bever up, so that a Musket at such a distance could have done him but little harm; yet was he Shot in the left Eye, and killed Dead in the place without speak∣ing one word. Whence I shall observe three things. First, that this great and known Enemy to Cathedral-Churches died thus fear∣fully in the Assault of a Cathedral. A fearful manner of Death in such a Quarrel! Secondly, that this happened upon Saint Chads Day, of which Saint the Cathedral bears the Name: Thirdly, that this Lord coming from Dinner about two Years since, from the Lord Herbert's House in Lambeth, upon some Discourse of St. Paul's Church, then in their Eye upon the Water, said to some young Lords that were with him, that he hoped to live to see that one Stone of that Building should not be left upon another. But that Church stands yet, and that Eye is put out that hoped to see the Ruins of it. Many heavy Accidents have already fallen out in these unnatural Wars; and God alone knows, how many more shall, before they end: But I intend no History but of my own sad Misfortunes; nor would I have mentioned this, but that it relates to the Church, which for my Calling sake, I take as a part, and a near one of my self.

On Friday, March 24. one Mr. Ford came to me to the Tower, and * 16.38 told me, there was a Plot to send me, and my Lord of Ely Bishop Wren, as Delinquents, to New England, within fourteen days: And that Mr. Wells, a Minister that came thence, offer'd Wagers of it.

The Meeting where he heard this, was (he said) at Mr. Barnes, a Mer∣cers House in Friday-Street, a Son in Law of Mr. Fords. This Gen∣tleman told me he was a Suffolk man; but I never saw him before, and was doubtful of the Truth of his Relation: Partly, because I knew no motive he had to take such care of me, being a Stranger to him; And partly, because it could not sink into me, that the Ho∣nourable Houses, after so long Imprisonment, would send me into such a Banishment, without hearing me or my Cause. Yet he protested the truth of it very deeply, and wished me to endeavour to pre∣vent it. That I knew not how to do: For to Petition against it upon such a private Information, might rather call it on, than keep it off, seeing what an edge there was against me. Therefore I re∣ferred my self to God, my constant Anchor, and so rested my Thoughts as well as I could.

It was now known in the House to the Lord General's Friends, that I had a resolution not to give Chartham to Mr. Corbet: And it may be it was thought also, that I did but pretend the Kings Letters about it; and that if some other Man were named, against whom I had no Exception, it might be that I would give it: And if I did give it, then they should discover, that either I had no Letters from the King; Or that I could make bold to dispence with them, so Mr. Corbet were not the Man. And if they could have gained this upon me, that notwithstanding his Majesties Letters, I would have given that Benefice to another man, they would then have recalled their Order * 16.39 from him, and commanded me for Mr. Corbet.

That this my Conjecture hath Truth in it, seems evident to me by all the future carriage of this Business. For one Mr. Hudson came and Preached at the Tower, and gave all men very good content: And on Tuesday, March 28. he brought me an Order from * 16.40 the Lords, requiring me to give Chartham to him. And this Order was known in the Tower: For some Prisoners of Note said, I might do well to give it him, being so good a Preacher. My answer to him was fair; yet I told him truly, that the King had written to me for another: That I had promised to give it, or lapse it, as his Majesty required me: That the King never asked any of me till now: That I hoped the Parliament would not take it ill, that I gave this one at the Kings requisition, since I had already given as many Be∣nefices upon their Orders, as came to above Eight hundred Pounds a year, passing by my own Friends and Chaplains, honest and able men: And for his particular, I might live to pleasure him with another, so I were not over-pressed concerning this.

Hudson either mistook my Answer, or wilfully misreported it and me to the House; and thereupon came another Order to me of April 11. to give him Chartham. I was not willing to be mistaken a∣gain, * 16.41 and therefore desired Mr. Lieutenant to deliver me a Petition to the House on Thursday, Apr. 13. in which I set forth my true Answer, * 16.42 as is above expressed, and in all Humility desired their Favour. That very day another quick Order was made for Hudson, and brought to me the next day, April 14. I Petitioned the House again, the * 16.43 same day, with all submission; yet professed, that I could not diso∣bey

the King in so fair a Command. When all this would not serve, the Mask was pulled off, and a peremptory Order, bearing date April 21. was brought to me on Saturday April 22. to Col∣late * 16.44 Chartham upon Mr. Edw. Corbet. And upon Monday April 24. * 16.45 I humbly gave my Answer, as before; but in the softest Terms I could express it, and in a Petition.

Monday, May 1. the Windows of my Chappel at Lambeth were * 16.46 defaced, and the Steps to the Communion-Table torn up. And on Tuesday, May 2. the Cross in Cheapside was taken down, to cleanse * 16.47 that great Street of Superstition. The same day in prosecution of the former Plot, March 24. it was moved in the House of Com∣mons, to send me to New England; but it was rejected. The Plot was laid by Peters, Wells, and others of that Crew, that so they might insult over me.

Then followed an Exemplary piece of Justice, and another of * 16.48 Mercy. Of Justice: For my Goods in Lambeth-House, and my Books were seized upon, and my Goods set to Sale by Captain Guest, Dickins, and Layton. And my Goods were sold, and scarce at a third part of their worth, all save what Layton took to him∣self, who usually said, all was his, House, Land, Goods and all. This was on Tuesday, May 9. And all this before any Proceedings had against me. And of Mercy: For the same day there came out an Order, for my farther Restraint, that I might not go out of my Lodging without my Keeper, so much as to take Air.

Much about this time I received another Letter from his Ma∣jesty, in which he requires me (as he had formerly done, for Char∣tham in particular) that as oft as any Benefice or other Spiritual Promotion whatsoever should fall void in my Gift, I should dispose it only to such as his Majesty should name unto me; Or if any Command lay otherwise upon me from either, or both Houses of Parliament, I should then let them fall into Lapse, that he might dispose of them to Men of worth.

Upon Tuesday, May 16. there came out an Ordinance of both Houses, * 16.49 (for now the Order was grown up into an Ordinance) requiring me to give no Benefice, or Spiritual Promotion now void, or to be void at any time before my Trial, but with leave and Order of both Houses of Parliament. This Ordinance was delivered unto me the next day: And upon the reading of it I foresaw a Cloud rising over me, about this Business of Chartham, for which I did assure my self the Ordinance was made: And soon after came another Ordi∣nance, * 16.50 requiring me by vertue of the said Ordinance to give Char∣tham to Mr. Corbet. This Order was not brought to me till Friday, May 26. Then it was brought unto me by Mr. Corbet himself, * 16.51 and Sir John Corbet a Parliament Man came with him. Now up∣on * 16.52 the Tuesday before I had sent an humble Petition to the Lords for Maintenance: The Prayer of which Petition was as follows: Humbly prayeth that your Lordships will take his sad condition into your Honourable Consideration, that somewhat may be allowed him out of his Estate to supply the Necessities of life; assuring himself that in Honour and Justice you will not suffer him either to beg or starve. And your Petitioner shall ever pray, &c. The Answer which this Petition had

in the Lords House was, Let him give Chartham as is Ordered, and then We will consider of Maintenance. So my Petition was sent down to the House of Commons. To the last forenamed Order, I gave my former Answer, and humbly Petitioned the Lords accordingly, May 27. following. So they departed, and as they went down the Hill together, Sir John was over-heard to say to Mr. Corbet thus: The Archbishop hath Petitioned the Lords for Maintenance, and they have sent his Petition to the Commons; And since he will not give you the Benefice, I'll warrant you he shall have no Maintenance. And so accordingly my Petition was rejected in the House of Commons.

CAP. XVIII.

THis was Wednesday, the last of May: It was the Fast-Day. * 16.53 A Search came betimes in the Morning into the Tower upon all the Prisoners, for Letters and other Papers. But I have some Reasons to think the Search had a special aim at me. First, be∣cause following me thus close about Chartham as they did, I con∣ceive they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 desirous to see whether I had any such Letter from the King, as I pretended: If I had not, they had advantage against me for my Falshood; if I had, they meant to see what Secret pas∣sed from his Majesty to me. Secondly, because I had lately Petiti∣oned for Maintenance, and by this Search they might see what I had by me. And he that searched my Chamber, told me upon occasion, that he was to take all Papers which might discover De∣linquents Estates. Thirdly, because all other Prisoners had their Papers re-delivered them before the Searchers went from the Tower; except some few Verses of Sir Edward Hern's: But mine were car∣ried to the Committee; yet with promise, that I should have them again within two or three Days. Fourthly, because as Layton was put into Lambeth-House, so my implacable Enemy, Mr. Pryn, was picked out (as a Man whose Malice might be trusted) to make the search upon me. And he did it exactly.

The manner of the Search upon me was thus. Mr. Pryn came into the Tower, with other Searchers, so soon as the Gates were open. Other Men went to other Prisoners; he made haste to my Lodging, Commanded the Warder to open my Doors, left two Musketeers Centinels below, that no Man might go in or out, and one at the Stair-head; with three other, which had their Muskets ready Cocked, he came into my Chamber, and found me in Bed (as were also my Servants in theirs.) I presently thought upon my Blessed Sa∣viour, when Judas led in the Swords and Staves about him. Mr. Pryn seeing me safe in Bed, falls first to my Pockets to rifle them; and by that time my two Servants came running in, half ready. I de∣manded the sight of his Warrant; he shewed it me, and therein was Expressed, that he should search my Pockets. The Warrant came from the Close Committee, and the Hands that were to it, were * 16.54 these. E. Manchester, W. Saye and Seale, Wharton, H. Vane, Gilbert Gerard, and John Pim. Did they remember when they gave this Warrant, how odious it was to Parliaments, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of themselves, to have the Pockets of Men searched? When my Pockets had been sufficiently ransacked, I rose and got my Cloaths about me, and so half ready, with my Gown upon my Shoulders, he held me in the search till past Nine of the Clock in the Morning. He took from me Twenty and One Bundles of Papers, which I had prepared for my Defence; the two Letters before named, which came to me from his Gracious Majesty about Chartham and my other Benefices; the Scottish Service-Book, with such Directions as accompanied it; a little Book, or Diary, containing all the Occurrences of my Life;

and my Book of Private Devotions; both these last written through with my own Hand. Nor could I get him to leave this last; but he must needs see what passed between God and me: A thing, I think, scarce ever offer'd to any Christian. The last place which he rifled, was a Trunk which stood by my Bed-side. In that he found nothing, but about Forty Pound in Money for my necessary Ex∣pences (which he meddled not with,) and a Bundle of some Gloves. This Bundle he was so careful to open, as that he caused each Glove to be looked into; upon this I tender'd him one pair of the Gloves; which he refusing, I told him he might take them, and fear no Bribe, for he had already done me all the Mischief he could, and I asked no Favour of him: So he thanked me, took the Gloves, bound up my Papers, left two Centinels at my Door, (which were not dismissed till the next Day Noon,) and went his way. I was somewhat troubled to see my self used in this manner; but knew no help but in God, and the Patience which he had given me: And how his Gracious Providence over me, and his Goodness to me, wrought upon all this, I shall in the End discover, and will mag∣nisie, however it succeed with me.

CAP. XIX.

UPon my last Answer to the House concerning Chartham, there came out an Ordinance against me, to take all my Temporalities into the Parliament's hands; that so they might give not only Chartham, but all things else, which fell into my Gift: And because it is an Ordi∣nance of a great Power and Extent, I shall set it down, as it was Printed and Published, Junij 10. being Saturday. * 16.55

Whereas by an Ordinance of the Lords and Commons, in this pre∣sent Parliament, of the 17. of May, 1643. the Arch-Bishop of Can∣terbury * 16.56 is required, from time to time until his Tryal, to Collate such fit Persons unto any Ecclesiastical Preferment in his Patronage, as shall by both Houses be Nominated unto him; and in pursuance of the said Ordinance, another Ordinance of the Lords and Commons, past the 20th of the same Month, requiring the said Arch-Bishop to Collate upon Ed. Corbet, Fellow of Merton Colledge in the University of Oxford, the Rectory of Chartham in the County of Kent, void by the Death of Dr. Bargrave, the last Incumbent; and whereas the said Arch-Bishop * 16.57 refuseth Obedience to the said Ordinance: It is therefore Ordered, and be it so Ordained by the Lords and Com∣mons in Parliament, that all the Temporalities of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury be hereby Sequestred, by, and unto the Parliament; And William Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury † 16.58 Suspended ab Offi∣cio & Beneficio, & omni, & omnimodâ Jurisdictione Archiepiscopali, until he be either Convicted or Acquitted of High Treason, for which he stands now Accused; and whatsoever Livings, Dignities, or Ecclesiastical Promotions, in the said Arch-Bishop's Gift or Colla∣tion are, or hereafter shall be void, shall henceforth be Instituted and Inducted unto by the Arch-Bishop's Vicar General, or any other having Authority in * 16.59 this behalf, upon the Nomination and Re∣commendation of both Houses of Parliament, during the time of the Suspension and Seque stration aforesaid. And upon this Ordinance it is Ordered, and be it so Ordained by the Lords and Commons in Parliament, that the said Ed. Corbet be, and is hereby Nominated and Recommended, forthwith upon sight hereof, to be Admitted, Instituted and Inducted by the Vicar General aforesaid, or any other having Authority in † 16.60 this behalf, into the said Rectory of Chartham, Ratione suspensionis Domini Gulielmi Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis * 16.61 Temporalium Archiepiscopatûs, in Manibus Supremae Curiae Parliamenti jam existentium, the same belonging unto their Gift. And it is hereby farther Ordained, by the Lords and Commons in Parliament, that during the Suspension and Sequestration aforesaid, the Juris∣diction of the said Arch-Bishop shall be Executed and Exercised by his Vicar General, and other his inferiour Judges and Officers, as for∣merly the same hath been.

This Ordinance was laid as a great Punishment upon me: But I humbly thank both Houses for it, as for the greatest Benefit they have bestowed on me since my Troubles; especially since the Seque∣stration

of my Jurisdiction, Novemb. 2. 1641. For it appears before in this History, how ever since that time I have been troubled for every Benefice which hath fallen in my Gift; disinabled to prefer any Friend or Chaplain of my own, were he never so worthy: And (which is worse by much) forced to admit such Men, how unworthy so-ever, as were by them Nominated to me, or else fall under a Contempt of their Ordinances, and such Arbitrary Punishment as they shall there∣upon load me with: Whereas now, I am freed both from the Trou∣ble and the Sin of admitting unworthy Persons into the Church-Ser∣vice, and leave them to the Business, and the Account for it.

On Sunday, Junij 11. One came and Preached at the Tower, (his * 16.62 Name I could not learn.) In his Sermon, after he had liberally railed on me, he told the Auditory, that Mr. Pryn had found a Book in my Pocket, which would discover great things: This to inflame the Peo∣ple against me; Et si non satis insanirent suâ sponte, instigare. This is Zealous Preaching! God forgive their Malice.

An Ordinance passed on Munday, Junij 12. that the Synod of Di∣vines * 16.63 formerly Named by both Houses (not chosen by the Clergy) should begin to sit on the first of July following: And they did be∣gin * 16.64 to sit that day; Dr. Twiss in the Chair; and he made the Latin Sermon. The Names of these Synodical Men, are to be seen in the Ordinance Printed Junij 12. Where any Man that will, may see a great, if not the greater part of them, Brownists, or Independents, or New-England-Ministers, if not worse, or at the best refractory Persons to the Doctrine or Discipline, or both, of the Church of England Esta∣blished by Law, and now brought together to Reform it. An excel∣lent Conclave! But I pray God, that befal not them, which Tully * 16.65 observes fell upon Epicurus, Si quae corrigere voluit, deteriora fecit; He made every thing worse that he went about to mend. I shall for my part never deny, but that the Liturgy of the Church of England may be made better; but I am sure withal it may easily be made worse. And howsoever, it would become this Synod well, to remem∣ber, that there is a Convocation of the English Prelates and Clergy, lawfully Chosen and Summoned, and by no Supream or Legal Autho∣rity as yet dissolved: And can there be two National Synods at one time, but that one must be irregular? Belike we shall fall to it in the Donatists way: They set up Altare contra Altare in Africk; and these will set up Synodum contra Synodum in England: And this, with∣out God's Infinite Mercy, will bring forth a Schism, fierce enough to rent and tear Religion out of this Kingdom: Which God for the Merits and Mercies of Christ forbid.

A Committee of the House of Commons sent Mr. Dobson my Con∣trowler to me to the Tower, to require me to send them word under my Hand, what Originals I had of the Articles of Religion Established, 1562, & 1571. This was on Wednesday, July 12. And I returned by * 16.66 him the same day this Answer in Writing, with my Name to it.

The Original Articles of 1571. I could never find in my Paper-Study at Lambeth, or any where else: And whether any Copy of them were ever left there, I cannot tell. The Original Articles of 1562. with many Hands to them, I did see, and peruse there: But whether the Bishops Hands were to them or not, I cannot

remember.

This Answer satisfied them; but what their Aim was I cannot tell, unless they meant to make a search about the two first Lines in the twentieth Article, concerning the Power of the Church; in these words: The Church hath Power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and Authority in Controversies of Faith: Which words are left out in divers printed Copies of the Articles, and are not in the one and twen∣tieth Article of Edw. 6. nor in the Latin Copy of the Articles 1571. But in the Original Articles of 1562. the words are plain and manifest, without any Interlining at all. If this were their Aim, 'tis probable we shall see somewhat, by what their Synod shall do concerning that Article.

On Tuesday, August 3. my Servant Mr. Edw. Lenthrop, came to me * 16.67 and told me, that the day before he met with Sir K. Digbye, who had the leave to go out of Prison, (by the Suit of the French Queen) and to Travel into France. But before he took his Journey, he was to come before a Committee, and there (he said) he had been. It seems it was some Committee about my Business; for he told Mr. Lenthrop, and wished him to tell it me, that the Committee took special notice of his Acquaintance with me, and Examined him strictly concerning me and my Religion, whether he did not know, that I was offer'd to be made a Cardinal; and many other such like things. That he An∣swer'd them, That he knew nothing of any Cardinal-ship offer'd me: And for my Religion he had Reason to think, I was truly and really as I professed my self; for I had laboured with him against his return to the Church of Rome: (Which is true, and I have some of my Pa∣pers yet to shew.) But he farther sent me word, that their Malice was great against me; though he saw plainly, they were like Men that groped in the Dark, and were to seek what to lay to my Charge. But soon after Mutterings arose, that Mr. Pryn in his Search had found great Matters against me, and that now I should be brought to Tryal out of Hand.

Some Men now it seems made Overture for Peace, and some good hopes of it began to shew themselves (as it was then said) in both Houses. This was on Saturday, Aug. 5. But there wanted not those, * 16.68 which made themselves ready for Battel: For on Sunday, Aug. 6. Printed Bills were pasted up in London, to animate the People to go to Westminster against Peace; and the like Bills were Read in some Churches. Excellent Church-work! And on Munday, Aug. 7. some * 16.69 Thousands, Men and Women; went to the Parliament and clamo∣rously Petitioned against Peace; and the next day five or six Hun∣dred * 16.70 Women, and these were as earnest for Peace: But ye may ob∣serve, 'tis but Hundreds for Thousands that came against it. Yet on Wednesday, Aug. 9. the number of Women increased, when it seems * 16.71 Men durst not appear. But their desire for Peace was answer'd by some Troops of Horse which were sent for, by which some of the Women were killed, and divers of them shrewdly wounded. God of his Mercy set an end to these bloody Distractions. In the midst of this Fury of the People, on Thursday, Aug. 10. came out Rome's Ma∣ster-Piece. * 16.72 This Book Mr. Pryn sets forth in print, upon occasion of some Papers which he had in his search taken from me: And 'twas done to drive the People headlong into mischief, whose Malice against

me needed not his setting on. After this the Diurnal and other Pam∣phlets began to mention me, and that now a Charge was drawing up against me.

Upon Friday, Aug. 11. Sir Robert Harlowe was made Lieutenant of * 16.73 the Tower, in the room of Sir Jo. Conniers. And on Tuesday, Aug. 15. he removed Mr. Bray, who had been my Warder from my first Commitment to the Tower, and put Mr. Cowes, another of the War∣ders, to be my Keeper. The cause of this change I could never learn. The Nineteenth of Aug. after, being Saturday, Alderman Pennington, * 16.74 then Lord Mayor of London, was made Lieutenant of the Tower, and took possession of it. The next day being Sunday, in the Afternoon, * 16.75 one Preached in the Tower-Church, in a Buff-Coat and a Scarf, but had a Gown on. He told the People, they were all Blessed that dyed in this Cause, with much more such Stuff. His Name (as I then heard) was Kem, Parson or Vicar of * 16.76 Loe-Layton in Essex, and then Captain of a Troop of Horse. Quam bene conveniunt! But the next Sunday, Aug. 27. during the Afternoon Sermon, a Letter, Sub∣scribed * 16.77 John Browne, was thrust under the Door of my Prison. When I opened it, I found it a most bitter Libel. God forgive the Author of it. On Munday, Septem. 11. the new Lieutenant the Lord Mayor, * 16.78 changed my Warder again, removed Mr. Cowes, and put Mr. Spencer to attend me. And when I moved him, that I might not have such often change put upon me, as no other Prisoner had; His Answer was, that if he did not remove Mr. Cowes, the Committee would. So I knew not how to help my self, but by Patience.

Then came the Covenant, that excellent Piece of ...... from Scotland, and was Sworn by the Parliament and the Synod, in St. Mar∣garets * 16.79 Church in Westminster, on Munday, September 25. The Effects which followed, were as strict as the Covenant: For on Munday, Octob. 3. the Order made that time Twelve-Month, was renewed, and * 16.80 all Prisoners locked up, and no Man suffered to speak with them, but by leave from the Lieutenant, and in the presence of their several Warders respectively.

CAP. XX.

BY this time Mr. Pryn's malice had hammer'd out some∣thing: * 16.81 And on Tuesday, Octob. 24. an Order was brought me from the Lords, Dated Octob. 23. with a Copy of ten Additional Ar∣ticles, brought up by the Commons against me. This Order requi∣red me to make my Answer in Writing by the Thirtieth of the same Month. These Articles charged me not with Treason only, as the former did, but with Treason, and other high Crimes and Misdemeanours. I sent instantly by the same Messenger a Petition for longer time; for Means out of my Estate to Fee my Councel, and bear the necessary Charge of my Trial; for Councel, and for a Solicitor, and some Ser∣vants to attend my Business. The Lords, I humbly thank them, gave me longer time, and assigned me Mr. Hearn, Mr. Chute, Mr. Hales; and at my Petition, * 16.82 added Mr. Gerrard. For Money they referred me to the Committee of Sequestrations; but delayed their Answer concerning my Ser∣vants, and the Papers of my Defence, which Mr. Pryn took from me. For though he promised me a faithful Restitution of them within three or four days, yet to this day (being almost five Months after) I had received but three Bundles of the Twenty and one, which he had from me.

Friday, Octob. 27. I Petitioned again, that the Papers of my De∣fence * 16.83 being (as I was informed) in the hands of the Close Com∣mittee, might be delivered unto me; and sent my Petition with the Order of the Lords annexed to the Committee for Sequestrations. There many were very favourable, till Mr. Glyn was pleased to say, They were not to allow me Means, and there was a known Course in Law, which was, that I might go on in Formâ Pauperis; and so was left without any Allowance out of my Estate, to Fee my Councel, or sup∣ply other Wants. This succeeding so ill with me, I Petitioned the Lords again on Saturday, Octob. 28. and then Mr. Dell my Se∣cretary * 16.84 was assigned me for my Solicitor; and I was allowed two * 16.85 Servants more to go about my Business: And the House of Commons by their Order agreed to the Lords, that I should have Copies of any the Papers taken from me; but it should be at my own Charge. Won∣derful Favour this, and as much Justice! My Estate all taken from me, and my Goods sold, before ever I came to Hearing: And then I may take Copies of my Papers at my own Charge.

On Tuesday, Octob. 31. I humbly Petitioned the Lords for direction * 16.86 of my Councel, how to carry themselves towards me and my Defence: and that they would Honourably be pleased, in regard the Articles Char∣ged me with Treason and Misdemeanour, and were intermixed one with another; to distinguish which were for Treason, and which for Mis∣demeanour; as also for longer time to put in my Answer. The Lords upon this gave an Order, that I should have time till Novemb. 13. but

would declare no Opinion touching the distinguishment of the Arti∣cles, * 16.87 but left me to my Councel to advise as they pleased. My Coun∣cel told me plainly, I were as good have no Councel, if the Articles were not distinguished; for they were so woven one within another, and so knit up together in the Conclusion, that they might refer all to Treason, and so they be suffer'd to give me no Councel at all in mat∣ter of Fact. Hereupon they drew me another Petition to the same effect, which I caused to be delivered Novemb. 6. But it received the * 16.88 same Answer. Then Novemb. 7. being Wednesday I Petitioned the House of Commons to the same purpose: And Novemb. 8. this my Petition * 16.89 was read in the House of Commons; and, after a short Debate, the Re∣solution was, that they being my Accusers would not meddle with any thing, but left all to the Order of the Lords, before whom the Business was, and my Councel's own Judgment thereupon. This seemed very hard, not only to my self and my Councel, but to all indifferent Men, that heard it. In the mean time I could resort no whither but to Patience and God's Mercy.

Novemb. 13. I appeared in the Parliament-House according to the * 16.90 Order, and was at the Bar. That which I spake to the Lords was this:

That I had no Skill to judge of the Streights into which I might fall by my Plea, which I had resolved on, being left with∣out all assistance of my Councel, in regard of the nature and form of the Impeachment, that was against me. That yet my Innocency prompted me to a ready Obedience of their Lordships Order, casting my self wholly upon God's Mercy, their Lordships Justice, and my own Innocency. Then I humbly desired that their Lordships Order first, and the Impeachment after might be read.

This done, I put in my Answer in Writing, as I was or∣dered to do, and humbly prayed it might be * 16.91 entred. My Answer was: All Advantages of Law against this Impeachment saved and reserved to this Defendant, he pleads, Not Guilty to all, and every part of the Impeachment, in manner and form as 'tis Charged in the Articles: And to this Answer I put my Hand. My Answer being thus put in, I humbly besought their Lordships

to take into their Honourable Consideration, my great Years, being Threescore and ten compleat, and my Memory, and other Faculties, by Age and Affliction much decayed: My long Imprisonment, wanting very little of three whole Years, and this last year little better than close Imprisonment: My want of skill and knowledge in the Laws to defend my self: The Generality and Incertainty of almost all the Articles, so that I cannot see any Particulars against which I may provide my self. In the next place I did thankfully acknowledge their Lordships Honourable Favour in assigning me such Councel as I desired: But I told their Lordships withal, that as my Councel were most ready to obey their Lordships in all the Commands laid up∣on them, so there were certain Doubts arisen in them, how far they might advise me without Offence; considering the Charges against me were so interwoven, and left without all distinguish∣ment,

what is intended as a Charge of Treason, and what of Crime and Misdemeanour: That to remove these Doubts, I had humbly besought their Lordships twice for distinguishment, by se∣veral Petitions: That their Lordships not thinking it fit to distin∣guish, I have without advice of Councel put in my Plea, as their Lordships see. But do most humbly pray, that their Lordships will take me so far into Consideration, as that I may not lose the Benefit of my Councel for Law in all, or any; and for Law and Fact, in whatsoever is not Charged as Treason, when it shall be distinguished: As still my Prayers were, that by their Lordships Wisdom and Honourable Direction, some way might be found to distinguish them: And that having (not without much dif∣ficulty) prevailed with my Councel to attend; their Lordships would be pleased to hear them speak in this perplexed Busi∣ness.

While I was speaking this, the Lords were very attentive, and two of them took Pen and Paper at the Table, and took Notes: And it was unanimously granted, that my Councel should * 16.92 be heard; and so they were. And the Order then made upon their Hearing was, that they should advise me, and be heard themselves in all things concerning matter of Law, and in all things, whether of Law or Fact, that * 16.93 was not Charged as Treason; and that they would think upon the distinguishment in time convenient. This was all I could get, and my Councel seem'd somewhat better con∣tent, that they had gotten so much. Not long after this, I heard from good Hands, that some of the Lords confessed, I had much de∣ceived their expectation; for they found me in a Calm, but thought I would have been stormy. And this being so, I believe the two Lords so careful at their Pen and Ink, made ready to observe any Disadvantages to me, which they thought Choler and Indignation might thrust forth. But I praise God the Giver, I am better acquainted with Patience, than they think I am.

So this my main Business staid a while. In the mean time, that I might not rust, I was warned, Decemb. 8. to appear in Parliament * 16.94 the 18th. of that Month, as a Collateral Defendant in a Case of Smart against Dr. Cosin, formerly heard in the High Commission. This Cause had been called upon both in this and former Parlia∣ments; but I never heard, that I was made a Defendant till now: Nor do I know any thing of the Cause, but that in the High Com∣mission I gave my Vote according to my Conscience, and Law too, (for ought I know) and must refer my self to the Acts of that Court. On Wednesday, Decemb. 13. I Petitioned for Councel in this * 16.95 Cause, and had the same assigned me: And on the 18. day I ap∣peared according to my Summons, but I was not called in, and the Business put off to that day three Weeks.

On Thursday, Decemb. 28. which was Innocents day, one Mr. Wells, * 16.96 a New-England Minister, came to me, and in a boisterous manner de∣manded to know, whether I had Repented or not? I knew him not, till he told me he was Suspended by me, when I was Bishop of Lon∣don, and he then a Minister in Essex. I told him, if he were Suspended,

it was doubtless according to Law. Then upon a little further Speech, I recalled the Man to my Remembrance, and what care I took in Conference with him at London-House, to recall him from some of his turbulent ways; but all in vain: And now he inferred out of the good words I then gave him, that I Suspended him against my Conscience. In conclusion he told me, I went about to bring Popery into the Kingdom, and he hoped I should have my Reward for it. When I saw him at this heighth, I told him, he and his Fel∣lows, what by their Ignorance, and what by their Railing, and other boisterous Carriage, would soon actually make more Papists by far, than ever I intended; and that I was a better Protestant than he, or any of his Followers. So I left him in his Heat. This Man was brought to my Chamber by Mr. Isaac Pennington, Son to the Lieutenant.

By this time something was made ready again in my great Busi∣ness: * 16.97 And Wednesday at Night, Januar. 3. I received an Order for my Appearance, and to Answer to the Impeachment against me, on the Munday following, Januar. 8. This Summons seem'd sudden after so great an Intermission: Yet I could not Petition for more time, till Saturday, Januar. 6. because (as the Messenger told me) the House * 16.98 sat not again till then. Then I Petitioned for more time, in regard my Councel were not in Town: And I had time given till Tuesday, Januar. 16. and that Day set peremptorily. Notwithstanding the short∣ness of this time, my Councel being out of Town, as not expecting it, I was on Sunday, Januar. 7. Ordered again to appear in Mr. Smart's Suit the next day. The Warrant bare date a Fortnight before; yet partly to Sanctifie the Sabbath * 16.99, and partly to shew his great Civility to me in giving me Warning, I was not served with it till Sunday night at Seven of the Clock. The next Morning I went to Westmin∣ster, as I was commanded: But I was sent back, and not so much as * 16.100 called upon. So, beside the Charge I was at, that Day was lost and taken from me and my Business, as short time as I had given me.

Then Tuesday came on, Januar. 16. And whereas I was Ordered to * 16.101 appear at the Lords House, at Nine in the Morning, I was by ano∣ther Order put off to One of the Clock in the Afternoon. Then I appeared. The Committee that were to press the Evidence against me, began to proceed upon the former general Articles, as well as upon the latter. But to the first Articles I had never been called to Answer, nor ever joyned Issue. Upon this, there was much looking one upon another, as if they meant to ask where the Failure was: But by this means there could not then be any Proceeding. So I was there peremptorily Ordered to put in my Answer on Munday, Jan. 22. both to the Original and to the Additional Articles, and in Writing.

At this day and time I appeared, as I was Ordered to do; but could not obtain of the Lords, either to take my former Answer off from the File, if I must put in another; nor to distinguish the Ar∣ticles, which were Treason, and which Misdemeanour: Nor leave for my Councel to speak to the Generality and Uncertainty of the Origi∣nal

Articles, which they professed were such, * 16.102 as no Man living could prepare Answer for. But I must put in my Answer pre∣sently, or be taken Pro Confesso. So in these Streights I put in my Answer to both Articles; which follows in haec verba.

THE Humble Answer of William Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, to the first and farther Articles of Impeachment brought up by the Honourable House of Commons against him, and by Order of the Right Honourable the Lords in Parliament of the 16th of this Instant, directed to be put in.

As to the 13th Article of the said first Articles, and the Matters there∣in charged, and all Matters or Things in the same, or any of the rest of the said Articles contained, which concern any Act of Hostility, whether between the King and his Subjects, or between Subject and Subject, or which may be conceived to arise upon the coming of any English Army against Scotland, or the coming of the Scottish Army into England; or upon any Action, Attempt, Assistance, Coun∣sel or Device, having relation thereunto, and falling out by the occasion of the late Troubles, preceding the late conclusion of the Treaty, and return of the Scottish Army into Scotland: This De∣fendant saith; That it is Enacted by an Act made during the Sitting of this present Parliament, that the same, and whatsoever hath ensued thereupon, whether Trenching upon the Laws and Liber∣ties of the Church and Kingdom, or upon his Majesty's Honour and Authority, in no time hereafter may be called in question, or resented as a Wrong, National or Personal; and that no mention be made thereof in time coming, neither in Judgment nor out of Judgment; but that it be held and reputed, as though never such things had been thought or wrought; as by the said Act may more at large appear: With this, that this Defendant doth Aver, that he is none of the Persons Excepted by the said Act, or the said Offences charged upon this Defendant, any of the Offences excepted by the said Act.

And as to all the rest of the said first and farther Articles, this Defendant, saving to himself all Advantages of Exception to the said Articles, Humbly saith; He is not Guilty of all, or any the Matters by the said Articles charged, in such Manner and Form as the same are by the said Articles charged against him.

This day the Thames was so full of Ice, that I could not go by Wa∣ter. It was Frost and Snow, and a most bitter day. I went there∣fore with the Lieutenant in his Coach, and twelve Warders with Hal∣berts went all along the Streets. I could not obtain either the send∣ing of them before, or the suffering them to come behind, but with the Coach they must come; which was as good as to call the People about me. So from the Tower-gate to Westminster, I was sufficiently railed on, and reviled all the way. God of his Mercy forgive the misguided People. My Answer being put in, I was for that time

dismissed; and the Tyde serving me, I made a hard shift to return by Water.

And now, notwithstanding all this haste made to have my An∣swer in, Mr. Pryn cannot make this broken Business ready against me. Therefore to fill up some time, I was Ordered to be at the House again on Munday, Jan. 29. about Mr. Smart's Business. But * 16.103 being put to this Trouble and Charge, and shewed to the People for a farther Scorn, I was sent back again, and had nothing said to me.

All February passed over, and Mr. Pryn not yet ready; he had not yet sufficiently prepared his Witnesses. But on Munday, Mar. 4. an * 16.104 Order passed to call me to the House, to answer my Charge of High-Treason, on Tuesday, March 12. following. And on Saturday, March 9. I received a Note from the Committee, which were to press the Evi∣dence against me, what Articles they meant to begin with; which had a shew of some fair Respect; but the Generality and Uncertain∣ty of the Articles was such, as rendred it a bare shew only; no Par∣ticular being charged, concerning which I might provide for any Witnesses or Counter-proof.

CAP. XXI.

AND now being ready to enter upon the Hearing and the Tryal it self, I hold it necessary for me to acquaint the Reader with some General things before that begin: Partly to the end he may see the course of this Tryal, and the carriage which hath been in it; and partly to avoid the often and tedious Repetition, which else must necessarily be of some of them; and especially that they may not be mingled, either with the Evidence, or my Answers to it, to interrupt the Current, or make any thing more obscure.

1. The Committee appointed by the House of Commons, to manage and press the Evidence against me, were Serjeant Wilde, Mr. Browne, Mr. Maynard, Mr. Nicolas, Mr. Hill: But none spake at the Bar, but the first four; Mr. Hill was Consul-Bibulus; Mr. Pryn was trusted with the providing of all the Evidence, and was Relater and Prompter, and all: Never weary of any thing, so he might do me mischief. And I conceive in future times, it will not be the greatest Honour to these Proceedings, that he, a Man twice Censured in the High Court of Star-Chamber, set in the Pillory twice; once for Libelling the Queen's Majesty, and other Ladies of great Honour; and again for Libelling the Church, and the Government and Governours of it, the Bishops, and that had his Ears there cropt; should now be thought the only fit and indifferent Man to be trusted with the Witnesses and the Evidence against me, an Arch-Bishop, and sitting at his Censure.

2. Mr. Pryn took to him two Young Men to help to turn his Pa∣pers, and assist him; Mr. Grice, and Mr. Beck. Mr. Grice was Son to Mr. Tho. Grice, Fellow of St. Jo. Bapt. Colledge in my time, and after Beneficed near Stanes. I know not what the matter was, but I

could never get his Love: But he is Dead, and so let him rest. And now his Son succeeds, and it seems he Inherits his Father's Disposition towards me; for I hear his Tongue walks liberally o∣ver me in all Places. For Mr. Beck, he hath received some Cour∣tesie from me, and needed not in this kind to have expressed his Thankfulness. But I leave them both to do the Office which they have undertaken, and to grow up under the shadow of Mr. Pryn; God knows to what.

3. It was told me by a Man of good Credit, that was present and heard it, That my Name coming in question among some Gentlemen, after divers had spoken their Thoughts of me, and not all one way, a Parliament-Man being there, was pleased to say, That I was now an Old Man, and it would be happy both for me and the Parliament that God would be pleased to take me away: And yet I make no doubt, but that if Age, or Grief, or Faintness of Spirit had ended my Days, many of them would have done * 16.105 as Tiberius did in the case of Asinius Gallus; That is, Incusarent Casus, qui reum abstulissent, antequam coram Convinceretur. They would * 16.106 cry out against this hard Chance, that should take away so guilty a Person from publick Tryal, when they were even rea∣dy for it. After this when a Friend of mine bemoaned my Case to another Parliament-Man (of whom I had deserved very well) and said, he knew I was a good Man: The Parliament-Man replyed, Be he never so Good, we must now make him Ill for our own Sakes. What the meaning of these Speeches is, let understanding Men Judge. And even during my Tryal, some Citizens of London were heard to say, that indeed I answered many things very well: But yet I must suffer somewhat for the Honour of the House.

4. So all my Hopes now, under God, lay wholly on the Honour and Justice of the Lords. Yet seeing how fierce many of the Peo∣ple were against me, and how they had Clamour'd in other Cases, and that Mr. Pryn was set up at once to mischief and to scorn me, and foreseeing how full of Reproaches my Tryal was like to be; I had a strong Tentation in me, rather to desert my Defence, and put my self into the Hands of God's Mercy, than indure them: But when I considered what Offence I should commit therein against the Course of Justice, that that might not proceed in the ordinary way; what Offence against my own Innocency and my good Name, which I was bound both in Nature and Conscience to maintain by all good means, which by deserting my Cause could not be: But especially, what Offence against God, as if he were not able to protect me, or not willing, in Case it stood with my Eternal Happiness, and his blessed Will of Tryal of me in the mean time; I say when I considered this, I humbly besought God for Strength and Patience, and resolved to undergo all Scorns, and whatsoever else might happen to me, rather than betray my Innocency to the Malice of any.

5. And though my Hopes under God were upon the Lords, yet when my Tryal came on, it did somewhat trouble me, to see so few Lords in that great House. For at the greatest Presence that was any day of my Hearing, there were not above Fourteen, and usually

not above Eleven or Twelve. Of these, one third part at least, each day took, or had occasion to be gone, before the Charge of the day was half given. I never had any one day the same Lords all present at my Defence in the Afternoon, that were at my Charge in the Morning: Some leading Lords scarce present at my Charge, four days of all my long Tryal, nor three at my Defence: And which is most, no one Lord present at my whole Tryal, but the Right Honourable the Lord Gray of Wark, the Speaker, without whose Presence it could not be a House. In this Case I stood in regard of my Honourable Judges.

6. When my Hearing came on, usually my Charge was in giving till almost Two of the Clock. Then I was commanded to withdraw; and upon my Humble Petition for time to Answer, I had no more given me, than till Four the same Afternoon; scarce time enough ad∣visedly to peruse the Evidence: My Councel not suffer'd to come to me, till I had made my Answer, nor any Friend else, but my Solici∣tor Mr. Dell, to help to turn my Papers; and my Warder of the Tower to sit by to look to this. And this was not the least Cause, why I was at first Accused of no less than Treason; Ne quis necessario∣rum * 16.107 juvaret periclitantem Majestatis Crimina subdebantur, as it fell out in Silanus his Case, who had more Guilt about him (yet not of Trea∣son) than (God be thanked) I have; but was prosecuted with like Malice, as appears in that Story. At Four a Clock, or after, the House sate again; and I made my Answer: And if I produced any Witness, he was not suffer'd to be Sworn; so it was but like a Testi∣mony at large, which the Lords might the more freely believe or not believe, as they pleased. After my Answer, one, or more of the Com∣mittee, replyed upon me. By that time all was done, it was usually half an Hour past Seven. Then in the heat of the Year (when it overtook me) I was presently to go by Water to the Tower, full of Weariness, and with a Shirt as wet to my Back with Sweat, as the Water could have made it, had I fallen in: Yet I humbly thank God for it, he so preserved my Health, as that though I were weary and saint the day after, yet I never had so much as half an Hours Head∣ach, or other Infirmity, all the time of this Comfortless and Tedious Tryal.

7. Now for the Method, which I shall hold in this History of my Tryal, it shall be this. I will set down the Evidence given on each day, by it self, and my Answer to it. But whereas all the Evidence was given together, and so my whole Answer after; to avoid all looking back, and trouble of turning Leaves to compare the Answer with the Evidence, I will set down each particular Evidence, and my Answer to it, and so all along, that the indifferent Reader, may without farther trouble, see the force of the one, and the satisfaction given in the other, and how far every Particular is from Treason. And if I add any thing to my Answers in any place, either it is because in the shortness of time then given me to make my Answer, it came not to my present Thoughts; or if it did, yet I forbare to speak it with that sharpness; holding it neither fit nor safe in my Condition, to provoke either my Accusers or my Judges. And whatsoever is so added by me, in either of these respects, the Reader shall find it thus marked in the Margent, as here it stands in this.

8. Nor did I wrong Mr. Pryn, where I say, * 16.108 that for all the haste to put in my Answer, Jan. 22. he could not make this broken Business so soon ready against me: For 'tis well known, he kept a kind of School of Instruction for such of the Witnesses as he durst trust, that they might be sure to speak home to the pur∣pose he would have them. And this an Vtter Barrister, a Man of good Credit knows; who in the hearing of Men beyond Exception, said, The Arch-Bishop is a Stranger to me, but Mr. Pryn's tampering about the Witnesses, is so palpable and foul, that I cannot but pity him and cry shame of it. When I heard this, I sent to this Gentleman, to know if he tendered my Case so far, as to witness it before the Lords. The Answer I received was; that the Thing was true, and that very Indignation of it made him speak: But heartily prayed me, I would not produce him as a Witness; for if I did, the Times were such, he should be utterly undone: And 'tis not hard to guess by whom. Upon this I consulted some Friends; and upon regard of his safety on the one side, and my own doubt, lest if forced to his undoing, he might through Fear, blanch and mince the Truth to my own prejudice, who produced him; I forbare the business, and left Mr. Pryn to the Bar of Christ, whose Mercy give him Repentance, and amend him. But upon my Christi∣anity this Story is Truth.

CAP. XXII. The First Day of my Hearing.

AND now I come to Tuesday, March 12. the Day appointed * 16.109 for my Tryal to begin; and begin it did. When I was come, and settled at the Bar, Serjeant Wilde made a Solemn Speech * 16.110 for Introduction. I had a Character given me before of this Gen∣tleman, which I will forbear to express; but in this Speech of his, and his future Proceedings with me, I found it exactly true. His Speech my decayed Memory cannot give you at large; but a Ske∣leton of it I here present, according to such Limbs as my brief * 16.111 Notes then taken, can now call to my Memory.

He began, and told the Lords, That the Children, which I had travel'd with, were now come to the Birth; and that my Acti∣ons were so foul, and my Treason so great, as that the like could not be read in any History; nay so great, as that Nullus Poet a fin∣gere, No Poet could ever fain the like: And that if all Treason were lost, and not to be found in any Author what it is, it might be recovered and found out in me and my Actions; with divers Pieces of Latin Sentences to this effect. [And though these high and loud Expressions troubled me much at the present; yet I could not but think, that in this Canto of his he was much like one of them which cry up and down the City, Have you any old Ends of Gold and Silver?]

After this he proceeded to give Reasons why I was not sooner proceeded against, having now lain by it above three years. The first Reason he gave, was the Distractions of the Time. [And they indeed were now grown great; but the Distractions which were now, can be no Argument why I was not proceeded against at the beginning of the Parliament, when things were in some better quiet.] His second Reason was the * 16.112 Death of some Persons. [But this could be no reason at all: For if the Persons he speaks of were Wit∣nesses against me, more might die, but the Dead could not be made alive again by this delay; unless Mr. Serjeant had some hope, the Resurrection might have been by this time, that so he might have produced them. And if the Persons were Members of the House of Commons, as all Men know Mr. Pym was in the Chair for Prepara∣tion of my Tryal; Then this is known too, that Mr. Pym came up to the Committee of Lords full of great hopes, to prove God knows what against me. The Persons to be examined, were William Lord Bishop of London, and Matthew Lord Bishop of Ely, my very Wor∣thy Friends, and Men like to know as much of me as any Men. A Lord then present told me, there were some Eighteen or Nineteen Interrogatories, upon which these Bishops were to be Examined a∣gainst me, concerning my Intercourse with Rome; but all were built upon the first, which was their knowledge of the Man, who (it

seems) was thought to be my Chief Agent in that Secret. But both the Bishops denying upon their Oaths, that they, or either of them ever knew any such Man, all the rest of the Interrogatories, what Relations he had to me, and the like, must needs fall to nothing, as they did: And the Lord told me farther, he never saw Mr. Pym, and the rest, so abashed at any thing in his Life. After this Mr. Pym (as 'tis well known) gave over that Chair, despairing to do that a∣gainst me, which was desired.] His third Reason, was a good large one, and that was * 16.113 other Impediments. [And that's true, some Im∣pediments there were, no doubt, or else I had come sooner to Hear∣ing. And, as I conceive, a chief Impediment was, that there was not a Man whose Malice would make him diligent enough to search into such a forsaken Business, till Mr. Pryn offered himself to that Service: For I think I may be confident, that that Honourable and Great House would not seek any Man out of their own Body for any such Imployment, had not Suit, some way or other, been made for it.]

After these Reasons given for the delay of my Tryal, he fell upon me again as foul as at first; as that I was the Author of all the Ex∣travagancies in the Government, and of all the Concussions in the State: That the Quality of my Person aggravated my Crime: That my Abilities and Gifts were great, but that I perverted them all: And that I was guilty of * 16.114 Treason in the highest Altitude. [These were the Liveries, which he liberally gave me, but I had no mind to wear them: And yet I might not desire him to wear this Cloth himself, considering where I then stood, and in what Condi∣tion.]

This Treason in the Altitude, he said, was in my Endeavour to al∣ter the Religion established by Law, and to subvert the Laws them∣selves: And that to effect these I left no way unattempted. For Religion, he told the Lords, That I laboured a Reconciliation with Rome: That I maintained Popish and Arminian Opinions: That I suffered * 16.115 Transubstantiation, Justification by Merits, Purgatory, and what not to be openly Preached all over the Kingdom: That I induced Superstitious Ceremonies, as † 16.116 Consecrations of Churches, and Chalices, and Pictures of Christ in Glass-Windows: That I gave liberty to the Prophanation of the Lords-day: That I held Intelli∣gence with Cardinals and Priests, and endeavoured to ascend to Papal Dignity; Offers being made me to be a Cardinal. [And for the Laws, he was altogether as Wild in his Assertions, as he was be∣fore for Religion: And if he have no more true sense of Religion, than he hath knowledge in the Law, (though it be his Profession) I think he may offer both long enough to Sale, before he find a Chapman for either.] And here he told the Lords, That I held the same Method for this, which I did for Religion. [And surely that was to uphold both, had the Kingdom been so happy as to believe me;] But he affirmed (with great Confidence,) * 16.117 That I caused Sermons to be Preached in Court to set the Kings Preroga∣tive above the Law, and Books to be Printed to the same effect: That my Actions were according to these: Then he fell upon the Canons, and discharged them upon me. Then, that I might be

guilty enough, [if his bare Word could make me so] he Charged upon me the Benevolence, the Loan, the Ship-money, the Illegal pulling down of Buildings, Inclosures; saying, that as Antichrist sets himself above all that is called God, so I laboured to set the King above all that is called Law. And after a tedious stir, he concluded his Speech with this, That I was like Naaman the Syri∣an, a great Person (he confessed) but a Leper. [So ended this No∣ble Celeustes.]

I was much troubled to see my self, in such an Honourable As∣sembly made so vile: Yet seeing all Mens Eyes upon me, I recol∣lected my self, and humbly desired of the Lords two things:

One, that they would expect Proof, before they give up their Belief to these loud, but loose Assertions: Especially, since it is an easie thing for Men so resolved, to Conviciate, instead of Accusing; when as the Rule given by Optatus holds firm, Quum intenditur Crimen, * 16.118 when a Crime is objected, (especially so high a Crime, as this Charged on me) 'tis necessary that the Proof be manifest, which yet against me is none at all. The other, that their Lordships would give me leave, not to Answer this Gentleman's Particulars, (for that I shall defer till I hear his Proofs) but to speak some few things concerning my self, and this grievous Impeachment brought up against me.

Which being yielded unto me, I then spake as follows.

My Lords, my being in this Place, and in this Condition, recalls * 16.119 to my memory that which I long since read in Seneca; Tormen∣tum est, etiamsi absolutus quis fuerit, Causam dixisse: 'Tis not a grief only, no, 'tis no less than a Torment, for an ingenuous Man to plead * 16.120 Criminally, much more Capitally, at such a Bar as this; yea, though it should so fall out, that he be absolved. The great * 16.121 truth of this I find at present in my self: And so much the more, because I am a Christian; And not that only, but in Holy Orders; And not so only, but by Gods Grace and Goodness preferred to the greatest Place this Church affords; and yet now brought, Causam dicere, to Plead, and for no less than Life, at this Great Bar. And whatsoever the World thinks of me, (and they have been taught to think † 16.122 more ill, than, I humbly thank Christ for it, I was ever acquainted with;) Yet, my Lords, this I find, Tormentum est, 'tis no less than Torment to me to appear in this Place to such an Ac∣cusation. Nay, my Lords, give me leave, I beseech you, to speak plain Truth: No Sentence, that can justly pass upon me, (and o∣ther I will never fear from your Lordships) can go so near me as Causam dixisse, to have pleaded for my self, upon this occasion, and in this Place. For as for the Sentence (I thank God for it) I am at St. Paul's Ward: If I have committed any thing worthy of death, I * 16.123 refuse not to die: For I bless God, I have so spent my time, as that I am neither ashamed to live, nor afraid to die. Nor can the World be more weary of me, than I am of it: For seeing the Malignity which hath been raised against me by some Men, I have carried my Life in my Hands these divers years past. But yet, my Lords, if none of these things, whereof these Men accuse me, merit Death by Law; though I may not in this Case, and

from this Bar appeal unto Caesar; yet to your Lordships Justice and Integrity, I both may, and do Appeal; not doubting, but that God of his Goodness will preserve my Innocency. And as Job in the midst of his Affliction said to his mistaken Friends, so shall I to my Accusers; God forbid, I should justifie you; till I * 16.124 Dye I will not remove my Integrity from me; I will hold it fast, and not let it go; my Heart shall not reproach me, as long as I live.

My Lords, I see by the Articles, and have now heard from this Gentleman, that the Charge against me is divided into two main Heads; * 16.125 the Laws of the Land, and the Religion by those Laws established.

For the Laws first, I think I may safely say, I have been, to my Understanding, as strict an Observer of them all the Days of my Life, so far as they concern me, as any Man hath; and since I came into Place, I have followed them, and been as much guided by them, as any Man that sat where I had the Honour to sit. And for this I am sorry I have lost the † 16.126 Witness of the Lord Keeper Coventry, and of some other Persons of Honour, since Dead. And the Learned Councel at Law, which attended frequent∣ly at the Council Table, can Witness (some of them | 16.127) that in References to that Board, and in Debates arising at the Board, I was usually for that part of the Cause where I found Law to be: And if the Councel desired to have their Clyents Cause referred to the Law, (well I might move in some Cases for Charity, or Conscience, to have admittance, but) to the Law I left them, if thither they would go. And how such a Carriage as this through the whole Course of my Life, in private and publick, can stand with an Intention, nay a Practice to over∣throw the Law, and to introduce an Arbitrary Government, which my Soul hath always hated, I cannot yet see. And 'tis now many Years since I learned of my great Master (In humanis) Aristotle, * 16.128 Periculosum esse; that it is a very dangerous thing to trust to the Will of the Judge, rather than the written Law. And all Kingdoms and Commonwealths have followed his Judgment ever since; and the School-Disputes have not dissented from it. Nay more, * 16.129 I have ever been of Opinion, that Humane Laws bind the Con∣science, and have accordingly made Conscience of observing them. And this Doctrine I have constantly Preached, as occasion hath been offered me. And how is it possible I should seek to o∣verthrow those Laws, which I held my self bound in Conscience to keep and observe? Especially, since an endeavour to overthrow Law, is a far greater Crime than to break or disobey any parti∣cular Law whatsoever; all Particulars being swept away in that General. And, my Lords, that this is my Judgment, both of Parliaments and Laws; I beseech your Lordships that I may read a short Passage in my Book against Fisher the Jesuit, which was Printed and Published to the World, before these Troubles fell on me, and before I could so much as suspect this Charge could come against me; and therefore could not be purposely written to serve any Turn. [I had leave, and did read it; but for Brevi∣ties * 16.130 sake refer the Reader to the Book it self.]

As for Religion, I was born and bred up in, and under the Church of England, as it yet stands Established by Law. I have, by God's Blessing and the Favour of my Prince, grown up in it to the Years which are now upon me, and to the Place of Preferment which I * 16.131 yet bear: And in this Church, by the Grace and Goodness of God, I resolve to Dye. I have ever since I understood ought in Divinity, kept one constant Tenor in this my Profession, without variation or shifting from one Opi∣nion to another, for any worldly Ends: And if my Conscience would have suffered me to shift Tenets in Religion with Time and Occasion, I could easily have slid through all the difficul∣ties which have pressed upon me in this kind. But, of all Dis∣eases, I have ever † 16.132 hated a Palsie in Religion; well know∣ing, that too often a Dead-Palsie ends that Difease, in the fear∣ful forgetfulness of God and his Judgments. Ever since I came in Place, I laboured nothing more, than that the External Pub∣lick Worship of God (| 16.133 too much slighted in most parts of this Kingdom) might be preserved, and that with as much Decency and Uniformity, as might be; being still of Opinion, that Vni∣ty cannot long continue in the Church, where Vniformity is shut out at the Church-Door. And I evidently saw, that the Pub∣lick neglect of God's Service in the outward Face of it, and the nasty lying of many Places Dedicated to that Service, had al∣most cast a Damp upon the true and inward Worship of God; which while we live in the Body, needs External helps, and all lit∣tle enough to keep it in any vigour. And this I did to the uttermost of my Knowledge, according both to Law and Canon, and with the consent and liking of the People: Nor did any Command Issue out from me against the one, or without the other, that I know of.

Farther, my Lords, give me leave, I beseech you, to * 16.134 tell you this also: That I have as little Acquaintance with Recusants of any sort, as I believe any Man of † 16.135 Place in England hath: And for my Kindred, no one of them was ever a Recusant, but Sir Willi∣am Webb, Grandchild to my Uncle Sir William Webb, sometimes Lord Mayor of London; and | 16.136 him, with some of his Children, I reduced back again to the Church of England, as is well known, and I as able to prove.

One thing more I humbly desire may be thought on; 'tis this, I I am fallen into a great deal of Obloquy in Matter of Religion, and that so far, as that 'tis charged in the Articles, That I have endeavoured to advance and bring in Popery. Perhaps, my Lords, I am not igno∣rant, what Party of Men have raised this Scandal upon me; nor for what End; nor perhaps by whom set on: But howsoever, I would fain have a good Reason given me (if my Conscience * 16.137 lead me that way, and that with my Conscience I could Subscribe to the Church of Rome) what should have kept me here (before my Impri∣sonment) to indure the † 16.138 Libels, and the Slanders, and the base usage in all kinds, which have been put upon me, and these to end in this Question for my Life: I say, I would fain know a good Reason of this.

For first, My Lords; Is it because of any Pledges I have in the World to sway me against my Conscience? No sure. For I have nor Wife nor Children, to cry out upon me to stay with them; and if I had, I hope the Call of my Conscience should be heard above them. Or Secondly; Is it, because I was loth to leave the Honour and the Profit of the Place I was risen unto? Surely no: For I de∣sire your Lordships, and all the World else should know, I do much scorn Honour and Profit, both the one and the other, in compari∣son of my Conscience. Besides, it cannot be imagined by any Reasonable Man, but that if I could have complyed with Rome, I should not have wanted either Honour or Profit. And suppose I could not have so much of either, as here I had; yet sure, would my Conscience have served me that way, less of either with my Conscience, would have prevailed with me, more than greater against my Conscience.

Or Thirdly: Is it because I lived here at ease, and was loth to ven∣ture the loss of that? Not so neither: For whatsoever the World may be pleased to think of me, I have 〈◊〉〈◊〉 very painful Life, and such as I could have been very well content to change, had I well known how. And had my Conscience * 16.139 led me that way, I am sure I might have lived at far more ease; and either have avoided the barbarous Libellings, and other bitter and grievous Scorns which I have here indured, or at the least been out of the hearing of them. Nay, my Lords, I am as Innocent in this business of Religi∣on, as free from all Practice, or so much as thought of Practice for any alteration to Popery, or any way blemishing the True Protestant Religion Established in the Church of England, as I was when my Mother first bare me into the World. And let nothing be spoken against me but Truth, and I do here Challenge whatsoever is be∣tween Heaven and Hell, to say their worst against me in point of my Religion: In which by God's Grace I have ever hated Dissimula∣tion; and had I not hated it, perhaps it might have been better with me for worldly safety, than now it is. But it can no way be∣come a Christian Bishop to halt with God.

Lastly; If I had any purpose to blast the True Religion Establish∣ed in the Church of England, and to introduce Popery; sure I took a very wrong way to it. For, my Lords, I have stayed * 16.140 as many that were going to Rome, and reduced † 16.141 as many that were already gone, as (I believe) any Bishop or other Minister in this Kingdom hath done; and some of them Men of great Abilities; and some of them | 16.142 Persons of great Place. And is this the way, my Lords, to introduce Popery? I beseech your Lordships consider it well. For surely, if I had blemished the True Protestant Religion, I could not have setled such Men in it: And if I had * 16.143 purposed to introduce Popery, I would never have reduced such Men from it. And though it please the Author of the Popish Royal Favourite, to say, That scarce one of the swaying Lord Prelats is able to say, that ever he Converted one Papist to our Religion; yet how void of Charity this Speech of his is, and how full of Falshood, shall appear by the number of those Persons, whom by Gods Blessing upon my Labours, I have setled in the True Protestant Religion Established in England:

And with your Lordships leave, I shall Name them, that you may see both their Number and their Condition; though I cannot set them down in that order of time, in which I either Converted or Setled them.

1. And first, Hen: Birk-head of Trinity Coll. in Oxford, was seduced by a Jesuit, and brought up to London to be conveyed beyond the Seas. His Friends complained to me: I had the happiness to find him out, and the blessing from God to settle his Conscience. So he returned to Oxford, and there continued * 16.144.

2. 3. Two Daughters of Sir Rich: Lech∣ford in Surrey, were sent to Sea to be carried to a Nunnery. I heard of it, and caused them to be brought back, before they were got out of the Thames. I setled their Consciences, and both of them sent me great thanks, since I was a Prisoner in the Tower.

4. 5. Two Scholars of St: John's Coll. in Cambridge, Topping and Ashton, had slipped away from the College, and here at London had got the French Embassadour's Pass, (I have the Pass to shew:) I found means to get them to me, and I thank God set∣led both their Minds, sent them back to their College. After∣wards hearing of Topping's Wants, I allowed him Means till I procured him a Fellowship † 16.145: And he is at this time a very hopeful Young Man, as most of his time in that University, a Minister, and Chaplain in House at this Present, to the Right Honourable the Earl of Westmerland.

6. 7. 8. Sir William Web my Kinsman, and two of his Daughters; and the better to secure them in Religion, I was at the Charge (their Father being utterly decayed) to Marry them to two Religious Protestants; and they both continued very constant. And his Eldest Son I took from him, placed him with a care∣ful * 16.146 Divine, maintained him divers Years, and then setled him with a Gentleman of Good Worth.

10. 11. The next, in my remembrance, was the Lord Maio of Ire∣land, who, with another Gentleman (whose name I can∣not recal) was brought to me to Fulham, by | 16.147 Mr. Jefford, a Servant of his Majesty's, and well known to divers of your Lord∣ships.

12. The Right Honourable the Lord Duke of Buckingham was almost lost from the Church of England, between the conti∣nual cunning Labours of Fisher the Jesuit, and the Perswasions of the Lady his Mother * 16.148. After some Miscarriages, King James of ever Blessed Memory Commanded me to that Service. I had God's Blessing upon me so far, as to settle my Lord Duke to his Death. And I brought the † 16.149 Lady his Mother to the Church * 16.150 again; but she was not so happy, as to continue with us.

14. The Lady Marchioness Hamilton was much solicited by some Priests, and much troubled in Mind about it. My Lord

spake with me of it; and though at that present I was so overlaid with Business, that I could not (as I much desired) wait upon that Ho∣nourable Person my self; yet I told my Lord, I would send one to his Lordship, that should diligently attend that Service, and that I would give him the best direction I could. And this I did, and God be thanked, she dyed very quietly, and very Religiously, and a good Protestant: And my Lord Marquess told me, he had acknow∣ledged this Service of mine to an Honourable Lord, whom I now see present.

15. Mr. Chillingworth's * 16.151 Learning and Abilities are sufficiently known to all your Lordships. He was gone, and setled at Dowaye. My Letters brought him back; and he Lived and Dyed a Defender of the Church of England. And that this is so, your Lordships can∣not but know: For Mr. Pryn took away my Letters, and all the Papers which concerned him, and they were Examined at the Committee.

16. 17. Mr. Digby was a Priest; and Mr. James † 16.152 Gentleman, a School-master in a Recusant's House. This latter was brought to me by a Minister (as far as I remember) in Buckingham∣shire. I converted both of them, and they remain setled.

18. Dr. Hart a Civilian, Son to a Neighbour of mine at Fulham. He was so far gone, that he had written part of his Motives which wrought (as he said) that Change in him. I got sight of them; shewed him wherein he was deceived; had God's Blessing to settle his Conscience; and then caused an able Divine to Answer his Mo∣tives, and give him the Copy.

19. There were beside these, Mr. Christopher Seburne, a Gentle∣man of an Ancient Family in Hereford-shire; and Sir William Spencer * 16.153 of Yarnton in Oxfordshire. The Sons and Heirs of Mr. | 16.154 Wintchome, * 16.155 and Mr. * 16.156 Williscot, whom I sent with their Friends good liking to Wadham-College in Oxford; and I received a Certificate, Anno 1638. of their continuing in conformity to the Church of England: Nor did ever any of these relapse again to Rome, but only the Old Countess of Buckingham, and Sir William Spencer, that ever I heard of † 16.157. And if any of your Lordships doubt of the Truth of any of these Particu∣lars, I am able and ready to bring full proof of them all. And by this time I hope it appears, that one of the swaying Prelats of the time is able to say, he hath Converted one Papist to the Protestant Reli∣gion. And let any Clergy Man of England come forth, and give a better account of his Zeal to this present Church.

And now, my Lords, with my most humble Thanks for your Lordships favour and patience in hearing me; I shall cease to be far∣ther troublesom for the present; not doubting but I shall be able to Answer whatever shall be particularly objected against me.

After I had ended this Speech, I was commanded to withdraw. As I went from the Bar, there was Alderman Hoyle of York, and some other, which I knew not, very Angry, and saying, it was a very strange Conversion that I was like to make of them; with other Terms of Scorn. I went patiently into the little Committee-Chamber at the entring into the House. Thither Mr. Peters followed me in great haste, and began to give me ill Language, and told me that

he, and other Ministers, were able to name Thousands * 16.158 that they had Converted. I knew him not, as having never seen him (to my remembrance) in my Life, though I had heard enough of him. And as I was going to answer him, one of my Councel, Mr. Hearn, seeing how violently he began, stepped between us, and told him of his uncivil Carriage towards me in my Affliction: And indeed he came as if he would have struck me. By this time, some occasion brought the Earl of Essex into that Room, and Mr. Hearn complained to him of Mr. Peters his usage of me; who very Honourably checked him for it, and sent him forth. Not long after, Mr. Hearn was set upon by Alderman Hoyle, and used as coursly as Peters had used me, and (as far as I remember) only for being of Councel with such a one as I; though he was assigned to that Office by the Lords.

What put them into this Choler, I know not; unless they were Angry to hear me say so much in my own Defence; especially for the Conversion of so many, which I think they little expected. For the next day a great Lord met a Friend of mine, and grew very Angry with him about me; not forbearing to ask what I meant, to Name the Particulars, which I had mentioned in the end of my Speech, say∣ing, many Godly Ministers had done more. And not long after this, (the day I now remember not) Mr. Peters came and Preached at Lambeth, and there told them in the Pulpit, that a great Prelat, their Neighbour, (or in words to that effect) had bragged in the Parlia∣ment-House, that he had Converted Two and Twenty; but that he had Wisdom enough, not to tell how many Thousands he had Per∣verted; with much more abuse. God of his Mercy relieve me from these Reproaches, and lay not these Mens causeless Malice to their Charge.

After a little stay, I received my Dismission for that time, and a Command to appear again the next day at Nine in the Morning: Which was my usual Hour to attend, though I was seldom called into the House in two Hours after.

CAP. XXIII. The Second Day of my Hearing.

I Came as commanded. But here before the Charge begins, I shall set down the Articles, upon which, according to the Or∣der * 16.159 of March 9. they which were intrusted with the Evidence, * 16.160 meant this Day to proceed. They were the First and Second Ori∣ginal Articles, and the Second Additional Article: which follow in these words.

1. That he hath Traiterously endeavoured to subvert the Fundamen∣tal Laws and Government of the Kingdom of England, and in∣stead thereof, to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Govern∣ment against Law; and to that end hath wickedly and traite∣rously advised his Majesty, that he might at his own Will and Pleasure Levy and take Money of his Subjects, without their Consent in Parliament; and this he affirmed was Warrantable by the Law of God.

2. He hath for the better accomplishment of that his traiterous Design, advised and procured divers Sermons and other 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to be Preached, Printed and Published; in which the Au∣thority of Parliaments, and the Force of the Laws of the King∣dom are denyed, and an Absolute and Unlimited Power over the Persons and Estates of his Majesty's Subjects is maintained and defended, not only in the King, but also in himself and o∣ther Bishops, above and against the Law; and he hath been a great Protector, Favourer and Promoter of the Publishers of such false and Pernicious Opinions.

Second Additional Article,

2. That within the space of Ten Years last past, the said Arch-Bishop hath Treacherously endeavoured to subvert the Fundamen∣tal Laws of this Realm; and to that end hath in like manner endeavoured to advance the Power of the Council-Table, the Ca∣nons of the Church and the King's Prerogative, above the Laws and Statutes of the Realm. And for manifestation thereof, a∣bout Six Years last past, being then a Privy Counsellor to his Ma∣jesty, and sitting at the Council-Table, he said, That as long as he sate there, they should know that an Order of that Board, should be of equal Force with a Law or Act of Parliament. And at another Time used these Words, That he hoped e're long, that the Canons of the Church and the King's Prerogative, should be of as great Power as an Act of Parliament. And at another Time said, That those which would not yield to the King's Power, he would crush them to pieces.

These three Articles they begun with; and the first Man appoint∣ed to begin was Mr. Maynard: And after some general things a∣gainst me, as if I were the most violent Man for all illegal Ways; The First Particular charged against me was out of my Diary. * 16.161 The Words these, The King Declared his Resolution for a Parlia∣ment in Case of the Scottish Rebellion. The First Movers of it were my Lord Deputy of Ireland, the Lord Marquess Hamilton, and my self: And a Resolution voted at the Board, to Assist the King in Ex∣traordinary Ways, if the Parliament should prove peevish, and refuse, &c. The Time was Decemb. 5. 1639. That which was inforced from these Words, was, First, that I bestowed the Epithete Peevish upon the Parliament: And the Second, that this Voting to Assist the King in Extraordinary Ways, in Case the Parliament refused, proceed∣ed from my Counsel.

1. To this I replyed: And first I humbly desired once for all, that all things concerning Law may be saved entire unto me, and my Councel to be heard in every such Particular.

2.

Secondly, that the Epithete Peevish was a very Peevish Word, if written by me. I say, If: For I know into whose Hands my Book is fallen; but what hath been done with it I know not. This is to be seen, some Passages in that Book are half burnt out, whether Purposely, or by Chance, God knows: And some other Papers taken by the same Hand from me, are now want∣ing.

Is it not possible therefore some Art may be used in this? Besides, if I did use the Word Peevish, it was in my Private Pock∣et Book, which I well hoped should never be made Publick; and then no Disgrace thereby affixed to the Parliament. And I hope, should a Man forget himself in such an Expression of some Passage in some one Parliament, (and this was no more) it is far short of any thing that can be called Treason.

And yet farther, most manifest it is in the very Words themselves, that I do not bestow the Ti∣tle upon that Parliament, in that Case; but say only, If it should prove Peevish; which is possible, doubtless, that in some particu∣lars a Parliament may: Though for the Happiness of this King∣dom, I would to God it were impossible. But suppose the Word Peevish had been absolutely spoken by me; is it Lawful upon Record to say the Parliament An. 42. Hen. 3. was Insanum Par∣liamentum, * 16.162 a Mad Parliament; and that in the 6. Hen. 4. Indoctum, an Unlearned Parliament; and that in the 4. Hen. 6. a Parliament of Clubbs? And shall it be High Treason in me to say a Parlia∣ment in some one Particular was Peevish? or but to suppose if it were? Canany Man think, that an Vnlearned, or a Mad Parliament, or one of Clubbs did not do something Peevishly? Might my Pre∣cessor, Tho. Arundel, tell the Commons openly in Parliament, that * 16.163 their Petitions were Sacrilegious? And may not I so much as sup∣pose some one Action of a Parliament to be Peevish, but it shall be Treason? May an ordinary Historian say of that Vnlearned * 16.164 Parliament, that the Commons were fit to enter Common with their Cattle, for any Vertue they had more than Brute-Beasts? And may not I in my private Notes write the Word Peevish of them, without Treason?

3. Thirdly, Whereas 'tis said, That the Voting at the Council-Ta∣ble to assist the King in Extraordinary Ways, if, &c. was by my Coun∣sel: There is no such thing in my Diary. There is, that I with others advised a Parliament: But there is not one Word, that the Voting mentioned at the Council-Table proceeded from any Advice of mine.

So there is no Proof from my Diary; and other Proof beside that, was not so much as urged; which was not in Fa∣vour, but because they had it not. For had they had any other Proof, I see already, it should not have been lost for want of urging.

Where, I desired their Lordships also to observe, in what a difficulty I have lived with some Men, who will needs make me a great Enemy to Parliaments, and yet are angry with me, that I was one with others who moved for that Parliament. So it seems, nothing that I do can content some Men: For a Parliament, or against it; nothing must be well, if the Counsel be mine.

4. Fourthly, For the Voting of Assistance in Extraordinary Ways, I was included in the general Vote of the Table; and therefore that cannot be called or accounted my Counsel.

5. Fifthly, It is expressed in my Diary, whence all this Proof is taken; that it was in and for the Scottish Business, and so is with∣in the Act of Oblivion.

And these Answers I gave to Mr. Brown, when, in the summing up of the Charge against me in the Ho∣nourable House of Commons, he made this to be my Counsel to the King: And he began with it, in his Charging of the Points against Law.

The Second Particular this Day 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against me, was, That * 16.165 after the Ending of the late Parliament, I did use these Words to the King, That now he might use his own Power, or Words to that Effect. This was attested by Sir Henry Vane the Elder, then a Counsellor, and present.

1. To this my Answer was, That I spake not these Words, either in Terms, or in Sense, to the uttermost of my Knowledge.

2. Secondly, If I had spoken these Words, either they were ill advised Words, but no Treason; and then they come not home to the Charge: Or they are Treasonable, and then I ought by * 16.166 Law to have been tryed within Six Months.

Mr. Brown, in his Reply to me in the House of Commons, said, That this Statute ex∣pired with the Queen, because it concerned none but her, and the Heirs of her Body. I had here urged * 16.167 Sir Edward Coke, as urging this Statute, and commending the Moderation of it. But I was therein mistaken for he speaks of 1. Eliz. c. 1. And that * 16.168 Statute is in force, and is for Tryal within Six Months, for such Crimes as are within that Statute. So it comes all to one for my Cause, so either of the Statutes be in force. And to this Charge in general, I gave the same Answers which are here.

3. Thirdly, Sir Henry Vane is in this a single Witness; whereas * 16.169 by Lav, he that is accused of Treason, must be convicted by two Witnesses, or his own Confession without Violence; neither of which is in this Case: And strange it is to me, that at such a full Table, no Person of Honour should remember such a Speech, but Sir Henry Vane.

4. Fourthly, both this and the former Charge relate to the Scot∣tish Business, and so are within the Act of Oblivion, which I have Pleaded.

Besides, here is nothing expressed in the Words Charged, which savours of Practice, Conspiracy, Combination or Force; and can∣not therefore possibly be adjudged Treason; especially since there is no Expression made in the Words Witnessed, what Power is meant. For what should hinder the King to use his own Pow∣er? But Legal still: Since nothing is so properly a King's own Power, as that which is made or declared his own by Law. As for the Inference, That this was called his own, in opposition to Law: First, Sir Henry Vane is a Witness to the Words only, and not to any Inference: So the Words have but one Witness, and the Inference none. And perhaps it were as well for themselves, as for Persons questioned in great Courts, if they who are imploy∣ed about the Evidence, would be more sparing of their Inferences; * 16.170 many Men laying hold of them without Reason or Proof.

Lastly, For the Honour of Sir Henry Vane let me not forget this; he is a Man of some Years, and Memory is one of the first Powers of Man, on which Age works; and yet his Memo∣ry so good, so fresh, that he alone can remember Words spoken at a full Council-Table, which no Person of Honour remembers but himself. Had any Man else remembred such Words, he could not have stood single in this Testimony. But I would not have him brag of it: For I have read in St: Augustin, That Quidam Pessimi, some, even the worst of Men, have great Memories, and * 16.171 are Tanto Pejores, so much the worse for having them. God Bless Sir Henry.

I have stayed the longer upon these Two, because they were apprehended to be of more weight than most which follow. The next was a Head containing my Illegal Pressures for Money, un∣der which the next Particular was, That in the Case of Ship-Money * 16.172 I was very angry against one Samuel Sherman of Dedham in Essex. That I should say Dedham was a Maritime Town: And that when the Sum demanded of him was Named, I should say, a Proper Sum; whereas the Distress came to eleven Subsidies.

To this I Answered: First, here was no Proof but Sherman; and in his own Cause. Secondly, he himself says no more, than that he be∣lieves I was the Instrument of his Oppression (as he called it;) whereas his Censure was laid upon him by the Council-Table, not by me: Nor was I in any other Fault, than that I was present, and gave my Vote with the rest. So here's no Proof at all, but his Belief.

Lastly, here can be no Treason, but against Dedham, or Sherman, that I can discover.

The next to Sherman comes in my great Friend, Alderman * 16.173 Atkins; and he Testifies, That when he was brought to the Council-Table, about the Ship-Money, none was so violent against him as I was, and that this Pressure for Ship-Money was before the Judges had given Sentence for the King. And that at another time I pres∣sed him hard to lend Money, the King being present: At which time

he conceived that I favoured Alderman Harrison for Country sake; because himself was Committed, and not the other.

To this I must confess, I did use to be Serious and Zealous too in his Majesty's Service; but not with any the least intention to vi∣olate Law. And if this here instanced were before the Judgment given for the King, yet it was long after the Judges had put the Legality of it under their Hands. And I for my part could not conceive the Judges would put that under their Hands to be Law, which should after be found unlawful. Therefore in this, as I Erred with Honourable Company at the Council-Table, so both they and I had, as we thought, sufficient Guides to lead us.

As for the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which he puts upon me in preserving my Country-man, Alderman Harrison, from Prison: First, he himself durst not affirm it upon his Oath, but says only that he Conceives I fa∣voured him; but his Conceit is no Proof. Secondly, if I had fa∣voured him, and done him that Office, 'tis far short of Treason. But the Truth is, Alderman Harrison gave a modest and a ci∣vil Answer; but this Man was Rough, even to Unmannerliness, and, so far as I remember, was Committed for that.

And whereas he says, I Pressed him hard to lend Money, and that none was so violent as I; he is much mistaken. For of all Men in that Fraternity, I durst never Press him hard for any thing, least of all for Money. For I knew not what Stuffing might fly out of so full a Cushion, as afterwards 'tis said did, when being a Colonel he was pressed, but not hard, in a little Skir∣mishing in Finsbury-Fields.

Then it was urged, that I aggravated a Crime against Alderman * 16.174 Chambers, and told him, that if the King had many such Chambers he would have never a Chamber to Rest in: That in the Case of Tunnage and Poundage, he laboured to take Bread from the King: And that I Pressed upon him in the Business of Coat and Conduct-Money.

To this I gave this Answer, That by the Affection Mr. Cham∣bers then shewed the King, I had some Reason to think, he desi∣red so many Chambers to his use, that if the King had many such Subjects, he might want a Chamber for himself; or to that effect: And the violence of his Carriage in that Honourable Assembly gave just Occasion to other Men to think so. But as for the Business of Tunnage and Poundage, and of Coat and Conduct-Mo∣ney, I conceived both were Lawful on the King's part. And I was led into this Opinion by the express Judgment of some Lords pre∣sent, and the Silence of others in that behalf; none of the great Lawyers at the Table contradicting either: And no Witness to this, but Alderman Chambers himself.

The sixth Particular was, That I urged the business of Ship-Money * 16.175 upon Alderman Adams.

To this my Answer was; That I never pressed the Ship-Money, but as other Lords did at the Council-Table, nor upon other grounds: Nor doth Alderman Adams say any more, than that he was pressed to this payment by me and others. And to me it seems strange, and will I hope to all Men else, that this, and the like, should be a common

Act of the Lords at the Council-Table, but should be High-Treason in no body but in me. And howsoever, if it be Treason, 'tis against three Aldermen, Atkins, Chambers, and Adams.

The Seventh Particular was, that I was so violent about the slight∣ing * 16.176 of the King's Proclamations, as that I said, A Proclamation was of as great force, or equal to a Statute-Law: And that I compared the King to the Stone spoken of in the Gospel, That whosoever falls upon it, * 16.177 shall be broken; but upon whomsoever it falls, it will grind him to powder. And for this they brought three Witnesses, Mr. Griffin, and Tho. Wood, and Rich. Hayles.

1. This was in the Case of the Soap-business, and * 16.178 the two Wit∣nesses were Soap-boylers. They and their Company slighted all the Proclamations which the King set out; and all the Lords in the Star-Chamber were much offended, (as I conceive they had great Reason to be) at the great and open daring of that whole Company. And whatsoever Sentence passed upon them in that whole Business, was given by the Court of Star-Chamber, not by me.

For the Words; First, these Men have good Memories, that can punctually, being plain ordinary Men, Swear Words spoken full Twelve Years since: And yet, as good as their Memory is, they Swear doubtfully touching the time; as that the Words were spoken in May 1632, or 33.

2. Secondly, my Lords, 'tis impossible these Words should be spoken by me. For I think no Man in this Honourable Presence thinks me so ignorant, as that I should not know the vast difference that is between an Act of Parliament and a Proclamation. Neither can these Gentle∣men, which press the Evidence, think me so wilfully foolish so to speak, considering they accuse me here for a Cunning Delinquent.

So God forgive these Men the Falshood and the Malice of this Oath.

3. For the Words spoken of the Stone in Scripture, 'tis so long since, I cannot recal whether I said it or no: Nor have I any great Reason to believe these Angry Witnesses in their own Cause. But if, by way of Allusion, I did apply that place to the King and them, 'tis far enough from Treason.

And let them, and their like, take heed lest it prove true upon themselves: For seldom do Subjects fall upon their King, but in the end they are broken; and if it so happen, that he falls upon them, they are ground to powder.

And Salomon taught me this Answer, where he says, The Anger of a King * 16.179 is Death. And yet I would not be mistaken. For I do not conceive this is spoken of a King and his Natural Anger, (though it be good Wisdom to stir as little Passion in Kings as may be;) but of his Legal Anger: According to which, if the Stone roul strictly, few Men can so Live, but for something or other they may be in danger of grinding.

4. And for these Soap-boylers, they have little cause to be so vehe∣ment against me. For if the Sentence, passed against them in the Star-Chamber, were in any thing illegal, though it were done by that Court and not by me; yet I alone, so soon as I heard but muttering of it, was the only means of resetling them and their Trade, which none of all the Lords else took care of.

And the Summ of these Answers I gave to Mr. Browne, when he gave up the Summ of his Charge against me.

The next Particular was about Depopulations. A Commission of Grace, to compound with some Delinquents in that kind, was Issued * 16.180 under the Broad Seal, to some Lords and other Persons of Honour of the Council, of which I was one. One Mr. Talboys was called thither. And the Charge about this was, that when he pleaded, that by Statute 39. Eliz. he might convert some to Pasture, I should say, Do you plead Law here? Either abide the Order, or take your Tryal at the Star-Chamber: And that he was Fined 50 l.

In this Particular Mr. Talboys is single, and in his own Cause; but I was single at no sitting of that Commission: Nor did I ever sit, unless the Lord Privy-Seal, and Mr. Secretary Coke were pre∣sent; that we might have direction from their Knowledge and Experience.

And for the Words (if spoken) they were not to derogate from the Law; but to shew, that we sate not there as any Judges of the Law, but to offer his Majesty's Grace to such as would ac∣cept it.

As for the Fine mentioned, we imposed none upon him or any other, but by the consent of the Parties themselves. If any Man thought he was not faulty, and would not accept of the Favour shewed him, we left him to the Law. But the plain truth is, this Gentleman, being Tenant to the Dean and Chapter of Christ-Church in Oxford, offer'd them (as they conceived) great wrong in the Land he held of them; in so much as they feared other their Tenants might follow his Ex∣ample, and therefore complained of him. And because I laid open his usage of his Landlords before the Commissioners, he comes here to vent his Spleen against me.

And 'tis observable, that in all the business of Depopulations, in which so many appeared, no one com∣plained either against me or any other Lord, but only this Talboys. Mr. Browne, when he pressed the Summ of this Charge against me, added, That at the Council-Table, I was for all Illegal Projects, as well as for these Inclosures. But First, I was neither for this nor any other, either longer or otherwise than I understood them to be Lawful. And Secondly, I opposed there the business of Salt and the Base Mony; and I alone took off that of the Malt, and the Brew∣ing: And three Gentlemen of Hertfordshire (which County was principally concerned in the Case of the Malt) came over to Lam∣beth to give me Thanks for it.

Then was charged upon me the Printing of Books, which asserted * 16.181 the King's Prerogative above Law, &c. The instance was in Dr. Cowell's Book, Verbo, * 16.182 Rex: That this Book was decryed by Pro∣clamation; that Complaint was made to me, that this Book was Printing in a close House without Licence, and by Hodgkinson, who was my Printer; that I referred them to Sir John Lambe; that they came to me again, and a third time, and I still continued my Reference; which Sir John Lambe slighting, the Book came forth. The Witnesses to this, were Hunt and Wallye, if I mistook not their Names.

1. For this Book of Dr. Cowell's, I never knew of it, till it was Printed; or so far gone on in Printing, that I could not stay it: And the Witnesses say, it was in a close House, and without Licence; so neither I nor my Chaplains could take notice of it.

2. They say, they informed me of it, but name no time, but only the Year 1638. But they confess I was then at Croydon: So being out of Town (as were almost all the High Commissioners) I required Sir John Lambe, who being a High Commissioner, had in that business as much power as my self, to look to it carefully, that the Book pro∣ceeded not; or if it were already Printed, that it came not forth. If Sir John slighted his own Duty and my Command, (as themselves say) he is Living, and may answer for himself; and I hope your Lord∣ships will not put his Neglect upon my Account.

3. As for Hodgkinson, he was never my Printer; but Badger was the Man whom I imployed, as is well known to all the Stationers. Nor was Hodgkinson ever imployed by me in that kind or any other: Upon just Complaint I turned him out of a place, but never put him into any: And therefore those Terms which were put upon me, of my Hodgkinson, and my Sir John Lambe, might have been spared. Sir John was indeed Dean of the Arches, and I imployed him, as other Arch-Bishops did the Deans which were in their Times; otherwise no way mine: And Hodgkinson had his whole dependance on Sir Henry Martin, and was a meer Stranger to me.

And this Answer I gave to Mr. Browne, when he summ'd up the Charge. Nor could any danger be in the Printing of that Book to mislead any Man: Be∣cause it was generally made known by Proclamation, that it was a Book Condemned, and in such Particulars: But for other things the Book very useful.

The next Charge was, That when Dr: Gill, School-Master of Paul's * 16.183 School in London, was warned out by the Mercers (to the Care of which Company that School some way belongs) upon Dr: Gill's Petiti∣on to the King, there was a Reference to some other Lords and my self to hear the Business. The Charge is, that at this Hearing I should say, the Mercers might not put out Dr: Gill without his Ordi∣nary's Knowledge: And that upon mention made of an Act of Parlia∣ment, I should reply, I see nothing will down with you but Acts of Parlia∣ment; no regard at all of the Canons of the Church: And that I should farther add, That I would rescind all Acts which were against the Canons; and that I hoped shortly to see the Canons and the King's Prerogative of equal force with an Act of Parliament.

To this I Answer'd; That if all this Charge were true, yet this is but the single Testimony of Samuel Bland, an Officer belonging to the Company of the Mercers, and no small Stickler against Dr. Gill, whose Aged Reverend Father had done that Company great Service in that School for many Years together.

The Reference he grants was to me and others: So I neither thrust my self into the Business, nor was alone in it.

And as there is a Canon of this Church, That no Man may be allowed * 16.184 to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 School, but by the Bishop of the Diocess; so à paritate rationis, it stands good, They may not turn him out, without the said Bishops knowledge and Approbation. And 'tis expressed in another Canon; That if any School-Master offend in any of the Premises (there spoken of) * 16.185 he shall be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by his Ordinary; and if he do not amend upon that his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, he shall then be Suspended from Teaching: Which I think

makes the Case plain, that the Mercers might not turn out Dr. Gill, without so much as the Knowledge of his Bishop.

And for the Words; That I saw nothing would down with them but an Act of Parliament, and that no regard was had to the Canons; I humbly conceive there was no offence in the Words. For though the Supe∣riority by far in this Kingdom belongs to the Acts of Parliament; yet some regard doubtless, is or ought to be had to the Canons of the Church:

And if nothing will down with Men but Acts of Par∣liament, the Government cannot be held up in many Parti∣culars.

For the other Words, God forgive this Witness: For I am well assured, I neither did nor could speak them. For is it so much as probable, that I should say, I would rescind all Acts that are against the Canons? What power have I or any particular Man, to rescind Acts of Parliament? Nor do I think any Man that knows me, will believe I could be such a Fool, as to say, That I hoped shortly to see the Canons and the Kings Prerogative equal to Acts of Parliament; Since I have lived to see (and that often) many Canons rejected, as contrary to the Custom of the Place; as in choice of Parish-Clerks, and about the Reparation of some Churches; and the King's Prerogative discussed and weighed by Law: Neither of which hath, or can be done by any Judges to an Act of Parliament.

That there is Malice in this Man against me, appears plainly; but upon what 'tis grounded I cannot tell: Unless it be, that in this business of Dr. Gill, and in some other about placing Lecturers, (which in some Cases this Com∣pany of the Mercers took on them to do) I opposing it so far as Law and Canon would give me leave, crossed some way, either his Opinion in Religion, or his Purse-profit. I was (I confess) so much moved at the Unworthiness of this Man's Testimony, that I thought to bind this Sin upon his Soul, not to be forgiven him till he did publickly ask me Forgiveness for this Notorious Publick Wrong done me. But by God's Goodness I master'd my self; and I hearti∣ly desire God to give him a sense of this Sin against me his poor Servant, and forgive him.

And if these words could possibly scape me, and be within the danger of that Statute; then to that Statute, which requires my Tryal within six Months, I refer my self.

The Eleventh Charge of this day, was the Imprisonment of * 16.186 Mr. George * 16.187 Waker, about a Sermon of his, Preached to prove (as he said) That 'tis Sin to obey the greatest Monarchs in things which are against the Command of God: That I had Notes of his Sermons for four or five Years together, of purpose to intrap him; That I told his Majesty he was Factious; That Sir Dadly Carlton writ to keep him close; That in this Affliction I protested to do him Kindness, and yet did contrary.

My Answer was; That for the Scope of his Sermon, To Obey God rather than Man, no Man doubts but it ought to be so, when the Commands are opposite. But his Sermon was viewed, and many factious Passages, and of high Nature, found in it. And yet I did not tell the King he was Factious, but that he was so complained of to me; and this was openly at the Council-Table.

And whereas he speaks of Notes of his Sermons for divers Years, with a purpose to intrap him; all that he says is, that he was told so, but produces not by whom. And truly I never had any such Notes, nor ever used any such Art against any Man in my Life. For his Commitment, it was done by the Council-Table; and after, upon some Carriage of his there, by the Court of Star-Chamber, not by me; nor can that be imputed to me, which is done there by the major part, and I having no Negative. And if Sir Dudly Carl∣ton writ to keep him close at his Brother's House, contrary to the Lords Order, let him answer it: And if he supposes that was done by me, why is not Sir Dudly examined to try that Truth? As for the Protestation, which he says I made to his Wife and his Brother, that I complained not against him; it was no Denyal of my Com∣plaint made against him at the first, that I heard he was Factious; but that after the time, in which I had seen the full Testimony of grave Ministers in London, that he was not Factious, I made no Complaint after that, but did my best to free him. And the Trea∣son in these two Charges is against the Company of the Mercers, and Mr. Waker.

The next Charge was, that Dr: Manwaring having been Cen∣sured * 16.188 by the Lords in Parliament for a Sermon of his against the Liberty and Propriety of the Subject, was yet after this preferred by me, in Contempt of the Parliament-Censure, both to the Dea∣nery of Warcester, and the Bishoprick of St: Davids; And my own Diary witnesses that I was complained of in Parliament for it; And that yet after this I did consecrate him Bishop.

1. To this I answered, that he was not preferred by me to ei∣ther of these; and therefore that could not be done in contempt of the Parliament-Censure, which was not done at all. For as for St: Davids, 'tis confessed, Secretary Windebank signified the King's Pleasure, not I. And whereas it was added, that this was by my means; That is only said, but not proved. And for Worcester, there is no Proof but the Docket-Book: Now, my Lords, 'tis well known in Court, that the Docket doth but signifie the King's Pleasure for such a Bill to be drawn, it never mentions who procured the Pre∣ferment: So that the Docket can be no Proof at all against me; and other there is none.

2. For the Sermon, 'tis true, I was complained of in Parliament, that I had been the Cause of Licensing it to the Press; and 'tis as true, that upon that Complaint, I was narrowly sifted, and an Honourable Lord now present, and the Lord Bishop of Lincoln, were sent to Bishop Mountain, who Licensed the Sermon, to Ex∣amine, and see, whether any Warrant had come from me, or a∣ny Message: But when nothing appeared, I was acquitted in open Parliament; To some Body's no small Grief.

God forgive them, and their Malice against me; for to my knowledge my Ruin was then thirsted for. And as I answered Mr. Brown's Summary Charge, when he pressed this against me, could this have been proved, I had been undone long since; the Work had not been now to be done.

That he was after Consecrated by me, is true likewise; and I

hope, 'tis not expected I should ruine my self, and fall into a Premu∣nire, by refusing the King's Royal Assent; and this for fear lest it * 16.189 might be thought I procured his Preferment. But the Truth is, his Majesty commanded me to put him in mind of him when Preferments fell; and I did so: But withal I told his Majesty of his Censure, and that I fear'd ill Construction would be made of it.

To this it was replyed, That I might have refused to Consecrate, the Cause why being sufficient, and justifiable in Parliament, and excepted in that Law.

But how sufficient soever that Cause may be in Parliament, if I had been in a Premunire there-while, and lost my Liberty and all that I had beside, for disobeying the Royal Assent; I believe I should have had but cold Comfort when the next Parliament had been Summoned; no Exception against the Man being known to me, either for Life or Learning, but only this Censure: Nor is there any Exception which the Arch-Bishop is by that Law allowed to make, if my Book be truly Printed.

Then followed the Charge of Dr. Heylin's Book against Mr. Bur∣ton; * 16.190 out of which it was urged, That an unlimited Power was pres∣sed very far; and out of p. 40. That a way was found to make the Sub∣ject * 16.191 free, and the King a Subject; that this Man was preferred by me; that Dr. Heylin confessed to a Committee, that I commanded him to Answer Mr. Burton's Book; and that my Chaplain Dr. Braye Li∣censed it.

I Answer'd as follows; I did not prefer Dr. Heylin to the King's Ser∣vice; it was the Earl of Danby, who had taken Honourable Care of him before in the University. His Preferments I did not procure: For it appears by what hath been urged against me, that the Lord Viscount Dorchester procured him his Parsonage, and Mr. Secretary Coke his Prebend in Westminster.

For his Answer to the Committee, that I commanded him to Write against Burton, It was an Ingenuous and a True Answer, and became him and his Calling well; for I did so.

And neither I in Com∣manding, nor he in Obeying, did other than what we had good Precedent for in the Primitive Church of Christ. For when some Monks had troubled the Church at Carthage, but not with half that danger which Mr. Burton's Book threatned to this; Aurelius, then Bishop, commanded St. Aug. to Write against it; and he did so. * 16.192 His Words are, Aurelius Scribere Jussit, & feci.

But though I did, as by my Place I might, Command him to Write and Answer; yet I did neither Command nor Advise him, to insert any thing unsound or unfit. If any such thing be found in it, he must Answer for himself, and the Licenser for himself. For as for Licensing of Books, I held the same course which all my Predecessors had done: And when any Chaplain came new into my House, I gave him a strict Charge in that Particular. And in all my Predecessors Times, the Chaplains suffer'd for faults committed, and not their Lords; though now all is heaped on me.

As for the particular Words urged out of Dr. Heylin's Book, p. 40. there is neither Expression by them, nor Intention in them, against either the Law, or any Lawful Proceedings; but they are directed to Mr. Burton and his Doctrine only. The words are: You have found out a way (not the Law, but you Mr. Burton) to make the

Subject free, and the King a Subject: Whereas it would well have beseem'd Mr. Burton, to have carried his Pen even at the least, and left the King his Freedom, as well as the Subject his.

From this they proceeded to another Charge: which was, That I * 16.193 preferred Chaplains to be about the King and the Prince, which were disaffected to the Publick Welfare of the Kingdom. The Instance was in Dr: Dove: And a Passage Read out of his Book against Mr: Burton: And it was added, that the declaring of such disaffection, was the best Inducement or Bribe to procure them Preferment.

To this I then said, and 'tis true; I did never knowingly pre∣fer any Chaplain to the King or Prince, that was ill-affected to the Publick. And for Dr. Dove, if he utter'd by Tongue or by Pen, any such wild Speech concerning any Members of the Honou∣rable House of Commons, as is urged, thereby to shew his disaf∣fection to the Publick; he is Living, and I humbly desire he may answer it. But whereas it was said, That this was the best Inducement or Bribe to get Preferment; This might have been spared, had it so pleased the Gentleman which spake it: But I know my Condition, and where I am, and will not lose my Pa∣tience for Language.

And whereas 'tis urged, That after this he was Named by me, to be a Chaplain to the Prince his Highness; the Thing was thus, His Majesty had suit made to him, that the Prince might have Ser∣mons in his own Chappel for his Family. Hereupon his Majesty, approving the Motion, commanded me to think upon the Names of some fit Men for that Service. I did so: But before any thing was done, I acquainted the Right Honourable the Lord Chamberlain, that then was, with it; my Lord knew most of the Men, and approved the Note, and delivered it to his Secretary Mr: Oldsworth, to Swear them. This was the Fact: And at this time, when I put Dr: Dove's Name into the List, I did not know of any such Passage in his Book, nor indeed ever heard of it till now. For I had not Read his Book, but here and there by snatches.

I am now come (and 'tis time) to the last Particular of this * 16.194 day. And this Charge was, The giving of Subsidies to the King in the Convocation, without consent in Parliament; That the Penal∣ties for not paying were strict, and without Appeal, as appears in the Act; where it is farther said, that we do this according to the Duty which by Scripture we are bound unto; which reflects upon the Liberties of Parliaments in that behalf. But it was added, they would not meddle now with the late Canons for any thing else, till they came to their due place.

1. My Answer to this was: That this was not my single Act, but the Act of the whole Convocation, and could not be appliable to me only.

2. That this Grant was no other, nor in any other way, Mu∣tatis Mutandis, than was granted to Queen Elizabeth in Arch-Bishop Whitgift's time. This Grant was also put in Execution, as appeared by the Originals which we followed. These Origi∣nals (among many other Records) were commanded away by

the Honourable House of Commons, and where they now are I know not: But for want of them my Defence cannot be so full.

3. For the Circumstances; as that the Penalties are without Ap∣peal, and the like, 'tis usual in all such Grants. And that we did it according to our Duty and the Rules of Scripture, we conceived was a fitting Expression for our selves, and Men of our Calling, without giving Law to others, or any intention to violate the Law in the least. For thus, I humbly conceive, lyes the mu∣tual Relation between the King and his People, by Rules of Con∣science. The Subjects are to supply a full and Honourable Main∣tenance to the King: And the King (when Necessities call upon him) is to ask of his People, in such a way as is, per pacta, by Law and Covenant agreed upon between them, which in this Kingdom is by Parliament; yet the Clergy ever granting their own at all times. And that this was my Judgment long before this, appears by a Sermon of mine, appointed to be Preached at the opening of the Parliament; in the Year 1625. My Words * 16.195 are these. If you would have indeed a flourishing both State and Church; The King must trust and indear his People; and the People must Honour, Obey, and Support their King, &c. This, I hope, is far enough from derogating from any Law: And if I should privately have spoken any thing to him contrary to this, which I had both Preached and Printed, how could his Majesty have trusted me in any thing?

CAP. XXIV.

THis brought this tedious Day to an End. And I had an Or∣der * 16.196 the same Day to appear again on Saturday, March 16. 1643. with a Note also from the Committee which were to Charge me, that they meant then to proceed upon part of the Second Additi∣onal Article, and upon the Third Original, and the Third and Fifth Additional Articles. The Second Additional Article is written down before. And here follow the rest now mentioned to be next pro∣ceeded upon.

3. The third Original is, He hath by Letters, Messages, Threats, Promises, and divers other ways, to Judges and other Ministers of Justice, Interrupted and Perverted, and at other Times by the means aforesaid, hath endeavoured to Interrput and Pervert the Course of Justice in his Majesty's Courts at Westminster, and other Courts, to the Subversion of the Laws of this Kingdom; whereby sundry of his Majesty's Subjects have been stopped in their just Suits, and deprived of their Lawful Rights, and subjected to his Tyrannical Will, to their utter Ruine and Destruction.

The Third and Fifth Additionals follow.

3. That the said Arch-Bishop, to advance the Canons of the Church and Power Ecclesiastical above the Law of the Land, and to Per∣vert and hinder the Course of Justice, hath at divers Times within the said Time, by his Letters and other undue Means and Solicitations used to Judges, opposed and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the granting of his Majesty's Writs of Prohibition, where the same ought to have been Granted for Stay of Proceedings in the Ecclesia∣stical Court, whereby Justice hath been delayed and hindered, and the Judges diverted from doing their Duties.

5. That the said Arch-Bishop about Eight Years last past, being then also a Privy-Counsellor to his Majesty, for the End and Pur∣pose aforesaid, caused Sir John Corbet of Stoak in the County of Salop Baronet, then a Justice of Peace of the said County, to be Committed to the Prison of the Fleet, where he continued Prisoner for the space of half a Year or more; for no other Cause but for calling for the Petition of Right, and causing it to be Read at the Sessions of the Peace for that County, upon a just and necessary Occasion. And during the Time of his said Impri∣sonment, the said Arch-Bishop, without any Colour of Right, by a Writing under the Seal of his Arch-Bishoprick, granted away Par∣cel of the Glebe-Land of the Church of Adderly in the said County, whereof the said Sir Jo. Corbet was then Patron, unto Robert Viscount Kilmurry, without the consent of the said Sir John, or the then Incumbent of the said Church; which said Viscount Kilmurry, Built a Chappel upon the said Parcel of Glebe-Land, to the great prejudice of the said Sir John Corbet, which hath caused great Suits and * 16.197 Dissentions between them. And whereas

the said Sir John Corbet had a Judgment against Sir James Stonehouse, Knight, in an Action of Waste in his Majesty's Court of Common Pleas at Westminster, which was after∣ward affirmed in a Writ of Error in the King's Bench, and Execution thereupon Awarded; yet the said Sir John, by means of the said Arch-Bishop, could not have the Effect thereof, but was committed to Prison by the said Arch-Bishop and others at the Council Table; until he had submitted himself unto the Order of the said Table, whereby he lost the benefit of the said Judg∣ment and Execution.

The Third Day of my Hearing.

In the Interim, between the 13th and this 16th of March, upon * 16.198 some strict Charge to look to the Tower, my Solicitor was not suffer'd to come in to me. Whereupon, so soon as I was setled at the Bar, before the Evidence began to be open'd, I spake to the Lords as follows.

My Lords; I stand not here to complain of any thing, or any Man; but only am inforced to acquaint your Lordships with my sad Condi∣tion. Your Lordships have appointed my Secretary to be my Solici∣tor, and given him leave to assist me in the turning of my Papers, and to warn in such Witnesses, and to fetch me the Copies of such Records, as I shall have occasion to use. And I humbly desire your Lordships to consider, that my self being Imprisoned, and so utterly disinabled to do these things my self; it will be absolutely impossible for me to make any Defence, if my Solicitor be denyed to come to me, as now he is. * 16.199 This was granted, and the Hearing adjourned till Munday following; and I humbly thanked their Lordships * 16.200 for it.

CAP. XXV. The Fourth Day of my Hearing.

THE fourth Day of my Hearing was Munday, March 18. and * 16.201 was only my Answer to the third Day's Charge, and the only time in which I was not put to answer the same Day. The first Charge of this Day was about St. Pauls. And first out of my * 16.202 Diary; (where I confess it one of my Projects to repair that Ancient Fabrick:) And three strict Orders of the Lords of the Council for the demolishing of the Houses Built about that Church. One was Novemb. 21. 1634. The demolishing of the Houses commanded by this before Jan. 6. for one, and for the rest by Midsummer. Another was Mar. 26. 1631. a Committee appointed with Power to compound with the Tenants, and with Order to pull down, if they would not Compound. The third was Mar. 2. 1631. which gives Power to the Sheriffs to pull down, if Obedience be not yielded.

To this I confess I did, when I came first to be Bishop of London, Project the Repair of that Ancient and famous Cathedral of St. Paul, ready to sink into its own Ruins. And to this I held my self bound in general, as Bishop of the Place; and in particular for the Body of the Church, the Repair of which is by the Local Statutes laid upon the Bishop. And the Bishop was well able to do it, while he enjoyed those Lands which he had, when that Burthen was laid upon him.

But what Sacrilegious Hands despoiled that Bishoprick of them, 'tis to no purpose to tell.

And truly, my Lords, since I am in this present Condition, I humbly and heartily thank God, that St. Pauls comes into my Sufferings; and that God is pleased to think me worthy to suffer either for it, or with it any way: Though I confess I little thought to meet that here, or as a Charge any where else. And so God be pleased (as I hope in Christ he will) to Par∣don my other Sins, I hope I shall be able (Humane Frailties always set aside) to give an easie Account for this. But whereas I said, the Repair of St. Pauls was a strange piece of Treason. And they pre∣sently Replyed, that they did not Charge the Repair upon me, but the Manner of doing it, by demolishing of Mens Houses. To that I Answered as follows; with this first, that the Work hath cost me above One Thousand and two Hundred Pounds out of my own Purse, besides all my Care and Pains, and now this heavy Charge to boot: No one Man offering to prove, that I have Mis-spent or diverted to other use, any one Penny given to that work; or that I have done any thing about it, without the Knowledge, Approbation and Or∣der of his Majesty, or the Lords of the Council, or both.

To the Particulars then. For the three Orders taken out of the Council-Books, I shall not need to repeat them. But what is the My∣stery, that these Orders are reckoned backward, the last first? Is it to aggravate, as if it rose by steps? That cannot well be; because

the first Order is the Sourest, if I conceive it right. Besides, here was real Composition allotted for them, and that by a Committee named by the Lords, not by me. And I think it was very real; for it Cost Eight or Nine Thousand Pounds (as appears upon the Accounts) meerly to take down the Houses (which had no Right to stand there) before we could come at the Church to Repair it.

And if any thing should be amiss in any of these (which is more than I either know or believe;) they were the Council's Orders, not mine. And shall that be urged as Treason against me, which is not Imputed to them so much as a Misdemeanour? Besides, the Lords of the Council are in the ancient Constitution of this Kingdom one Body; and whatsoever the Major Part of them concludes, is reputed the Act of the whole, not any one Man's. And this I must often Inculcate, because I see such Publick Acts like to be heaped upon my Particular.

1. The first Witness about this Business of St. Pauls is Mich. Burton, and 'tis charged that his House was pulled down in King James's time; That he was Promised relief, but had none: That hereupon he got a Reference from his Majesty that now is, and came with it to the Council, and was referred to the Committee. That Sir Hen. Martin told him that the Arch-Bishop was his hinderance. That he resorted to me, and that I bid him go to King James for his Recompence.

To this my Answer was, That this House, which he says was his, was (as is confessed by himself) taken down in King James's Time, when an attempt was made about the Repair of this Cathedral, but nothing done. If he desired satisfaction, he was to seek it of them who took down his House, not of me. If his Majesty that now is gave him a Reference, he was by the Lords of the Council, or by me (if to me it were Referred) to be sent to the Sub-Com∣mittee, because Satisfaction for each House was to be Ordered by them. Nor had I any Reason to take it on my Care, which was done so long before. He says, that Sir Henry Martin told him that I hindred him: But that's no Proof, that Sir Hen: Martin told him so: For 'tis but his Report of Sir Henry Martin's Speech: And I hope, Sir Henry neither did, nor would do me such apparent Wrong. He was the third Man to whom I brake my Intentions touching the Repair, and the Difficulties which I foresaw I was to meet with: And he gave me all Encouragement. And it may be, when no∣thing would satisfie the eager Old Man, I might bid him go to King James for Recompence; but 'tis more than I remember if I did so. And this Man is single, and in his own Case; and where lyes the Treason that is in it? Besides, least Consideration was due to this House: For, not many Years before the Demolishing of it, it was Built at the West End of St. Pauls for a Lottery; (it was said to be the House of one Wheatly;) and after the Lottery ended, finished up into a Dwelling-House, to the great annoyance of that Church: The Bishop, and Dean, and Chapter being asleep while it was done.

2. The next Charge about St. Pauls was Witnessed by Mary Berry,

That her Husband was fain to set up his Trade elsewhere, and that every Man reported, the Bishop was the Cause of it.

Her Husband was forced by this Remove to set up his Trade elsewhere; so she says: And perhaps in a better Place, and with Satisfaction sufficient to make him a better Stock: Where's the Wrong? Beside, she is single, and in her own Cause, and no Proof, but that every Man reported the Bishop was the means to remove him. And it is Observable, that in King James his Time, when the Commission issued out for the demolishing of these very Houses, the Work was highly applauded; and yet no Care taken for Satisfaction of any Private Mans Interest:

That now great Care hath been taken, and great Sums of Mo∣ney Expended about it, yet I must be a Traytor, and no less for doing it. This makes me think, some Party of Men were hear∣tily angry at the Repair it self; though for very Shame it be turned off upon the demolishing of the Houses.

3. The next that came in, was Tho: Wheeler: He says that his House was pulled down by the Committee, by my Direction, above Eleven Years ago: And that Word was brought him of it.

His House was pulled down; but himself confesses it was by the Committee. It was, he says, above eleven Years ago, and the time limited in that Article is * 16.203 Six Years. He says, that Word was brought him that I was the Cause, or gave the Direction. Word was brought him, but he Names not by whom, nor from whom; so all this Proof is a single Hearsay of he knows not whom: Whereas I had the Broad-Seal of England for all that was done. It was replyed here, That for demolishing of these Houses the King's Com∣mission was no full and legal Warrant; I should have procured Authority from Parliament. I replyed to this Interruption, That Houses more remote from the Church of St. Pauls were pulled down by the King's Com∣mission * 16.204 only in K. Ed. 3. time; and humbly desired a Salvo might be entered for me, till I might bring the † Record; which was granted.

4. The last Instance for this Charge of St. Pauls, was the House of W: Wakern; who Witnessed, that he had a Hundred Pound re∣compence for his House; but then was after Fined in the High-Com∣mission-Court 100 l. for Prophanation, of which he paid 30 l.

To this I gave this Answer; That his Charge is true; and that after he had received 100 l. Composition, the Cry of the Prophanation brought him into the High-Commission. It was thus: The Skulls of Dead-Men (perhaps better than himself) were tumbled out of their Graves into his Draught, and part of the Foundation of the Church (as appeared in the taking down of his House) was broken, or pared away, to make room for the uncleanness to pass into the Vault: And surely were I to sit again in the High-Commission, I should give my Vote to Censure this Prophanation. But himself confesses, he paid but Thirty Pound of it, which was too little for such an Offence. And besides, my Lords, this was the Act of the High-Commission, and cannot be charged singly upon me.

And I cannot forbear to add thus much more, That the Bishop, and Dean, and Chapter, whoever they were, did ill to give way to these Buildings, and to increase their Rents by a Sacrilegious Re∣venue: No Law that I know giving way to Build upon Conse∣crated Ground, as that Church-Yard is. But howsoever, the present Tenants being not in Dolo, I ever thought fit they should have Recompence for their Estates, and they had it.

The next Charge was about the Shops of the Goldsmiths in Cheap∣side * 16.205 and Lumbard-street. An Order was made at the Council-Table, Novemb. 12. 1634. That within Six Months the Goldsmiths should pro∣vide themselves Shops there, and no where else, till all those Shops were furnished: And this under a Penalty, and to give Bond.

These two were the ancient Places for Goldsmiths only, Time out of Mind: And it was thought fit by the Lords, for the Beauty of the Place, and the Honour of the City, to have these Places fur∣nished as they were wont, and not to have other Trades mixed among them. Beside, it concerned all Mens Safety: For if any Plate were stoln, the enquiry after it might be made with more ease and speed: Whereas if the Goldsmiths might dwell here and there, and keep their Shops in every by-place of the City, stoln Plate might easily be made off, and never heard of. But howso∣ever, if in this Order there were any thing amiss, it was the Order of the Council-Table, not mine: And far enough off from Treason, as I conceive.

1. Upon this Charge there were two Instances. The first is Mr: Bartley; who said, his House was taken from him, by Order to the Lord Mayor, 1637. That my Hand was to the Order; That he was Imprisoned Six Months, and recovered 600. l. Damages of Sir Ed. Bromfield; That after this he was Committed to Flamsted, a Mes∣senger belonging to the High Commission, about Dr. Bastwick's and Mr. Burton's Books; That after this he was sent for to the Council, and there heard my Voice only; That when he desired some help, Sir Tho. Ailsbury's Man told him, he were as good take a Bear by the Tooth: That all this was for his entertaining a Man that came out of Scotland; and lastly, That Dr. Haywood, my Chaplain, had Licen∣sed a Popish Book.

To which I gave this Answer: That if the Lord Mayor put him from his house, by Order from the Lords (being a Stationer among the Goldsmiths) then it was not done by me: And though my Hand were to the Order, yet not mine alone; and I hope my Hand there subscribed no more Treason than other Lords Hands did: And if he did recover 600 l. against Sir Ed. Bromfield, who (I think) was the Lord Mayor spoken of, surely he was a Gainer by the Business. And whereas he says, he was after seized again, and Commit∣ted to Flamsted about the Books Named: If he were (as was in∣formed) a great Vender of those, and such like Books, less could not be done to him, than to call him to Answer. He says farther, that he was sent for to the Council-Table, and there he heard my Voice only against him. It may be so, and without all fault of mine: For that heavy Office was usually put upon me and the Lord Keeper, to deliver the Sense of the Board to such as

were called thither, and Examined there: And by this Means, if any sour or displeasing Sentence passed (how just soever, it mat∣tered not) it was taken as our own, and the Envy of it fell on us. And that this was so, many Lords here present know well. He adds what Sir Thomas Ailsbury's Man said, when he would have Pe∣titioned again: But since Mr. Bartley is single here, and in his own Cause, why doth he rest upon a Hearsay of Sir Thomas Ailsbury's Man? Why was not this Man Examined to make out the Proof? And if this Man did so far abuse me, as to speak such Words of me, shall I be Abused first, and then have that Abuse made a Charge? That he was troubled thus for a Scotchman's coming to him, is nothing so, nor is any Proof offered: Though then the Trou∣bles were begun in Scotland; and therefore if this had any relation to that Business, I pleaded again the Act of Oblivion. For that of Dr. Haywood, I shall give my Answer in a more proper Place; for 'tis objected again.

2. The second Instance was in Mr Manning's Case. He speaks also of the Order of the Council, Novemb. 12. 1634. That the Goldsmiths in their Book make an Order upon it, June 15. 1635. That they which obey not, should be suspended, (I think 'tis meant from use of their Trade;) That when some intreated them to Obedience, I should say, This Board is not so Weak, but that it can Command; or to that effect.

For the Council's Order, it was theirs, not mine. For the Order which the Company of Goldsmiths made upon it, It was their own Act, I had nothing to do with it. For the Words, If I did speak them (which is more than I remember) he is single that Swears them, and in his own Cause. But, my Lords, I must needs say, whether I spake it then, or not, most true it is, that the Council-Table is very weak indeed, if it cannot Command in things of De∣cency, and for Safety of the Subject, and where there is no Law to the contrary. And this was then my Answer.

The Third Charge of this Day, was, That I forced Men to * 16.206 lend Money to the Church of St: Pauls: And Mrs: Moore was called upon. But this was deserted.

The next Charge was concerning a long and tedious Suit between * 16.207 Rich and Poole, about the Parsonage of North-Cerny in Glocester∣shire; That Rich was turned out after three Years Possession, by a Reference procured by Poole, to the Lord Keeper Coventry and my self; And that I did in a manner Act the whole Business at the Reference; That Letters were sent from the Council to Sir William Masters, one of the Patrons, to see Poole Instituted, and to Imprison Rich if he refused Obedience: That after, by the Lord Marshal's pro∣curement, there was another Reference obtained to thirteen Lords; who awarded for Rich.

I was never more weary of any Business in my Life, than I was of this Reference: And I was so far from Acting the whole Business, as that I did nothing, but as the Lord Keeper directed; the Cause was so entangled with Quare Impedits, and many other Businesses of Law. Our Judgments upon full Hearing went with Poole, and we certified accordingly: And upon this (it may

be) the Letters mentioned were sent down for Poole. And if the Lord Keeper that now is, then his Majesty's Solicitor, could not, or durst not meddle, but gave back his Fee (as was farther urged) his Lordship is living to tell the Cause himself; for here was none set down, though it were urged, as if he did it because I was a Referree: And in the mean time this is but a bare Report concerning him. If the thirteen Lords, to whom it was after referred, were of another Opi∣nion, that was nothing to us, who without any touch of Corruption, did as our Knowledge and Conscience guided us. And, my Lords, it seems this Title was very doubtful; for after all this, it came into this Parliament, was referred to a Committee, where Mr. Rich was very willing to compound the Business.

And well he might; for I was since certified by a Gentleman, a Lawyer, that understood well, and was at the Hearing of that Cause, that it was one of the foulest Causes on Rich's side, that ever he heard. And out of this I took the Summ of my Answer, which I gave to Mr. Browne, when he Summed up my Charge.

The Witnesses to this Charge were Mr. Rich his Brother, and my good Friend Mr. Talboys. But this latter witnesses nothing but that he heard me say, that Poole's Behaviour was unfit; so there I checked the one Party: And that upon some words given me by Rich, I should say, do you throw dirt in my face? And why might I not ask this Question, if his words deserved it? So upon the Matter, here is Rich single in his Brother's Case; and nothing throughout that looks like Treason.

Here I had a snap given me, that I slighted the Evidence, whereas they (as 'twas said) did not urge these Particulars as Treason, but as things tending to the violation of Law, and should be found to make Treason in the Result.

The Truth is, I did then think within my self, that such Evidence might very well be slighted in an Accusation of Treason.

But I thought better to forbear; and so, in my continued patience, expected the next Charge.

Which was Mr: Foxlie's Imprisonment about Popish Books. That he * 16.208 was tender'd the Oath ex Officio; then brought before the Council, and imprisoned again by a Warrant under my Hand and others; and my Hand first to the Warrant; his Wife not suffer'd to come to him, till he was sick; that the chief Cause of all this was the Impropriations, because he desired to Name the Men for the Feoffment.

My Lords, This Man confesses, he was called in question about Popish-Books; but expressing no more, I cannot tell what to make of it; nor can I tell how to Accuse him of Popish Books.

For I cannot tell which is least, his Understanding of them, or his Love to them.

And for tendring him the Oath ex Officio, that was the usual proceed∣ing in that Court. When he was brought before the Lords of the Council, he says the Warrant for his Imprisonment was under my Hand and others. This was according to course: So the Commitment of him was by the Lords, not by me. But my Hand was first; so was it in all things else, to which I was to set it. And the restraint of his Wife from coming to him, was by the same Order of the Lords: And upon her Petition, when her Husband was sick, both of them confess she had admittance. But whereas he says, The chief Cause of

his Commitment was the Feoffment, he is much mistaken: Himself says before it was about Popish Books. This I am sure of, the Feoff∣ment was not so much as mentioned against him: Though he freely confesses, that he got twelve Men to undertake that Feoffment, which was a great deal more power than he could take to himself by Law. And his Wife speaks not one word to the Cause of his Imprison∣ment. So he is single, and in his own Cause; and no Treason, unless it be against Mr. Foxlye.

The next Charge of this day, was Mr: Vassall's Imprisonment: * 16.209 And to save Repetition, I shall weave all the circumstances of Aggra∣vation and my Answer together.

First, he is single in all, both Substance and Circumstance. Se∣condly, he says that he conceives I was the cause of his Imprisonment. But his Conceit is no proof. He says again, that I said at the Council-Table (whither he was called,) Why sit we here, if we be not able to Judge? It may be, my Lords, I said so; I remember not now; but if I did say so, it was of such things only, as were fit and proper for that Honourable Board to judge of. Then he Charged me, that I should there say, That he did eat the Bread out of the King's Childrens Mouths; and that if he were in another Country he would be Hang'd for it.

I doubt this Gentleman has borrowed some of Sir Hen. Vane's Me∣mory: But I remember no such thing.

Yet if I did say it, it was no Treason: For if I did say he might be Hang'd for the like in some other Country; it was because the Laws and Customs of other Countries, and this of ours, differ in many things. So that by this Speech, he was to thank the Law of the Land for his preservation, notwithstanding his opposition against Majesty; which, where the Laws were not so favourable to the Subject, would not be indured.

He says, He was fain to deposite 300 l. into the Hand of Sir Abra. Dawes, and that it was taken out the next day: But he says withal, it was done by a Decree at the Council-Board; and I hope I shall not be held Author of all Decrees which passed there. He says, that I called him Sirrah:

A high Crime, if I did so! High Treason at least!

But sure this Gentleman's Spleen swell'd up Sir into Sirrah:

For that is no Language of mine to meaner Men than Mr. Vassal is. The main of this Charge is Words; and those (if utter'd) hasty, not Treaso∣nable: And as M. Lepidus spake in the Case of C. Lutorius Priscus, * 16.210 Vana à scelestis, dicta à maleficiis differunt; vain things differ from wicked, and words from malicious deeds; and let any Man else be sifted as I have been for all the time I have been a Bishop, which is now upon the point of Twenty and three Years, and I doubt not but as high Words as these will be heard fallen from him upon less occasion, and of greater Personages than Mr. Vassal is. Besides, Mr. Vassal, at the end of his Testimony, desired the Lords he might have Reparation; which altogether in Law infirms that which he Testified.

After this followed a Charge about a Grant passed from his Majesty * 16.211 to one Mr. Smith. The difference was between Mrs. Burrill and him. As far as I can recall, it was thus. The King had made a Grant to Mr. Burrill, in his Life time, of a Wharf or something else belonging to the Thames. Mr. Smith conceals this, and gets a Grant from his

Majesty, over the Head of the Widow and her Children. And, as himself confesses, His Majesty being informed that Mrs. Burrill was Sister to the Reverend Prelate Bishop Andrews, being then dead, * 16.212 should say, that he would not have granted it to Mr. Smith, had he known so much. This was an Honourable Memory of his faithful Servant, her Worthy Brother. But whatsoever was done in this business, was by Order of the Council-Board, and not by me: As was also the 250 l. which (he says) was paid in to Sir William Beecher, (by way of deposite, as I conceive;) In which if he had any hard Measure, the Law was open for his Right. And in the whole busi∣ness he is single, and in his own Cause.

The next Charge was Sir Jo: Corbett's; which because it is expres∣sed * 16.213 at large in the Article before recited, I shall not here repeat, but apply the Answer to it, which I then gave.

Sir John says, he was sent for about Reading the Petition of Right, at a Sessions in the Country; and that the Earl of Bridgwater should say, he was disaffected to the King. This concerns not me in any thing. He says, That for this he was Committed, lay long in the Fleet, and was de∣nied Bail: But he says it was denyed by the whole Board.

So by his own Confession, this was the Act of the Council, not mine. And this Answer I gave to Mr. Browne, when he put this part of the Charge into his Summ.

In his Cause with Sir John Stonehouse about a Waste, I cannot recal the Particulars: But what-ever was done therein, himself confesses was by Order at the Council-Table, and His Majesty present, April 18. 1638.

For the Ile built by the Lord Viscount Kilmurrye; the Grant which I made was no more, than is ordinary in all such Cases: And 'tis expressed in the Body of the Grant, Quantum in nobis est, & de Jure possumus; so there is nothing at all done to the prejudice of Sir John's Inheritance: For if we cannot Grant it by Law, then the Grant is voided by its own words. And that the Grant was such, and no other, I shew'd the Deeds ready Attested out of the Office. Besides, had I wronged him, there was an ordinary Remedy open, by Appeal to the Delegates. And this was well known to him; for he did so Appeal from a like Grant against him, by the now Lord Bishop of Duresme, then of Lichfield, and Sir John's Diocesan. And whereas 'tis alledged, That I made this Grant without the consent of him the Patron, or the then Incumbent; Sir John acknowledges, like a Gentleman, that I sent unto him for his consent, if it might have been had. And this I foresaw also, that if I had denyed the Lord Viscount that which was not unusual; then the Complaint would have fallen more heavy on the other side, that I made Persons of Quality in a manner Recusants, by denying them that conveniency which was in my power to grant. So I must be faulty, whatever I do.

Then the business of the Tythes of London was raised up in Judg∣ment * 16.214 against me. And it was Read out of my Diary, that I projected to give the Ministers assistance therein.

I had been much to blame, having been Bishop of London, should I have had other thoughts. For their Case is very hard; all their Offe∣rings being shrunk a way into nothing, but a poor Easter-Book. The

Ministers of London had often petitioned about some Relief long before my time: And I did then, and do still think it most just, they should have it.

For they are now under the Taskmakers of AEgypt; the * 16.215 Tale of Brick must be made, they must Preach twice a Sunday, get Straw where they can.

And yet I never thought of any thing con∣trary to Law, had all been done which I desired. For that was no more, than that the Citizens would voluntarily yield to some reaso∣nable addition, where Right and Need appeared: And this, I am sure, nor did nor could cross with the Act of Parliament concerning the Tythes of London. And Mr. Moss, who is their only Witness in this particular, says no more against me, but that I pressed this business much, and often: Which is most true I did, and held it my Duty so to do; but still in the way before mentioned.

After this came the great Charge (as it was accounted) concern∣ing * 16.216 the Censure of Mr: Pryn, and Burton, and Bastwick, in the Star-Chamber, and their Banishment (as 'tis called) upon it. The Witnesses produced in some Circumstances of that Cause, were Mr: Cockshott, Tho: Edwards, William Wickens, Mr: Burton, Mrs: Bast∣wicke, and Mr: Pryn himself. The Censure is known, and urged to be against Law: But so far as any Particular is put upon me, my Answer is present to it.

1. And first for Mr: Cockshott, he says, Mr. Attorney Bancks sent him (being then his Servant) to give me an Account of that Business: Hence 'tis inferred, That I took care of it. This might have had some shew of Proof, if I had sent to Mr. Attorney to give me an account of it. But there's no word of any such Proof. And yet, considering what relation their Cause had to the Church, if I had sent and desired some Account of the Proceedings; I humbly conceive (my Place in the Church considered) it could have been no great Crime.

2. Then were Read certain Warrants: One Febr. 1. 1632. for Commitment; another of Febr. 2. 1636. to bar access to them. These were Acts of the Lords sitting in Star-Chamber, not mine. Then was Read a third Order after Sentence given, of May 13. 1634. for the seizing of his Books. But this, as the former, was an Act of the Court; not mine: And 'tis expressed in the Order (as the Charge it self lays it down) for the disposal of the Books according to Law. Then the Warrant of their Commitment to the Islands, Aug. 27. 1637. This Commitment was no Device of mine; nor did I ever hear of it, till it was spoken by others in the Star-Chamber: Nor do any one of these Warrants prove any thing, that can be call'd my Act: And I humbly conceive, that I ought not by Law, nor can by Usage of Parliamentary-Proceedings, be charged single for those things which were done in Publick Courts. The last Order was, No∣vember 12. 1637. about the Aldermen of Coventry, and the Quo Warranto resolved upon against the Charter of that City, only for supposed Favours shew'd to Mr. Pryn in his passage that way. First, 'tis confessed in the Charge, that this was an Act of the Lords. Se∣condly, that it was made at a full Board. Thirdly, 'tis not urged that any one Man disliked it. Fourthly, the Complaint which caused it, was, that both Aldermen and their Wives, and other Citi∣zens,

were not content to shew Mr. Pryn kindness; but they both did, and spake that which was disgraceful to the Star-Chamber-Sentence. But howsoever, there is no Particular in that Order, that is, or can be Charged upon me.

3. This for the Warrants. The next Witness concerning this Charge was Tho. Edwards. He says, That three Hampers of Mr. Pryn's Books were taken out of his House (whither it seems, they were con∣veyed for Safety,) and no Warrant shewed to take them. The weaker Man he, to let his Friends Books go so. But this Witness hath not one Word of me.

4. The next Witness, was William Wickens; he says, he knew of no Warrant neither; but that License was given by the Sheriffs about Six Years since. Here's never a Word concerning me; nor am I to An∣swer for the Sheriffs Act. And whereas it is an Aggravation in the Charge, That all Mr. Pryn's Books were sold: Tho. Edwards says there were but Three Hampers of them; and this Witness says he bought them for Two and Thirty Pounds: And these neither by Number nor Price, could be half of Mr. Pryn's Books, if I have heard Truth of his Library.

5. After this Man's Testimony comes Mr. Pryn himself in his own Cause. He made a long relation of the Business, and full of Bitterness against me. This I doubt not was purposely done, to re∣present me as Odious as he could, to the Lords and the Hearers. But I shall assume nothing to my self, that was done by Order of the Court of Star-Chamber: Whatsoever was done there by Common Consent, was their Act, not mine; and if any Treason be in it, they are as guilty as I; for Treason admits no Accessories. Nor will I meddle with the Language: God forgive him that, and what ever else he hath done against me: Only I shall answer to all such particulars of his, as seem to touch upon my self.

(1) First then he says, he brought a Prohibition, An. 1629. and that was the Ground of my Hatred against him. For Prohibitions, I shall Answer when they are Charged: But as I remember not this, so I bare him no Hatred; and bearing him none, it could not be for that Cause: Nor doth he so much as offer to prove it was.

(2) Next he says, I gave Direction to Mr. Attorney Noy, and that Dr. Heylin drew some Informations for him. Dr. Heylin was well ac∣quainted with Mr. Attorney; but how long, or upon what grounds I know not: Nor did I give Mr. Attorney any direction. What Dr. Heylin did, if he did any thing, is nothing to me, unless I set him on; which is not Proved, nor Sworn.

(3) He farther says, That Mr. Attorney read his Book twice over, and said that he found nothing amiss in it. I know not what Mr. Attorney said to him; nor what he may say of Mr. Attorney, now he is dead: This I am sure of, and 'tis well known to some of your Lordships, he said far otherwise in open Court.

(4) He says, That his Book was Licensed to the Press, and after that seized, and that the Messenger told him it was done by me. This was done by Warrant of the High Commission, not by me: Nor doth he offer any Proof against me, but that the Messenger told him so; which is a bare Hearsay, and no Proof.

(5) Then he says, That there was another Order given about his Business, and that I did it. But he brings no Proof for this, but that Mr. Ingram, the then Keeper of the Fleet, told him so. But this is as bare a Hearsay as the former, and Mr. Ingram not pro∣duced to make out the Proof.

(6) Then he says, He writ me a Letter, and that I sent it to Mr. Attorney, to have him yet farther proceeded against. 'Tis true, my Lords, he did Write unto me; but whether it were a Letter, or a Libel, I leave other Men to Judge. This Letter I did send to Mr. Attorney; but only to let him see how I was used, not to have any farther proceeding against him. But Mr. Attorny was so moved at the sight of it, that when he saw me next, he told me he would call him Ore tenus for it. Therefore it seems, somewhat was very much amiss in it, call the Writing what you will.

(7) He says, Mr. Attorney thought he had not kept the Letter; but he was deceived, for he had it. But how was Mr. Attorney deceived? I'le tell your Lordships what himself told me. When Mr. Attorney saw that I would not agree to any farther Prosecution, he sent for Mr. Pryn, shewed him the Letter, and thought after he had Read it to give him some good Counsel, to desist from that Libelling Hu∣mour of his. But Mr. Pryn, after he had got the Letter into his Hands, went to the Window, as if he meant to read it, and while Mr. Attorney was otherwise busied, he tare it into small Pieces, and threw it out at the Window, and then said unto him, This shall never rise in Judgment against me. Now he confesses he hath the Letter still, and that Mr. Attorney was deceived: Belike he tare some other Paper for it, and put the Letter in his Pocket.

But that you may see the Honesty of this Man, and what Conscience he makes of that which he speaks upon his Oath; Here he says he had the Letter still, and that Mr. Attorney was deceived: And yet after this, when he sets out his Breviate of my Life; he confesses, * 16.217 in an unsavoury Marginal Note, That he Tare it, Mr. Attorney having need of such a Paper. And for this Breviate of his, if God lend me Life and Strength to end this first, I shall discover to the World the Base and Malicious Slanders with which it is fraught.

(8) He went on, and said, There was an Order made against him when Term was done, so that he could have no Remedy. This is di∣rectly against the Court and their Order, not against me.

(9) Then he cites out of the Epistle before my Speech in the Star-Chamber, * 16.218 that I Censured him for having his Hand in the Pamphlets of those times, and yet was doubtful of it. The Words are; For I doubt his Pen is in all the Pamphlets. But first, 'tis acknowledged I gave no Vote at all in his Censure: And if I did not Judicially Censure him, then sure I was not doubtful, and yet Censured. Secondly, he was Censured upon his own Pamphlet: And his Hand was certainly in his own, what doubt soever I might make of it's being in theirs. And Thirdly, if the Words be extended to their Pamphlets also, that's nothing to prove I doubted of the Justness of the Sentence. For the Words are not, I doubt his Pen is in all those Pamphlets of Mr. Burton, and Dr. Bastwick; but in all the Pamphlets, whether their

Libels, or any others; so I might be doubtful of the one, and yet certain enough of the other.

(10) And whereas he adds, That he was joyntly Charged with Dr. Bastwick and Mr. Burton, yet could not be suffered to speak together for a joynt Answer; and that his Cross Bill was refused. All this was done by the Court of Star-Chamber; not by me. And your Lordships know well the Lord Keeper managed the Affairs of that Court, not I.

(11) Then he says, That at last, Mr. Holt came to him, but was threatned that very Afternoon for it. But he doth not tell your Lordships by whom; and for my part more than civil giving him the time of the Day, I never spake with him in all my Life.

(12) He tells your Lordships next, how he passed through Coventry, (to which I have spoken already) and how through Chester, and how some Chester men were used concerning him, and his entertainment. But, my Lords, whatsoever was done in this, was by the High-Commission at York; and if any thing be therein amiss, they must answer that did it.

(13) Lastly, he spake of sending Sir William Balfore to me, and some other like Particulars. Of all which there is no Proof, but a bare Relation, what Mr. Hungerford, Mr. Ingram and Sir William Balfore said; which is all Hearsay, and makes no Evidence, unless they were present to Witness what is said.

And here give me leave to observe, that Mr. Pryn hath in this Charge woven toge∣ther all that he cou'd say concerning both Causes, for which he was Censured: For in the third Particular he speaks of his Book, for which he was first Censured; and in the Ninth and Tenth of his Cross-Bill, and the like, which were in his second Cause.

6. The sixth Witness was Mr. Burton, a Party too. For that which he said agreeable to Mr. Pryn, it received the same Answer. And he added nothing new, but that his Wife was kept from him by Warrant from the Lords: And if it was by the Lords Order, then was it not by me. And when it was replyed, that till he was Senten∣ced to Garnsey, his Wife had access to him: Mr. Burton answered, Yea; but, my Lords, she was not suffered to be with me at Nights. At which the Lords fell a Laughing, and there ended his Charge.

7. The last Witness was Mrs. Bastwick: And she also said nothing different from Mr. Pryn; but that she was kept from her Husband, and that she Petitioned the Lords about it: But of me in particular, not one Word.

And though Mr. Brown, in his last Reply upon me, said, The Time of these Mens Censure was the noted Time of the Oppression of the Subjects Liberty; yet I shall crave leave to say of these Men, as S. Augustin once said of two great Donatists in his time, who (it seems) had received some Sentence, and after∣wards a return, not altogether unlike these Men: (They were Felicianus and Pretextatus;) of those thus S. Augustin, If these Men were * 16.219 Innocent, why were they so Condemned? And if they were Guilty, why were they with such Honour returned, and received? This applies it self. And here I am willing to put the Reader in Mind too, that Mr. Brown drawing up an exact Summ of my Charge, and pressing it hard against me, to my Remembrance (and I think my Notes could

not have slipped it) passed by this Charge concerning Mr. Pryn; and I cannot but think, he had some Reason for it.

This tedious Charge being over, the World ran round, and * 16.220 I was brought back again to another Charge about demolishing the Houses at St: Pauls; and here three Witnesses more came against me.

1. The first was Mr. Bently. He said, there were above Sixty Houses pulled down. I Answered, I know not the number; but if there were so many, the Recompence given was sufficient for more. He said farther, That there was Twenty Yards between the Church and some of the Houses. There were very few, if any such (let him look to his Oath;) but then some were close upon the Wall of the Church. And suppose all had been Twenty Yards distant; that was not room enough to bring in, and Lodge Materials for the Repair, and to turn the Carriages. And here again I made mention of my Salvo, before desired, for the Record of Ed. 3. touching the like Build∣ings, and their Demolition.

2. The second Witness was Mr. Goare. For the Sixty Houses as was before testified; I gave the same Answer; as also, that the Act of the Council-Table cannot be said to be my Act. For St. Gregory's Church, they were not left without a Place for Divine Service, (as he would fain have it thought:) For they were assigned to a part of Christ-Church, till another Church might be built for them. And for the pulling down of St. Gregory's, 'tis well known to divers of that Parish, that I was not so much as one of the Referees, to whose view and consideration it was referred. But the Truth is, this Man Rented the Parsonage-House, and had a good Penniworth of it to gain by his Under-Tenant. The going down of that House trou∣bles him, and not the Church.

3. The Third Witness, Walter Biggs, says nothing different from the two former; but that I said I was opposed for the pulling down of the Houses. Whence it was inferred, that it was my Act; because I was opposed. But, my Lords, I hope I might say [I was Opposed] without any Offence, or without taking the Order of the Council-Table to my self: For 'tis well known, the Work of that Repair, un∣der God, was mine; and I took no indirect, no oppressing Way to it; nor can I now be ashamed of that, which in future times, in despight of the present Malice, will be my Honour. So that the Care of the Work lying upon me, I might well say I was opposed, though the Opposition went higher, against the Orders of the Lords.

The last Charge of this Day, was about the putting down of two * 16.221 Brewers in Westminster, because the Excessive and Noysom Smoak from thence much annoyed the King's House, Gardens and Park at St. James. These two were Mr: Bond, and Mr: Arnold.

1. For Mr. Bond, he begins with somewhat that I should say at the Council-Table: As Namely, that he must Seal a Bond of two Thousand Pounds, to Brew no more with Sea-Coal. Now this argues, if I did so speak, that it was in delivering to him the Sense of the Board; which Office (as I have before expressed, and is well known) was usually put upon me, if I were present. And your Lordships may here again see, what En∣vy hath followed me upon that, which I could not decline. He says farther, that upon this Mr. Attorney Banks proceeded against him in

the Exchequer; That there, upon some occasion, the Lord Chief Baron should say, ye are wise Witnesses for the King; That his Councel were for∣bid to Plead; and so a Verdict passed for the King. All this is no∣thing to me; I was neither Chief Baron nor Witness, nor one of the Jury that gave the Verdict. He says, he was informed, that there was an Order of Council made, that no Man should put up a Petition for him. But himself doth not so much as mention, that this Order was procured by me: And it is but a Report that no Petition might be delivered for him; and none of them that told him so, produced for proof: So he scandalizes the Lords by Hearsay.

Next he says, that the King graciously sent him with a Reference to the Council for satisfaction. First, I must believe, if he were so sent, the Wrong being only the Kings, and he willing he should have sa∣tisfaction however for his Loss;

that the Lords would never refuse in such a Case, whatsoever is here said to the contrary. Secondly, it may be observed, how Gracious the King was to the Subject; that though the Annoyance was great to that House of his Re∣creation and retiring near the City; yet he would not have Mr. Bond suffer without satisfaction: Notwithstanding which Goodness of the King, he comes into this great Court; and so he may have a Blow at me, blasts (as much in him lies) all the King's Proceedings, under the Name of Oppression, and that in a high degree.

He says also, That a Friend of his perswaded him to come to me, and offer me somewhat to St. Pauls; and that he did come to me accordingly, and that I said I must have of him a Thousand Pounds to St. Pauls; That he was not unwilling to give it, because his Brewing was worth twice as much to him. My Lords, I humbly desire your Lordships to consider this part of the Charge well. First, what Friend of his this was, that came so to him, he says not, nor do I know, and so have no possibility to Examine. Secondly, he says, not that I sent this Friend of his to him, thus to advise him; and then his coming no way concerns me. Thirdly, when he was come upon this Friend's perswasion, if he were willing to give a Thousand Pounds to St. Pauls, in regard of his double gain from his Brew-House, as himself confesses; I do not see (under Fa∣vour) what Crime or Oppression is in it. Lastly, I remember none of this, and let him well weigh his Oath with himself: For I cannot call to mind one Penny that he gave to St. Pauls: Nor yet shall I ever think it a Sin, to take a Thousand Pounds to such a work, from any Rich and Able Man that shall voluntarily offer it; especially upon hope of gaining twice as much.

To make this Charge the heavier, He says, I sent him to the Queen-Mother, who lay then at St. James's; and that there he was laboured by some about her to change his Religion, and then he should have all Favour. This is a bold Oath; let him look to it, for I sent him not. It may be I might tell him, that if the Queen Mother were offended with the Annoyance from his House, it would not be in my power to help him; which was true. And that about his Religion, was added, to make your Lordships think, that I sent him thither for that purpose: But God be thanked, this Witness says not any one word tending that way. And for the Queen Mother, since she is thus mentioned, I shall

crave leave to say two things: The one, that I did both in open Coun∣cil, and privately, oppose her coming into England, with all the strength I had; though little to my own ease, as I after found: The other, that after she was come, the Lords of the Council went in a Body to do their Duty to her: That time I could not but go; but never either before or after was I with her.

Then he concludes, that there was a Capias out for him, and that he was fain to make an Escape by Night, which he did to Alderman Pennington, who very Nobly Succoured him privately in his House. All which con∣cerns me nothing.

2. The other Witness is Mr. Arnold; who told as long a Tale as this, to as little purpose. He speaks of three Brew-Houses in Westmin∣ster, all to be put down, or not brew with Sea-Coal; That Secretary Win∣debanck gave the Order. Thus far it concerns not me. He added, that I told him they burnt Sea-Coal: I said indeed, I was informed they did; and that I hope was no Offence. He says, that upon Sir John Banks his new Information, four Lords were appointed to view the Brew-Houses, and what they burnt. But I was none of the four, nor did I make any Report, for or against. He says, Mr. Attorney Banks came one day over to him, and told him that his House annoyed Lambeth, and that I sent him over. The Truth is this; Mr. Attorney came one-day over to Dine with me at Lambeth, and walking in the Garden before Din∣ner, we were very sufficiently annoyed from a Brew-House; the Wind bringing over so much Smoak, as made us leave the place. Upon this Mr. Attorney asked me, why I would not shew my self more against those Brew-Houses, being more annoyed by them than any other? I replyed, I would never be a means to undo any Man, or put him from his Trade, to free my self from Smoak. And this Witness doth after confess, that I said the same words to himself. Mr. Attorney at our parting said, he would call in at the Brew-House: I left him to do as he pleased, but sent him not: And I humbly desire Mr. Attorney may be Examined of the Truth of this.

He farther says, that he came over to me to Lambeth, and confesses the words before mentioned; and that he offer'd me Ten Pound Yearly to St. Pauls, and that I said he might give Twenty. He says, that I sent him to Mr. Attorney; but withal told him, that if he found not such fa∣vour as I wished him, it was a sign he had more powerful Adversaries than my Friendship could take off. In all this I cannot see what Fault I have committed. And I foretold him Truth: For though the Business were after referred to Mr. Attorney and my self, (as himself says;) yet we were not able to end it. Then he says, I would not suffer Sir Edw. Powell, Master of the Requests, to deliver his Petition to the King. But first, this is but Sir Edw. Powell's Report, and so no Proof, unless he were produced to justifie it. Secondly, the World knows I had no power in Sir Edward: He would then willingly have delivered Petition, or any thing else, that he thought might hurt me: And the Cause is known.

Lastly, He says, Mr. Attorney sent out a Capias for him; that the Sheriff came by force to take him, and what hard shift he made to escape: That after upon his Petition, the Lords gave him six Months time to pro∣vide himself elsewhere; and that he was fain to give Five-Hundred-Pound-Bond

not to Brew there. To all this I then said, and say still: First, here's no one thing Charged upon me in particular. Secondly, here's not a word of my Advice or Endeavour to set on Mr. Attorney, or to move the Lords to any thing against him. And whereas it hath been urged, that my Power was such, that I sway'd the Lords to go my way: This cannot be said, without laying an Imputation upon the Lords, as if they could so easily be over-wrought by any one Man, and that against Law; which is a most unworthy Aspersion upon Men of Honour. And if all this were true, it is but Treason against a Brew-House. Nor yet may this be called slighting of any Evidence, which is but to Answer home in my own just Defence.

And out of this I gave my Answer to Mr. Brown's summary Charge against me in the House of Commons, for that which concerned these two Brewers.

And here, before I close this day, give me leave, I beseech your Lordships, to observe two things. First, that here have been thirteen Witnesses at least produced in their own Cause. Secondly, that whereas here have been so many things urged this day about the Star-Chamber and the Council-Table; the Act made this Parliament, for the Regu∣lating of the one, and the taking away of the other, takes no notice of any thing past; and yet Acts past (and those Joynt-Acts of the Council, and not mine) are urged as Treasonable, or conducing to Treason, against me. Nay, the Act is so far from looking back, or making such Offences Treason, as that if any offend in future, and that several times, yet the Act makes it but Misdemeanour, and pre∣scribes Punishments accordingly.

CAP. XXVI. The Fifth Day of my Hearing.

THE first Charge of this Day was concerning the Indictment * 16.222 of Mr: Newcommin, a Minister at Colchester, for refusing to * 16.223 Administer the Sacrament, but at the Rails; and the Prosecution, which followed against Burrowes for this. The two Witnesses of the * 16.224 Particulars, are Burrowes and Mr. Aske.

1. The Testimony which Burrowes gave, was; That Mr. New∣commin would not Administer the Communion, but at the Rail; That he Indicted him for receiving it there; That the Foreman threw it out, &c. If Mr. Newcommin did this, Complaint might have been made of him; but howsoever here's no one word of any Command from me. And it seems the Factious Malice of Burrowes was seen, that the Foreman at first threw away the Indictment. He says, that upon this he was called into the High Commission; A Warrant from me; His House beset; Stockdall left the Warrant with the Mayor; A Habeas Corpus not obeyed. The Warrant, by which he was detained, was from the High Commission, not from me: And himself says, there were six or seven Hands to the Warrant. But then he says, my Hand alone was to another Warrant; which is impossible, for there must be three Hands at the least, or no Warrant can issue out: And all his Proof of this latter is, that he saw my Hand; which I hope he may do, though other Hands besides mine were to it. For the Habeas Cor∣pus, if the Mayor said (for so Burrowes adds) he would obey my Warrant, rather than the King's Writ, because it came first; he was extreamly ill advised: But if a Mayor of a Town give an undiscreet, or a worse Answer, I hope that shall not be imputed to me. And if there be any thing in this Business, why is not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Messenger produ∣ced, that knows those Proceedings? Lastly, he speaks of a Letter sent to Judge Crawlye, and shew'd to Judge Hutton. But first, he says not, that Letter was sent by me, or by my means. Secondly, he names not the Contents of the Letter; without which, no Man can tell, whether it Charge any thing upon me or not. And until the Letter be produced, or sufficiently witnessed, (neither of which is offer'd) 'tis but like a written Hearsay. And I humbly pray you to observe from himself, that the two Reverend Judges looking in∣to the Business, said, it was a meer Cheat for Money, and returned him back to Colchester: Which is a Proof too, that the Habeas Cor∣pus was obeyed; for if he were not brought up before them, how could he be returned by them?

2. Then Mr. Aske, the second Witness, was produced. He said there came Players to Town, and that some, which said they came from me, were taken in a Tavern upon Easter-Eve at unseasonable Hours. I know not of any that were sent from me: But if any were, and kept any disorder in the Town, especially at such a time, Mr. Aske

did very well to question them. He says, that upon the Matter I re∣ferred him twice to Sir John Lambe, and that at the second time he found the Plot was to make him an instrument about the Rails, which he absolutely refused. I did refer him (and it may be twice) to Sir John Lambe; but if Sir John spake to him about the Rails, he had no Commission from me so to do.

I understood Mr: Aske too well, to offer to make * 16.225 him an instrument in such a Business. His Zeal would have set the Rails on fire, so soon as ever he had come near them.

Next he says, that Mr. Newcommin was indicted, as is aforesaid, and that Indictment found: That Letters missive were sent for him and his Wife, by Stockdall. If Letters Missive by Stockdall, then they were sent by the High Commission, whose Joynt Act cannot be Charged upon me: And if any thing can be proved, why is not Stockdall produced? He says, that he went into Holland to avoid the Oath Ex Officio. The Oath Ex Officio was then the Common, and for ought I yet know, then the Legal Course of that Court: So I could not help the Tender of that Oath unto them, had they stayed and ap∣peared. But the Truth is, he was too guilty to appear; for his Wife was a Separatist, and himself confesses, that she came not to the Prayers of the Church. And as for him, I ever found him the great maintainer of all wilful opposition against the Church. He farther says, he came to me to Croyden; and that there I told him he might have put the Indictment against Mr. Newcommin in his Pocket. Indeed, my Lords, if I did say so, I think I spake it truly. For if he had born any respect to the Reputation of the Clergy, I think he might have Pocketted it for one Sessions, without any prejudice at all to the Law, or any thing else. God knows, this is often done. And if thereupon I added (as Mr. Aske says I did,) That if he were so strictly set against Church-Men in the Temporal Courts, he must look for as strict Proceedings in the High Commission; I see no great Crime in it: For we are as strictly bound to Prosecute in the one, as he was in the other. And if his Clerk (as he says) was attached, who Read the Indictment; yet it is not said by himself, that he was Attached for reading it.

And if it were so, that some Jurors were Attached, and not Mr. Aske's Clerk only, (as Mr. Browne pressed it in the Summ of his Charge) yet the Answer comes all to one. For no Witness says, these Jurors were called into the High Commission, for being Jurors, or discharging that Legal Duty. And then I hope a Man's being of a Jury shall not excuse him * 16.226 for answer∣ing any Crime in any Court, that hath Power to call him: Pro∣vided he be not called off at the time of his Service, or while he is under the Priviledge of that Court, in which he is a Juror. And according to this I gave Mr. Browne my Answer. And howsoe∣ver, the Attachment goes of Course out from the Commission, and not from me.

The second Charge of this Day was about the Censure which fell * 16.227 on the Inhabitants of Beckington in Sommersetshire, about their refu∣sing to remove the Communion-Table according to the Order of their Diocesan: About which were produced three Witnesses, to whose Evidence I shall Answer in order.

1. The first was William Longe, who says he was Foreman of the Jury, when these Men were Indicted for a Riot; and that as he con∣ceives, the Parson spake with the Judge about it, which caused a sudden Verdict. The Parson of the Place spake with the Judge, and he con∣ceives that produced a sudden Verdict: First, he doth but conceive so, and that can make no Proof. If it did make Proof, 'tis only a∣gainst the Parson, not against me. And if the Parson speaking of it, did say, (as Mr. Longe affirms he did) That this Riot was like a Waldensian, or Swisserland Commotion; He must answer for his own Distempered Language; me it cannot concern.

2. The second Witness was George Longe. He says, The Bishop of Bath Commanded the Communion-Table to be removed, and set at the upper end of the Chancel; that the Church-Wardens refusing, were Excom∣municated: But he says withal, that they Appealed to the Arches, and had remedy. Then he adds farther, that the Bishop proceeded again, but the Church-Wardens would not remove it, saying it was an Innovation, and against Law. But, my Lords, 'tis neither: And therefore these Church-Wardens were in a great Contempt against their Bishop, to the ill Example of all that Country. And that it is no Innovation against Law, appears by the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth, where it is Commanded Expresly to be set there. The Words are: The Holy * 16.228 Table in every Church (not Cathedrals only) shall be decently made, and set in the place where the Altar stood. Now all Men know, that with us in England the Altar stood North and South, at the upper end of the Chancel: And to set it East, and West, had been cross the place where the Altar stood, and not in it. And this being Law in the be∣ginning of the Reformation, cannot now be an Innovation.

When they came to me again (as they say they did) if I then told them, they deserved to be laid by the Heels for the Contempt of their Bishop; under Favour, my Lords, I spake Truth. And give me leave, I beseech you, to tell you this: It began to be a General Complaint, not of the Bishop of Bath only, but of other Bishops al∣so, that they could do little or no Service in their several Countries, by reason of the Inhibitions which issued out of my Courts to stay their Proceedings. And I wanted no good Friends in Court to tell the King as much, when any thing was complained of. By this I was brought into great straights: Deny Appeals I might not: Fre∣quent granting in my Courts destroyed in a manner the Bishops Jurisdictions. In this difficulty, seeing the wilfulness of these Men, and knowing they had received full benefit by their Appeal once already in the same Case; I did refuse to hear any more of it (un∣less there were new Matter;) but yet left them free to Appeal to the Delegats.

For Mr. Hughes, the Parson there, if he gave ill Words, or laid vio∣lent Hands on any of his Neighbours, it concerns not me: Let him an∣swer for what he hath said, or done. 'Tis farther said, That Mr. Hughes was with me at Windsor, and had Letters from me to the Lord Chief Justice Finch. But this Witness delivers not this upon his own knowledge; I sent no Letter by him, nor did he see me send by any other: So this is meerly a Report, and he doth not so much as tell from whom. Yea, but then he says, that Mr. Morgan (a

Man inward with the Judge) told him, that the Judge told him, that the little Man had put a spoke in their Cart; and thereupon (as he con∣ceives) the Petty-Jury was Changed. Here are, if your Lordships mark them, two great Proofs. The one is the Witnesses Report of Mr. Morgan's Report, that the Judge had said so of me: But why is not Mr. Morgan produced to clear this? The other is not the Knowledge, but the Conceit only of the Witness: He conceives, which I am Confident cannot sway with your Lordships for a Proof.

Besides, were Mr. Morgan never so inward with that Judge, yet it follows not, that he must know all. And if that Judge did mean me (for Name me he did not,) he did me the more wrong. For I never desired any thing of any Judge, him, or other, but what was ac∣cording to Law. Nay, I so expressed my self, as that, if by mi∣stake or misinformation I had desired any thing which was not according to Law; I humbly desired my Motion might be, as if it had never been made.

3. The third Witness is Mr. Jo. Ash. That which this Gentle∣man says, is, That Sir John Lambe told, that the Man which came about that Business, could have no Appeal admitted without me; and that if he would be so troublesome, he should be laid by the Heels. I have given your Lordships an Account, why he could not have an Appeal with∣out me: He had had the benefit of an Appeal before in the same Cause. And for this Witness, he delivers no knowledge of his own; but only he says, the Man imployed, related it to him: So 'tis a Relation, no Proof. He says, the Penance was injoyned them in three Churches. And truly, my Lords, their Disobedience to their Bishop was great; but if the Penance injoyned were too heavy, it was the Act of their own Bishop, not mine. Then he says, that the Lord Finch told him, another powerful Hand was upon him, intimating me. First, this is no knowledge of the Witness, but a Speech of the Lord Finch. Secondly, if the Lord Finch did say so, of a powerful Hand, he wronged me much, but himself more, to confess he could be drawn awry in Judgment. Thirdly, this Witness says not that he named me, but that he Intimated me: I pray your Lordships Judg∣ment, what a forward Witness this Man is, that can upon Oath deliver what is Intimated, and of whom.

He says farther, That upon Petition to Sir William Portman, for some Assistance, the Bishop of Bath laid all upon me; and that when him∣self came to me at the Tower, since my Restraint, I told him the Bishop of Bath did like an Obedient Bishop to his Metropolitan. For this, my Lords, here is no Proof, that the Bishop laid this Business upon me, but Sir William Portman's Report. Sir William is a worthy Gen∣tleman; why is not he produced? Why is not the Bishop, that is said to lay all upon me, brought into the Court, that he may clear himself and me, if he said it not; or that I may make him asham∣ed, if he said it? For 'tis confessed, that in the first Business, the Church-Wardens had Remedy by their Appeal to me; but that then the Bishop began again, as the former Witness declared: Nor knew I any thing of this Business till the Appeal came. As for my An∣swer to himself, that, under Favour, is quite mistaken: For I did not say, That in this Particular, but that in his General Proceedings in

his Diocess, the Bishop of Bath carried himself like an Obedient Bishop to his Metropolitan. Nor can my Words be drawn to mean this Par∣ticular: For how could I say, that in this Particular he carried him∣self like an Obedient Bishop to me, when after Remedy given to these Men by their first Appeal into my Court, he began with them a∣gain upon the same Cause? Besides, my Lords, this is not the first time Mr. Ash hath mistaken me.

Mr. Browne in summing up this Charge against me, falls twice very heavily upon this Business of Beckington. First, for the point of Religion: And there he Quoted a passage out of my Speech in the Star-Chamber, where I do reserve the indifferency of the standing of the Communion-Table either way; and yet (saith he) they were thus heavily Sentenced for that, which I my self hold indifferent. But first, this Sentence was laid upon them by their own Bishop, not by me. Secondly, the more in∣different the thing was, the greater was their Contumacy to diso∣bey their Ordinary: And had it not been a thing so indifferent, and without danger of advancing Popery, would Queen Elizabeth, who banished Popery out of the Kingdom, have endured it in her own Chappel all her time? Thirdly, the heaviness of the Sentence so much complained of, was but to confess their Contumacy in three Churches of the Diocess, to Example other Men's Obedience. Secondly, for the same Point, as it contained Matter against Law, I answered Mr. Browne, as I had before answered the Lords.

The third Charge was about certain Houses given to S. Edmunds * 16.229 Lumbard-street, where old Mr. Pagett is Parson. The Witnesses are Two.

1. The first is Mr. Symms; who says, that after a Verdict, Mr. Pa∣gett the Incumbent, upon a pretenc, that these Tenements were Church-Land, got a Reference to the Lord Bishop of London, then Lord Trea∣surer, and my self. My Lords, we procured not the Reference: But when it was brought to us under the King's Hand, we could not refuse to sit upon it. Upon full Hearing we were satisfied, that the Cause was not rightly stated, and therefore we referred them to the Law again for another Tryal; and for Costs to the Barons of that Court.

And this was the Answer which I gave to Mr. Browne, when he instanced in this Case.

He says, the Houses were given to Supersti∣tious Vses. But Possessions are not to be carried away for saying so. If Men may get Land from others, by saying it was given to Su∣perstitious Uses, they may get an easie Purchase. And Mr. Symms is here in his own Case: But whether the Houses were given to Super∣stitious Uses, or not, is the thing to be tryed in Law, and not to be Pleaded to us. He complains, that I would not hear his Petition a∣lone: And surely, my Lords, I had no reason, since it was referred to another with me. And yet I see, though I was not in the Re∣ference alone, nor would hear it alone, yet I must be alone in the Treason. And here I desired that Mr. Pagett, the Incumbent, might be heard.

2. The other Witness, was Mr. Barnard. He says, he was pre∣sent at the Hearing, and that Mr. Symms said he was undone, if he must go to a new Tryal. But, my Lords, so many Men say, that by their troublesomness in Law-Suits go about to undo others. He

says, that Mr. Pagett named his own Referees. If that be so, 'tis no fault of mine. He says, the Reference was made to us only to Certifie, not to make any Order in it. If this be so, here's no Proof so much as offer'd, that we did not Certifie, as we were required; and then had Power given to order it, which we did. And he confesses the Councel on both sides had full Hearing, before ought was done.

The Fourth Charge of this Day was concerning the Imprisonment * 16.230 of one Grafton, an Upholster in London. The Witnesses Three. Of which,

1. The first is Grafton, in his own Cause; and 'tis much if he can∣not tell a plausible Tale for himself. He says first, That twelve Years ago he was Committed, and Fined Fifty Pounds by other Commissioners. By others (my Lords,) therefore not by me: And an Act of the High Commission, by his own Words it appears to be. He says, He was continued in Prison by my procurement, as he verily believes. First, (as he verily believes) is no Proof. And the ground of his Belief is as weak: For he gives no reason of it, but this, That Dr. Ryves, the King's Advocate, spake with the Barons; But he doth not say about what, or from whom. He adds farther, that Mr. Ingram, Keeper of the Fleet, would not give way to his Release, notwithstanding the Barons Orders, till he heard from me. Here's no Man produced, that heard Mr. Ingram say so: Nor is Mr. Ingram himself brought to Testifie. Lastly, he says, that he then made Means in Court, and so repaired to the Barons again; but all in vain: And that Baron Trevor cryed out, O the Bishop! O the Bishop! First, here's a Confession of Means in Court made to the Judges: So belike, they may have Means made to them, so it be not by me. For the Particular, I did hum∣bly desire, the Baron, being then present, might be asked. He was asked; he blushed and fumbled, the Lords laughed, and I could not hear what he said.

2. The second Witness was Mr. Lenthall: But he said nothing, but that there was an Order for Grafton's Liberty; which is not de∣nied.

3. The third was Mr: Rivett. He says, that Mr. Ingram said, that Grafton was a Brownist, and must be brought into the Fleet again, be∣cause he did much hurt among the King's Subjects. This is a bare Re∣port of a Speech of Mr. Ingram; it no way concerns me. And a Separatist he is from the Church of England; but whether a Brownist, or no, I cannot tell, there are so many Sects (God help us.) And much harm he hath done among weak People: For most true it is, * 16.231 which S. Cyril observes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

That the Devil pre∣pares these Schismatical Separations, that so much the more easily the Enemy may be received.

As for this Man, he was in his way cunning enough; for under pretence that he suffer'd by me, he got Madam Vantlett, and other of the French, to Negotiate with the Queens Majesty in his behalf. And this I found, that sometimes, when her Majesty knew not of it, they sent to the Barons for Favour for him.

And yet I never heard, that Baron Trevor ever cryed out, O the French! O the French! Nor can I tell what stopped his Mouth in this Cry, and opened it so wide in the other, when we

moved to defend our selves and our Proceedings. Where, I hum∣bly desire, this Passage of the Law may be considered. In the Case of depraving the Common-Prayer Book (so much Scorned and Vilified at this Day) and for not coming to Church. The Words of the Law are; For due Execution hereof, the Queens most Excellent Majesty, the Lords Temporal, and all the Commons in this present Parli∣ament * 16.232 Assembled, do in God's Name earnestly require, and Charge all the Arch-Bishops, and Bishops, and other Ordinaries, that they shall en∣deavour to the uttermost of their Knowledge, that the due and true Execution hereof may be had throughout their Diocesses and Charges, as they will answer before God, &c. Now, if I do not this, here's an apparent Breach of the Law: And if I do it against this common and great Depraver of this Book, then the Judge, who by this Law should assist me, Cries, O the Bishop! and this Answer I gave Mr. Browne, when he Summ'd his Charge against me.

The Fifth Charge of this Day, was Mr. John Ward's Case, in a * 16.233 Suit about Symony in the High Commission.

He says (for he also is in his own Cause;) That upon a pretence of a Lapse by Symony, I procured a Presentation from the King to the Church of Dinnington. His Majesty trusted me with the Titles, which did accrew to him in that kind; and because Symony had been so rife, Commanded me to be careful I might not betray this Trust; and therefore the Symony being offer'd to be proved, I procured his Maje∣sties Presentation for Tryal of the Title. And this I conceive was no Offence: Though this be that, which he calls, the heaviness of my Hand upon him. He farther says, That I sent to the Bishop of Nor∣wich, to admit the King's Clerk, the Church being void, 7. Junij. 1638. Nor do I yet see, my Lords, what Crime it is in me, trusted especi∣ally as before, to send to the Bishop to admit, when the Church is void: Many Lay Patrons do that upon Allegation of Symony, before Proof:

And Mr. Bland, produced as a Witness also, says, that the Lord Goring prevailed with the Lord Bishop of Norwich, not to ad∣mit. And I hope, an Arch-Bishop, and trusted therein by his Ma∣jesty, may as lawfully write to the Ordinary for Admission of the King's Clerk, as any Lay-Lord may write against it. But Mr. Ward says nothing to this of the Lord Goring;

but adds, That Sir John Rowse prevented this Admission by a Ne admittas, Junij. 12. And that thereupon I said, it was to no purpose for us to sit there, if after a long Tryal, and Judgment given, all might be stopped. If I did say so, I think it is a manifest Truth that I spake: For it were far better not to have Symony tryed at all in Ecclesiastical Courts, than after a long Tryal to have it called off into Westminster-Hall,

to the double Charge and trouble of the Subject. But if the Law will have it otherwise, we cannot help that. Nor is this Expres∣sion of mine any Violation of the Law.

Then he says, a Letter was directed from the Court of the High Commission, to the Judges, to revoke the Ne admittas; and that I was forward to have the Letter sent. How forward soever I was, yet it is confessed the Letter was sent by the Court, not by me: And let the Letter be produced, it shall therein appear, that it was not to revoke the Ne Admittas, but to desire the Judges to consider,

whether it were not fit to be revoked, considering the Church was not void till Junij 14. And it hath been usual in that Court, to Write or send some of their Body to the Temporal Judges, where they conceive there hath been a Misinformation, or a mistake in the Cause; the Judges being still free to judge ac∣cording to Law, both for the one and the other. And here he confesses the Writ of Ne admittas was revoked by three Judges, and therefore I think Legally.

But here he hopes he hath found me in a Contradiction. For when I writ to the Bishop of Norwich, Junij 7. 1638. I there said the Church was void; whereas this Letter to the Judges says, it was not void till Ju∣nij 14. But here is no Contradiction at all. For after the Tryal past, and the Symony proved, the Church is void to so much as the Bishop's giving of Institution; and so I writ Junij 7. But till the Sentence was pronounced in open Court, and Read, the Church was not void, as touching those Legalities, which (as I humbly conceive) do not till then take place in Westminster-Hall: And the Reading of the Sen∣tence was not till Junij 14. However, if I were mistaken in my own private Letter to the Bishop; yet that was better thought on, in the Letter from the High Commission to the Judges. He says lastly, That upon a Quare Impedit after taken forth, it was found that the King had no Right. Why, my Lords, if different Courts judge dif∣ferently of Symony, I hope that shall not be imputed to me. In the Court, where I sate, I judged according to my Conscience, and the Law, and the Proof, as it appeared to me. And for Dr. Ryve's his Letter, which he says was sent to the Cursitor to stop the Ne admittas; Let Dr. Ryves answer it: The Witness himself confesses, that Dr. Ryves says, the Command to the Cursitor, was from the Lord Keeper, not from me.

And here ends the Treason against Mr. Ward; and till now I did not think any could have been committed against a Minister.

Then follow'd the Case of Ferdinando Adams his Excommunicati∣on, * 16.234 and the Suits which followed it: As it will appear * 16.235 in the Witnesses following, which were four.

1. The first was Mr: Hen. Dade, the Commissary then, before whom the Cause began: And he confesses, He did Excommunicate Adams for not blotting out a Sentence of Scripture, which the said Adams had caused to be written upon the Church-Wall, as in many Churches Senten∣ces of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 are written. But he tells your Lordships too, that this Sentence was, My House shall be called the House of Prayer; but ye have * 16.236 made it a Den of Thieves. The Commissary's Court was kept (as usu∣ally it is) at, or toward the West-end of the Church: And just over the Court Adams had written this Sentence upon the Wall, meerly to put a scorn and a scandal (though I hope an unjust one) upon that Court.

He was commanded to blot it out. He would not, because it was Scripture; as if a Man might not Revile and Slander, nay speak Treason too (if he will be so wicked) and all in Scripture-Phrase: Witness that lewd Speech lately utter'd, To your Tents * 16.237 O Israel, &c.

Upon this he was Excommunicated, and I cannot but think he well deserved it. For the Suit which followed against Mr. Dade in the Star-Chamber; the Motion, that Mr. Attorney

would leave him to the common Prosecutor, and not follow it in his own Name, himself confesses was made in open Court by Mr. Bierly, and that from me he had no Instructions at all.

2. The second Witness, is Adams in his own Cause. To the place of Scripture I have spoken already. And the next that he says, is, That Sir Nath. Brent, in my Visitation, commanded the setting of the Communion Table at the upper end of the Chancel; That upon his not blot∣ting out the passage of Scripture, he had an Action, and that his Solicitor was Committed by J. Jones, till he relinquished his Suit. In all this, there is not one word of any thing that I did. And for that which Sir Nath. Brent did about placing the Communion Table, 'tis * 16.238 answered before. He says also, that when he saw that he must Prosecute his Suit against Commissary Dade in his own Name, he left the Kingdom. And surely, my Lords, if he would leave the Kingdom rather than Prosecute his Cause in his own Name, 'tis more than a sign, that his Cause was not very good.

3. The third Witness was Mr. Cockshot, one of Mr. Attorney Banks his Servants. He says, that Adams moved him, and he Mr. At∣torney, and that thereupon Mr. Attorney gave his Warrant against Dade. By which your Lordships may see, how active Mr. Cock∣shot was against a Church-Officer, and in so foul a Scandal. He says also, that Mr. Dade came to Mr. Attorney, and told him, that I did not think it fit, a Prosecution in such a Cause should be followed in Mr. Attorney's Name. First, 'tis true, I did not think it fit; nor did Mr. Attorney himself, when upon Mr. Bierlye's Motion he fully understood it. Secondly, the Cause being so scandalous to a Church-Officer, I conceive I might so say to Mr. Dade, or any other, without offence. But then thirdly, here's not one word that I sent Mr. Dade to Mr. Attorney about it: He came and used my Name, so Mr. Cock∣shot says; but not one word that I sent him. Lastly, he says, That Mr. Attorney told him, that I blamed him for the business, and that thereupon he chid this Witness, and sent him to me, and that I re∣buked him for it; but he particularly remembers not what I said. Nor truly, my Lords, do I remember any of this. But if I did blame Mr. Attorney for lending his Name in such a Scandalous Cause as this, I did (as I conceive) what became me: And if he chid his Man, he did what became him: And if I rebuked Mr. Cockshot, when he was sent to me, sure he deserved it; and it seems it was with no great sharpness, that he cannot remember any thing of it.

And so I answer'd Mr. Browne, when he instanced in this.

4. The last Witness was Mr. Pryn; who says, no Appeal was left him. But that, under Favour, cannot be: For if my Courts re∣fused him (which is more than I know,) he might have Appealed to the Delegats. He says, That he advised Adams to an Action of the Case; that he blamed Lechford for deserting the Suit; and that he advised him to go to Mr. Attorney. So here's no assistance wanting to Adams, but the Church-Officer Mr. Dade must have none. Yet I blame not Mr. Pryn, because he says he did it as his Councel. He says farther, That when Adams was put to prefer his Bill in his owne

Name, that then the Excommunication was pleaded in Bar: But he doth not say it was pleaded by me, or my Advice; nor do I hear him say, it was unjustly pleaded. And had not Adams been wilful, he might have taken off the Excommunication, and then proceeded as it had pleased him.

Then the Charge went on against me, about the stop of Mr. Bag∣shawe * 16.239 the Reader of the Middle-Temple. The Witnesses are two Law∣yers, which accompanied Mr. Bagshawe to Lambeth, Mr. White and Mr. Pepys. They say, that Mr. Bagshawe insisted upon these two points: First, that a Parliament might be held without Bishops; and Secondly, that Bishops might not meddle in Civil affairs. My Lords, these things are now setled by an Act of this Parliament; but then they were not. And I conceive, under Favour, that Mr. Bagshawe (the Crasiness of these Times considered) might have bestowed his time better upon some other Argument: And sure, no Man can think that either my self, or any Church-Governour, could approve his Judgment in that Particular. And whereas they say, that the Lord Keeper Finch, and the Lord Privy Seal told them, that I was the Man that complained of it to the King and the Lords. 'Tis most true I did so; and I think I had been much to blame if I had not done it. And if when they came over to Lambeth about it, they heard me tell Mr. Bagshawe (as they also say they did) that he should answer it in the High-Commission Court next Term; I humbly conceive this no great Offence; but out of all Question no Treason, to threaten the High-Commission to a Reader of the Inns of Court.

The last Charge of this Day was concerning the Lord Chief * 16.240 Justice Richardson, and what he suffered for putting down Wakes and other disorderly Meetings, in Sommersetshire, at the Assises there holden.

The single Witness to this is Edward Richardson, (a Kinsman of the Judges, as I suppose.) He says, That Complaints were made to the Judge of Wakes and Feasts of Dedication; that his Majesty writ Let∣ters about it to Sir Robert Philips, and others: They Certify a Com∣mand comes by the Lord Keeper to revoke the Order next Assises. First, 'tis not done. Then by Command from the Lords of the Council, the Judge upon that second Command revokes it; but as 'tis Certified, not fitly. In all this here's not one Word that concerns me. Then he says, That upon this last Certificate, the business was referred to the Lord Mar∣shal and my self, and the Judge put from that Circuit. I cannot now remember, what Report we made: But what e're it was, the Lord Marshal agreed to it as well as I. Then a Letter of mine was pro∣duced of Octob. 4. 1633. But the Letter being openly read, nothing was found amiss in it. And, under your Lordships Favour, I am still of Opini∣on, that there is no Reason the Feasts should be taken away for some Abuses in them; and those such as every Justice of Peace is able by Law to remedy, if he will do his Duty.

Else by this kind of proceeding, we may go back to the old Cure, and Remedy Drunkenness by rooting out all the Vines; the Wine of whose Fruit causes it.

As for the Pretences, which this Witness spake of; they were none of mine, as appears Evidently by the Letter it self.

As an Appendix to these, was added a Letter of my Secretary Mr. Dell, to Sir John Bridgman, Chief Justice of Chester, in a Cause of one * 16.241 Ed. Morris. It was (as I think it appears) upon an Incroachment made in the Marches Court upon the Church: In which Case I con∣ceive by my Place I may write to any Judge for Information: And there is nothing Peremptory in the Letter. The Words are (If things be rightly suggested.) But howsoever, the Letter is Dell's; and if he have done amiss in it, he is here present to Answer. And it will be a hard business with Men of Honour, if, when any Lord shall Command his Secretary to Write, and give him Directions for the Matter, he shall afterwards be answerable for every slip of his Secretary's Pen; especially in so high a way, as 'tis Charg∣ed on me. But the best is, here's nothing amiss, that I know.

CAP. XXVII. The Sixth Day of my Hearing.

THE First Charge of this Day concerned the Censure, Depri∣vation * 16.242 and Imprisonment of Mr: Huntly. The Witnesses pro∣duced * 16.243 are Four.

1. Mr. Merifield comes on first. He says, That himself was Com∣mitted * 16.244 by the Lords of the Council; and that there I said, that he the said Merifield deserved to be laid by the Heels, and to be called into the Star-Chamber. This Man was (as I take it) Mr: Huntly's Attorney; and if I did speak those Words concerning him, surely his Words and Carriage deserved it: Else I am confident the Lords would not have Committed him for a naked, and an orderly following of his Clyent's Cause; especially in the presence of two Judges, Justice Jones, and Justice Crook; who he says himself were present.

And this Answer I gave Mr: Brown; who in the Sum of his Charge against me omitted not this Case of Mr: Merifield, for so was this Attorney's Name.

2. The next Witness is Mr: Huntly himself. He says, That I said unto him, that he being an Ecclesiastical Person, and in an Ecclesi∣astical Cause, ought not to decline the Church-Censure: Then followed his Imprisonment, and his Action for false Imprisonment, and the rest of his proceedings. In all which the High-Commission proceeded against him, and he proceeded against the High-Commissioners; nothing done by me, or against me, in particular. So nothing of this Charge falls upon me, but the Words; and for them, they are very far from offering to * 16.245 Exempt any Clergyman, him or other, from the Temporal Laws, it things cognizable by them. But I humbly conceive, his Oath of Canonical Obedience considered, that he ought not to decline the Ecclesiastical Judicature, in things meerly Ecclesiastical. And if in

this my Judgment I do Err, yet it is Error without Crime: And surely, my Lords, no Treason.

3. The Third Witness is John Dillingham. He says, That Mr: Huntly moved before the Lord Chief Justice Richardson, and that the Judge replyed, By his Faith he durst not do him Justice. To this, my Lords, I answer: Here's never a Word, that he durst not do him Justice for fear of me; that's not said by the Witness, and ought not by Conjectures be inforced against me. But howsoever, if he spake those Words, the more shame for him. He is Dead, and I will not rake into his Grave; but if he so spake, it seems he was none of those Judges, which Jethro advised Moses to make for * 16.246 the ease of himself, and the good of the People.

Mr: Brown, in sum∣ming up of his Charge, pressed this Speech of the Judge hard up∣on me; which inforces me to add thus much more, That this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 lays it hard upon the Judge, not upon me: For no Proof is offered, that I did Solicit him in that Cause: And if he wanted Courage to do Justice, why sat he there?

4. The Fourth Witness was Mr: Pit, a sworn Officer; he says, The Order concerning Mr: Huntly was from the Council, and that there was then a full Board. So this was no single Act of mine. He says farther, That he was not simply Prohibited, but only till he had ac∣quainted the Lord Keeper with it, or those Judges, whose Courts it concerned. And this was so Ordered (as I concelve) to remedy the tedious and troublesome Interpositions of Mr: Huntly. Where it is not unfit for me to inform your Lordships, that this Cause of Mr: Huntly's was in my Predecessor Arch-Bishop Abbot his time; I had nothing to do in it, but as any other ordinary Commissioner then present had.

And here, at the entring upon my Answers this Day, I did in ge∣neral put the Lords in mind, that nothing of late times was done, either in Star-Chamber, or at Council-Table, which was not done in King James and Queen Elizabeth's Times, before I was born; and that many Parliaments have been since, and no Man accused of Mis∣demeanour for things done there, much less of Treason: Nor is there any one Witness, that hath charged me, That that which I did, was to overthrow the Laws, or to introduce Arbitrary Government:

That's only the Construction made on't at the Bar; which, as it is with∣out all Proof for any such Intention, so I am confident they shall answer for it at another Bar, and for something else in these Proceedings.

Then followed the Charge about Prohibitions: In which are many * 16.247 Particulars, which I shall take in Order, as the several Witnesses Charge them upon me.

1. The First is Mr: Pryn. He says, That An: 4: Caroli he brought a Prohibition, and that thereupon I should say, Doth the King give us Power, and then are we prohibited? Let us go and Complain. First, If this were An: 4: Caroli, it was long before the Article; so that I could neither expect the Charge, nor provide the Answer. Secondly, I humbly conceive, there's no Offence in the Words. For if a Prohibition be unjustly granted upon Misinformation or otherwise; or if we do probably conceive it is ill grounded, I hope 'tis no Sin to complain

of it to the King, the Fountain of Justice in both Courts. Yea; but he says farther, That I said I would lay him by the Heels that * 16.248 brought the next. And this Mr: Burton witnesses with him. First, if I did say so, they were but a few hasty Words: For upon se∣cond thoughts it was not done. Next I desire your Lordships to consider what manner of Witness Mr: Burton is; who confesses here before your Lordships, that he brought the next with a purpose to tempt me: You know whose Office that is; and so Mr: Burton hath abundantly shewed himself, and proclaimed his Religion.

3. As for Mr: * 16.249 Comes; he says just the same with Mr: Pryn, and I give the same Answer.

Then about taking down of a Pew in a Church in London, (my Notes are uncertain for the Name) which Pew was set above the Communion Table; That I required to have it pulled down; That they came to me to have an Order for it; and that thereupon I should say, You desire an Order of Court, that you may have it to shew, and get a Prohibition; But I will break the Back of Prohibitions, or they shall break mine. And this is joyntly Witnessed by Mr: Pocock, and * 16.250 Mr: Langham: And this they say was Thirteen or Fourteen Years * 16.251 ago. Excellent Memories, that can punctually swear Words so long after. But, my Lords, I confess to your Lordships, I could never like, that Seats should be set above the Communion Table: If that be any Error in me, be it so. For the Words, I did not speak them of Prohibitions in general, but of such as I did conceive very Illegal; as, for ought I yet know, this must have been.

And this was the Answer wich I gave Mr: Brown, when in Summing up the Charge he instanced in this against me.

To these Rouland Tomson adds new Words; That I wondered who durst grant a Prohibi∣tion, * 16.252 the High-Commission Court being above all. But he confesses, he knows not the time when this was spoken. Let him look to his Oath, for I am as Confident, he knows not the thing. And I farther believe, that neither he, nor any the rest of my Accusers think me so Ignorant, as to say, the High-Commission Court was above all.

7. Francis Nicolas says, that about Four Years since he delivered a Pro∣hibition, and was committed for it. To this, Quaterman comes in, and * 16.253 says more than Nicolas himself: For he says, he delivered it in up∣on a Stick, and was Committed for it. First, if he were Committed, it was not for bringing the Prohibition, but for his unmannerly de∣livery of it; and to reach it into the Court upon a Stick to call the People to see it, was no Handsom way of Delivery. And one that brought a Prohibition (whether this Man or no, I cannot certainly say) threw it with that violent Scorn into the Court, that it bounded on the Table, and hit me on the Breast, as I sat in Court. How∣soever, his Commitment was the Act of the Court, not mine: And for Quaterman, he is an Exasperated Man against me and that Court; as hath appeared to the World many ways.

9. Mr: Edwards was called up next; and he says, it was a com∣mon thing to lay them by the Heels, which brought Prohibitions. And they were commonly brought by bold impudent Men, picked out of purpose to affront the Court. And then if the Court made their

Imprisonment as common as they their Rudeness, where's the Fault? And I pray mark, this is still the Act of the Court, not mine.

10. Mr. Welden says, That there was a Command given to lay hold of a Man, which brought a Prohibition: But more he says not. Nor did he offer to make himself Judge of the Justice of the Court in that behalf. And considering what Affronts have been put upon the Court of High Commission, by the bringers of Prohibitions, I hope it shall not be accounted a Crime to stay him that brings it, till the Prohi∣bition be seen, and considered.

11.

The next Witness is Mr. Ward: And he is an angry Witness, for his Cause before-mentioned about Symony.

That which he says is, That An. 1638, He that brought a Prohibition in a Cause of Mr. Foetroughts, was laid by the Heels: But he himself confesses, the Court then declared, that they were affronted by him: And then he was Punished for that Misdemeanour in his Carriage, not for bringing the Prohibition. He says farther, that I directed some Commissioners to attend the Judges about it, and that the Party had no benefit by his Prohibition. For my directing Attendance upon the Judges, I think I did what well became me: For there came a Rule before the Pro∣hibition, which required the Court so to do;

And Mr. Pryn object∣ed, because this was not done; and now I am Accused, because I gave direction to do it.

And if the Party had no benefit by his Pro∣hibition; it must needs follow, that either the Judges were satisfied by our Information of the Cause; or, if not, that they did Mr. Foetrought the wrong, and not we.

12. The last Witness about Prohibitions, was Mr. Wheeler. He says, that in a Sermon of mine long since, I used these Words: They which grant Prohibitions to the Disturbance of the Churches Right; God will prohibit their entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven: And he says he writ down the Words, that he might remember them. If this Gentleman will tell me, what Text I then Preached on, I will look upon my Sermon (if that with my other Papers be not taken from me;) and shew the place. In the mean time, with that Limitation with which he confesses I spake them, I conceive there is no fault at all in the Words. For it will be found no small fault in Judges to grant Prohibitions to the Disturbance of the Rights of the Church, which no Law of God or Man warrants them to do. So the words I spake, must needs be understood of illegal Prohibitions. For they which are Legal, do only stop the Church from doing wrong, but do no wrong to the Church by disturbing her Rights.

Mr. Browne charged this Sermon Note upon me also, and I gave him this Answer. Nevertheless, I cannot but be sorry to hear it from Mr. Wheeler's own Mouth; that he was so careful to write this Passage, and so ready to come to witness it against me; considering how many Years I have known him, and how freely he hath often come to my Table, and been welcome to me; yet never told me, this Passage in my Sermon troubled him. It seems some Malig∣nity or other laid it up against this wet Day.

Here, having thus answered all Particulars; I humbly craved leave of their Lordships, to inform them some few things concerning Pro∣hibitions. As first, that there was a great Contestation about them, * 16.254

between my Predecessor, Arch-Bishop Bancroft, and the then Judges, and this before King James and the Lords of the Council; and Mr. Atturney Hobart Pleaded for the Church against them. Sir Henry Martin gave me Copies of all those Papers on both sides. No final End made, that I could ever hear of. This calling them all in Question, was far more than ever was done by me, or in my time; and yet no Accusation at all, much less any of Treason, put up a∣gainst Arch-Bishop Bancroft for this. Secondly, I have here Pa∣pers * 16.255 Attested of all the Prohibitions, which have been admitted in my Courts of Arches, and Audience: And I find, there are as many (if not more) admitted in my Seven Years time, as in any Seven * 16.256 Years of my Predecessor Arch-Bishop Abbot. And these Papers I delivered into the Court. As for the High-Commission, the Records are all taken from us; else I make no doubt, but it would soon ap∣pear by them, that as many have been admitted there also. Third∣ly, * 16.257 There is a great difference touching Prohibitions, and the send∣ing of them, since the Times of Reformation, and before. For be∣fore, the Bishops Courts were kept under a foreign Power, and there were then weighty Reasons for Prohibitions, both in regard of the King's Power, and the Subjects Indempnity. But since the Reforma∣tion, all Power Exercised in the Spiritual Courts, is from the King, as well as the Temporal; so that now there neither is, nor can be so much Cause, as formerly was. And yet, all that I did humbly and earnestly desire, was, that some known Bounds might be set to each Court, that the Subject might not, to his great Trouble and Expence, be hurried, as now he was, from one Court to another. And here I desired a Salvo, till I might bring Arch-Bishop Parker's * 16.258 Book, to shew his Judgment in this Point, in the beginning of the Reformation, if it shall be thought needful:

According to whose Judgment (and he proves it at large) there is open Wrong done to the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by Prohibitions.

The next Charge is about my undue taking of Gifts: A Charge, * 16.259 which I confess I did not think to meet here. And I must, and do humbly desire your Lordships to remember, that till this Day I have not been Accused, in the least, for doing any thing Corruptly: And if I would have had any thing to do in the base dirty Business of Bribery, I needed not have been in such Want as now I am. But my Innocency is far more to my Comfort, than any Wealth so got∣ten could have been. For I cannot forget that of Job, That Fire * 16.260 shall consume the Tabernacles of Bribery.

And in the Roman Story, when P. Rutilius, a Man Summâ Innocentiâ, of greatest Integrity, * 16.261 was Accused, Condemned and Banished; 'tis observed by the Story, that he suffered all this, not for Bribery, of which he was not Guilty, but Ob Invidiam, for Envy; against which, when it Rages, no Innocency, no Worth of any Man is able to stand.

1. But to come to the Particulars; the first is the Case of Sir Ed∣ward Gresham's Son, unhappily Married against his Father's will; a Suit in the High Commission about it; and that there he had but Fifty Pounds Damages given him. That was no fault of mine; my Vote gave him more, but it was carried against me. The Bond of two Hundred Pounds, which was taken according to * 16.262 Course in the

Court, was demanded of me by Sir Edward, to help himself that way; and 'tis confessed I granted it: But then 'tis Charged, that in my Reference to Sir John Lambe, to deliver him the Bond, I required him to demand one half of the Forfeiture of the Bond, toward the Repair of St. Pauls. 'Tis true, I did so. But First, I desire it may be consi∣dered, that it was wholly in my Power, whether I would have de∣livered him the Bond, or not. Secondly, That upon this gross Abuse, I might have sued the Bond in my own Name, and bestowed the Money upon what Charitable Uses I had thought fit. Thirdly, That I did nothing herein, but what the Letters-Patent for Repair of St. Pauls give me power to do. Fourthly, That this is the third time St. Pauls is urged against me: Which I am not sorry for, because I desire (since 'tis once moved) it may be sifted 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the uttermost. And whereas, to make all Ecclesiastical Proceedings the more odious, it was urged, that the Rubrick in the Common-Prayer Book mentions no License, but asking of Banes; That Rubrick is to be understood, * 16.263 where no License is granted: For else no License at all for Marriage without Banes-asking can be good; which is against the Common, both Law, and Practice of the Kingdom.

2. The second Particular was Charged by one Mr. Stone, of London, who said, he sent into Lambeth two Butts of Sack, in a Cause of some Chester-Men, whom it was then in my Power to relieve, and mitigate their Fine set upon them in the High Commission at York, about Mr. Pryn's En∣tertainment, as he passed that way: And that this Sack was sent in before my Composition with him, what should be mitigated, and so before my return of the Fine mitigated into the Exchequer. The Business, my Lords, was thus. His Majesty having taken the Repair of the West End of St. Pauls to himself, granted me to that end all the Fines in the High-Commission Court, both here, and at York, and left the Power of Mi∣tigation in me. The Chester-Men, which this Witness speaks of, were deeply Sentenced at York, for some Misdemeanours about Mr. Pryn, then lately Sentenced in the Star-Chamber. One, or more of them were Debtors to this Mr. Stone, to the value of near Three Thousand Pounds (as he said.) These Men, for fear of the Sentence, kept themselves close, and gave Mr. Stone to know, how it was with them; and that if he could not get me to moderate the Fine, they would away, and save themselves; (for they had now heard the Power was in me.) Upon this, Mr. Stone, to save his own Debt of three Thousand Pounds, sends his Son-in-Law, Mr. Wheat, and Dr. Bailie, Men that were bred in the College of S. John, under me, and had ever since good interest in me, to desire my Favour. I at first, thought this a pretence, and was willing to preserve to St. Pauls as much as fairly I might: But at last, upon their earnest pleading, that the Men were not Rich, and that Mr. Stone was like (without any fault of his) to be so much damnified; I mitigated their Fines, which were in all above a Thousand Pounds, to two Hundred. I had great Thanks of all Hands; and was told from the Chester-Men, that they heartily wished I had had the Hearing of their Cause from the beginning. While Mr. Wheat and his Bro∣ther Dr. Bailie were Soliciting me for Favour to Mr. Stone, He thinks upon sending Sack into my House, and comes to my Steward

about it. My Steward acquaints me with it. I gave him absolute Command not to receive it, nor any thing from any Man that had Business before me: So he refuses to admit of any. Mr. Stone presses him again, and tells him, he had no Relation to the Chester-Men's Cause; but would give it for the great Favour I had always shew'd to his Son-in-Law: But still I Commanded my Steward to receive none. When Mr: Stone saw he could not fasten it, he watches a time, when my Steward was out of Town, and my self at Court, and brings in his Sack, and tells the Yeoman of my Wine-Cellar, he had leave to lay it in. My Steward comes home; finds the Sack in the Cellar; tells me of it: I Commanded it should be taken out, and carried back. Then Mr. Stone comes; intreats he may not be so Disgraced; protests as before, that he did it meerly for my great Favour to his Son-in-Law; and that he had no Relation to the Chester-Men's Business: And so after he protested to my self, meet∣ing me in a Morning, as I was going over to the Star-Chamber. Yet afterwards this Religious Professour (for so he carries himself) goes Home, and puts the Price of the Sack upon the Chester-Men's Ac∣count. Hereupon they complain to the House of Commons, and Stone is their Witness.

This is the truth of this Business, as I shall answer it to God.

And whether this do not look like a thing Plotted by the Faction so much imbittered against me, let understanding Men judge.

Mr. Wheat, his Son-in-Law, was present in Court, and there avowed, that he Transacted the Business with me, and that he went not out of Town, till I had agreed to the Mitigation; that in all that time there was no Tender of Sack, or any thing else unto me; and he, and Dr. Bailie, the only Men with whom I Transacted the whole Business.

And so much could Dr. Bailie also witness, but that (as the Times are) I could not bring him from Oxford.

With Mr. Stone himself, I never treated. For my Steward, he is dead three Years since, who could have been my Witness clean thorough the Business. And when I pressed Mr. Stone at the Bar with the Pro∣testation, which he made to me, that he had no Relation herein to the Chester-Men; he that remembred every Circumstance else, said he remembred not that. Then I offer'd to take my voluntary Oath of the Truth of it; but that was not admitted. Then it was pres∣sed, that this Bribe must needs be before the Agreement, for he says, the Sack was sent in to my House, ......... and the Mitigation of the Fine into the Exchequer not till ...... But that is nothing: For my Agree∣ment was passed, and I medled no more with it. Yea, but he says, that Mr. Holford my Servant had Forty Pound more than I agreed up∣on, before he would finish their Business. Mr. Holford was the King's Officer for those Returns into the Exchequer: And if, after my Agree∣ment made, he either unduely delaid their Business, or Corruptly took any Money from them, he is living, and must answer for his own Fault: Me it cannot concern, who did not so much as know of it.

Mr. Wheat having thus testified in open Parliament, before the Lords, was within a Day or two called before the Committee; there re-examined in private, and very strictly, touching the time of my

Agreement made; Then (not without some Harshness) Com∣manded not to depart the Town, till he heard farther from them. This himself afterwards told me. Hereupon I resolved to call him again for farther Evidence, and if I saw cause, to acquaint the Lords with this usage. And I did call upon it divers times af∣ter; but one Delay or other was found, and I could never obtain it. And such a kind of calling my Witnesses to a private after∣reckning, is that, which was never offer'd any Man in Parliament. And here Mr. Brown, in summing up my Charge, did me a great deal of Right: For neither to the Lords, nor in the House of Com∣mons, did he vouchsafe so much as to name this false, base, and unworthy Charge; of which my greatest Enemies are ready to ac∣quit me.

3. The Third Particular was charged by one Mr. Delbridge; Who says, he was oppressed at the Council-Table by the Lord Keeper Finch: That he was advised by Mr. Watkins, to give my Secretary Mr. Dell Money, to get my Hand to a Petition to the Lord Keeper, who he said would not oppose me: That Dell took of him One Hundred and Fifty Pounds, and procured my Hand to his Petition. I remember nothing of this Busi∣ness, and it lies wholly upon my Secretary; who being my Sollici∣tor, is here present in Court, and desires he may answer the Scandal. There's no touch at all upon me, but that (he says) my Secretary got my Hand to his Petition to the Lord Keeper. This Petition of his was either just, or unjust. If just, I committed no Fault in setting my Hand to it: If unjust, he must confess himself a Disho∣nest Man, to offer to get my Hand, to help to Boulster out his In∣justice: And yet if the Injustice of it were Varnished over with fair Pretences, and so kept from my knowledge; the Crime is still his own, and nothing mine, but an Error at most. As for Mr. Watkins, he did me much wrong, if he sent any Man to my House on such an Errand.

Here my Secretary had leave to speak; denied the whole Busi∣ness; and produced Mr. Hollys, with whom it was said the Hun∣dred and Fifty Pounds before named should be deposited; who (to my remembrance) said, he knew of no such thing.

4. The Fourth Instance was A Bond for the Payment of Money as a Fine: The Bond found in Sir Jo: Lamb's Chamber, with a Note upon the back of it, for One Hundred Pound received, and Sir John by my di∣rection was to call for the rest. And here it was said, that I used the Name of St: Pauls in an illegal way to get Money; which might well have been spared. For (as is aforesaid) I had a Broad Seal, which gave me all Fines in the High Commission Court, to the re∣pairing of the West End of St: Pauls, and with Power to mitigate. And the Fines are the Kings, and he may give them by Law. The Broad Seal is in the Hands of Mr: Holford, who is thereby appoint∣ed Receiver of all such Fines: But is upon Record to be seen; and if it be doubted, I humbly desire a Salvo till the Record can be ta∣ken out, and shewed. But I presume these Gentlemen have seen it: And Commutations for such Crimes, as Sir James Price's was, are according to Law, and the Ancient Custom and Practice in this Kingdom; especially, where Men of Quality are the Offendors. And

the Power of Commuting is as Legal in that Court, as any other: And if that be doubted, I humbly desire my Councel may Argue it.

5. The Fifth Instance was a Charge concerning a Lease in Lancashire held in three Lives by Sir Ralph Ashton. 'Tis said by his Son Mr. Ashton (the only Witness in the Cause,) That I by Power at Chester, and York, and the High-Commission here, being Landlord in right of my Arch-Bishoprick, did violently wrest this Lease of the Rectory of Whally in Lancashire, out of his Hands against Law, and made him take a Lease for Years, and Pay a great Fine besides, and other Fines besides toward the Repair of St: Pauls, and raised the Rent Sixty Pound. Truly, my Lords, I am not any whit solicitous to answer this Charge. I challenged this Lease as void, and had great Reason so to do, both for the Inva∣lidity of the Lease it self, and the unworthiness of the Tenant, both to me and my See. If in the Preparations for Tryal at Law, the Judge at Chester (altogether unknown to me, and unlaboured by me,) did say (as Mr. Ashton says he did) That for higher Powers above he durst not; he was the more unworthy. And for York, I needed no Power there; for I resolved to have him called into the High-Commission here; which was after done.

This Gentleman his Son came to me about the Lease: I told him plainly, it was void in Law, and that I meant to overthrow it; That if his Father would surrender, I would renew it for Years at a reasonable rate; but if he put me to Expence in Law, I would secure my self, as well as Legally I might. He replyed, That Mr. Solicitor Littleton (for so then he was) said, he durst not be against me. And there was good Reason for it; he was my Coun∣cel, and Feed in that Particular. And what a poor Evasion was this? Were there no other Lawyers for him, because Mr. Solicitor was for me? The Truth is, all that ever I did in this Business, was not only with the Knowledge, but by the Advice of my Councel, which were Mr. Solicitor Littleton, and Mr. Herbert.

At last this Gentleman submitted himself and the Cause; and if (as he says) Dr. Eden perswaded him to it, that's nothing to me. As for the Fine, I referred the moderation of it wholly to my Councel. They pitched upon Sixteen Hundred Pounds, and gave such Days of Payment, as that a good part is yet unpaid: And this Summ was little above one Years Rent: For the Parsonage is known to be well worth Thirteen Hundred Pound a Year, if not more. And after the Business was setled, my Lord Wimbleton came to me, and gave me great Thanks for preserving this Gentleman, being (as he said) his Kinsman, whom he confessed it was in my Power to ruin.

For the raising of the Rent Sixty Pounds; it was to add Means to the several Curats to the Chappels of Ease: And I had no Reason to suffer Sir Ralph Ashton to go away with so much Profit, and leave the Curats both upon my Conscience and my Purse. And for his Fine to St: Pauls, I gave him all the Ease I could. But since his Son will force it from me; he was accused of Adultery with di∣vers Women, and confessed all: And whither that Fine went, and by what Authority, I have already shewed. And thus much more, my Lords, at Mr. Bridgman's Intreaty, I turned this Lease into Lives

again without Fine: But since I have this Reward for it, I wish with all my Heart I had not done it. For I am confident in such a Case of Right, your Lordships would have left me to the Law, and more I wou'd not have asked. And I think this (though in∣treated into it) was my greatest Error in the Business.

6. The last Instance, was about the conversion of some Money to St. Pauls, out of Administrations: By Name, Two Thousand Pounds taken out of Wimark's Estate, and Five Hundred out of Mr. Gray's. First, whatsoever was done in this kind, I have the Broad-Seal to Warrant it. And for Mr. Wimark's Estate, all was done according to Law, and all care taken for his Kindred. And if I had not stir∣ed in the Business; Four Men, all Strangers to his Kindred, would have made themselves by a broken Will Executors, and swept all away from the Kindred. Secondly, for Mr. Gray's Estate, after as Odious an expression of it as could be made, and as void of Truth as need to be, the Proceedings were confessed to be Orderly and Le∣gal, and the Charge deserted.

Then there was a fling at Sir Charles Caesar's getting of the Ma∣stership of the Rolls for Money, and that I was his means for it: And so it was thence inferred, That I sold Places of Judicature, or helped to sell them. For this they produced a Paper under my Hand. But when they had thrown all the Dirt they could upon me, they say they did only shew what Probabilities they had for it, and what Reason they had to lay it in the end of the Fourth Original Article; and so deserted it. And well they might: For I never had more Hand in this Business, than that when he came to me about it, I told him plainly, as things then stood, that Place was not like to go without more Money, than I thought any Wise Man would give for it: Nor doth the Paper mentioned say any more, but that I informed the Lord Treasurer what had passed between us.

CAP. XXVIII. * 16.264

THis day ended, I was Ordered to appear again, April 4. 1644. * 16.265 And received a Note from the Committee, under Serjeant Wild's Hand, dated April 1. That they meant to proceed next upon the Fifth and Sixth Original Articles, and upon the Ninth Additional; which follow in haec verba.

The Fifth Original. He hath Trayterously caused a Book of Canons to be Composed and Published, and those Canons to be put in Execution, without any lawful Warrant and Authority in that behalf; in which pretended Canons many Matters are contained contrary to the King's Prerogative, to the Fundamental Laws and Statutes of this Realm, to the Right of Parliament, to the Propriety and Liberty of the Subjects, and Matters tending to Sedition, and of dangerous Consequence, and to the Establishment of a vast, unlawful, and presumptus Power, in himself and his Suc∣cessors: Many of the which Canons, by the practice of the said Arch-Bishop, were surreptitiously passed in the late Convocation, without due consideration and debate; others by fear and compulsion were Subscribed unto by the Prelats and Clerks there assembled, which had never been Voted and Passed in the Convocation, as they ought to have been. And the said Arch-Bishop hath contrived and en∣deavoured, to assure and confirm the Vnlawful and Exorbitant Power, which he hath Vsurped and Exercised over his Majesty's Sub∣jects, by a Wicked and Vngodly Oath in one of the said pretended Canons injoyned to be taken by all the Clergy, and many of the Layety of this Kingdom.

The Sixth Original.

He hath Trayterously assumed to himself a Papal and Tyrannical Power, both in Ecclesiastical and Temporal Matters, over his Ma∣jesty's Subjects in this Realm of England, and in other places, to the Disherison of the Crown, Dishonour of his Majesty, and Dero∣gation of his Supream Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters. And the said Arch-Bishop claims the King's Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, as incident to his Episcopal and Archiepiscopal Office in this Kingdom, and doth deny the same to be derived from the Crown of England, which he hath accordingly exercised, to the high contempt of his Roy∣al Majesty, and to the destruction of divers of the King's Liege People, in their Persons and Estates.

The Ninth Additional Article.

That in or about the Month of May * 16.266 1641. presently after the dis∣solution of the last Parliament, the said Arch-Bishop, for the ends and purposes aforesaid, caused a Synod or Convocation of the Clergy, to be held for the several Provinces of Canterbury and York; wherein were made and established, by his Means and procurement, divers Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical, contrary to the Laws of this Realm, the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament, and

Liberty and Property of the Subject; tending also to Sedition, and of dangerous Consequence. And, amongst other things, the said Arch-Bishop caused a most Dangerous and Illegal Oath to be there∣in made and contrived; the Tenor whereof followeth in these words. That, I A. B. do Swear, that I do approve the Doctrine and Discipline, or Government Established in the Church of Eng∣land, as containing all things necessary to Salvation: And that I will not endeavour, by my self or any other, directly or indi∣rectly, to bring in any Popish Doctrine, contrary to that which is so Established: Nor will I ever give my consent to alter the Government of this Church by Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deans, and Arch-Deacons, &c. as it stands now Established, and as by right it ought to stand; nor yet ever to subject it to the Usur∣pations and Superstitions of the See of Rome. And all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and Swear, ac∣cording to the plain and common Sense and Understanding of the same Words, without any Equivocation or Mental Eva∣sion, or secret Reservation whatsoever. And this I do hearti∣ly, willingly, and truly, upon the Faith of a Christian: So help me God in Jesus Christ. Which Oath the said Arch-Bishop himself did take, and caused divers other Ministers of the Church to take the same, upon pain of Suspension and Deprivation of their Livings, and other severe Penalties; and did also cause Godfrey, then Bishop of Gloucester, to be committed to Prison for refusing to Subscribe to the said Canons, and to take the said Oath; and afterward the said Bishop submitting himself to take the said Oath, he was set at Liberty.

On Thursday April 4. I was again brought to the House, made a * 16.267 sufficient scorn and gazing-stock to the People; and after I had waited some hours, was sent back, by Reason of other Business, unheard: But Order'd to appear again Munday April 8. Then I appeared again, and * 16.268 was used by the basest of the People as before. I did not appear any day but it cost me six or seven Pound: I grew into want. This made my Councel, and other Friends, to perswade me, the next time I had ad∣mittance to speak, to move the Lords again for some necessary Allow∣ance; notwithstanding my former Petition had been rejected. This Advice I meant to have followed that day: But after some Hours Attendance, I was sent back again unheard, and Order'd to come again on Thursday April 11. This day I did not come to the House; * 16.269 a Warrant being sent to the Tower, which stayed me till Tuesday April 16.

CAP. XXIX. The Seventh Day of my Hearing.

THen I appeared, and (as I remember) here Mr. Maynard left off * 16.270 (save that now and then he interposed, both in the Reply * 16.271 and otherwise) and Mr. Nicolas, a Man of another Temper, undertook the managing of the Evidence. And the first Charge was con∣cerning * 16.272 the late Canons, * 16.273 which he said were against Law to sit, the Parliament being Dissolved. No, my Lords, nothing against Law that I know. For we were called to Sit in Convocation, by a different Writ from that which called us as Bishops to the Parliament. And we could not rise, till his Majesty sent us another Writ to discharge us; and this is well known to the Judges, and the other Lawyers here present: So we continued sitting, though the Parliament rose. Nor was this sitting continued by any Advice or Desire of mine. For I humbly desired a Writ to dissolve us: But the best Councel then present, both of Judges, and other Lawyers, assured the King we * 16.274 might Legally sit. And here is a Copy attested under their Hands.

Then he urged out of my Diary, at May 29. 1640. That I acknow∣ledged there were Seventeen Canons made, which I did hope would be use∣ful to the Church. 'Tis true, my Lords, I did hope so. And had I not hoped it, I would never have passed my Consent unto them. And when I writ this, there was nothing done or said against them. And if by any Inadvertency, or Humane Frailty, any thing Erro∣neous or Unfit have slipped into those Canons, I humbly beseech your Lordships to remember, it is an Article of the Church of * 16.275 England, that General Councils may Err, and therefore this National Synod may mistake. And that since (if any Error be) it is not Wilful; it may be rectified, and in Charity passed by.

For the Bishop of Gloucester's refusing to Subscribe the Canons, and take the Oath; Which is here said by the Council, but no Proof offered: The Truth is this. He first pretended (to avoid his Sub∣scription) that we could not sit, the Parliament risen. He was Satis∣fied in this by the Judges Hands. Then he pretended the Oath. But that which stuck in his Stomach, was the Canon about the sup∣pressing * 16.276 of the growth of Popery. For, coming over to me to Lambeth about that Business, he told me he would be torn with Wild Horses before he would Subscribe that Canon. I gave him the best Ad∣vice I could; but his Carriage was such, when he came into the Convocation, that I was forced to charge him openly with it, and he as freely acknowledged it: As there is plentiful Proof of Bishops and other Divines then present. And for his Lordship's being after put to take the Oath (which was also urged;) it was thus. I took my self bound to accquaint his Majesty with this Proceeding of my Lord of Gloucester's, and did so. But all that was after done about his Commitment first, and his Release after, when he had taken the Oath, was done openly at a full Council-Table, and his

Majesty present, and can no way be charged upon me, as my Act. For it was my Duty to let his Majesty know it, to prevent farther Danger then also discovered. But I am here to defend my self, not to accuse any Man else.

Next he urged, that I had Interlined the Original Copy of the Canons with my own Hand. But this is clearly a mistake, if not a wilful one. For perusing the Place, I find the Interlining is not in my Hand, but my Hand is to it; as (I humbly conceive) it was fit it should. And the Words are in the Ratification of the Canons, and therefore were necessarily to be in the Original, howsoever slip∣ped in the writing of them.

As for the Oath so bitterly spoken of at the Bar, and in the Arti∣cles; either it was made according to Law, or else we were wholly mis-led by President, and that such as was never excepted against.

For in the Canons made in King James his Time, there was an Oath made against a 16.277 Symonie, b 16.278 and an Oath for Church-Wardens, and an Oath about c 16.279 Licences for Marriages, and an Oath for d 16.280 Judges in Ecclesiastical Courts: And some of these Oaths as dangerous as this is acounted to be. And all these established by no other Authority than these late were.

And yet neither those Canons nor those Oaths were ever declared Illegal by any ensuing Parliament, nor the Makers of them accused of any Crime, much less of Treason. So that we had in this Synod unblamed President for what we did, as touching our Power of doing it.

But, after all this, he said he would pass these things by (that is, when he had made them as Odious as he could) and would Charge nothing upon me but the Votes of both Houses, namely, That these Canons contain Matters contrary to the King's Prerogative, to the Fundamental Laws of the Realm, to the Rights of Parliaments, to the Propriety and Liberty of the Subject, and Matters tending to Sedition, and of dangerous Consequence. So these Votes of the Honourable Houses made so long after (and therefore cannot well be an Evidence against the making of that which was done so long before) is the Task lying now upon me to answer; which, with your Lordships ho∣nourable Favour, I shall in all Humbleness Address my self unto.

Before these Words were well out of my Mouth, Mr. Nicolas with much earnestness interposed; That he hoped their Lordships would not indure that the Solemn Votes of both Houses should be called in∣to Question by any Delinquent, and was sure the House of Commons would not endure it. Upon this the Lords presently gave their Re∣solution, that I might not speak to any thing that was declared by Votes; but was to answer only to the Fact, whether I made the Canons or no. To this, with leave humbly asked, I replyed, That if I might not answer to the Votes, I must yield the Evidence; which I could not do: And that if I might answer, I must dispute the Votes, which their Lordships resolved I should not do: That then I was in a Perplexity, and must necessarily offend either way. And therefore humbly besought them, to consider not my Case only, but their own too. For I did conceive it would concern them in Honour, as much as me in Safety: That no Charge might be brought against me in that great Court, to which I should not be

suffered to make answer: Or else that they in Honour would not judge me for that, to which my Answer is not suffer'd to be given. With this, that all these Canons were made in open and full Con∣vocation, and are Acts of that Body, and cannot be ascribed to me, though President of that Synod, but are the Joynt Acts of the whole Body: So by me they were not made; which is my An∣swer.

And according to this I framed my Answer to Mr. Brown's Summary of my Charge, both hinting the Canons in general, and concerning the Instance before given about the Bishop of Glou∣cester.

But though I was not allowed there to make any farther An∣swer in defence of these Canons: Nor can hold it fit to insert here so long an Answer, as these Votes require: I humbly desire the Courteous Reader, if he please, to look upon the Answer which I have made to a Speech * 16.281 of Mr. Nathaniel Fynes, in the House of Commons, against these Canons. In which Answer, I humbly con∣ceive, I have satisfied whatsoever these Votes contain against them. Howsoever, I cannot but observe this in present. The Words in the Sixth Original Article, are as they are above Cited: That the late Canons contain Matters contrary to the King's Prerogative, the Laws, &c. But in the Ninth Additional, all the rest of the Excep∣tions are in against them, but these Words about the King's Pre∣rogative are quite left out. I would fain know, if I could, what is the Reason of this Omission in these added Articles. Is it for Shame, because there was a purpose to Charge me (as Serjeant * 16.282 Wild did in his Speech the first Day) that I laboured to advance the King's Prerogative above the Law? To advance it, and yet made contrary Canons against it; which is the way to destroy it? What pretty Nonsense is this? Or is it because the framers of these Ad∣ditionals (whom I conceive were some Committee, with the help of Mr. Pryn) thought the time was come, or coming, in which the King should have no more Prerogative? Or if there be a third Reason; let them give it themselves.

This was all concerning the Canons. Then followed the sixth Original Article about my assuming of Papal Power; where Mr. Brown, in Summing up of his Charge, was pleased to say,

that no Pope claimed so much as I had done. But he was herein much mistaken. For never any Pope claimed so little. For he that claimed least, claimed it in his own right, which was none; whereas I claimed nothing but in the King's right, and by vertue of his Concession. Between which there is a vast Latitude.

The first Proof upon this Article, was read out of certain Letters sent unto me, by the Vniversity of Oxford, I being then their Chancellor. Which great Titles were urged to prove my assuming of Papal Power, because I did not check them in my Answers to those Letters. (1) The first Title was Sanctitas tua, which Mr. Nicolas said, was the Pope's own Title. But he is de∣ceived. For the Title was commonly given to other Bishops also, clean through the Primitive Church, both Greek and Latin.

He replied in great heat (as his manner it seems is) that 'tis Blasphemy to give that Title (Sanctitas) in the Abstract, to any but God. And

though by the Course of the Court I might not answer then to the Reply, yet now I may. And must tell Mr. Nicolas, that 'tis a great Presumption for him, a Lawyer, and no Studied Divine, to Charge Blasphemy upon all the Fathers of the Primitive Church. 'Tis given to † 16.283 St. Augustine by Hilarius and Euodius, and in the Abstract. And (which is the Charge laid to me) St. Augustine ne∣ver checks at, or finds fault with the Title, nor with them for writing it. And b 16.284 St. Augustine himself gives that Title to Euo∣dius, answering his Letters, which I was not to do to theirs. And after that to c 16.285 Quintianus. Neither is any thing more common, than this Stile among the Fathers; as all Learned Men know. And 'tis commonly given by d 16.286 St. Gregory the Great, to divers Bishops: Who, being Pope himself, would not certainly have given away his own Title (had it been peculiar to him) to any other Bishop. Nor would any of the Fathers have given this Epithete to their Brethren, had any savour of Blasphemy been about it.

But there is a two-fold Holiness, the one Original, Absolute and Essen∣tial, and that is in God only, and incommu∣nicable to any Creature: The other Deriva∣tive * 16.287 and Relative; and that is found in the Creatures, both Things and Persons: Or else God should have no Saints, no Holy Ones. For no Man can be said to be Sanctus, Holy, but he who in some degree hath Sanctitatem, Holiness residing in him. And this I an∣swered at the present.

But, according to Mr. Nicolas his Divinity, we shall learn in time, to deny the Immortality of the Soul. For Immortality in the Abstract is applied to God only. 1 Tim. 6. Who only hath Immor∣tality. * 16.288 Therefore, if it may not in an under and a qualified Sense, by Participation, be applied to the Creature; the Soul of Man can∣not be Immortal.

(2) The Second Title is, Spiritu Sancto effusissimè plenus. My Lords, I had sent them many Hundred Manuscripts, and in many Langua∣ges; upon this, in Allusion to the gift of Tongues (and it was about Pentecost too that I sent them) the Luxuriant Pen of the University Orator ran upon these Phrases, which I could neither fore-see be∣fore they were written, nor remedy after. And finding fault could not remedy that which was past. Besides, all these Letters were in Answer to mine, I was to answer none of theirs. That might have made me work enough, had I wanted any.

(3) The Third Stile is Summus Pontifex. But this was in my Lord of London's Letters, and he must answer, if any thing be amiss. But Pontifex, and Summus too, is no unusual Stile to, and of the Chief Prelate in any Nation.

(4) The Fourth Stile is Archangelus, & ne quid nimis. Yes sure, the meanest of these Titles is Multum nimis, far too much, applied to my Person and unworthiness: Yet a great sign it is, that I de∣served very well of that University, in the place I then bare; or else they would never have bestowed such Titles upon me. And if they

did offend, in giving such an unworthy Man such high Language, why are not they called in Question for their own Fault?

(5) The last which I remember is, Quo rectior non stat Regula, &c. And this is no more than an absolute Hyperbole; A high one I confess; yet as high are found in all Rhetorical Authors: And what should make that Blasphemy in an Vniversity Orator, which is every where common, and not only allowed, but commendable, I know not.

Especially since the Rule of the Interpretation of them, is as well known as the Figure. Where the Words are not to be under∣stood in their Proper and Literal Sense, but as St. Augustine speaks, * 16.289 when that which is spoken, Longè est amplius, is far larger than that which is signified by it.

And if I had assumed any of these Titles to my self, which I am, and ever was, far from doing; yet 'tis one thing to assume Papal Title; and another to assume Papal Power (which is the thing Charged;) though I thank God I did neither.

If I have here omitted any Title, it is meer forgetfulness; for one part or other of the Answers given will reach it, what-e're it be. And, as I told Mr. Browne, when he Charged this on me, Dr. Strowd the University Orator, who writ those Letters, and gave those Titles, was called up before a Committee of this Parlia∣ment, examined about them, Acquitted, and Dismissed.

(6) These Titles from the Letters being past; He quoted ano∣ther, which he called a Blasphemous Speech too, out of my Book a∣gainst * 16.290 Fisher; where, he said, I approved of Anselme, an Enemy to the Crown; and took on me to be Patriarch of this other World. Let any Man look into that place of my Book; and he shall find that I make use of that Passage, only to prove that the Pope could not be Ap∣pealed unto out of England, according to their own Doctrine: Which I hope is no Blasphemy. And for St. Anselme, howsoever he was swayed with the Corruptions of his time; yet was he in other things worthy the Testimony which the Authors by me Cited give him.

And if any Man be angry that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury is called the Patriarch of this other World, he may be pleased to remember, that St. Jerom gives St. Augustine, who was Bishop of Hippo, and * 16.291 no Arch-Bishop, a greater Title than that. For he writes Beatis∣simo Papae Augustino, more than once and again, as appears in his Epistles to St. Augustine.

(7) To these Sir Nathaniel Brent's Testimony is produced: Who says, that he over-heard me say to another, that I would not so easily quit the Plenitude of my Power; or to that Effect. He confesses he was coming in, and finding me speaking with another, made stay, and stood a-far off, and knows not of what I spake, (for so he said) but over-heard the Words. I beseech your Lordships, observe this Wit∣ness. He confesses, he knows not of what I spake, and yet comes here upon his Oath, to testifie of Plenitude of Power in Relation to my assuming Papal Power. If he meant not this, his Testimony is nothing; for Plenitude of Power may Extend to many other things; and I might justly say, (if I said it) that I would not easily part with the Plenitude of my Power, in Relation to other Bishops of my Pro∣vince, who by Law have not so full Power as I have. But if he did mean this; then his Testimony is worse than nothing; Nothing

in regard he confesses he knows not of what I was speaking. And worse than nothing; That, not knowing, he would give such a Testimony upon Oath.

[* 16.292 As for the Statutes themselves, there was scarce one urged against me; but it was either a Statute, or a Prescription of that University, long before I was born into the World; and could not therefore be of my new-making. And this was my An∣swer to Mr. Browne in the House of Commons. And such Ban∣nition, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and the like, are well known to be.]

The next Charge of this Day, was, that I went about to Exempt * 16.293 the Clergy from the Civil Magistrate.

1. The first Witness is Mr. Pincen; He says, he heard me say at the High-Commission, That the Clergy were now debased; that hereto∣fore it was otherwise, and I hope to see it so again. Truly, my Lords, if I did say thus (which is more than I can call to Memory) I spake truth; they were debased; and I did hope to see it otherwise. For, the debasing of the Clergy will make their Office and their Doctrine base, as well as their Persons. But here is not a word of freeing them from Laws, or the Temporal Magistrate. It was re∣plyed, he did mention the Civil Magistrate.

If he did, he mentions no time, by which I might be inabled to make Counterproof. He is single. They are words, and if within the Statute, then triable by it within six Months. And I desire this grave Gentle∣man to consider his Oath: For if I spake of any such Exemption; I must speak against my Conscience and Judgment, which I hum∣bly thank God I use not to do. Nor is it altogether impossible for the Civil Magistrate sometimes to oppress poor Clergy-Men. But a little will be thought too much of this. And therefore to Mr. Browne's Summary Charge, I gave the former Answer, that I spake of Exemption from Oppression, not from Law.

2. The Second Witness was Alderman Railton, about the carrying up of the Sword in the Church, when he was Lord Mayor. He says, I once sent him word about it, but knows not by whom, and after heard no more of it, but refers himself to Mr. Marsh. He says, there was an Order of the Council-Table, May 3. 1633. concerning the submitting of the Sword in time and place of Divine Service. If an Or∣der of Council, then was it no Act of mine, as I have often Plead∣ed, and must as often as it comes. He says farther, that I spake these Words, or to this Effect; That the Church had been low for these Hundred Years; but I hoped it would Flourish again in another Hundred. But here's no one word of Exemption from Civil Magistracy. And I hope your Lordships will take Witnesses as they speak, not as Men shall infer, and descant upon them.

And then, my Lords, under Favour, I see no harm in the Words.

Only I shall recall my hope: For if I had then any hope to see it Flourish in another Hundred Years, 'tis that which I cannot hope for now. He says, there was a Reference to the Councel on both sides, and that under that Reference the Business dyed. And if it dyed then, what makes it here before the Resurrection? Yea, but says Mr. Nicolas, here's Agitation about the submitting of the Sword, which is the Emblem of Temporal Power.

But neither to Foreign, nor Home Power, but only to God; and that in the place, and at the performance of his Holy Worship. At which time and place Christian Kings submit themselves, and therefore cannot stand upon the Emblems of their Power. Nor would the Lords of the Council have made either Order or Refe∣rence; had there been any thing of danger, or against Law, in this kind of submitting. Mr. Yorke was produced as another Wit∣ness; but said just the same with Marsh; and so the same Answer served him.

Then followed a Charge about the Charter of York to be re∣newed; * 16.294 and that I did labour to have the Arch-Bishop of York his Chancellor, and some of the Residentiaries named in it to be Justices of Peace within the City. To prove this, Alderman Hoyle is produced: Who says, There was an Order of the Council about this, but cannot say that I procured it. So far then this Proof reaches not me. For the Bishop his Chancellor, and some of the Residentiaries to be Justices of Peace within the City. If I were of this Opinion (as then advised) I am sure there's no Treason in it, and I be∣lieve no Crime. And, under your Lordships Favour, I could not but think it would have made much Peace, and done much Good in all the Cities of England where Cathedrals are. Lastly, he says, There was a Debauched Man committed about breach of the Sabbath, and being casually smother'd, I should say, they deserved to be Hanged that Killed him. Concerning this Man; he lost his Life, that's confessed. His Debauchery, what it was, is not proved. And were he never so disorderly, I am sure he was not with∣out Legal Tryal to be shut up into a House and smother'd. That is against both Law and Conscience. And the Officers then in being had reason to smother the Business, as much as they could. And, it may be, deserved somewhat; if not that which this Alder∣man says I said, to his best Remembrance. For so, and with no more certainty he expressed it. This I am sure I said, That if the Bishop, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 any of the Church had been then in their Charter; the Poor Man's Life had not been lost.

The Fourth Charge was just of the same Nature, concerning the * 16.295 Charge of Shrewsbury. For this there were produced two Witnesses, Mr. Lee and Mr. Mackworth: But they make up but one between them. For Mr. Lee could say nothing, but what he acknowledges he heard from Mr. Mackworth. And Mr. Mackworth says first: That the Schoolmaster's Business was referred to other Lords and my self. That's no Crime; and to my knowledge, that has been a troublesom business for these Thirty Years. He says, I caused that there should go a Quo Warranto against the Town. This is but as Mr. Owen informed him, so no proof. Beside, 'tis no Crime, being a Referee, if I gave legal Reason for it. Nor is it any Crime, that the Bishop and his Chancellor should be Justices within the Town; As is aforesaid in the Case of York: Considering especially, that then many Clergy-Men bare that Office in divers Counties of England. He adds, that an Old Alderman gave Fifty Pound to St. Pauls. But out of what Consideration I know not, nor doth he speak: And if every Alderman in the Town would have given me as much to that use; I would have taken it, and

thanked them for it. Then he says, There was an Order from all the Lords Referees, for setling all things about their Charter. So, by his own Confession, the whole Business was transacted publickly, and by Per∣sons of great Honour; and nothing charged upon my Particular. If Mr. Owen sent me in a Butt of Sack, and after put it upon the Town Account, (for so he also says) Mr. Owen did ill in both; but I knew of neither. And this the Councel in their Reply said they urged not in that kind. Lastly, the Charter it self was Read to both Points, of the Bishops and his Chancellors being Justices of Peace within the Town, and the not bearing up of the Sword. To both which I have answer'd al∣ready. And I hope your Lordships cannot think his Majesty would have passed such a Charter: Or that his Learned Councel durst have put it to him, had this thing been such a Crime as 'tis here made.

The next Charge was out of my Diary, at March 5: 1635. The * 16.296 words are, William Juxon Lord Bishop of London, made Lord High Treasurer of England. No Church-Man had it since H: 7: time. I pray God bless him to carry it so, that the Church may have Honour, and the King and the State Service and Contentment by it. And now if the Church will not hold up themselves under God, I can do no more. I can see no Trea∣son in this, nor Crime neither. And though that which I did to help on this Business, was very little; yet Aim I had none in it, but the Service of the King, and the Good of the Church. And I am con∣fident it would have been both, had not such troublesom Times fol∣lowed, as did.

Then they instanced in the Case of Mr. Newcomen. But that Cause * 16.297 being handled before, they did only refer the Lords to their Notes: And so did I to my former Answers.

Then followed the Case of Thorn and Middleton; which were Fined * 16.298 in the High Commission about some Clergy-Mens Business; Thorne be∣ing Constable: The Witnesses in this Case are Three.

1. The first is Huntford (if I took his Name right:) And for the Censure of these Men, he confesses, it was in and by the High Commis∣sion; and so no Act of mine (as I have often pleaded:) But then he says, that I there spake these words, That no Man of their Rank should meddle with Men in Holy Orders. First, he is in this part of the Charge single, and neither of the other Witnesses comes in to him. Secondly, I humbly desire the Proceedings of the High Commission may be seen (which are taken out of our hands.) For so far as I can remember any thing of this Cause, the Minister, Mr. Lewis, had hard measure. And perhaps thereupon I might say, that Men of their Rank should not in such sort meddle with Men in Holy Orders. But to tax the proceedings of a violent busie Constable, was not to exempt the Clergy from Civil Magistracy.

Upon this he falls just upon the same words, and says, that I utter'd them about their offering to turn out a Corrector from the Printing-House. This Corrector was a Minister, and a well deserving Man. The Trust of the Press was referred to the High-Commission Court. And I hope your Lordships will not think, that not to suffer the Printers to turn out a deserving Man at their pleasure, is to exempt the Clergy from the Civil Magistrate. The business, my Lords, was this. This Corrector

was principally entertained for the Latin and Greek Press especially, which I had then not without great pains and some cost Erected. They were desirous to keep only one for the English, and him at the cheap∣est. Among them their negligence was such, as that there were found above a Thousand faults in two Editions of the Bible and Com∣mon-Prayer-Book. And one which caused this search was, that in Exod. 20. where they had shamefully Printed, Thou shalt commit Adultery. For this the Masters of the Printing-House were called into the High-Commission, and Censured, as they well deserved it. As for this Cor∣rector whom they would have heaved out, they never did so much as complain of him to any that had power over the Press, till this fell upon themselves for so gross an Abuse. Nor did they after this proceed against him, to make him appear faulty; and till that were done, we could not punish. And for this Business of the Press, he is single too. And I have told your Lordships that which is a known Truth.

And Hunsford, being bit in his Credit and Purse, and Friends, by that Censure, for so gross an abuse of the Church and Religion, labours to fasten his Fangs upon me in this way.

2. The Second Witness is Mr. Bland. But all that he says is, that there was once a dismission of this Cause out of the Court, and that though I disliked it, yet I gave way to it, because all Parties were agreed. And no word of proof, that I was any cause of bringing it back into the Court again. What's my fault in this?

3. The Third Witness was Thorn in his own Cause: And 'tis plain, by his own words, that this Cause was depending in Court before my time. And I believe, were the Records of the Court here, Mr. Lewis would not be found so great an Offender as Mr. Thorn would make him. This I am sure of, both the High-Commission and my self have been quick enough against all Ministers which have been proved to be debauched in their Life and Conversation. And he says nothing against me, but that I sided with his Adversaries; which is easie to say against any Judge that delivers his Sen∣tence against any Man. But neither of these come home to Hunsford.

The next Charge is in the Case of one Mr. Tomkins, about the * 16.299 Taxing of a Minister in a Case of Robbery, and Repayment by the Country.

To this Mr. Newdigate is produced; who says, as he remembers, that I should speak these words, That Ministers were free from such Taxes, and I hoped to see the Times in which they might be free again. First, this Gentleman is single. Secondly, he speaks not positively, but (as he remembers.) Thirdly, this Tax I do humbly conceive is not by Law to be laid upon any Minister. For no Man is subject to this Tax, but they which are to keep Watch and Ward; which Mi∣nisters in that kind are not bound unto. And this I learned of the Lord Keeper Coventry at the Council-Table. So I might well then hope to see Ministers free from all such Taxes, by the right under∣standing and due Execution of our own Laws, without assuming any Papal Power.

The last Instance of this Day was the bringing of Sir Rich: Sa∣muel * 16.300

into the High-Commission, for doing his Office as Justice of the Peace upon some Clergy-Men. First, for this, this Gentleman is single, and in his own Case. Secondly, himself confesses, that his bringing into the High-Commission was long after the Fact. Therefore in all Probability not for that; nor doth he say that I caused his bringing in. He says farther, That one Article for which he was called into the Commission, was, that he was an Enemy to the Clergy. But he doth not say, that I preferred these Articles against him: Nor doth he tell, or can I remember, what the other Articles were, which with this may be bad enough to merit what was there laid against him: And whatsoever was done, appears by his own Nar∣ration, to be the Act of the High-Commission, or the Council-Table, and so not Chargeable upon me alone. And whereas he says, I blamed him much at the Council-Table: Let him tell why, and then I'll give him a farther Answer: And sure if I did blame him; I had just Cause so to do. Lastly, he says, I did use the Word Base to him when he came to me. Sure I cannot believe I did: It was not my Language to meaner Men. If it did slip from me, it was in Relation to his Enmity to the Clergy, not to his Person or Quality.

And I conceive 'tis no Gentile part, for a Man of Place and Power in his Country, to oppress poor Clergy-Men which neighbour about him. In which kind this Gentleman, Pessi∣mè Audiebat, heard extreamly ill.

CAP. XXX.

THis Day thus ended, I was ordered to appear again on Mon∣day, April 22. I came, and my former Answers having taken * 16.301 off the Edge of many Men, (for so I was told by good Hands) the Scorns put upon me at my Landing and elsewhere were somewhat a bated, though when it was at best I suffered enough. After I had attend∣ed the Pleasure of the House some Hours, I was remitted without * 16.302 Hearing, and commanded to attend again upon Thursday, April 25. But sent back again then also, and ordered to appear on Tuesday, April 30. And when I came, I was sent away once more unheard: No * 16.303 Consideration had of my self, or the great Charge which this fre∣quent coming put me to. I was then ordered to appear again, on Saturday, May 4. Then I was heard again: And the Day proceed∣ed as follows.

My Eighth Day of Hearing.

To raise up Envy against me, Mr. Nicolas falls first to repeating * 16.304 the Titles which were given me in Letters from Oxford; to which I gave answer the Day before. From thence he fell again upon the * 16.305 former Charge, My Endeavour to exempt the Clergy from the Civil Power. And very loud he was, and full of sour Language upon me. To this General I answered with another more true; That I never did attempt to bring the Temporal Power under the Clergy, nor to free the Clergy from being under it: But I do free∣ly confess, I did labour all I could to preserve poor Clergy-Men from some Lay-Mens Oppression, which lay heavy on them. And de Vi Laica hath been an old, and a great, and too Just a Com∣plaint. And this I took to be my Duty, doing it without Wrong to any Man; as sincerely I did to the best of my Knowledge. And assuring my self, that God did not raise me to that Place of Eminency, to sit still, see his Service neglected, and his Ministers discountenanced; nay, sometimes little better than trampled on.

And my standing thus to the Clergy, and their just Grievances, is not the least Cause of my present Condition. In which my Case (though not my Abilities) is somewhat like Cicero's. For having now for many Years defended the Publick State of the Church, and the Private of many Church-Men; as he had done many Citizens; when he by prevailing Factions came into danger him∣self, ejus Salutem defendit nemo, no Man took care to defend him * 16.306 that had defended so many; which yet I speak not to impute any thing to Men of my own Calling, who, I presume, would have lent me their just Defence, to their Power; had not the same Storm which drove against my Life, driven them into Corners to preserve themselves.

The First Instance was in Mr. Shervil's Case; in which Mr. John Steevens tells what I said to the Councel Pleading in the Star-Chamber, * 16.307 which was, that they should take care, not to cause the Laws of the Church and the Kingdom to clash one against another. I see, my Lords, nothing that I spake was let fall, nor can I remember every Speech that passed from me; he may be happy that can. But if I did speak these Words, I know no Crime in them: It was a good Caveat to the Councel, for ought I know. For surely the Laws of Church and State in England would agree well enough together, if some did not set them at Odds. And if I did farther say, to the then Lord Keeper, (as 'tis Charged) that some Clergy-Men had sat as high as he, and might again; which I do not believe I said; yet if I did, 'tis a known Truth: For the Lord Coventry, then Lord Keeper, did imme∣diately succeed the Lord Bishop of Lincoln in that Office. But though I dare say, I said not thus to the Lord Keeper, whose Mode∣ration gave me no Cause to be so round with him, yet to the Coun∣cel at the Bar, I remember well, upon just occasion given, that I spake to this Effect; That they would forbear too much depressing of the Clergy, either in their Reputation or Maintenance; in re∣gard it was not impossible that their Profession, now as high as ours once was, may fall to be as low as ours now is;

If the Professors set themselves against the Church, as some of late are known to have done: And that the sinking of the Church would be found the ready way to it.

The Second Instance was about calling some Justices of the Peace * 16.308 into the High-Commission, about a Sessions kept at 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

1. The First Witness for this (for Three were produced) was Mr. Jo. Steevens. He says, That the Isle where the Sessions were kept, was joyned to the Church. If it were not now a part of the Chuch, yet doubtless, being within the Church-Yard, it was Consecrated Ground. He says, That Sessions were kept there heretofore. And I say the more often the worse. He says, That I procured the calling of them into the High-Commission. But he proves no one of these Things, but by the Report of Sir Rob: Cook of Gloucestershire, a Party in this Cause. He says again, that They had the Bishop's License to keep Sessions there. But the Proof of this also is no more than that Sir Rob. Cook told him so: So all this hitherto is Hearsay. Then he says the 88. Ca∣non * 16.309 of the Church of England (was urged in the Commission Court) which seems to give leave in the close of the Canon, that Temporal Courts or Leets may be kept in Church or Church-Yard. First, that Clause in the end of the Canon, is referred to the Ringing of Bells, not to the Profanations mentioned in the former part of that Canon. Nor is it probable, the Minister and Church-Wardens should have Power to give such leave, when no Canon gives such Power to the Bishop himself. And were it so, here's no Proof offered, that the Minister and Church-Wardens did give leave: And suppose some Temporal Courts might upon urgent Occasion be kept in the Church with leave, yet that is no Warrant for Sessions, where there may be Tryal for Blood. He says farther, That the Civilians quoted an Old Canon of the Pope's, and that that prevailed against the Canon of Our Church, * 16.310 and Sentence given against them. All those Canons which the Civilians

urged, are Law in England, where nothing is contrary to the Law of God, or the Law of the Land, or the King's Prerogative Royal: And to keep off Profanation from Churches is none of these. Besides, were all this true which is urged, the Act was the High-Commissions, not mine. Nor is there any thing in it that looks to∣ward Treason.

2. The Second Witness is Mr. Edward Steevens. He confesses that the Sentence was given by the High-Commission, and that I had but my single Vote in it. And for the Place it self, he says, The Place where the Sessions were kept, was separated from the Isle of the Church by a Wall Breast-high; which is an evident Proof that it was formerly a Part of that Church, and continued yet under the same Roof.

3. The Third Witness is Mr. Talboyes (who, it seems, will not be out of any thing which may seem to hurt me.) He says, The Parish held it no part of the Church. Why are not some of them examined, but this Man's Report from them admitted? They thought no harm (he says) and got a License. But why did they get a License, if their own Conscience did not prompt them that something was Irregular in that Business? He says, he was informed the Sessions had been twice kept there before. And I say, under your Lordships Favour, the oftner the worse. But why is not his Informer produced, that there might be Proof, and not Hearsay? Upon this, I said (so he concludes) That I would make a President against keeping it any more. If I did say so, the Cause deserved it; Men in this Age growing so Bold with Churches, as if Profanation of them were no Fault at all.

The Third Instance concerned Sir Tho. Dacres, a Justice of Peace in * 16.311 Middlesex, and his Warrant for Punishing some disorderly Drinking. The Witnesses the two Church Wardens, Colliar and Wilson; two plain Men, but of great Memories: For this Business was when I was Bishop of London; and yet they agree in every Circumstance, in every Word, though so many Years since. Well, what say they? It seems Dr. Duck, then my Chancellor, had Cited these Church-Wardens into my Court, Therefore either there was, or at least, to his Judg∣ment there seemed to be somwhat done in that business against the Jurisdiction of the Church. They say then, That the Court ended, Dr. Duck brought them to me. And what then? Here is a Cause, by their own confession, depending in the Ecclesiastical Court; Dr. Duck in the King's Quarters, where I cannot fetch him to Testifie; no means left me to know what the Proceedings were; and I have good cause to think, that were all the Merits of the Cause open before your Lordships, you would say, Sir Tho. Dacres did not all according to Law. But what is the Heart of this Charge? It is, say they, That I Commanded Dr. Duck to prosecute them: And what fault was in this? For if it were Just, why should not Dr. Duck go on with his Prosecution? If Dr. Duck and I were both mistaken in the Particular, 'twas easy getting a Prohibition: Yea, but they say I said, If this must be so, Sir Thomas Dacres shall be Bishop of London, and I'll be Sir Tho. Dacres. For ought I see in the Weight of it, this whole Charge was but to bring in this Speech. And truly, my Lords, my old decayed Memory is not such, as that I can recall a Speech, Thirteen or Fourteen Years since. But if I did say it, I

presume 'tis not High Treason for a Bishop of London to say so much of Sir Tho. Dacres.

Mr. Browne, in the summing up the Charge against me, laid the weight of the Charge in this, That these Church-Wardens were Prosecuted for Executing the Warrant of a Justice of Peace, upon an Ale-House-Keeper, for Tipling on the Sabbath-Day, con∣trary to the Statutes Jacobi 7. & Caro. 3. To which I Answer'd, That those Statutes did concern the Ale-House-Keepers only; nor were the Church-Wardens called in question for that; but because being Church Officers, and a Church-Man Tipling there, they did not complain of that to the Chancellor of the Diocess. Mr. Browne replied, there was no Clergy-Man there. I am glad I was so mistaken. But that excuseth not the Church-Wardens, who being Church Officers, should have been as ready to inform the Bishop, as to obey the Justice of Peace.

The Fourth Instance was about Marriages in the Tower, which * 16.312 I opposed against Law. The Witness Sir William Balfore, then Lieu∣tenant of the Tower. He says, that I did oppose those Marriages. And so say I. But I did it for the Subject of England's sake. For many of their Sons and Daughters were there undone. Nor Banes, nor Li∣cence, nor any means of fore-knowledge to prevent it. Was this ill? He says, that when he spake with me about it, I desired him to speak with his Majesty about it, because it was the King's House. What could I do with more moderation? He confesses he did so, and that he moved the King that the Cause might be heard at the Council-Table, not at the High-Commission: To this his Majesty inclined, and I opposed nothing; so the general Abuse might be rectified. Then he says, Mr. Attorney Noye said at the Council-Table, it was the King's Free-Chappel, and that no Pope in those times offer'd to inhibit there. First, if Mr. Attorney did so say, he must have leave to speak freely in the King's Cause. Se∣condly, (as I humbly conceive) the Chappel for ordinary use of Pri∣soners and Inhabitants of the Tower, where these disorderly Mar∣riages are made, is not that which is called the King's Free-Chappel: But another in the side of the white Tower by the King's Lodgings. Thirdly, if it be, yet I have herein not offended, for I did all that was done by the King's leave, not by any assumption of Papal Power. Then he tells the Lords, that in a Discourse of mine with him at Green∣wich, about this business, I let fall an Oath. I am sorry for it, if I did. But that's no Treason.

And I know whom the Deponent thinks to please by this Interposition.

For to the matter it belongs not. In conclusion, he says truly, that the King committed the business to some Lords and Judges, that so an end might be put to it: And in the mean time Ordered, that, till it were ended, there should be no more Mar∣riages in the Tower. How this business ended, I know not. It began I am sure by Authority of his Majesty's Grant of the High Commis∣sion, to question and punish all such Abuses, Tam in loois Exemptis, quam non Exemptis. And his Majesty having Graciously taken this Care for the Indempnity of the Subject, I troubled my self no more with it: My aim being not to cut off any Priviledges of that Place, but only to prevent the Abuses of that Lawless Custom.

And if cui bono be a considerable Circumstance, as it uses to be in all such Busi∣nesses, then it may be thought on too, that this Gentleman the

Lieutenant had a considerable share for his part out of the Fee for every Marriage. Which I believe was as dear to him as the Priviledge.

The next Instance is broke out of the Tower, and got as far as Oxford. * 16.313 The Witness Alderman Nixon. He says, the Mayor and the Watch set by him were disturbed by the Proctors of the Vniversity, and a Constable Im∣prisoned. The Night-Walk, and the keeping of the Watch, is the ancient, known, and constant Priviledge of the University, for some Hundred of Years; and so the Watch set by the Town (pur∣posely to pick a quarrel) was not according to Law. He adds, That when the Right Honourable the Earl of Barkshire would have referred the business to the King's Councel Learned, I refused, and said I would main∣tain it by my own Power, as Chancellor. If I did say this (which I nei∣ther remember nor believe) I might better refuse Lawyers, (not the Law, but Lawyers) than they a Sworn Judge of their own Nomi∣nation, which they did.

The Case was briefly this. There were some five or six Particulars which had, for divers Years, bred much trouble and disagreement be∣tween the Vniversity and the City; of which (to my best remembrance) this about the Night-Watch, and another about Felons Goods, were two of the chief. The Vniversity complained to me. I was so far from going any by-way, that I was resolved upon a Tryal at West∣minster-Hall, thinking (as I after found) that nothing but a Legal Tryal would set those two Bodies at quiet. The Towns-Men liked not this. Came some of the Chief of them to London: Prevailed with their Honourable Steward my Lord the Earl of Barkshire, to come to me to Lambeth, and by his Lordship offer'd to have all ended without so great Charge at Law, by Reference to any of the Judges. I said I had no mind to wrong the Town, or put them to Charge, but thought they would fly off from all Awards, and therefore stuck to have a Legal Tryal. After this, some of the chief Aldermen came to me with my Lord, and offer'd me, that if the Vniversity would do the like, they would go down and bring it up under the Mayor and Aldermens Hands, that they would stand to such end as Judge Jones, who rode that Circuit, should upon Hearing make. They did so: And brought the Paper so Subscribed (and therefore I think Alderman Nixon's Hand is to it as well as the rest) upon this I gave way; the Vniversity accepted; the Judge heard and setled. And now when they saw my Troubles threatning me, they brake all, whistled up their Recorder to come and complain at the Council-Table, his Majesty present. And I remember well, I told his Lordship (then making the aforesaid Motion to refer to the King's Learned Councel) that his Lordship well knew what had passed, and that being so used as I had been by the Townsmen, I would trouble my self with no more Refe∣rences to Lawyers, or to that effect. And I appeal to the Honour of my Lord, whether this be not a true Relation.

The Sixth Instance concerns the putting of one Mr. Grant out of * 16.314 his Right. He says, (but he is single and in his own Cause) That Mr. Bridges was presented to an Impropriation, and that suing for Tythe, He (the said Grant ) got a Prohibition, and Mr. Bridges a Reference to the then Lord Keeper Coventry, and my self; that we referred them to the

Law, and that there Grant was Non-Suited, and so outed of his Right. First, in all this there's nothing said to be done by me alone. Se∣condly, the Lord Keeper, who well understood the Law, thought it fittest to refer them to the Law; and so we did. If he were there Non-Suited first, and outed after, it was the Law that put him out, not we.

Yet your Lordships see here was a Prohibition granted in a Case which the Law it self after rejected.

Then follows the Instance, that I had a purpose to Abolish all Im∣propriations. * 16.315 The first Proof alledged, was a passage out of Bishop * 16.316 Mountague's Book, p. 210. That Tythes were due by Divine Right, and then no Impropriations might stand. And Mr. Pryn witnessed very carefully: That this Book was found in my own Study, and given me by Bishop Mountague. And what of this? Doth any Bishop Print a Book, and not give the Arch-Bishop one of them? Or must I answer for every Proposition that is in every Book that is in my Study? Or that any Author gives me? And if Bishop Mountague be of Opinion that Tythes are due by Divine Right, what is that to me? Your Lordships know, many Men are of different Opinions in that difficul∣ty, and I am confident you will not determin the Controversie by an Act of Parliament. They were nibling at my Diary in this, to * 16.317 shew that it was one of my Projects to fetch in Impropriations; but it was not fit for their purpose: For 'tis expressed, That if I Lived to see the Repair of St. Paul's near an end, I would move his Majesty for the like Grant for the buying in of Impropriations. And to buy them from the Owners, is neither against Law, nor a∣gainst any thing else that is good; nor is it any Usurpation of Papal Power.

2. The Second Proof, was my procuring from the King such Im∣propriations in Ireland, as were in the King's Power, to the Church of Ireland.

Which Mr. Nicolas (in his gentle Language) calls Robbing of the Crown.

My Lords, the Case was this. The Lord Primate of Armagh writ unto me, how ill Conditioned the State of that Church was for want of Means, and besought me that I would move his Majesty to give the Impropriations there, which yet remained in the Crown, for the Maintenance and Incouragement of able Ministers to Live among the People, and Instruct them: Assuring me, they were daily one by one begged away by Private Men, to the great prejudice both of Crown and Church. And the Truth of this, the Lord Primate is now in this Kingdom, and will witness. I acquainted the King's great Officers, the Lord Treasurer and the Chancellor of the Exchequer with it. And after long delibera∣tion, the King was pleased, at my humble Suit, to grant them in the way which I proposed. Which was, that when they came into the Clergies Hands, they should pay all the Rents respectively to the King; and some consideration for the several Renewings. And the Truth of this appears in the Deeds. So here was no Robbing of the Crown. For the King had all his set Rents reserved to a Penny, and Consideration for his Casualties beside. And, my Lords, the increase of Popery is complained of in Ireland. Is there a better way to hinder this growth, than to place an Able Clergy among the In∣habitants? Can an Able Clergy be had without Means? Is any

Means fitter than Impropriations restored? My Lords, I did this, as holding it the best Means to keep down Popery, and to advance the Protestant Religion. And I wish with all my Heart, I had been able to do it sooner, before so many Impropriations were gotten from the Crown into Private Hands.

Next I was Charged with another Project in my Diary, which * 16.318 was to settle some fixed Commendams upon all the smaller Bishopricks. * 16.319 For this, I said their own Means were too small to live and keep any Hospitality, little exceeding Four or Five Hundred Pound a Year. I consider'd that the Commendams taken at large and far distant, caused a great dislike and murmur among many Men. That they were in some Cases Materia Odiosa, and justly complained of. And hereupon I thought it a good Church-work, to settle some Temporal Lease, or some Benefice Sine Cura upon the lesser Bishopricks; but no∣thing but such as was in their own Right and Patronage: That so no other Man's Patronage might receive prejudice by the Bishop's Commendam: Which was not the least Rock of Offence, against which Commendams indanger'd themselves. And that this was my intent and endeavour, is expressed in my Diary: And I cannot be sorry for it.

Then I was Accused for setting Old Popish Canons above the Laws. * 16.320 Mr. Burton is the sole Witness. He says, it was in a Case about a Pew, in which those Canons did weigh down an Act of Parliament.

I did never think till now Mr. Burton would have made any Canons Pew-Fellows with an Act of Parliament.

But seriously, should not Mr. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Testimony for this have been produced at the second In∣stance of this day? For in the end of that is just such another Charge; and the Answer there given will satisfie this, and that * 16.321 by Act of Parliament too.

After this came a Charge with a great out-cry, that since my * 16.322 coming to be Arch-Bishop I had renewed the High-Commission, and put in many Illegal and Exorbitant Clauses, which were not in the for∣mer. Both the Commissions were produced. Upon this I humbly desired, that the Dockett might be Read; by which their Lordships might see all those Particulars which were added in the New Com∣mission, and so be able to Judge, how fit or unfit they were to be added. The Dockett was Read. And there was no Particular found, but such as highly deserved Punishment, and were of Ecclesiastical Cognizance, as Blasphemy, Schism, and two or three more of like Nature.

1. In this Charge, the first Exorbitant Clause they insisted on, as added to the new Commission, was the Power given in locis Exemptis, & non Exemptis, as if it were thereby intended to destroy all Priviledges. No, not to destroy any Priviledge, but not to suffer Enormous Sins to have any Priviledge. Besides, this Clause hath ever been in all Commissions that ever were Granted. And I then shewed it to the Lords in the Old Commission there present, p. 28, 32, 35, 42.

Nay more, this pro∣ceeding tam in locis Exemptis quam non Exemptis, is allowed to the Governours of the Church, in the Exercise of their Ecclesiasti∣cal * 16.323 Jurisdiction, by Act of Parliament in Queen Elizabeth's Time;

which would never have been allowed, had it then been thought such a dangerous Business, as 'tis now made against me.

2. The Second Clause was Power to Censure, by Fine and Impri∣sonment. This also I shewed in the old Commission, Fol. 37. and is (as I conceive) in plain pursuance of the Act of Parliament * 16.324 upon which the High-Commission is grounded. For the King says there, Fol. 13. (And so 'tis in the new) That he grants this Power, by Vertue of his Supream Authority, and Prerogative Royal, * 16.325 and of the said Act. Nay farther, 'tis added in this latter Commission, and by our Authority Ecclesiastical, which is not expressed in the for∣mer. And sure I would never have caused Authority Ecclesiastical to be added, had I any Plot (as 'tis urged) either to exalt the Cler∣gy above the Laity, or to usurp Papal Power; which all Men know is far enough from ascribing Ecclesiastical Authority to the King. And as for Fine and Imprisonment; if that Power be not according to Law, why was it first admitted, and after continued in all former Commissions?

3. The Third Clause, was the Non Obstante, which he said was against all Law, and of such a boundless Extent, as was never found in Commission or other Grant in England. And he here desired the Lords, that he might read it, which he did, with great Assurance of a Triumph. But after all this Noise, which Mr. Nicolas had made, I shewed the same Non Obstante in the Old Commission, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 62. Word for Word, which I humbly desired might be read and compared: It was so. The Lords looked strangely upon it: Mr. Nicolas was so startled, that he had not Patience to stay till his Reply, (which he saw impossible to be made) but interrupted me, and had the Face to say in that Honourable Assembly, that I need not stand upon that, for he did but name that, without much regarding it. And yet at the giving of the Charge, he insisted principally upon that Clause, and in higher and louder Terms than are before expressed. Had such an Advantage been found against me, I should have been accounted extreamly Negligent if I compared not the Commissions together; or Extreamly Impu∣dent, if I did.

4. The Fourth Exception was, That by this Commission I took greater Power than ever any Court had, because both Temporal and Ec∣clesiastical. First, whatsoever Power the High-Commission had, was not taken by them, till given by his Majesty, and that according to Use and Statue, (for ought hath been yet declared.) Secondly, they have not Power of Life or Limb, therefore not so great Pow∣er as other Courts have. Thirdly, they may have more various Power in some respects, but that cannot make it greater.

As for the Expression in which 'tis said, I took this Power; that is put most unworthily and unjustly too, to derive the Envy as much as he could upon my Person only.

For he could not hold from comparing me to Pope Boniface 8. and saying, that I took on me the Power of both Swords. But this was only ad Faciendum Populum. For he knows well enough, that to take both the Swords, as the Pope takes them, is to challenge them Originally as due to him and his Place: Not to take both, as under the Prince, and given by

his Authority; and so, not I alone, but all the Commissioners take theirs.

5. Fifthly, To prove that this vast Commission (as it was called) was put in execution, Mr. Burton is produced. He says, that when he was called into the High-Commission, he appealed to the King, and pleaded his Appeal; and that thereupon I and the Bishop of London Writ to the King to have him submit to the Court. He confesses he was dismissed upon his Appeal, till his Majesty's Pleasure was farther known. And it was our Duty, considering what a Breach this would make upon the Jurisdiction of the Court, to inform his Majesty of it; and we did so. The King declared that he should submit to the Court, as is confessed by himself. Then he says, because he would not sub∣mit to the Court, he was Censured notwithstanding his Appeal. And he well deserved it, that would not be ruled by his Majesty, to whom he had appealed. And the Commission had Power to do what they did. Besides, himself confesses, all this was done by the High-Commission, not by me. Nor doth he urge any Threat, Promise, or Solicitation of mine, any way to particularize the Act upon me; and farther, he is single, and in his own Cause.

Then followed the last Charge of this Day, which was the Pa∣tent * 16.326 granted for the Fines in the High-Commission for Finishing the West End of St: Pauls, cryed out upon as Illegal, and Extorted from the King, and such as took all Power from him for the space of the Ten Years, for which time it was granted. This is the Fourth time that St: Pauls is struck at. My Lords, let it come as often as it will, my Project and Endeavour in that Work was Honest and Honourable, to both Church and Kingdom of England. No Man in all this Search and Pursuit hath been able to charge me with the turning of any one Penny, or Pennyworth, to other use than was limited to me. I took a great deal of Care and Pains about the Work, and cannot repent of any thing I did in that Service, but of Humane Frailty. And whereas 'tis said, this Patent was extorted from his Ma∣jesty; as there is no Proof offered for it, so is there no truth in it. For his Majesty's Piety was so forward, that nothing needed to be extorted from him. Thus went I on, Bonâ Fide, and took the Prime Direction of the Kingdom for drawing the Patent: The Lord Keeper Coventry, Mr. Noy, and Sir Henry Martin. And there∣fore if any thing be found against Law in it, it cannot be impu∣ted to me, who took all the care I could to have it beyond excep∣tion. And I marvel what security any Man shall have, that adven∣tures upon any great and publick Work in this Kingdom; if such Councel cannot be trusted for drawing up of his Warrant.

And whereas it was said, this Patent for the Ten Years space took away both Justice and Mercy from the King: That's nothing so. For whatever the Words be to enable me the better for that Work, yet these being inseparable from him, may be used by him, not∣withstanding this or any other Patent. And if these be insepara∣ble (as 'tis granted they are) no inseparable thing can be taken away; or if it be taken, 'tis void in Law, and the King is where he was in the Exercise of his Right, both for Justice and Mercy. And so I answered Mr. Brown's summary Charge against me; and

as for that which he farther urged concerning S. Gregory's Church, Mr. Jingo Jones and others were trusted with that whole Business, and were Censured for it in this present Parliament. In all which Examination, no part of the Charge fell on me.

And because here are so many things urged about Free-Chappels, Lay-Fees, Patents, Appeals, and the like, I humbly desire a Salvo may be entred for me, and that my Councel may be heard for matter of Law, if any Doubt stick with your Lordships.

This Day ended, I did, according to my Resolution formerly ta∣ken, move the Lords for Means, considering my Charge in com∣ing, and how oft I had Attended and was not Heard. Their Lord∣ships considered of my Motion, and sent me out Word I should Petition them. I did humbly Petition their Lordships May 6. My * 16.327 Petition was presently sent down to the House of Commons, that so by both Houses it might be recommended to the Committee for Sequestrations. But upon a Speech in the House of Commons, that it was fit to see what would become of me, before they troubled themselves with thinking of Means for me, my Petition was cast aside.

CAP. XXXI.

AT my Parting from the House, I was ordered to appear again on Thursday, May 9. But then fairly put off by an Order * 16.328 (sent to the Lieutenant of the Tower) to Munday, May 13. so the Scorn and Charge of that Day was scaped. But then I appeared according to this Order, and had Scorn plenty, for what I escaped the Day before. And, after long attendance, was dismissed again unheard, and had Thursday, May 16. assigned unto me. That Day held, and proceeded thus.

The Ninth Day of my Hearing.

The First Charge of this Day was about a Reversion of the * 16.329 Town-Clerks Office of Shrewsbury to one Mr. Lee, which he desir∣ed * 16.330 might be inserted into the new Charter. First, Mr. Lee is single here, and in his own Case. Secondly, it appears by his own con∣fession, * 16.331 out of the Mouth of Mr. Barnard, that there was a Refe∣rence of this Business to those Lords to whom Shrewsbury Charter was Referred. For he says, that Mr. Barnard told him his Bu∣siness was stayed, and he thought by me, but did not know whe∣ther the Lord-Keeper's Hand were not in it: So it seems by himself, this was done by the Lords Referees, and not by me. Thirdly, I did not then think, nor do now, that the Reversion of a Place to be sold for three Hundred Pound, (as he confesses that was) was fit to be put into a Town Charter: But yet neither I, nor the Lord Keeper did any thing in that stop, but what we acquainted

his Majesty with, and had his Approbation of. And, whereas he says, that he acquainted the Right Honourable the Earl of Dorset with the stay that was made, and That thereupon his Lordship should say, Have we Two Kings? I cannot believe that Honourable Lord would so say, unless he were much abused by Mr. Lee's Informa∣tion: Both in regard of his Love to me; And in regard it could not proceed from a Man of so great a Judgment as that Lord is. For, I beseech your Lordships consider, may not Lords, to whom a business is Referred, give his Majesty good Reason to alter his Mind in some particulars which they have Debated, and not he? And may not this be done, without any one of them taking on him to be a Second King?

The Second Charge was laid on me by Sir Arthur Haselrigg: * 16.332 (which should have come in the Day before (as Mr. Nicolas said) but that Sir Arthur was absent in the necessary service of the State) Sir Arthur being single, and in his own Case, says, That Sir John Lambe presented a Blind Parson to a Living of his. If Sir John did that, or any unworthy thing else, AEtatem habet, let him answer for himself. He says farther, That this Living is an Impropriation, and so a Lay-Fee by Law; and that when he told me so much, I made him this answer, That if I Lived, no Man should Name or stand upon his Lay-Fee. I conceive, my Lords, here's a great mistake in the main. For I have been Credibly informed, and do believe, that Benefice is Presentative, and so no Lay-Fee. And then there's no Fault to present unto it, so the Clerk be fit. Secondly, there is a main mistake in my Words, which I remember well, and where it was that I spake them. My Words, under this Gentleman's Favour, and your Lordships, were these and no other, That I had good Information, that the Benefice was Presentative, and that if I lived, I hoped to order it so, that no Man should make a Presenta∣tive Benefice a Lay-Fee; there were too many of them already. Thirdly, if I did speak the Words as they are Charged, if they come within that Statute of Six Months, so often mentioned, to that I refer my Self. Whatsoever the Bird at this time of the Year Sings; as Mr. Nicolas was pleased to put it upon me. And truly, my Lords, I could easily return all his Bitterness upon himself, could it befit my Person, my present Condition, or my Calling.

The Third Charge was about the refusing of a Pardon, which * 16.333 Mrs: Bastwick said she produced in the High-Commission Court, some Nine or Ten Years since: And she adds, that I should then say, it should not serve his turn. But this was no rejecting of the Pardon; for she confesses I said, I would move his Majesty about it. So that if it did not serve his turn, it was from the King himself, upon Motion made and Reason given, not from any Power assumed by the High-Commission, or my self. And the Act, whatever it were, was the Act of the whole Court, not mine. As for the Words (if mine) I give the same Answer as before, notwithstanding Mr. Nicolas his Bird.

The Fourth Charge was, That whereas there was a Proclamation * 16.334 to be Printed about the Pacification with the Scots, it was sudden∣ly stopped, and an Order after for burning of the Pacification. First,

Mr. Hunscot is single in this Charge. Secondly, whatsoever was done in this, was by Order of Council: And himself names an Order, which could not come from me. Thirdly, he Charges me with nothing but that I sent word the Proclamation was to be stayed: Which if I did, I did it by Command. Howsoever, this concerns the Scottish business, and therefore to the Act of Oblivion I refer my self.

With this, that I see by this Testimony, Mr. Hunscourt (for I took his Name uncertainly) hath not yet forgotten, Thou shalt commit Adul∣tery.

So desirous he is to catch me at the Press.

The Fifth Charge, was about a Benefice in North-Hamptonshire, * 16.335 in the Case of Mr: Fautrye, and Mr: Johnson, and Dr: Beal's succeed∣ing them. In which broken business (for such it was;) First, that business all along was acted by the High-Commission, not by me. Secondly, that though in the Case of Simony the Benefice be lost, Ipso Facto; yet that must be proved before the Incumbent can be thrust out, and another Instituted; else Church-Men were in a mi∣serable Condition for their Livelyhood. Excommunication is in ma∣ny Cases void in Law, Ipso Facto, and yet, ante latam Sententiam, till Sentence be orderly pronounced against it, no Man shall be sub∣jected to those fearful Consequences which follow upon it.

And upon this ground of Natural Equity, that in the Statute concern∣ing the Uniformity of Common-Prayer proceeds,

where 'tis said, that a party once Convicted for depraving the Common-Prayer * 16.336 Book, and relapsing into the same Crime, shall be deprived of all his Spiritual Promotions, Ipso Facto: But how? without any Legal Proceedings? No: God forbid. For the Words preceeding imme∣diately in the Statute, are, that he must be first Legally Convicted of that Criminal Relapse; and then follows Ipso Facto, and not before: And therefore the superinstitution, before the Simony tryed and jud∣ged, was Illegal; beside the great danger to the Parishioners, while two Parsons, and their several Friends are scambling for the Tithes. Secondly, Fautrye was not Censured for the Original cause of Si∣mony, but for an Intruder, and Colluder too, with Jeames to Abuse the Kings grant of the Benefice. Thirdly, it seems Fautrye had no better Opinion of his own Cause: for he went to his Benefice in Jarsey, and set not his Title on Foot again till after Seven Years, and that I think was when he heard that Mr. Johnson was a Pretender to it. And his Bond upon the Sentence, was to make a final Peace. For the Prohibition, which he says was refused, I have answered that before in the Charge about Prohibitions. Besides, it appears by Law, that as Prohibitions may be granted in some Cases, so in some * 16.337 Cases they may be refused. For Dr. Beal, there is not the least shew of Proof offered, that I brought him in; if to do so be a Crime.

Thus far Mr. Fautrye went. As for Mr. Johnson's Title, He says, That the Lords ordered it for him, and declared that we in the High-Commission could put no Man out of his Freehold. Where first, if your Lordships have Ordered this Business, I must crave to know how far I shall have leave to speak to it! For if there be any Er∣rours Charged upon the Sentence given in the High-Commission, if they may not be spoken to, they cannot be satisfied. This I am

sure of, the Commission hath Power to deprive. For the Statute gives it Power to use all Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Censures, of which * 16.338 Deprivation is known to be one. And that Power is expresly given, to deprive some Offenders of all their Spiritual Promotions, by the Statute following. Therefore I think it follows necessarily, either * 16.339 that we have Power over Freehold in that Case; or else that a Be∣nefice is not a Freehold. But I have no reason howsoever, to speak any thing (were I left never so free) against your Lordships Order, which very honourably left Dr. Beal to the Law; as 'tis confessed by Johnson.

Besides these two in their own Cause, one Mr. Jenkins is produ∣ced, but to what end I know not, unless it be to bespatter Dr. Beal. He says, That Seven Years since Dr. Beal was Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge; that in his Sermon then he inveighed bitterly against the Pow∣er of Parliaments, and named some unsavoury Speeches of his, both concern∣ing their Persons and Proceedings. Surely, if Dr. Beal did as is Te∣stified, he was much to blame. But what is this to me? If it be said, I did not punish him: How could I punish that I knew not? And I profess I heard not of it till now at Bar. If it be said, I did Prefer him: That I do absolutely deny; and neither Mr. Jenkins, nor any other, offers the least Proof, that I knew the one, or did the other.

The Sixth Charge was concerning the Statutes of the University * 16.340 of Oxford, in which, and the Cathedrals of the New Erection, Mr. Nicolas says, I took on me to be an Vniversal Law-giver. Many such Offices he bestows upon me, which God knows, and I believe he too, that I never affected: No, my Lords, the great Necessities of that Vniversity called upon me for it: Their Statutes lay in a misera∣ble confused Heap: When any Difficulty arose, they knew not where to look for Remedy, or Direction. Then into the Convocation-House, and make a new Statute; and that many times proved contrary to an Old one concerning the same business. Men in the mean time sworn to both, which could not possibly be kept together. By this means Perjury was in a manner unavoidable: And themselves con∣fess in their Register (which is now in Court) that till this was * 16.341 done, they did in a sort Swear, that they might be Forsworn.

Besides, my Lords, I did not abolish any the Old Books, in which the Statutes lay so confused, some in one Book, and some in another; but left them all entire in the Vniversity, in Case in any after-times any use might be made of them. Nor did I with them, as some Ancient Philosophers are said to have done with the Works of some that went before them: That is, make them away, to advance their own Honour the more, as if without any help of former Pains, they had done all themselves. Holding it Honour more than enough for me, that God had so highly Blessed me in this Work, as to finish and settle those Statutes; which the greatest Men in their times, Cardinal Wolsey first, and after him Cardinal Pool assayed, but left as imperfect as they found them. Neither did I any thing in this Work, but by the consent of the Vniversity, and according to an Act, (and a Delegacy thereby appointed) of their own Convocation.

Mr. Nicolas says, There is a Rasure in one of the Acts, and supplied

in other Ink. I told your Lordships then presently, (being loath to lye never so little under such an Imputation) that if there be any such, it must be Charged upon the Vniversity, not upon me; for those Records were never in my Hands, nor is it so much as said they were. And since I withdrew to make my Answer, I have viewed the Record, and an Alteration or Addition there is; and 'tis a known Hand. 'Tis Dr. Duppa's Hand, now Lord Bishop of Salisbury, and then Vice-Chancellor, who, I doubt not but is able to give a good account of what he did therein, and why. And for ought appears, 'tis nothing but the amendment of some slip, which their Ignorant Register French had failed in, and the Vice-Chancellor thought it safest to mend with his own Hand. And for my own part, if ever I did any thing worth Thanks from the Publick in all my Life, I did it in this Work for that Vniversity. And I wish with all my Heart, the times were so open, as that I might have the Vniversity's Testimony, both of me and it.

Since I cannot, a great Lord present in the House, when this Charge was laid against me, supplied in part their Absence. For he was over-heard say to another Lord, I think my Lord Arch-Bishop hath done no Good Work in all his Life, but these Men will object it as a Crime against him before they have done.

With this Charge about the Statutes, it was let fall (and I well know why;

It was to heat a Noble Person then present) That I procured my self to be chosen Chancellour of that Vniversity.

If I had so done, it might have been a great Ambition in me, but sure∣ly no Treason. But, my Lords, I have Proof great store, might I be enabled to fetch it from Oxford, that I was so far from en∣deavouring to procure this Honour to my self, as that I laboured by my Letters for another. And 'tis well known, that when they had chosen me, I went instantly to his Majesty, so soon as ever I heard it, and humbly besought him, that I might refuse it, as well foreseeing the Envy that would follow me for it; and it did plenti∣fully every way. But this for some Reasons his Majesty would not suffer me to do.

Then were objected against me divers Particulars contained in those Statutes. As First, the making of new Oaths. The Charters of * 16.342 the Vniversity are not new, and they gave Power to make Statutes for themselves, and they have ever been upon Oath. The next Ille∣gality * 16.343 is, That Men are tied to obey the Proctors in Singing the Litany. This is Ancient, and in use long before ever I came to the Vniver∣sity, and it is according to the Liturgy of the Church of England esta∣blished by Law. Thirdly, The Statute of Bannition from the Vniver∣sity. * 16.344 But there is nothing more ancient in the Vniversity Statutes than this. Fourthly, That nothing should be propased in Convocation, but * 16.345 what was consented unto among the Heads of Colleges first, which was said to be against the Liberty of the Students. The young Masters of Arts, void of Experience, were grown so tumultuous, that no Peace could be kept in the Vniversity, till my worthy Predecessor, the Right Ho∣nourable William Earl of Pembroke setled this Order among them. As he did also upon the same Grounds settle the present way of the choice of their Proctors: In both which, I did but follow, and con∣firm (for so much as lay in me) the Good and Peaceable Grounds,

which he had laid in those two Businesses.

And Mr. Brown, who in the summing up of my Charge, urged this against me, mainly mistook in two things. The one was, that he said, this Inhibition of Proposals was in Congregations: Whereas it was only in Convocations, where more weighty Businesses are handled. The other was, that this stay of Proposals was made till I might be first acquainted with them. No; it was but till the Heads of Colleges had met, and considered of them, for avoiding of tumultuary Pro∣ceedings. And when my Honourable Predecessor made that Order, it was highly commended every where; and is it now degenera∣ted into a Crime, because it is made up into a Statute?

Fifthly, * 16.346 That some things are referred to Arbitrary Penalties. And that some things are so referred is usual in that Vniversity, and many Colleges have a particular Statute for it. Nor is this any more Power, than Ordinary School-Masters have, which have not a Statute-Law for every Punishment they use in Schools. And in divers things, the old known Statute is, that the Vice-Chancellour shall proceed Grosso Modo, that is, without the regular Forms of Law, for the more speedy ending of Differences among the Scholars. Sixthly, That the * 16.347 Statute made by me against Conventicles, is very strict. But for these * 16.348 that Statute is express, De Illicitis Conventiculis, and I hope such as are unlawful may be both forbid, and punished. Besides, it is accord∣ing to the Charter of Richard the Second to that Vniversity. The Seventh was the Power of Discommoning. But this also hath ever been * 16.349 in Power and in Usage in that Vniversity; as is commonly known to all Oxford-Men. And no longer since than King James his time, Bishop King, then Vice-Chancellor, Discommuned Three or Four Towns-Men together. Next, That Students were bound to go to Pri∣son * 16.350 upon the Vice-Chancellors or Proctors Command. This also was Anci∣ent, and long before my coming to the Vniversity. And your Lordships may be sure the Delegacy, appointed by themselves, would not have admitted it, had it not been Ancient and Usual. Lastly, about the stay * 16.351 of granting Graces, unless there were Testimony from the Bishop of the Di∣ocess. * 16.352 This was for no Graces, but of such as Live not Resident in the Vniversity, and so they could not judge of their Manners and Conversation. And for their Conformity to the Church of England, none (as I conceive) can be a fitter Witness than the Bishop of the Diocess in which they resided. And, my Lords, for all these thus drawn up by some of their own Body, I obtained of his Majesty his Broad Seal for Confirmation: And therefore no one thing in them is by any Assumption of Papal Power, as 'tis urged, but by the King's Power only.

Then followed the Seventh Charge, about the Statutes of some * 16.353 Cathedral Churches. First, my Lords, for this I did it by Letters-Pa∣tents from the King, bearing Date Mar. 31. Decimo Caroli, and is extant upon Record. And all that was done, was Per Juris Remedia, and so nothing intended against Law, nor done, that I know. They had extream need of Statutes, for all lay loose for want of confir∣mation, and Men did what they listed: And I could not but observe it, for I was Dean of Gloucester, where I found it so. In seeking to remedy this, I had nothing but my Labour for my Pains, and now

this Accusation to Boot. The Particulars urged are, That I had Ordered that nothing should be done in these Statutes, Me inconsulto. * 16.354 And I had great Reason for it. For since I was principally trusted in that work by his Majesty, the King, if any Complaint were made, would expect the account from me. And how could I give it, if other Men might do all, and I not be so much as consulted before they passed?

2. That I made a Statute against letting Leases into three Lives. But first, my Lords, the Statute which makes it lawful to let Leases for * 16.355 One and Twenty Years, or three Lives, hath this limitation in it, that they shall not let for any more Years than are limited by the said Col∣leges or Churches. Now in Winchester Church, and some other, the old local Statute is most plain, that they shall let no Lease into Lives. Let the Dean and Prebendaries Answer their own Acts and their Consciences as they can. And in those Statutes which I did not find pregnant to that purpose, I did not make the Statute absolute, but left them free to renew all such Leases as were Anciently in Lives be∣fore. And this give me leave to say to your Lordships, without of∣fence; If but a few more Leases be granted into Lives, no Bishop nor Cathedral Church shall be able to subsist. And this is considerable also, that, as the state of the Church yet stands, the Laity have the bene∣fit, by the Leases which they hold, of more than five parts of all the Bishops, Deans and Chapters, and College Revenues in England.

And shall it be yet an Eye-sore to serve themselves with the rest of their own? This Evidence Mr. Browne, whose part it was to summ up the Evidence against me at the end of the Charge, wholly omitted: For what Cause he best knows.

The next Charge was about my Injunctions in my Visitation of Winton * 16.356 and Sarum, for the taking down of some Houses. But they were such as were upon Consecrated Ground, and ought not to have been built there; and yet with caution sufficient to preserve the Lessees from over-much dammage. For it appears apud Acta, that they were not to be pulled down till their several Leases were expired. And that they were Houses not built long since, but by them; and that all this was to be done, to the end that the Church might suffer no dammage by them: And that this demolition was to be made Juxta Decreta Regni, according to the Statutes of the Kingdom. Therefore nothing injoyned contrary to Law: Or if any thing were, the Injunction took not place, by the very Tenor of that which was charged.

Mr. Browne omitted this Charge also, though he hung heavily upon the like at St. Pauls, though there was satisfaction given, and not here.

The Ninth Charge was my intended Visitation of both the Vniversi∣ties, * 16.357 Oxford and Cambridge. For my Troubles began then to be foreseen by me, and I Visited them not. This was urged as a thing * 16.358 directly against Law. But this I conceive cannot be, so long as it was with the King's Knowledge, and by his Warrant. Secondly, * 16.359 because all Power of the King's Visitations was saved in the Warrant, and that with consent of all parts. Thirdly, because nothing in this * 16.360 was surreptitiously gotten from the King, all being done at a most full Council-Table, and great Councel at Law heard on both sides.

Fourthly, because it did there appear, that three of my Predeces∣sors did actually Visit the Vniversities, and that Jure Ecclesiae suae Me∣tropoliticae. * 16.361 Fifthly, no Immunity pleaded, why the Arch-Bishop * 16.362 should not Visit; for the instance against Cardinal Poole is nothing. For he attempted to Visit, not only by the Right of his See, but by his power Legatin * 16.363 from the Pope; whereas the University Char∣ters are Express, that such power of Visitati∣on cannot be granted per Bullas Papales. And yet now 'tis charged against me, that I chal∣lenged this by Papal Power.

Mr. Browne wholly neglected this Charge also, which, making such a shew, I think he would not have done, had he found it well grounded.

The Tenth Charge was my Visitation of Merton College in Ox∣ford. * 16.364 The Witness Sir Nathaniel Brent, the Warden of the College, and principally concerned in that business. He said, First, that no * 16.365 Visitation held so long. But if he consult his own Office, he may find one much longer, held and continued at All-Souls College by my worthy Predecessor Arch-Bishop Whitgift. Secondly, he urged that * 16.366 I should say I would be Warden for Seven Years: If I did so say, there was much need I should make it good. Thirdly, That one Mr. Rich. * 16.367 Nevil, Fellow of that College, lay abroad in an Ale-House, that a Wench was got with Child in that House, and he accused of it; and that this was complained of to me, and Sir Nath. Brent accused for Conspiring with the Ale-Wife against Nevil. I am not here to accuse the one or defend the other. But the Case is this. This Cause between them was publick, and came to Hearing in the Vice-Chancellor's Court, Witnesses Exa∣mined, Mr. Nevil acquitted, and the Ale-Wife punished. In all this I had no Hand. Then in my Visitation it was again complained of to me. I liked not the business; but forbare to do any thing in it, because it had been Legally Censured upon the place.

This part of the Charge Mr. Browne urged against me in the House of Commons, and I gave it the same Answer.

Lastly, when I sate to hear the * 16.368 main Business of that College, Sir Nathaniel Brent was beholding to me that he continued Warden. For in Arch-Bishop Warham's time, a Predecessor of his was expelled for less than was proved against him. And I found that true which one of my Visitors had formerly told me, namely, That Sir Nathaniel Brent had so carried himself in that College, as that if he were guilty of the like, he would lay his Key under the Door, and be gone, rather than come to Answer it. Yet I did not think it fit to proceed so rigidly. But while I was going to open some of the Particulars against him, Mr. Nicolas cut me off, and told the Lords, this was to scandalize their Witnesses. So I forbare.

Then followed the last Charge of this day, concerning a Book of * 16.369 Dr: Bastwick's, for which he was Censured in the High-Commission. The Witnesses in this Charge were three. Mr. Burton, a Mortal Ene∣my of mine, and so he hath shewed himself. Mrs. Bastwick, a Wo∣man and a Wife, and well Tutoured: For she had a Paper, and all written which she had to say; though I saw it not till 'twas too late.

And Mr. Hunscot, a Man that comes in to serve all turns against me, since the Sentence passed against the Printers, for, Thou shalt commit Adultery.

In the Particulars of this Charge, 'tis first said, That this Book was * 16.370 written Contra Episcopos Latiales. But how cunningly so-ever this was pretended, 'tis more than manifest, it was purposely written and di∣vulged against the Bishops and Church of England. Secondly, that I * 16.371 said that Christian Bishops were before Christian Kings: So Burton and Mrs. Bastwick. And with due Reverence to all Kingly Authority be it spoken, who can doubt but that there were many Christian Bi∣shops, before any King was Christian? Thirdly, Mr. Burton says, * 16.372 that I applied those words in the Psalm, whom thou may'st make Princes * 16.373 in all Lands, to the Bishops. For this if I did err in it, many of the Fathers of the Church mis-led me, who Interpret that place so. And if I be mistaken, 'tis no Treason. But I shall ever follow their Com∣ments * 16.374 before Mr. Burton's. Fourthly, Mrs. Bastwick says that I then said, no Bishop and no King: If I did say so, I Learned it of a Wise and Experienced Author, King James, who spake it out and plainly * 16.375 in the Conference at Hampton-Court. And I hope it cannot be Trea∣son in me to repeat it. Fifthly, Mrs. Bastwick complained, that I * 16.376 committed her Husband close Prisoner. Not I, but the High-Commission; not close Prisoner to his Chamber, but to the Prison, not to go abroad with his Keeper. Which is all the close Imprisonment which I ever knew that Court use. Lastly, the pinch of this Charge is, that I said, * 16.377 I received my Jurisdiction from God, and from Christ, contrary to an Act * 16.378 of Parliament, which says Bishops, derive their Jurisdiction from the King: This is Witnessed by all three, and that Dr. Bastwick read the Sta∣tute. That Statute speaks plainly of Jurisdiction in foro Contentioso, and places of Judicature, and no other. And all this forinsecal Ju∣risdiction, I and all Bishops in England derive from the Crown. But my Order, my Calling, my Jurisdiction in foro Conscientiae, that is from God, and from Christ, and by Divine and Apostolical Right. And of this Jurisdiction it was that I then spake (if I named Jurisdi∣ction at all, and not my Calling in general.) For I then sate in the High-Commission, and did Exercise the former Jurisdiction under the Broad Seal, and could not be so simple to deny the Power by which I then sate. Beside, the Canons of the Church of England, to which * 16.379 I have Subscribed, are plain for it. Nay farther: The Use and Exer∣cise of my Jurisdiction in foro Conscientiae, may not be but by the Leave and Power of the King within his Dominions. And if Bishops and Presbyters be all one Order (as these Men contend for) then Bishops must be Jure Divino, for so they maintain that Presbyters are.

This part of the Charge Mr. Browne pressed in his Report to the House of Commons: And when I gave this same Answer, he in his Reply said nothing but the same over and over again, save that he said, I fled to he knew not what inward Calling and Jurisdiction; which point as I expressed it, if he understood not, he should not have undertaken to Judge me.

CAP. XXXII.

THE 16th of May, I had an Order from the Lords, for free ac∣cess * 16.380 of four of my Servants to me.

On Friday May 17. I received a Note from the Committee, that * 16.381 they intended to proceed upon part of the Sixth Original Article remaining, and upon the Seventh; which Seventh Article follows in haec Verba.

That he hath Trayterously indeavoured to alter and subvert God's True Religion by Law Established in this Realm, and instead there∣of to set up Popish Superstition and Idolatry. And to that end hath Declared and Maintained in Speeches and Printed Books, di∣vers Popish Doctrins and Opinions, contrary to the Articles of Re∣ligion Established. He hath urged and injoyned divers Popish and Superstitious Ceremonies, without any Warrant of Law; and hath cruelly persecuted those who have opposed the same, by Corporal Pu∣nishment and Imprisonment; and most unjustly vexed others who refused to Conform thereunto, by Ecclesiastical Censures of Excom∣munication, Suspension, Deprivation, and Degradation, contrary to the Law of this Kingdom.

The Tenth Day of my Hearing.

This day, May 20. Mr. Serjeant Wild undertook the Business against * 16.382 me. And at his Entrance he made a Speech, being now to charge me with Matter of Religion. In this Speech he spake of a Tide * 16.383 which came not in all at once. And so he said it was in the intended alteration of Religion. First a Connivence, then a Toleration, then a Subversion. Nor this, nor that. But a Tide it seems he will have of Religion. And I pray God his Truth, (the True Protestant Re∣ligion here Established) sink not to so low an Ebb, that Men may with ease wade over to that side, which this Gentleman seems most to hate. He fears both Ceremonies and Doctrine. But in both he fears where no fear is; which I hope shall appear. He was pleased to begin with Ceremonies.

In this he Charged first my Chappel at Lambeth, and Innovation in * 16.384 Ceremonies there.

1. The First Witness for this was Dr. Featly; he says there were Alterations since my Predecessor's time. And I say so too, or else my Chappel must lye more undecently than is fit to express. He says, I turned the Table North and South. The Injunction says it shall be so. * 16.385

And then the Innovation was theirs in going from, not mine in returning to that way of placing it. Here Mr. Browne, in his last Reply in the House of Commons, said, that I cut the Injunction short, because in the Words immediately following, 'tis Ordered,

That this Place of standing shall be altered when the Communion is Admi∣nistred. But first, the Charge against me is only about the Place of it: Of which that Injunction is so careful, that it Commands, That when the Communion is done, it be placed where it stood before. Secondly, it was never Charged against me, that I did not remove it at the Time of Communion; nor doth the Reason expressed in the In∣junction require it; which is when the Number of Communicants is great, and that the Minister may be the better heard of them. Nei∣ther of which was necessary in my Chappel, where my Number was not great, and all might easily Hear.

(2) The second thing which Dr. Featly said, was in down-right Terms, That the Chappel lay nastily, all the time he served in that House. Was it one of my Faults too to cleanse it?

(3) Thirdly, he says, The Windows were not made up with Colour∣ed Glass, till my time. The Truth is, they were all shameful to look on, all diversly patched, like a Poor Beggars Coat. Had they had all white Glass, I had not stirred them. And for the Crucifix, he confesses it was standing in my Predecessors time, though a little broken: So I did but mend it, I did not set it up (as was urged against me.)

And it was utterly mistaken by Mr. Brown, that I * 16.386 did repair the Story of those Windows, by their like in the Mass-Book. No, but I, and my Secretary made out the Story, as well as we could, by the Remains that were unbroken. Nor was any Proof at all offered, that I did it by the Pictures in the Mass-Book; but only Mr. Pryn Testified, that such Pictures were there; where∣as this Argument is of no consequence: There are such Pictures in the Missal, therefore I repaired my Windows by them. The Win∣dows contain the whole Story from the Creation to the Day of Judgment: Three Lights in a Window: The two Side-Lights con∣tain the Types in the Old Testament, and the middle Light the Antitype and Verity of Christ in the New: And I believe the Types are not in the Pictures in the Missal. In the mean time, I know no Crime, or Superstition in this History: And though Cal∣vin * 16.387 do not approve Images in Churches, yet he doth approve very well of them which contain a History; and says plainly, that these have their use, in Docendo & Admonendo, in Teaching and Admonishing the People: And if they have that use, why they may not instruct in the Church, as well as out, I know not. Nor do * 16.388 the Homilies in this particular differ much from Calvin.

But here the † 16.389 Statute of Ed. 6. was charged against me, which requires the Destruction of all Images, as well in Glass-Windows, as else∣where.

And this was also earnestly pressed by Mr. Brown, when he repeated the Summ of the Charge against me in the House of Commons.

To which I answered at both times: First, that the Statute of Ed. 6. spake of other Images; and that Images in Glass-Windows, were neither mentioned, nor meant in that Law: The Words of the Statute are, Any Images of Stone, Timber, Alabaster or Earth; Graven, Carved or Painted, taken out of any Church, &c. shall be Destroyed, &c. and not reserved to any Superstitious Use. So here's not a Word of Glass-Windows, nor the Images that are in them. Secondly, that the Contemporary Practice, (which is one of

the best Expounders of the meaning of any Law) did neither de∣stroy all coloured Windows, though Images were in them, in the Queens time, nor abstain from setting up of new, both in her, and King James his Time. And as the Body of this Statute is utterly mi∣staken, so is the Penalty too; which for the First and Second Offence is but a small Fine; and but Imprisonment at the King's Will for the Third.

A great way short of Punishment for Treason. And I could not but wonder that Mr. Brown should be so earnest in this Point, considering he is of Lincolns-Inn, where Mr. Pryn's Zeal hath not yet beaten down the Images of the Apostles in the fair Windows of that Chappel; which Windows also were set up new long since that Statute of Edward 6. And tis well known, that I was once re∣solved to have returned this upon Mr. Brown in the House of Com∣mons, but changed my Mind, lest thereby I might have set some furious Spirit on Work to destroy those harmless, goodly Windows; to the just dislike of that Worthy Society.

But to the Statute Mr. Brown added, That the Destruction of all Images, as well in Windows, as elsewhere, were * 16.390 Condemned by the Homilies of the Church of England, and those Homilies confirmed in the Articles of Reli∣gion, and the Articles by Act of Parliament. This was also urged before; * 16.391 and my Answer was, First, that though we Subscribed generally to the Doctrine of the Homilies, as good: Yet we did not express, or mean thereby to justifie and maintain every particular Phrase or Sen∣tence contained in them. And Secondly, that the very Words of the Article to which we subscribe, are, That the Homilies do contain a God∣ly and a wholesom Doctrine, and necessary for those Times. Godly, and wholesom for all Times; but necessary for those, when People were newly Weaned from the Worship of Images: Afterwards, neither the Danger, nor the Scandal alike.

Mr. Brown in his Reply said, That since the Doctrine contained in the Homilies was wholesom and good, it must needs be necessary also for all Times. But this worthy Gentle∣man is herein much mistaken. Strong Meat, as well Spiritual as Bo∣dily, is good and wholesom; but though it be so, yet if it had been Necessary at all Times, and for all Men, the Apostle would ne∣ver * 16.392 have fed the Corinthians with Milk, and not with Meat: The Meat always good in it self, but not necessary for them which were not able to bear it.

(4) The Fourth thing which Dr. Featly Testifies, is, That there were Bowings at the coming into the Chappel, and going up to the Comma∣nion-Table.

This was usual in Queen Elizabeth's Time, and of Old, both among Jews, as appears in the Story of Hezekiah, 2 Chro. 29. * 16.393 28. and among Christians; as is evident in Rhenanus his Notes up∣on * 16.394 Tertullian:

And one of them, which have written against the late Canons, confesses it was usual in the Queens Time; but then adds, That that was a Time of Ignorance. What, a Time of such a Refor∣mation, and yet still a Time of Ignorance? I pray God the Opposite be not a Time of Prophaneness, and all is well.

Mr. Brown in the Summ of his Charge given me in the House of Commons, instan∣ced in this also. I answered as before, with this Addition, Shall I Bow to Men in each House of Parliament, and shall I not bow to God in his House, whither I do, or ought to come to Worship

him? Surely I must Worship God, and Bow to him, though nei∣ther Altar, nor Communion-Table be in the Church.

(5) For Organs, Candlesticks, a Picture of a History at the back of the Altar, and Copes at Communions, and Consecrations, All which Dr. Feat∣ly named. First, these things have been in use ever since the Refor∣mation. And Secondly, Dr. Featly himself did twice acknowledge that it was in my Chappel, as it was at White-Hall; no difference. And it is not to be thought, that Queen Elizabeth and King James would have endured them all their Time in their own Chappel, had they been introductions for Popery. And for Copes, they are allowed at Times of Communion, by the Canons of the Church. So * 16.395 that these, all or any, are very poor Motives, from whence to ar∣gue an Alteration of Religion.

2. The second Witness against my Chappel was Sir Nathaniel Brent: But he says not so much as Dr. Featly: And in what he doth say, he agrees with him, saving that he cannot say whether the Picture at the Back of the Communion-Table, were not there before my time.

3. The third Witness for this Charge, was one Mr. Boreman, who came into my Chappel at Prayers time, when I had some new Plate to Consecrate for use at the Communion: And I think it was brought to me for that end by Dr. Featly. This Man says first, he then saw me Bow, and wear a Cope. That's answer'd. Secondly, That he saw me Consecrate some Plate: That in that Consecration, I used some part of Solomon's Prayer, at the Dedication of the Temple: And that in my Prayer I did desire God to accept those Vessels. No fault in any of the Three. For in all Ages of the Church, especially since Constantine's Time, that Religion hath had publick allowance: There have been Consecrations of Sacred Vessels, as well as of Churches themselves. * 16.396 And these Inanimate things are Holy, in that they are Deputed and Dedi∣cated to the Service of God. And we are said to Minister about Holy Things, 1 Cor. 9. And the Altar is said to Sanctifie the Gift, S. Matt. * 16.397 23. which it could not do, if it self were not Holy. So then, if there be no Dedication of these Things to God, no separation of them from common use, there's neither Thing nor Place Holy. And then no Sa∣criledge; no difference between Churches and common Houses; be∣tween Holy-Tables (so the Injunction calls them) and ordinary Ta∣bles. * 16.398 But I would have no Man deceive himself; Sacriledge is a grievous Sin, and was severely Punished even among the Heathen. And S. Paul's Question puts it home, would we consider of it, Thou which abhorrest Idols, Committest thou Sacriledge? Rom. 2. Thou * 16.399 which abhorrest Idols to the very defacing of Church Windows, dost thou? Thou of all other, Commit Sacriledge, which the ve∣ry Worshippers of Idols punished? And this being so, I hope my use of a part of Solomon's Prayer, or the Words of my own Prayer, (That God would be pleased to accept them) shall not be reputed Faults.

But here stepped in Mr. Pryn, and said, This was according to the Form in Missali Parvo. But 'tis well known I borrowed nothing thence. All that I used was according to the Copy of the late Re∣verend Bishop of Winchester, Bishop Andrews, which I have by me to be seen, and which himself used all his Time.

Then from my Chappel, he went to my Study. And there the Second Charge was, That I had a Bible with the Five Wounds of Christ * 16.400 fair upon the Cover of it. This was curiously wrought in Needle-Work. * 16.401 The Bible was so sent me by a Lady, and she a Protestant; I was loth to deface the Work; but the Bible I kept in my Study from any Man's Hand or Eye, that might take Offence at it.

Mr. Brown touched upon this, and my Answer was the same, saving that I mentioned not the Lady. Secondly, That I had in my Study * 16.402 a Missal, and divers other Books belonging to the Roman Liturgy.

My Lords, 'tis true, I had many; but I had more of the Greek Litur∣gies, than the Roman. And I had as many of both, as I could get. And I would know, how we shall answer their Errors if we may not have their Books? I had Liturgies, all I could get, both Ancient and Modern. I had also the Alcoarn in divers Copies: If this be an Argument, why do they not accuse me to be a Turk? Thirdly, * 16.403 to this Charge was added my Private Prayer Book, which Mr. Pryn had taken from me in his Search. Where first I observed, That the Secrets between God and my Soul, were brought to be divulged in open Court.

Nihil Gravius dicam. But see whether it can be pa∣rallel'd in Hetheanism.

But what Popery was found in these Prayers? Why, first they said, my Prayers were in Canonical Hours, * 16.404 Hora Sexta, & Hora Nona, &c. I injoyned my self several hours of Prayer: That I hope is no Sin: And if some of them were Church-Hours, that's no Sin neither; Seven Times a Day will I praise thee, * 16.405 was the Prophet David's, long before any Canonical Hours. And among Christians they were in use before Popery got any Head. God grant this may be my greatest Sin. Secondly, The Prayer which I * 16.406 made at the Consecration of the Chappel at Hammersmith. I desired that might be read, or any other: No Offence found. Thirdly, the * 16.407 Word Prostratus, in my Private Devotions, before I came to the Eucha∣rist. If I did so to God, what's that to any Man? But I pray in all this curious Search,

(and Mr. Pryn here, and all along spared no pains)

why were no Prayers to the B. Virgin and the Saints found, if I were so swallowed up in Popery?

From my Study, he went on to my Gallery. The Serjeant * 16.408 would find out Popery ere he had done. Thence I was Charged with three Pictures. The First of them was a Fair Picture of the Four * 16.409 Fathers of the Western Church, S: Ambrose, S: Jerom, S: Augustine and S: Gregory. It was as Lawful to have this Picture as the Picture of any other Men. Yea; but there was a Dove pictured over them, and that stood for the Holy-Ghost. That's more than any Witness did, or durst depose. The Second was, the Ecce Homo, as Pilate brought * 16.410 Christ forth, and shewed him to the Jews. This Picture is Common, and I yet know no hurt of it, so it be not Worshipped. And that I detest as much as any Man, and have written as much against it as * 16.411 any Protestant hath: And it was then read in part. And for both these Pictures I answered farther out of Calvin; That it is Lawful * 16.412 to make, and have the Picture of any things Quorum sint Capaces Oculi, which may be seen: Now the Dove was visible and seen, S. John 1. That's for the first Picture. And for the Second, the * 16.413

Ecce Homo; why did Pilat say Ecce, but that the Jews might and did see him? St. Joh. 19. So both Pictures lawful by the Rule laid down, * 16.414 by Calvin.

Mr. Brown Charged against both these Pictures very warmly, And when I had Answer'd as before, in his Reply he fell upon my Answer; and said it was in the Homilies (but either he quoted not the place, or I else slipped it) That every Picture of Christ was a Lye, because whole Christ cannot be Pictured. But by this Argument it is unlawful to Picture any Man; for the whole Man cannot be Pictured. Who ever drew a Picture of the Soul? And yet who so simple as to say the Picture of a Man is a Lye? Besides, the Ecce Homo is a Picture of the Humanity of Christ only, which may as lawfully be drawn as any other Man. And it may be I may give farther Answer, when I see the place in the Homilies.

The Third Picture found in my Gallery, I marvel why it was * 16.415 produced. For it relates to that of our Saviour, St. John. 10. Where * 16.416 he says, that the Shepherd enters into the Sheepfold by the door, but they which climb up to enter another way, are Thieves and Robbers. And in that Picture the Pope and the Fryars are climbing up to get in at the Windows. So 'tis as directly against Popery as can be. Besides, it was Witnessed before the Lords by Mr. Walter Dobson, an Ancient Servant, both to Arch-Bishop Bancroft and Abbot, that both the Ecce Homo and this Picture, were in the Gallery when he came first to Lam∣beth-House, which was about Forty Years since. So it was not brought thither by me to countenance Popery. And I hope your Lordships do not think me such * 16.417 a Fool, if I had an intention to alter Religi∣on, I would hang the Profession of it openly in my Gallery, thereby to bring present dan∣ger upon my self, and destroy the work which themselves say I intended cunningly. And if there be any Error in having and keeping such Pictures, yet that is no sufficient proof, that I had any intention to alter the Religion Established, which I desire may be taken notice of once for all.

From my Gallery the Serjeant crossed the Water to White-Hall, * 16.418 (and sure in haste, for at that time he took no leave of Captain Guest, or his Wife, before he left Lambeth:) At the Court he met Sir Henry Mildmay. This Knight being produced by him against me, says, That in my time Bowings were constantly used in the Chappel there. But first, * 16.419 Dr. Featly told your Lordships, there was nothingin my Chappel but as it was in use at White-Hall. So all the Popery I could bring, was there before. And Secondly, if bowing to God in his own House be not amiss (as how it should I yet know not) then there can be no fault in the constant doing of it: Quod semel fecisse bonum est, non potest malum * 16.420 esse si frequentèr fiat. So St. Jerome Teaches. Thirdly, I am very sorry, that any Reverence to God, in his House, and in the time of his Worship, should be thought too much. I am sure the Homilies, so * 16.421 often pressed against me, cry out against the neglect of Reverence in the Church. This passage was read, and by this it seems, the Devil's Cunning was, so soon as he saw Superstition thrust out of this

Church, to bring Irreverence and Prophaneness in.

Here Mr. Browne having pressed this Charge, Replies upon me in his last, that I would admit no mean, but either there must be Superstition or Prophane∣ness; whereas my words can infer no such thing. I said this was the Devil's Practice. I would have brought in the mean between them, and preserved it too by God's Blessing, had I been let alone.

Sir Hen. says next, that he knew of no Bowings in that Chappel before * 16.422 my time, but by the Right Honourable the Knights of the Garter at their Solemnity. No time else? Did he never see the King his Master Offer before my time? Or did he ever see him Offer, or the Lord Chamber∣lain attend him there without Bowing and Kneeling too? And for the Knights of the Garter, if they might do it without Superstition, I * 16.423 hope I and other Men might do so too. Especially since they were Ordered by Hen. 5. to do it with great Reverence, ad modum Sacer∣dotum. Which proves the Antiquity of this Ceremony in England.

He farther says, there was a fair Crucifix in a piece of Hangings hung * 16.424 up behind the Altar, which he thinks was not used before my time. But that he thinks so is no proof. He says, This fair piece was hanged up in the Passion Week, as they call it. As they call it? Which they? Will he shut out himself from the Passion Week? All Christians have called it so for above a * 16.425 Thousand Years together; and is that become an Innovation too? As they call it. Fifthly, He says the hanging up of this piece was a great scandal to Men but indifferently affected to Religion. Here I humbly crave leave to observe some few Particulars. First, that here's no proof so much as offer'd, that the piece was hung up by me or my Command. Secondly, that this Gentleman came often to me to Lambeth, and professed much Love to me, yet was never the * 16.426 Man that told me his Conscience, or any Mans else was troubled at * 16.427 it; which had he done, that should have been a scandal to no Man. Thirdly, that if this were scandalous to any, it must be offensive in * 16.428 regard of the Workmanship; or Quatenus Tale, as it was a Crucifix. Not in regard of the work certainly, for that was very exact. And then if it were because it was a Crucifix, why did not the old one offend Sir Henry's Conscience as much as the new? For the piece of Hangings which hung constantly all the Year at the back of the Al∣tar, thirty Years together upon my own Knowledge, and somewhat above, long before, (as I offer'd proof by the Vestry Men) and so all the time of Sir Henry's being in Court, had a Crucifix wrought in it, and yet his Conscience never troubled at it. Fourthly, that he could * 16.429 not possibly think that I intended any Popery in it, considering how hateful he knew me to be at Rome, beyond any my Predecessors since the Reformation. For so he protested at his return from thence to my self. And I humbly desire a Salvo, that I may have him called to Witness it. Which was granted.

When they had charged me thus far, there came up a Message from the House of Commons. I was commanded to withdraw. But that Business requiring more haste, I was dismissed with a Command to attend again on Wednesday May 22. But then I was put off again * 16.430 to Munday May 27. And after much pressing for some Maintenance, * 16.431 considering how oft I was made attend, and with no small Ex∣pence, on May 25. I had an Order from the Committee of Seque∣strations, * 16.432

to have Two Hundred Pound allowed me out of my own now Sequestred Estate. It was a Month before I could receive this. And this was all that ever was yet allowed me, since the Sequestration of my Estate, being then of above Two Years con∣tinuance.

CAP. XXXIII. The Eleventh Day of my Hearing.

THis day Mr. Serjeant Wilde followed the Charge upon me. * 16.433 And went back again to my Chappel Windows at Lambeth. * 16.434 Three Witnesses against them. The first was one Pember a Glasier. He says, there was in one of the Glass-Windows on the North side, the * 16.435 Picture of an Old Man with a Glory, which he thinks was of God the * 16.436 Father. But his thinking so is no proof: Nor doth he express in which of the North Windows he saw it. And for the Glory, that is usual about the Head of every Saint. And Mr. Brown, who was the Second Witness, and was trusted by me for all the work of the * 16.437 Windows, both at Lambeth and Croydon, says expresly upon his Oath, that there was no Picture of God the Father in the Windows at Lam∣beth. But he says, He found a Picture of God the Father in a Window at Croydon, and Arch-Bishop Cranmer's Arms under it, and that he pulled it down. So it appears this Picture was there before my time: And continued there in so Zealous an Arch-Bishop's time as Cranmer was well known to be, and it was pulled down in my time. Neither did I know till now, that ever such a Picture was there; and the Witness deposes, he never made me acquainted with it. The Third * 16.438 Witness was Mr. Pryn. He says, he had taken a survey of the Windows at Lambeth. And I doubt not his diligence. He repeated the Story in each Window. I have told this before, and shall not repeat it. He says, the Pictures of these Stories are in the Mass-Book. If it be so, yet they were not taken thence by me. Arch-Bishop Morton did that work, as appears by his Device in the Windows. He says, the Story of the day of Judgment was in a Window in atrio, that must not come into the Chappel. Good Lord, whither will Malice carry a Man? The Story opposite is of the Creation; and what, must not that come into the Chappel neither? The Chappel is divided into an inner and utter Chappel. In this outward the two Windows mentioned are. And the Partition or Skreen of the Chappel, which makes it two, was just in the same place where now it stands, from the very building of the Chappel, for ought can be proved to the contrary. So neither I nor any Man else did shut out the day of Judgment. He says, I had Read the Mass-Book diligently. How else should I be able really to confute what is amiss in it? He says, I had also a Book of Pictures con∣cerning the Life of Christ in my Study. And it was fit for me to have

it. For some things are to be seen in their Pictures for the People, which their Writings do not, perhaps dare not avow.

The Second Charge of this day, was about the Administration of * 16.439 the Sacrament in my Chappel. The Witnesses two.

The first was Dr. Haywood, who had been my Chaplain in the * 16.440 House. They had got from others the Ceremonies there used, and then brought him upon Oath. He confessed he Administred in a Cope. And the Canon warranted it. He confesses (as it was urged) that he * 16.441 fetched the Elements from the Credential (a little Side-Table as they cal∣led it) and set them Reverently upon the Communion Table. Where's the offence? For first, the Communion Table was little, and there was hardly room for the Elements to stand conveniently there, while the Service was in Administration. And Secondly, I did not this without Example; for both Bishop Andrews and some other Bi∣shops, used it so all their time, and no exception taken. The Second Witness was Rob. Cornwall, one of my Menial Servants. A very for∣ward Witness he shewed himself. But said no more than is said and answered before. Both of them confessing that I was sometimes pre∣sent.

The Third Charge was about the Ceremonies at the Coronation of * 16.442 his Majesty. And first out of my Diary, Feb: 2: 1625. 'Tis urged, * 16.443 that I carried back the Regalia, offer'd them on the Altar, and then laid them up in their place of safety. I bare the place at the Coronation of the Dean of Westminster, and I was to look to all those things, and their safe return into Custody, by the place I then Executed. And the offering of them could be no offence. For the King himself offers upon solemn days. And the Right Honourable the Knights of the Garter offer at their Solemnity. And the Offertory is Established by Law in the Common Prayer Book of this Church. And the Preben∣daries assured me it was the Custom for the Dean so to do. Secondly, * 16.444 they charged a Marginal Note in the Book upon me: That the Vn∣ction was in formâ Crucis. That Note doth not say that it ought so to be done; but it only relates the Practice, what was done. And if any fault were in Anointing the King in that form, it was my Predeces∣sors fault, not mine, for he so Anointed him. They say, there was a * 16.445 Crucifix among the Regalia, and that it stood upon the Altar at the Coro∣nation, * 16.446 and that I did not except against it. My Predecessor Executed at that time. And I believe would have excepted against the Cru∣cifix had it stood there. But I remember not any there. Yet if there were, if my Predecessor approved the standing of it, or were con∣tent to connive at it, it would have been made but a Scorn had I quarrell'd it. They say one of the Prayers was taken out of the Pon∣tifical. * 16.447 And I say, if it were, it was not taken thence by me. And the Prayers are the same that were used at King James his Coronati∣on. And so the Prayer be good (and here's no word in it, that is ex∣cepted against) 'tis no matter whence 'tis taken.

Then leaving the Ceremonies, he charged me with two 〈◊〉〈◊〉 * 16.448 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Body of the King's Oath. One added, namely these Words (〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the King's Prerogative.) The other omitted, namely these words, (Quae Populus Elegerit, which the People have chosen, or shall choose.) For this latter, the Clause omitted, that suddenly va∣nished.

For it was omitted in the Oath of King James, as is confes∣sed by themselves in the * 16.449 Printed Votes of this present Parliament. But the other highly insisted on, as taking off the total assurance which the Subjects have by the Oath of their Prince for the performance of his Laws. First, I humbly conceive this Clause takes off none of the Peoples Assurance; none at all. For the King's Just and Legal Prerogative, and the Subjects Assurance for Liberty and Property may stand well together, and have so stood for Hundreds of Years. Secondly, that Alteration, what ever it be, was not made by me; nor is there any Interlining or Alteration so much as of a Letter found in that Book. Thirdly, if any thing be amiss therein, my Predecessor gave that Oath to the King, and not I. I was meerly Ministerial, both in the Preparation, and at the Coronation it self, supplying the place of the Dean of Westminster.

After this days work was ended, it instantly spread all over the City, that I had altered the King's Oath at his Coronation, and from thence into all parts of the Kingdom; as if all must be true which was said at the Bar against me, what Answer so-ever I made. The People and some of the Synod now crying out, that this one thing was enough to take away my Life. And though this was all that was Charged this day concerning this Oath, yet seeing how this fire took, I thought fit the next day that I came to the Bar, to desire that the Books of the Coronation of former Kings, especially those of Queen Elizabeth and King James, might be seen and compared, and the Copies brought into the Court, both from the Exchequer, and such as were in my Study at Lambeth: And a fuller Inquisition made into the Business: In regard I was as Innocent from this Crime, as when my Mother bare me into the World. A Salvo was entred for me upon this. And every day that I after came to the Bar, I called upon this Business. But somewhat or other was still pretended by them which managed the Evidence, that I could not get the Books to be brought forth, nor any thing to be done, till almost the last day of my Hear∣ing. Then no Books could be found in the Exchequer, nor in my Study, but only that of King James; whereas, when the Keys were taken from me, there were divers Books there, as is confessed in the Printed Votes of this Parliament: And one of them with a Watchet * 16.450 Sattin Cover, now missing. And whether this of King James (had not my Secretary, who knew the Book, seen it drop out of Mr. Pryn's Bag) would not have been concealed too, I cannot tell. At last, the Book of King James his Coronation, and the other urged against me concerning King Charles, were seen and compared openly in the Lords House, and found to be the same Oath in both, and no Inter∣lining or Alteration in the Book charged against me.

This Business was left by the Serjeant to Mr. Maynard, who made the most that could be out of my Diary against me. And so did Mr. Brown, when he came to give the Summ of the Charge against me, both before the Lords, and after in the House of Commons. And therefore for the avoiding of all tedious Repetition: And for that the Arguments which both used, are the same: And because I hold it not fit to break a Charge of this moment into divers pieces, or put them in different places, I will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 set

down the whole Business together, and the Answer which I then gave.

Mr. Brown in the Summ of the Charge against me in the Com∣mons-House, when he came to this Article, said, he was now come to the Business so much expected. And I humbly besought that Honou∣rable House, if it were a Matter of so great Expectation, it might be of as great Attention too, while I should follow that Worthy Gentleman, step after step, and Answer as I went.

1. And First, he went about to prove out of my Diary, that this Ad∣dition (of the King's Prerogative) to the Oath, was made by me. Thus he says, that Decemb. 31. 1625. I went to Hampton-Court. That's true. He says, that there, Januar. 1. I understood I was Named with other Bishops, to meet and consider of the Ceremonies about the Coronati∣on; and that, Januar. 4. we did meet at White-Hall accordingly; and that, Januar. 6. we gave his Majesty an Answer. Not I (as 'twas Charged) but We gave his Majesty Answer. So if the Oath, had been changed by me, it must have been known to the Committee, and broken forth to my Ruin long since. Then he says, that Ja∣nuar. 16. I was appointed to serve at the Coronation, in the room of the Dean of Westminster. That's no Crime; and 'tis added in the Diary, that this Charge was delivered unto me by my Predecessor. So he knew that this Service to Attend at the Coronation was im∣posed upon me. He says next, that Januar. 18. the Duke of Buck∣ingham had me to the King, to shew his Majesty the Notes we had agreed on, if nothing offended him. These were only Notes of the Cere∣monies. And the other Bishops sent me, being Puny, to give the Account. Then he says, Januar. 23. It is in my Diary, Librum habui paratum, I had a Book ready. And it was time, after such meet∣ings; and the Coronation being to follow Feb. 2. and I designed to assist and attend that Service, that I should have a Book ready. The Ceremonies were too long and various to carry them in Me∣mory. And whereas 'tis urged, that I prepared and altered this Book; the words in my Diary, are only Paratum habui, I had the Book ready for my own use in that Service. Nor can Paratum ha∣bui, signifie preparing or altering the Book. And Thirdly, 'tis ad∣ded there, That the Book which I had ready in my Hands, did agree per omnia cum Libro Regali: And if it did agree in all things with the King's Recorded Book then brought out of the Ex∣chequer, where then is the Alteration so laboriously sought to be fastned on me? I humbly beseech you to mark this.

Yet out of these Premises put together, Mr. Brown's Inference was, that I made this Alteration of the Oath. But surely these Pre∣mises, neither single nor together, can produce any such Conclusion; but rather the contrary. Beside, Inference upon Evidence is not Evidence, unless it be absolutely necessary; which all Men see that here it is not. But I pray observe. Why was such a sudden stay made at Januar. 23. whereas it appears in my Diary at Januar. 31. that the Bishops were not alone trusted with this Coronation Busi∣ness; Sed alii Proceres, but other Great and Noble Men also. And they did meet that Januar. 31. and sate in Council about it. So the Bishops Meetings were but Preparatory to ease the Lords, most of

the Ceremonies being in the Church-way. And then can any Man think, that these great Lords, when they came to review all that was done, would let the Oath be altered by me or any other, so materially, and not check at it? 'Tis impossible.

2. Secondly, this Gentleman went on to charge this Addition upon me, Thus, There were found in my Study at Lambeth two Books of King James his Coronation, one of them had this Clause or Addition in it, and the other had it not; and we cannot tell by which he was Crown∣ed, therefore it must needs be some wilful Error in me; to make choice of that Book which had this Addition in it; or some great mistake. First, if it were a mistake only, then it is no Crime. And wilful Error it could not be. For being Named one of them that were to consider of the Ceremonies, I went to my Predecessor, and desi∣red a Book, to see by it what was formerly done. He delivered me this now in question; I knew not whether he had more or no; nor did I know that any one of them differed from other. There∣fore no wilful Error. For I had no choice to make of this Book which had the Addition, before that which had it not; but thank∣fully took that which he gave me. But Secondly, If one Book of King James his Coronation, in which I could have no Hand, had this Addition in it, (as is confessed) then was not this a new Ad∣dition of my making. And Thirdly, it may easily be seen, that King James was Crowned by the Book which hath this Addition in it, this being in a fair Carnation Sattin Cover, the other in Paper without a Cover, and unfit for a King's Hand, especially in such a great and publick Solemnity.

3. In the Third place he said, There were in this Book twenty Alte∣rations more, and all or most in my Hand. Be it so, (for I was never suffered to have the Book to consider of) they are confessed not to be material. The Truth is, when we met in the Committee, we were fain to mend many slips of the Pen, to make Sense in some places, and good English in other. And the Book being trusted with me, I had Reason to do it with my own Hand, but openly at the Committee all. Yet two Things as Matters of some moment Mr. Brown checked at.

1. The one was, that Confirm is changed into Perform.

If it be so, Perform is the greater and more advantagious to the Subject, because it includes Execution, which the other word doth not. Nor doth this word hinder, but that the Laws and Liberties are the Peoples already. For though they be their own, yet the King by his place, may and ought to perform the keeping and maintaining of them. I say (if it be so) for I was never suffered to have this Book in my Hands thoroughly to peruse: Nor, under favour, do I believe this Alteration is so made, as 'tis urged. [In the Book which I have by me, and was Transcribed from the other, it is Confirm.]

2. The other is, that the King is said to Answer, I will for I do: But when will he? Why all the days of his Life; which is much more than I do for the present. So, if this change be made, 'tis still for the Peoples advantage. [And there also 'tis I do grant.] And yet again I say (if) for the Reason before given. Besides, in all the Latin Copies, there is a latitude left for them that are trusted, to add to those

Interrogatories which are then put to the King, any other that is just; In these Words, Adijciantur praedictis Interrogationibus quae justa fuerint. And such are these two mentioned, if they were made.

4. Mr. Brown's Fourth and last Objection was, that I made this Alteration of the Oath, because it agrees (as he said) with my Judg∣ment: For that in a Paper of Bishop Harsnett's, there is a Marginal Note in my Hand, that Salvo Jure Coronae, is understood in the Oaths of a King. But first, there's a great deal of difference between Jus Regis & Praerogativa, between the Right and Inheritance of the King and his Prerogative, though never so Legal. And with Sub∣mission, and until I shall be convinced herein, I must believe; that no King can Swear himself out of his Native Right. Second∣ly, If this were, and still be an Error in my Judgment, that's no Ar∣gument at all to prove Malice in my Will: That because that is my Judgment for Jus Regis, therefore I must thrust Praerogativam Regis, which is not my Judgment, into a Publick Oath which I had no Power to alter. These were all the Proofs which Mr. May∣nard at first, and Mr. Brown at last, brought against me in this Par∣ticular. And they are all but Conjectural, and the Conjectures weak. But that I did not alter this Oath by adding the Preroga∣tive, the Proofs I shall bring are Pregnant, and some of them Ne∣cessary. They are these.

1. My Predecessor was one of the Grand Committee for these Ceremonies. That was proved by his Servants to the Lords. Now his known Love to the Publick was such, as that he would never have suffered me or any other, to make such an Alteration. Nor would he have concealed such a Crime in me, loving me so well as he did.

2. Secondly, 'Tis Notoriously known, that he Crowned the King, and Administred the Oath, (which was avowed also before the Lords by his Ancient Servants.) And it cannot be rationally con∣ceived he would ever have Administred such an alter'd Oath to his Majesty.

3. Thirdly, 'Tis expressed in my Diary, at Januar. 31. 1625. (And that must be good Evidence for me, having been so often produced against me,) that divers great Lords were in this Committee for the Ceremonies, and did that Day sit in Council upon them. And can it be thought they would not so much as compare the Books? Or that comparing of them, they would indure an Oath with such an Alteration to be Tender'd to the King? Especially, since 'tis be∣fore confessed, that One Copy of King James his Coronation had this Alteration in it, and the other had it not.

4. Fourthly, 'Tis expressed in my Diary, and made use of a∣gainst me, at Januar. 23. 1625. That this Book urged against me did agree per Omnia cum Libro Regali, in all things with the King's Book brought out of the Exchequer. And if the Book that I then had, and is now insisted upon, did agree with that Book which came out of the Exchequer, and that in all things, how is it possible I should make this Alteration?

5. Fifthly, with much Labour I got the Books to be compared in the Lords House; That of King James his Coronation, and this

of King Charles. And they were found to agree in all things to a Syllable. Therefore 'tis impossible this should be added by me. And this I conceive cuts off all Conjectural Proofs to the con∣trary.

Lastly, In the Printed Book of the Votes of this present Parlia∣ment, * 16.451 it is acknowledged, that the Oath given to King James and King Charles was the same. The same. Therefore unaltered. And this Passage of that Book I then shewed the Lords in my De∣fence. To this Mr. Maynard then replyed. That the Votes there mentioned, were upon the Word Elegerit, and the doubt whether it should be, hath chosen, or shall chuse. I might not then Answer to the Reply, but the Answer is plain. For, be the occasion which led on the Votes, what it will; as long as the Oath is acknow∣ledged the same, 'tis manifest it could not be altered by me. And I doubt not, but these Reasons will give this Honourable House Satisfaction, that I added not this Particular of the Prerogative to the Oath.

Mr. Brown, in his last Reply, passed over the other Arguments I know not how. But against this, he took Exception. He brought the Book with him, and Read the Passage. And said (as far as I remember) that the Votes had Relation to the Word Chuse, and not to this Alteration. Which is in Effect the same which Mr. Maynard urged before. I might not Reply by the Course of the Court, but I have again considered of that Passage, and find it plain. Thus, * 16.452 First they say: They have considered of all the Alterations in the Form of this Oath which they can find. Therefore of this Alteration also, if any such were: Then they say, Excepting that Oath which was taken by his Majesty and his Father King James. There it is confessed, that the Oath taken by them, was one and the same, called there That Oath, which was taken by both. Where falls the Exception then? For 'tis said, Excepting that Oath, &c. why it fol∣lows, Excepting that the Word Chuse is wholly left out, as well hath Chosen as will Chuse. Which is a most manifest and evident Con∣fession, that the Oath of King James and King Charles was the same in all things, to the very leaving out of the Word Chuse. Therefore it was the same Oath all along. No difference at all. For Exceptio firmat Regulam in non Exceptis; and here's no Excep∣tion at all of this Clause of the Prerogative. Therefore the Oath of both the Kings was the same in that, or else the Votes would have been sure to mention it. Where it may be observed too, that Serjeant Wilde, though he knew these Votes, and was present both at the Debate and the Voting; and so must know that the Word Chuse, was omitted in both the Oaths, yet at the first he Charged it eagerly upon me, that I had left this Clause of Chusing out of King Charles his Oath, and added the other. God forgive him. But the World may see by this, and some other Passages, with what Art my Life was sought for.

And yet before I quite leave this Oath, I may say 'tis not al∣together improbable, that this Clause (And agreeing to the Preroga∣tive of the King's thereof) was added to the Oath in Edward 6. or Queen Elizabeth's time: And hath no Relation at all to the Laws of

this Kingdom, absolutely mentioned before in the beginning of this Oath; But only to the Words [The Profession of the Gospel Establish∣ed in this Kingdom,] And then immediately follows, And agreeing to the Prerogative of the Kings thereof. By which the King Swears to maintain his Prerogative, according to God's Law, and the Gospel Established, against all foreign Claims and Jurisdictions whatsoever. And if this be the meaning, he that made the Alte∣ration, whoever it were (for I did it not) deserves Thanks for it, and not the Reward of a Traytor.

Now to return to the Day. The Fourth Charge went on * 16.453 with the Ceremonies still. But Mr. Serjeant was very nimble. For he leaped from the Coronation at Westminster, to see what I did at Oxford. 1. There the first Witness is Sir Nathaniel Brent. And he says, The standing of the Communion-Table at St. Mary's was al∣tered. I have answered to this Situation of the Communion-Table already. And if it be lawful in one place, 'tis in another. For the Chappel of Magdalen College, and Christ-Church Quire, he con∣fesses he knows of no Direction given by me to either: Nor doth he know, whether I reproved the things there done or no. So all this is no Evidence. For the Picture of the Blessed Virgin at St. Mary's Door, as I knew nothing of it till it was done, so never did I hear any Abuse or Dislike of it after it was done. And here Sir Nathaniel confesses too, that he knows not of any Adoration of it, as Men passed the Streets or otherwise. When this Witness came not home, they urged the Statute of Merton College, or the Vniversity, where (if I took my Notes right) they say, I enjoyned Debitam * 16.454 Reverentiam. And as I know no fault in that Injunction, or Sta∣tute; so neither do I know what due Bodily Reverence can be given to God in his Church, without some Bowing or Genu∣flection.

2. The Second Witness was Mr. Corbett. He says, that when de∣cent Reverence was required by my Visitors 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one of my Articles, he gave Reasons against it, but Sir Jo. Lambe urged it still. First, my Lords, if Mr. Corbett's Reasons were sufficient, Sir Jo. Lambe was to blame in that; but Sir Jo. Lambe must answer it, and not I. Secondly, it may be observed, that this Man, by his own Confession, gave Rea∣sons (such as they were) against due Reverence to God in his own House. He says, that Dr. Frewen told him from me, That I wished he should do as others did at St. Mary's, or let another Execute his place as Proctor. This is but a Hearsay from Dr. Frewen, who being at Oxford, I cannot produce him. And if I had sent such a Message, I know no Crime in it. He says, that after this, he desired he might enjoy in this Particular the Liberty which the King and the Church of England gave him. He did so: And from that Day he heard no more of it, but enjoyed the Liberty which he asked. He says, Mr. † 16.455 Channell desired the same Liberty as well as he. And Mr. Channell had it granted as well as he. He confesses ingenuously, that the Bowing required, was only Toward, not to the Altar. And * 16.456 To the Picture at St. Mary's Door, he says, he never heard of any Reve∣verence done to it: And doth believe that all that was done at Christ-Church,

was since my Time. But it must be his Knowledge, not his Belief, that must make an Evidence.

3. The Third Witness, was one Mr. Bendye. He says, There was a Crucifix in Lincoln College Chappel since my time. If there be, 'tis more than I know. My Lord of York that now is, when he was Bi∣shop of Lincoln, worthily bestowed much Cost upon that Chappel, and if he did set up a Crucifix, I think it was before I had ought to do there. He says, there was Bowing at the Name of Jesus. And God forbid but there should; and the Canon of the Church requires * 16.457 it. He says, there were Latin Prayers in Lent, but he knows not who injoyned it. And then he might have held his Peace. But there were Latin Sermons, and Prayers on Ash-Wednesday, when few came to Church, but the Lent Proceeders, who understood them. And in divers Colleges they have their Morning-Prayers in Latin, and had so, long before I knew the University. The last Thing he says, was, That there were Copes used in some Colleges, and that a Traveller should say, upon the sight of them, that he saw just such a thing upon the Pope's Back. This Wise Man might have said as much of a Gown: He saw a Gown on the Pope's Back; therefore a Protestant may not wear one: or entring into S. Pauls, he may cry, Down with it; for I saw the Pope in just such another Church in Rome.

4. Then was urged the conclusion of a Letter of mine sent to that Vniversity. The Words were to this Effect, I desire you to re∣member me a Sinner, Quoties coram 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Dei 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The Charge lay upon the Word Procidatis; which is no more, than that when they there fall on their Knees, or Prostrate to Prayer, they would remember me. In which Desire of mine, or Expression of it, I can yet see no Offence. No, nor in coram Altare, their So∣lemnest time of Prayer being at the Communion.

Here Mr. Brown Aggravated the things done in that University: And fell upon the Titles given me in some Letters from thence; but because I have answered those Titles already, I refer the Reader thither, and shall not make here any tedious Repetition: Only this I shall add; That in the Civil Law 'tis frequent to be seen, that not Bishops only one to another, but the great Emperours of the World have com∣monly given that Title of Sanctitas vestra, to Bishops of meaner place than my self; to say no more. But here Mr. Brown, in his last Reply, was pleased to say, This Title was not given to any Bishop of England. First, if I had my Books about me, perhaps this might be refuted. Secondly, why should so Grave a Man as he so much Di∣sparage his own Nation? Is it impossible (be my Unworthiness what it will) for an English Bishop to deserve as good a Title as another? Thirdly, be that as it may, if it were (as certainly it was) Law∣fully given to other Bishops, though they not English, then is it neither Blasphemy, nor Assumption of Papal Power, as was Charged upon it.

From Oxford Mr. Serjeant went to Cambridge. And I must be * 16.458 Guilty, if ought were amiss there too. For this Fifth Charge were produced three Witnesses, Mr. Wallis, Mr. Greece, and Mr. Seaman. Their Testimonies agreed very near: So I will answer them together. First, they say, That at Peter-House there were Copes and Candlesticks,

and Pictures in the Glass-Windows; and the like. But these things I have often answered already, and shall not repeat. They say, the Chief Authors of these things, were Dr. Wren and Dr. Cosens. They are both living, why are they not called to answer their own Acts? For here's yet no shew of Proof to bring any thing home to me. For no one of them says, that I gave direction for any of these. No, (says Mr. Serjeant) but why did I tolerate them? First, no Man com∣plained to me. Secondly, I was not Chancellor, and endured no small Envy for any little thing that I had occasion to look upon in that place. And thirdly, this was not the least Cause, why I followed my Right for Power to visit there. And though that Power was confirmed to me, yet the Times have been such as that I did not then think fit to use it. It would have but heaped more Envy on me, who bare too much already.

As for Mr. Greece, who hath laboured much against me in all this Business, God forgive him; and while he Inherits his Father's ill Affections to me, God preserve him from his Father's End.

From Cambridge he went to the Cathedrals, and first to Canterbury. * 16.459 Here the Charge is Bowing versus Altare; the two Witnesses, two Prebendaries of that Church, Dr: Jackson, and Dr: Blechenden. And first, Dr: Jackson says, the Bowing was versus Altare: So not to, but to∣ward the Altar; and Dr: Blechenden says, it was the Adoration of the High Majesty of God, to whom, if no Altar were there, I should Bow. Dr: Jackson says, this Bowing was to his Grief. Strange! I avow to your Lordships and the World, no Man did so much approve all my Proceedings in that Church, as he: And for this Particular, he never found the least fault with it to me; and if he conceal his Grief, I cannot ease it. He says, this Bowing was not in use till within this Six or Seven Years. Sure the Old Man's Memory fails him. For Dr. Blechenden says, the Communion-Table was railed about, and Bowings be∣fore it, when he came first to be a Member of that Church; and saith up∣on his Oath that's above Ten Years ago. And that it was practised before their new Statutes were made; and that in those Statutes no Punishment is infticted for the Breach, or not Performance of this Reverence. I could tell your Lordships how often Dr: Jackson hath shifted his Opinions in Religion, but that they tell me their Witnesses must not be Scandalized. As for the Statutes, my Secretary Mr: Dell, who co∣pied them out, testified here to the Lords, that I left out divers Su∣perstitions which were in the Old Book, and Ordained many Sermons in their rooms.

The next Cathedral he instanced in was Winchester. But there's nothing but the old Objections, Copes. And the wearing of them is warranted by the Canon; and Reverence at coming in, and going out of * 16.460 the Church. And that, great Kings have not (in better Ages) thought much to do. And they did well to instance in the College of Win∣chester as well as the Church; for 'tis confessed, the Injunction sent thither requires, that the Reverence used be such as is not dissonant from the Church of England. So, this may be a Comment to the other Injunctions.

But for the Copes in Cathedrals, Mr. Brown in his last Reply was not satisfied. For he said, the Canon mentioned but the wearing of one Cope. Be it so: But they must have that before they

can wear it. And if the Canon enjoyn the wearing of one, my In∣junction might require the providing and using of one. Besides, if there be no Popery, no introduction to Superstition in the having or using of one; then certainly, there can be none in the having of more for the same use: The Superstition being lodged in the misuse, not in the number.

From the Cathedrals, Mr. Serjeant went to view some Parish-Churches. * 16.461 And First, 'tis Charged, That in a Parish-Church at Win∣chester two Seats were removed to make way for Rayling in of the Commu∣nion-Table. But for ought I know, this might have been concealed. For it was liked so well, that they to whom the Seats belonged, removed them at their own Charges, that the other might be done.

The next instance was in St: Gregory's Church, by S: Pauls. The Charge was, the Placing of the Communion-Table Altar-wise. To the Charge it self Answer is given before. The Particulars which are new are these: The Witness Mr: Wyan. He says, the Order for such placing of the Table was from the Dean and Chapter of S: Pauls. And S: Gregory's is in their peculiar Jurisdiction. So the Holy-Table was there placed by the Ordinary, not by me. He says next, That the Parishioners appealed to the Arches, but received an Order to Command them and the Cause to the Council Board: That it was a full Board when the Cause was heard, and his Majesty present: And that there I main∣tained the Queens Injunction, about placing the Communion-Table. In * 16.462 all this, here's nothing Charged upon me, but maintenance of the Injunction: And I had been much to blame if I should not have maintained it. He says, Sir Henry Martin came and saw it, and said it would make a good Court Cupboard. If Sir Henry did say so, the Scorn ill became either his Age, or Profession; though a Court Cupboard be somewhat a better Phrase than a Dresser. God forgive them who have in Print called it so. He says, That hereupon I did say, that he which spake that, had a Stigmatical Puritan in his Bosom. This Man's Memo∣ry serves him long for Words: This was many Years since; and if I did speak any thing sounding this way, 'tis more like I should say Schismatical, than Stigmatical Puritan. But let him look to his Oath; and which Word soever I used, if Sir Henry used the one, he might well hear the other. For a prophane Speech it was, and lit∣tle becoming a Dean of the Arches. He says, that soon after this, Sir Henry was put out of his Place. Not very soon after this; for I was at the time of this Business (as far as I remember) Bishop of Lon∣don, and had nothing to do with the disposing of his Place. After, when I came to be Arch-Bishop I found his Patent was void, neither could Sir Henry himself deny it. And being void, and in my Gift, I gave it to another.

He says farther, That it was urged that this way of Placing the Com∣munion Table was against the Word of God, in Bishop Jewel, and Mr: Fox his Judgment; and that I replied, it were better they should not have these Books in Churches, than so to abuse them. First, for ought I yet know (and in these straights of time the Books I cannot come at) their Judgment, rightly understood, is not so. Secondly, Though these two were very worthy Men in their Time, yet every thing which they say is not by and by the Doctrine of the Church of Eng∣land.

And I may upon good reason depart from their Judgment in some Particulars, and yet not differ from the Church of England. As in this very Particular, the Injunction for placing of the Table so, is the Act of the Queen and the Church of England. And I con∣cieve the Queen, then upon the Act of Reformation, would not have enjoyned it, nor the Church obeyed it, had it been against the Word of God. Thirdly, if I did say, That if they could make no better use of Jewel and the Book of Martyrs, it were better they had them not in the Churches. They gave too great occasion for the Speech: For they had picked divers things out of those Books which they could not master, and with them distempered both themselves and their Neighbours. And yet in hope other more Modest Men might make better use of them, I never gave Counsel to have those Books remo∣ved (nor is that so much as Charged) but said only thus, That if no better use would be made of them, then that last Remedy; but ne∣ver till then.

This last Passage Mr. Brown insisted upon: The taking of good Books from the People. But as I have answered, there was no such thing done, or intended; only a Word spoken to make bu∣sie Men see how they abused themselves and the Church, by mis∣understanding and misapplying that which was written for the good of both.

Lastly, it was urged, He said, that the Communion-Table must stand Altarwise, that Strangers which come and look into these Churches, might not see such a Disproportion: The Holy Table standing one way in the Mother-Church, and quite otherwise in the Parochial an∣nexed. And truly, to see this, could be no Commendation of the Di∣scipline of the Church of England. But howsoever, Mr. Clarke (the other Witness with Wyan, and agreeing with him in the most) says plainly that it was the Lord of Arundel that spake this, not I: And that he was seconded in it by the Lord Weston, then Lord Treasu∣rer, not by me.

The last Charge of this Day was a passage out of one Mr: Shel∣ford's * 16.463 Book, p. 20, 21. That they must take the Reverend Prelates for their Examples, &c. And Mr. Pryn Witnessed, the like was in the Missal, p. 256. Mr. Shelford is a meer Stranger to me; his Book I ne∣ver read; if he have said any thing Unjust or Untrue; let him answer for himself. As for the like to that, which he says, being in the Missal, though that be but a weak Argument, yet let him salve it.

Here this Day ending, I was put off to Saturday, June 1. And * 16.464 then again put off to Thursday, June 6. which held. * 16.465

CAP. XXXIV. My Twelfth Day of Hearing.

THis Day Serjeant Wild, instead of beginning with a new Charge, * 16.466 made another long Reply to my Answers of the former Day. Whether he found that his former Reply made at the time, was * 16.467 weak, and so reputed, I cannot tell.

But another he made, as full of premeditated Weakness, as the former was of sudden. Mr. Pryn I think perceived it, and was often at his Ear; but Mr. Serjeant was little less than angry, and would on.

I knew I was to make no Answer to any Reply, and so took no Notes: Indeed, hold∣ing it all as it was, that is, either nothing, or nothing to the purpose. This tedious Reply ended;

Then came on the First Charge about the Window of Coloured * 16.468 Glass set up in the New Chappel at Westminster. It was the Histo∣ry of the coming down of the Holy-Ghost upon the Apostles. This was Charged to be done by me, and at my Cost: The Witnesses, Mr. Brown, imployed in setting up the Window, and Mr: Sutton the Glasier.

These Men say, that Dr: Newell, Sub-Dean of Westminster, gave Order for the Window and the setting of it up; but they know not at whose Cost, nor was any Order given from me. So here's nothing Charged upon me. And if it were, I know nothing amiss in the Window. As for the Kings Arms being taken down (as they say) Let them an∣swer that did it. Though I believe, that the King's Arms standing alone in a white Window, was not taken down out of any ill mean∣ing, but only out of necessity to make way for the History.

The Second Charge was the Picture of the Blessed Virgin set upon * 16.469 a New-Built Door at S: Marys in Oxford. Here Alderman Nixon says, That some Passengers put off their Hats, and, as he supposes, to that Picture. But, my Lords, his Supposal is no Proof. He says, that the next day he saw it. But what did he see? Nothing, but the put∣ting off the Hat; For he could not see why, or to what; unless they which put off, told it. They might put off to some Acquaintance that passed by. He farther says, he saw a Man in that Porch upon his Knees, and he thinks praying; but he cannot say to that.

But then (if the Malice he hath long born me, would have suffer'd him)

he might have stayed till he knew to whom he was Praying, for till then 'tis no Evidence. He says, he thinks that I Countenanced the setting of it up, because it was done by Bishop Owen. But Mr: Bromfeeld, who did that Work, gave Testimony to the Lords, that I had nothing to do in it. He says, there was an Image set up at Carfax Church, but pulled down again by Mr: Widdows, Vicar there. But this hath no re∣lation at all to me.

This Picture of the Blessed Virgin was twice mentioned before. And Sir Nath: Brent could say nothing to it but Hearsay. And Mr: Corbet did not so much as hear of any Abuse. And now Alderman Nixon says, he saw Hats put off; but the wise

Man knows not to what. Nor is there any shew of Proof offer'd, that I had any Hand or Approbation in the setting of it up. Or that ever any Complaint was made to me of any Abuse to it, or dislike of it. And yet Mr. Brown, when he gave the Summ of the Charge against me, insisted upon this also, as some great Fault of mine, which I cannot yet see.

In the next Charge, Mr. Serjeant is gone back again to White-Hall, * 16.470 as in the former to Oxford. The Witnesses are Mrs. Charnock, and her Daughter. They say, they went (being at Court) into the Chappel, and it seems a Woman with them, that was a Papist: And that while they were there, Dr. Brown, one of the King's Chaplains came in, Bowed toward the Communion-Table, and then at the Altar kneeled down to his Prayers. I do not know of any Fault Dr. Brown com∣mitted, either in doing Reverence to God, or Praying, and there. And yet if he had committed any Fault, I hope I shall not answer for him. I was not then Dean of the Chappel, nor did any ever complain to me. They say, that two Strangers came into the Chappel at the same time, and saw what Dr. Brown did, and said thereupon, that sure we did not differ much, and should be of one Religion shortly. And that the Woman which was with these Witnesses, told them they were Priests. First, this can no way Relate to me; for neither did these Women complain to me of it, nor any from them. Secondly, if these two Men were Priests, and did say, as is Testified; are we e∣ver a whit the nearer them in Religion? Indeed, if all the difference between Rome and us, consisted in outward Reverence, and no Points of Doctrine, some Argument might hence be drawn; but the Points of Doctrine being so many and great, put stop enough to that. Thirdly, if Recusants, Priests especially, did so speak, might it not be said in Cunning to Discountenance all External Worship in the Service of God, that so they may have opportunity to make more Proselytes? And 'tis no small Advantage, to my knowledge, which they have this way made.

And this was the Answer which I gave Mr. Brown, when he Charged this upon me in the House of Commons.

Here, before they went any farther, Mr. Serjeant Wilde told the Lords, that when Sir Nathaniel Brent was imployed in my Visita∣tion, he had Instructions for particular Churches, of which some were Tacit Intimations, and some Express. I know not to what end this was spoken; for no Coherent Charge followed upon it. But sure, he thinks Sir Nathaniel Brent very skilful in me, that he can under∣stand my Tacit Intimations, and know to what Particular Church to apply them.

And as I said no more at the Bar, so neither did I think to say any more after; yet now I cannot but a little bemoan my self. For ever since Mr. Maynard left off, who Pleaded, though strongly, yet fairly, against me, I have been in very ill Condition between the other two. For from Mr. Nicolas, I had some Sense, but extream virulent and foul Language. And from Serjeant Wilde, Language good enough sometimes, but little or no Sense. For let me answer what I would, when he came to Reply, he repeated the Charge again, as if I had made no Answer at all. Or as if all that I Expressed never so plainly, had been but Tacit

Intimations; which I think he understood as much as Sir Nathaniel Brent

In the Fourth Charge, he told the Lords he would not trouble * 16.471 them with repeating the Evidence, but only put them in mind of some things in the Case of Ferdinando Adams, of Ipswich: Of the Men of Lewis suffering in the High-Commission: Of the Parishioners of Beckington, and some others heard before, but would leave the Lords to their Memory and their Notes. Yet read over the Sentences given in the High-Commission, and made a Repetition of whatsoever might but make a shew to render me odious to the People.

And this hath been their Art all along, to run over the same thing twice and again (as they did here in the second Charge about the Picture of the Blessed Virgin:) To the end, that as the Audi∣tors changed, the more of them might hear it; and that which wrought not upon some, might upon others. In all which I pa∣tiently referred my self to my former Answers, having no other way to help my self; in regard they pretended that they renewed the same Instances, but not the same way; but in one place, as against Law; and in another, as against Religion. But why then did they in both places run over all Circumstances appliable to both?

And on they went too with the Men of Lewis, where one * 16.472 Mr. Parnlye (they say) was Censured cruelly in the High-Commission, for not removing the Communion-Table. The Business was but this. Sir Nathaniel Brent, and his own Ordinary, Dr. Nevill, Ordered the remove of the Table: He would not. For this Contumacy he was Censured, but injoyned only to make his Submission to Dr. Nevill. Which I think was a Sentence far from any Barbarous Cruelty, as 'tis called.

2. Another Instance, and the next, was Mr. Burket. He says, he was Censured also about removing the Communion-Table, and for that on∣ly. But first, this was not simply for removing the Holy-Table; but it was for abetting the Church-Wardens to remove it back again from the place, where lawful Authority had set it. And secondly, whereas he says, he was Censured for this only; the very Charge it self confutes him. For there 'tis said, that this, about removing of the Communion-Table, appears in the Sixth Article that was against him. Therefore there were Five other Articles at least more against him. And therefore not this only.

3. The Third Instance was in Mr. Chancye: And he likewise is said to have suffered very much only about Railing in of the Communion-Table. But this is not so neither. For he confesses that he spake Reproachful Words against Authority, and in Contempt of his Or∣dinary. That he said, the Rails were fit to be set up in his Gar∣den. That he came Fifty Miles from his own Church, on purpose to Countenance this Business. And all this he acknowledges upon his Oath in his Submission. And yet nothing laid upon him but Suspension, and that no longer than till he submitted. And all this the Act of the High-Commission, not mine.

And so I answered Mr. Brown, who urged this against me also.

And the Truth of all this appears apud Acta; though they were taken away, and kept ever since from my use, yet many things done in that Court, have

been Charged against me. And here stepped in a Testimony of Mr. Genebrards, That I threatned openly in the High-Commission to suspend Dr. Merrick. And why might I not do it, if he will be o∣ver-bold with the Proceeding of the whole Court? I have known e're now, a very good Lawyer Committed from the Chancery Bar to the Fleet. Though I shall spare Names.

4. The fourth Instance was in Mr. Workman's Case: Charged as if he were Sentenced only for Preaching a Sermon to the Judges, against Images in Churches. 1. The first Witness in the Cause was Mr. Langly: He says, Mr. Workman was Censured for this Sermon, and other things. Therefore not for this Sermon only: The High-Commissioners were no such Patrons of Images. He says, that when I was Dean of Glou∣cester, I told them in the Chappel, that King James had heard of many things amiss in that Church, and required me to take care of them. 'Tis true, he did so. He says farther, that hereupon I placed the Commu∣nion-Table Altar-wise, and Commanded due Reverence at the coming into the Church. This I did, and I have given my Reason often already for it, out of the Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth. He says, that Bi∣shop Smith took offence at this, and would come no more to the Cathedral. First, my Lords, this Gentleman was then Schoolmaster there, and had free Access unto me: He never discovered this. Secondly, the Bishop himself never said a word to me about it: If he had, I would either have satisfied his Lordship in that, or any thing else that I did: Or if he had satisfied me, I would have forborn it: He says, that Mr. Workman, after he was put from his Lecture, was not suffered to teach Children. First, if he had been suffered, this Man had been like to make the first Complaint for decay of his own School. But secondly, The Commission thought it no way fit to trust him with the Education of Children, who had been Factious among Men. Especially not in that place, where he had so shewed him∣self.

And this Answer I gave to Mr. Brown, who in Summing the Evidence stood as much, and inveighed as earnestly against this Cruel proceeding with Mr. Workman, as upon any one thing in the Charge. At which time he added also, that he would not be suffered to Practise Physick to get his Living. But First, no Wit∣ness Evidenceth this, that he was denied to Practise Physick. And Secondly, he might have taught a School, or Practised Physick a∣ny where else. But he had done so much Harm, and made such a Faction in Gloucester, as that the High Commission thought it not fit to continue him there; and he was not willing to go from thence, where he had made his Party.

He says farther, that some few of the Citizens of Gloucester were called into the High-Commission, for an Annuity of Twenty Pound a Year allowed Mr. Workman, out of the Town-Stock. For the thing it self, it was a Gross Abuse and Scorn put upon that Court; that when they had Censured a Schis∣matical Lecturer (for such he was there proved) the Towns-Men should make him an allowance of Twenty Pound a Year. A thing (as I humbly conceive) not fit to be indured in any settled Govern∣ment. And whereas Clamour is made, that some few of the Citi∣zens were called to an account for it, that's as strange on the other side. For where there are many Offenders, the Noise would be too

great to call all. And yet here's Noise enough made for calling a few. Here it was replyed by Mr. Maynard, That this was done by that Corpo∣ration, and yet a few singled out to Answer; and that therefore I might be singled out to Answer for things done in the High-Commission.

But, under Favour, this Learned and Worthy Gentleman is mistaken. For here the Mayor and Magistrates of Gloucester, did that which was no way warrantable by their Charter, in which Case they may be ac∣countable, all or some: But in the High-Commission we medled with no Cause not Cognoscible there; or if by Misinformation we did, we were sure of a Prohibition to stop us. And medling with nothing but things proper to them, I conceive still, no one Man can be singled out to suffer for that which was done by all. And this may serve to Answer Mr. Brown also, who in his last Reply upon me, when I might not Answer, made use of it:

2. The Second Witness was Mr. Purye of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. He says, that Mr. Brewster and Mr. Guies the Town-Clark, were called to the Council-Table about this Annuity, and that I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it might be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Examined at the High-Commission. If this were true, I know no Of∣fence in it, to desire that such an Affront to Government might be more thoroughly Examined than the Lords had leisure to do. But the Witness doth not give this in Evidence. For he says no more, than that he heard so from Mr. Brewster. And his Hear-say is no Con∣viction. He says farther, that the High-Commission called upon this Business of the Annuity, as informed that the Twenty Pound given to Mr. Workman, was taken out of the Moneys for the Poor. And this I must still think was a good and a sufficient ground, justly to call them in question. He says also, That these Men were Fined, because that which they did was against Authority. So by their own Witness it appears, that they were not Fined simply for allowing Means to Mr. Workman, but for doing it in opposition to Authority. Lastly, he says, they were Fined Ten Pound apiece, and that presently taken off again. So here was no such great Persecution as is made in the Cause. And for the Can∣celling of this Deed of the Annuity, it was done by themselves, as Mr. Langlye Witnesses.

After these two Witnesses heard, the Sentence of the High-Com∣mission-Court was read, which I could not have come at, had not they produced it. And by that it appeared evidently, that Mr: Work∣man was Censured, as well for other things as for his Sermon about Images in Churches. As first, he said, so many Paces in Dancing were so many to Hell. This was hard, if he meant the Measures in the Inns of Court at Christmas; and he excepted none. Then he said, and was no way able to prove it; that Drunkards, so they were Conformable, were preferred. Which was a great and a notorious Slander upon the Governours of the Church, and upon Orderly and Conformable Men. Then he said, that Election of Ministers was in the People. And this is directly against the Laws of England, in the Right of all Pa∣trons. Then constantly in his Prayer before his Sermon, he Prayed for the States and the King of Sweden, before his Majesty, which was the Garb of that time, among that Party of Men. Then, that one of his common Themes of Preaching to the People, was against the Government of the Church. And then, that Images in Churches, were 〈◊〉〈◊〉 better

than Stews in the Commonwealth, which at the best is a very unsavoury Comparison. But here it was replyed, That Images were Idols, and so called in the Homilies, and that therefore the Comparison might hold. Yea, * 16.473 but in the second Homily, against the Peril of Idolatry, Images or Pi∣ctures in Glass or Hangings, are expresly and truly said not to be Idols, till they be Worshipped. And therefore Mr. Workman should not have compared their setting up, to Stews, till he could have proved them Worshipped. And in all this, were the Act good or bad in the Censuring of him, it was the Act of the High-Commission, not mine.

After this followed the Fifth Charge, which was Mr: Sherfeild's * 16.474 Case, his Sentence in the Star-Chamber for defacing of a Church-Win∣dow in or near Salisbury. The Witnesses produced were Two. The First * 16.475 was Mr: Carill. He said that Mr: Sherfeild defaced this Window, because there was an Image in it, conceived to be the Picture of God the Father. But first, this comes not home. For many a Picture may be con∣ceived to be of God the Father, which yet is not, nor was ever made for it. And then suppose it were so, yet Mr: Sherfeild in a setled Go∣vernment of a State, ought not to have done it, but by Command of Authority. He says, that in my Speech there in the Court, I justi∣fied the having of the Picture of God the Father, as he remembers, out of Dan. 7. 22. This (as he remembers) came well in. For I ne∣ver justified the making or having that Picture.

For Calvin's Rule, * 16.476 that we may picture that which may be seen, is grounded upon the Ne∣gative, that no Picture may be made of that which was never, never can be seen. And to ground this Negative, is the Command given by Moses, Deut. 4. Take good heed to your selves. For what? That you * 16.477 make not to your selves this Picture: Why? For that you saw no man∣ner of similitude, in the day that the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire. Out of the midst of the fire, and yet he still reserved himself in thick darkness, Exod. 20. So no Picture of him, because no simili∣tude * 16.478 ever seen. And this Rule having ever possessed me wholly, I could not justifie the having of it.

I said indeed, that some Men in later Superstitious Times, were so foolish as to Picture God the Father, by occasion of that place in Daniel; but for my self I ever rejected it. Nor can that place bear any shew of it. For Daniel says there, that the Ancient of days came. But in what shape or similitude he came, no Man Living can tell. And he is called the Ancient of days from his Eternity, not as if he appeared like an Old Man. The Text hath no Warrant at all for that.

2. Yet the Second Witness Mr. Tomlyns says also, that I did justi∣fie this Picture.

God forgive him the Malice or Ignorance of this Oath, be it which it will.

He might have been as wary as Mr. Ca∣ril, and added (as he remembers;) For so many Years since, as this Hearing was, he may easily mistake. But if I did say any such thing; why are not my own Papers here produced against me? I had that written which I then spake, and the Paper was in my Study with the rest, and came (for ought I know) into their Hands which follow the Charge against me. I ask again, why is not this Paper produced? Out of all doubt it would, had there appeared any such thing in it. He says also, that I said then, that if the Idol of Jupiter

were set up, yet it were not lawful to pull it down in a Popular Tumult, but by Order and Authority. I did say so, or to that effect, indeed; and must say it still. For I find in St. Augustin almost the very words. * 16.479 And Bishop Davenant, a Man very Learned, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this place of St. Augustin and approves it. And they both prove this Doctrine from Deut. 12. Where the Command given for destroying of the Idols, * 16.480 when they came into the Land of Canaan, was not left at large to the People, but setled in Moses the chief Magistrate, and his Power. And according to this Rule, the Temple of AEsculapius, though then grown very Scandalous, was not pulled down but by * 16.481 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Command. Which place I then shewed the Lords. But this Wit∣ness added, that Mr: Sherfeild had. Authority to do this from the Vestry. If he had, that's as good as none; for by the Laws of England there is yet no power given them for that or any thing else. And all that Vestries do, is by usurpation or consent of the Parish, but reaches not this. The Bishop of the Diocess had been fitter to be consulted here∣in, than the Vestry.

Here, as if these Witnesses had not said enough, Mr: Nicolas of∣fered himself to be a Witness. And told the Lords he was present at the Hearing of this Cause, and that four Witnesses came in clear, that the Picture broken down, was the Picture of God the Father, and that yet the Sentence of the Court passed against Mr: Sherfeild. First, if this be so, it concludes against the Sentence given in the Star-Chamber, not against me; and he calls it here the Sentence of the Court. Second∣ly, be it, that it were undoubtedly the Picture of God the Father; yet he ought to have taken Authority along with him, and not to go about it with violence, which he did, and fell and brake his Leg in the Business. Thirdly, by his own description of the Picture, it seems to me to be some old Fabulous Picture out of a Legend, and not one of God the Father: For he then told the Lords, it was a Picture of an Old Man with a Budget by his side, out of which he was plucking Adam and Eve,

And I believe no Man ever saw God the Father so Pictured any where. Lastly, let me observe how Mr: Nicolas takes all parts upon him wherein he may hope to do me mischief.

The Sixth Charge was concerning a Bible, that was Printed with * 16.482 Pictures, and sold. The Witness Mr: Walsal a Stationer. Who says, That this Bible was Licensed by Dr: Weeks; my Lord of London's Chaplain, not mine; so thus far it concerns not me.

Yes, says Mr. Brown in his last Reply: For it appears in a List of my Chaplains un∣der my own Hand, that Dr: Weeks was one: 'Tis true, when I was Bishop of Bath and Wells he was mine; but my Lord of London had him from me, so soon as ever he was Bishop. And was his, not mine, when he Licensed that Book. And Mr. Brown knew that I answer'd it thus to the Lords.

He says, that I gave him direction that they should not be sold openly upon the Stalls, but only to discreet Men that knew how to use them. The Case was this. As I was at Prayers in the King's Chappel, I there saw one of them in Mrs. Kirk's Hand. She was far enough from any affection to Rome. And this being the first knowledge I had of it, many were vented and sold before I could prevent it. Upon this I sent for one (whether to this Witness or ano∣ther I cannot say) and acquainted the Lords of the Council with it,

and craved their direction what should be done. It was there Orde∣red, that I should forbid the open Sale of them upon their Stalls, but not otherwise to Learned and Discreet Men. And when I would have had this Order stricter, no Man stuck to me but Mr: Secretary Cook. So according to this Order I gave direction to Mr: Walsal, as he witnesses.

Here Mr. Maynard replyed, that I ought to have withstood this Order, in regard it was every way faulty. For, said he, either these Pictures were good or bad. And if they were good, why should they not be Sold openly upon the Stalls to all that would buy? And if they were bad, why should they be Sold privately to any?

To this Reply I was not suffer'd to Answer: But when I heard Mr. Brown charge this Bible with Pictures against me, then I answer'd the thing as before, and took occasion thereby to answer this Dilemma thus. Namely, that this kind of Argument concludes not, but in things Necessary, and where no Medium can be given. For where a Medium can be given, the Horns of this Argument are too weak to hurt. And so 'tis here. For Pictures in themselves are things indifferent; not simply good, nor simply bad, but as they are used. And therefore they were not to be sold to all comers, because they may be abused, and become evil; and yet might be sold to Learned and Discreet Men, who might turn them to good. And that Images are things indifferent of them∣selves, is granted in the Homilies which are against the very Peril of * 16.483 Idolatry.

He said, there was some inconvenient Pictures among them; as the Assumption, and the Dove. Be it so, the Book was not Licensed by me or mine. And yet, as I then shewed the Lords, they were not so strict at Amsterdam against these Pictures. For the Book which Mr. Walsal shewed me, was Printed and sent thence, before it was Printed here. Besides, our old English Bibles in the beginning of the Queen were full of Pictures; and no fault found. As for that which is added at the Bar, that one of these Bibles was found in Secretary Winde∣bank's Trunk, and another in Sir John Lambs. That's nothing to me.

The last Charge of this day was, that something about Images was * 16.484 Expunged out of Dr: Featly's Sermons, by my Chaplain Dr: Bray, before they could be suffer'd to be Printed. But first, he himself confesses, that I told him he might Print them, so nothing were in them contra∣ry to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England. Secondly, he confesses, that when Dr. Bray made stay of them, he never complain∣ed to me; and I cannot remedy that which I do not know. Thirdly, he confesses, that all the time he was in Lambeth-House, my Predecessor ever left that care of the Press upon his Chaplains; and why I might not do it as well as my Predecessor, I do not yet know. But he said, that he complained to Sir Edmund Scott, and desired to be advised by him what he should do: And that he Answer'd, he thought I would not meddle with that troublesome Business, more than my Predecessors had done.

Be this so, yet Sir Ed. Scott never told me this; nor is there any the least Proof offer'd that he did. But because this and the like passages about Expunging some things out of Books, makes such a great Noise, as if nothing concerning Popery might be Printed: And be∣cause Mr. Brown in Summing up of the Charge in the House of Com∣mons, warmly insisted upon this Particular, I thought it necessary

to Answer as follows. That what moved my Chaplain to Ex∣punge that large passage against Images, I knew not; nor could I now know, my Chaplain being Dead. But that this I was sure of, that else-where in those very Sermons, there was as plain a passage, * 16.485 and full against * 16.486 Images left in. And in another place a whole Leaf together, spent to prove them † 16.487 Idolaters; and that as gross as the Baalists, and so he terms them. Yea; and that the | 16.488 Pope is Antichrist too, and not only called so, but proved by divers Ar∣guments. And not so only, but in plain Terms, that he is the * 16.489 Whore of Babylon. And these passages I then Read out of the Book it self in the House of Commons. And many other-like to these there are. So my Chaplain might see good Cause to leave out some passages.

Where so many upon as good Cause were left in:

But to the Business of leaving the Care of these Books, and the overview of them to my Chaplains, it was then urged,

That the Com∣missary * 16.490 of John Lord Arch-Bishop of York, had Excommunicated the Lord Bishop of Durham, being then in the King's Service. And that the Arch-Bishop himself was deeply Fined for this Act of his Commissary. And that therefore I ought much more to be answerable for my Chaplain's Act, whom I might put away when I would, than he for his Commissary, who had a Patent, and could not be put out at pleasure.

Mr. Brown also followed this Precedent close upon me. But first, there is a great deal of difference in the thing it self: My Chaplain's Case being but the leaving out of a passage in a Book to be Printed: But his Com∣missary's Case being the Excommunicating of a great Bishop, and he in the King's Service, of whose Honour the Laws of this Realm are very tender. And Secondly, the Bishop and his Official, (call him Chancellor or Commissary, or what you will) make but one Person in Law; and therefore the Act of the Commissary to the full extent of his Patent, is the Act of the Bishop in legal Construction, and the Bishop may be answerable for it. But the Bishop and his Chaplain are not one Person in any Construction of Law.

And say he may put away his Chaplain when he will, yet that cannot help what is past, if ought have been done amiss by him. And this was the Answer I insisted on to Mr. Brown.

Upon my entrance on this days Defence, I found my self aggrieved at the Diurnal, and another Pamphlet of the Week, wherein they Print whatsoever is Charged against me, as if it were fully proved; never so much as mentioning what, or how I Answer'd. And that it troubled me the more, because (as I conceived) the passages as there expressed, trenched deep upon the Justice and Proceedings of that Honourable House. And could have no Aim but to incense the Mul∣titude against me. With some difficulty I got these Pamphlets re∣ceived, but there they dyed, and the Weekly abuse of me continu∣ed to keep my Patience in Breath.

CAP. XXXV. The Thirteenth Day of my Hearing.

THE First Charge of this Day, was the Opinion which was * 16.491 held of me beyond the Seas. The first Witness was Sir * 16.492 Henry Mildmaye, who (as is before related) told me without ask∣ing; That I was the most Hateful Man at Rome, that ever sate in my See since the Reformation. Now he denied not this,

but be∣ing * 16.493 helped on by good Preparation, a Flexible Conscience, and a fair leading Interrogatory by Mr. Nicolas,

(Mr. Serjeant Wilde was Sick, and came no more till the last day when I made my Recapi∣tulation) he minced it. And now he says, that there were two Fa∣ctions at Rome, and that one of them did indeed speak very ill of me, because they thought I aimed at too great a Power here in England: But the other Faction spake as well of me, because they thought I endeavoured to bring us in England nearer to the Church of Rome. But first, my Lords, this Gentleman's Words to me were Round and General. That I was hated at Rome; not of a Party, or Faction there. And my Servants heard him at the same time, and are here ready to witness it, that he then said the Pope was a goodly Gentleman, and did use to ride two or three great Horses in a Morning, and, but that he was something taller, he was as like Auditor Philips (who was then at Dinner with me) as could be. But I pray mark what Wise Men he makes them at Rome: One Faction hates me, because I aim at too much Power: And the other loves me, because I would draw England nearer Rome; Why, if I went about to draw England nearer Rome, can any among them be such Fools as to think my Power too great? For if I used my Power for them; why should any there Condemn me? And if I used it against them, why should any here Accuse me?

Non sunt haec benè divisa temporibus. These things suit not with the Times, or the Dispositions of Rome: But the plain Truth is, I do not think that ever he was at Rome; I after heard a whisper, that he only stepped into France for another Cure, not to Rome for Curiosity, which was the only cause he gave the Lords of his going thither.

2. The second Witness was Mr. Challoner. He says not much of his own knowledge, but of Fame, that tatling Gossip; yet he told the Lords, I was a very Obscure Man, till within these Fifteen Years. Be it so, if he please. Yet I have been a Bishop above Three and Twenty Years: And 'tis Eighteen Years since I was first Dean of his Majesty's Chappel Royal. He says, that after this time there was a strong Opinion of Reconciliation to Rome. A strong Opinion, but a weak Proof. For it was an Opinion of Enemies, and such as could easily believe, what they over-much desired. He farther said, that some of them were of Opinion, that I was a good Roman-Catholick, and that I wrought cunningly to introduce that Religion by Inches: And that they

Prayed for me. First, my Lords, the Opinion of Enemies is no Proof at all, that I am such as they think me. And secondly, this is a Notable, and no unusual piece of Cunning, for an Enemy to de∣stroy by commending. For this was the ready way, and I doubt not, but it hath been Practised, to raise a Jealousie against me at home, thereby either to work the Ruin of my Person, or utterly to weaken and disable me from doing harm to them, or good for the Church of England. Besides, if the Commendation of Enemies may in this kind go for Proof; it shall be in the power of two or three Practising Jesuits, to destroy any Bishop or other Church-Man of England when they please. At last, he told a Story of one Father John, a Benedictin; that he asked him how Church-Livings were disposed in England, and whether I had not the disposing of those which were in the King's Gift. And concluded, that he was not out of hope to see England reduced to Rome. Why, my Lords, this is not Father John's hope alone; for there is no * 16.494 Roman-Catholick but hath some hope alive in him to see this day. And were it not for that hope, there would not have been so many, some desperate, all dangerous Pra∣ctices upon this Kingdom to Effect it, both in Queen Elizabeth's time, and since. But if this, I know not what Father John hope so, what is that to me?

3. The third Witness was Mr. Anthony Mildmaye. A Man not thought on for a Witness, till I called for his Brother Sir Henry. But now he comes laden with his Brother's Language. He says just as Sir Henry did before, that there were two Factions in Rome, the Je∣suits, and they abhorred me; but the other, the Secular Priests, they wish∣ed me well, as he was informed. First, this is so one and the same Testimony; that any Man that will may see, that either he in∣formed his Brother, or his Brother him. Secondly, here's nothing affirmed; for it is but as he was informed. And he doth not tell you by whom. It may be my Lords, it was by his Brother. Then he says, This was to make my self Great, and tells a Tale of Father Fitton, as much to the purpose as that which Mr. Challoner told of Father John. But whatsoever either of these Fathers said, it was but their own Opi∣nion of me, or Hearsay; neither of which can prove me guilty of any thing.

Thus much Mr. Anthony made a shift to say by Five of the Clock at Afternoon; when I came to make my Answer. And this (as I have sufficient Cause to think) only to help to shoar up his Brother's Testimony. But in the Morning, when he should have come, as his Brother did, he was by Nine in the Morning so Drunk, that he was not able to come to the Bar, nor to speak Common Sense, had he been brought thither.

Nobile par Fratrum.

The Second Charge was the Consecration of two Churches in * 16.495 London: St: Catharin Cree-Church, and St: Giles in the Fields. The Witnesses two.

1. The first Witness was one Mr: Willingham. And he says, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 I came to these Churches in a Pompous manner: But all the Pomp that he mentions, is, that Sir Henry Martin, Dr: Duck, and some other of the Arches attended me, as they usually do their Diocesans in

such Solemnities. He says, he did curiously observe what was done, thinking it would one Day be called to an Account, as now it is. So this Man (himself being Judge) looked upon that Work with Male∣volent Eye, and God preserve him from being a malitious Witness. He says, That at my approach to the Church Door, was read, Lift up your Heads, O ye Gates, and be ye lift up ye everlasting Doors, and the King of Glory shall come in. Psal: 24. And this was urged * 16.496 over and over as a jeer upon my Person. But this Place of Scrip∣ture hath been anciently used in Consecrations. And it relates not to the Bishop, but to God Almighty, the true King of Glory, who at the Dedication enters by his Servant to take Possession of the House, then to be made his. He says, that I kneeled down at my com∣ing in, and after used many Bowings and Cringings. For my kneeling down at my entranee, to begin with Prayer, and after to proceed with Reverence, I did but my Duty in that, let him scoffingly call it Cringing, or Ducking, or what he please.

He says farther, That at the beginning I took up Dust, and threw it in the Air, and after used divers Curses. And here Mr: Pryn put Mr: Nicolas in mind to add, that Spargere Cinerem is in the Form of Consecration used in the Pontifical.

And Mr: Brown, in his summary Account of my Charge, laid the very Consecration of these Churches, as a Crime upon me; and insisted on this particular.

But here my an∣swer to all was the same: That this Witness had need look well to his Oath; for there was no throwing up of Dust, no Curses used throughout the whole Action: Nor did I follow the Pontifical, but a Copy of Learn∣ed and Reverend Bishop Andrews, by which he Consecrated divers Churches in his time; and that this is so, I have the Copy by me to Wit∣ness, and offered them to shew it. Nor can this howsoever savour any way of Treason. No; said Mr: Brown, but the Treason is, To seek, by these Ceremonies, to overthrow the Religion Established. Nor was that ever sought by me: And God of his Mercy Preserve the true Prote∣stant Religion amongst us, till the Consecration of Churches, and Reverence in the Church, can overthrow it; and then I doubt not, but by God's Blessing, it shall continue safe to the Worlds End.

He says also, That I did pronounce the Place Holy. I did so: And that was in the Solemn Act it self of the Consecration, according to the usual Form in that behalf. And no Man will deny, but that there is a Derivative, and * 16.497 a Relative Holiness in Places, as well as in Vessels, and other Things Dedicated to the Honour and Service of God. Nor is any thing more common in the Old Testament; and 'tis express in the New, both for Place and Things. 1: Cor: 9.

Then it was urged at the Bar, That a Prayer which I used, was like one that is in the Pontifical. So in the Missal are many Prayers like to the Collects used in our English Liturgy, so like, that some are the very same, Translated only into English; and yet these con∣firmed by Law. And for that of Psal. 95. Venite Procidamus, &c. * 16.498 then also excepted against, that hath been of very ancient use in the Li∣turgies of the Church. From which Rejecimus Paleam, numquid & Grana? We have separated the Chaff, shall we cast away the Corn too? If it come to that let us take heed we fall not upon the De∣vil's Winnowing, who labours to beat down the Corn; 'tis not the

Chaff that Troubles him, S: Luc: 22. Then they urged my Prede∣cessor Arch-Bishop Parker, That he found Fault with the Consecration of New Churches. I answered then upon Memory, that he did not find * 16.499 fault simply with Consecrations of Churches, but only with the Su∣perstitious Ceremonies used therein.

And this since upon perusal of the Place, I find to be true. For after he had in some sort Commended the Popes for taking away some gross and superstitious Purgations, he adds, that yet for want of Piety, or Prudence, their later Pontifical and Missal-Books did outgo the Ancient In Multi∣tudine Ceremoniarum, & peragendi Difficultate, & Taedio, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 amentiâ. So these were the things he found fault with, not the Consecration it self; which he could not well do, himself being then a Consecrated Bishop.

2. The Second Witness was Mr. Hope. He says, That he agrees with the former Witness, and saw all, and the throwing up of the Dust, &c. Since he agrees with the former Witness, I give him the same Answer. Yet with this Observation upon him and his Oath. The former Witness says, that at the beginning of this Action, I took Dust and threw it up: This Man agrees with him, and saw all; and al∣most in the very next Words confesses, he was not there at the begin∣ning. Not there: Yet he saw it. My Lords; if you mark it, this is a wholsom Oath. He says, That then the Church-Yard was Consecrated by it self. It was ever so; the one Act must follow the other, though both done the same Day: For the Places being different, the Act could not pass upon them at the same time. Then he said, there were Fees required, and a good Eye had to the Money. This is a poor Objection against me: If the Officers did exact any Money without Rule, or beyond President; let them answer for it. But for that which was said to belong to me, I presently gave it to the Poor of the Parish. And this Mr. Dell my Secretary then present attested to the Lords. Lastly, he said, they were not New Churches. Let him look to his Oath again; for 'tis notoriously known, they were both New Built from the Ground; and St. Giles not wholly upon the Old Foundation.

The Third Charge was laid on me, only by Mr. Nieolas, and with∣out * 16.500 any Witness. It was, That I out-went Po∣pery * 16.501 it self; for the Papists Consecrated Church∣es only, but I had been so Ceremonious, that I had Consecrated Chappels too. My Lords, the use of Chappels and of Churches in regard of God's Service is the same. Therefore if Consecration be fit for the one; it must needs be for the other. And the Consecrations of Chappels was long before Popery came into the World. For even Oratories Newly Built were Consecra∣ted in or before Eusebius his Time. And he Flourished about the * 16.502 Year of Christ 310. So ancient they are in the course of Christia∣nity; and for any Prohibition of them, there is neither Law nor Canon in the State or Church of England that doth it.

The Chappels they instance in are Three. First, they say, I Con∣secrated a Chappel of the Right Honourable the Lord Treasurer Weston's. I did so, and did no harm therein. As for the touch given by

the way upon that Honourable Person, he is gone to God, I have nothing to do with it. Secondly, they Instanced in a Chappel of Sir John Worstenham's Building. 'Tis true I Consecrated that too, * 16.503 but that was a Parish-Church, Built in the Place where he was born, and it was in my Diocess, and so the Work proper for me. The Third Instance was in my own Chappel, in my House at Aberguilly, * 16.504 when I was Bishop of St. Davids; the Room lay waste and out of Repair, and I fitted it at my own Cost, and Consecrated it into a Chappel, that House having no Oratory before. Here they farther aggravated many circumstances: As First, that I named it at the De∣dication, * 16.505 The Chappel of S. John the Baptist. I did so Name that Chappel, in Memory of the College where I was Bred, which bears the same Name; but I dedicated it to God and his Service. And to give the Names of Angels and Saints to Churches, for di∣stinction sake, and for the Honour of their Memory, is very Anci∣ent and Usual in the Church, as appears in S. Augustin, and divers * 16.506 others of the Fathers; but Dedicated only to God:

Which in the midst of Superstitious times, the School it self confesses:

So yet no Offence. Secondly, That I did it upon the 29th. of August. And * 16.507 why might I not do it that Day, as well as upon any other? But resolving to Name the Chappel as I did, I the rather made choice of that Day, both because it was the Day of the Decollation of S: John the Baptist; and because, as upon that Day God had wonderfully Blessed me, in the Hearing of my Cause concerning the Presidentship of S. John's College in Oxford, by King James of ever blessed Me∣mory: So yet no Offence. Thirdly, there was a Paper read, and * 16.508 Avowed to be mine, in which was a fair description of Chappel Furniture, and Rich Plate, and the Ceremonies in use in that Chappel, and Wafers for the Communion. At the reading of this Paper, I was a little troubled. I knew I was not then so Rich, as to have such Plate, or Furniture; and therefore I humbly desired sight of the Paper. So soon as I saw it, I found there was nothing in it in my Hand, but the Indorsement, which told the Reader plainly, that it was the Model of Reverend Bishop Andrews his Chappel, with the Furniture, Plate, Ceremonies therein used, and all Things else. And this Copy was sent me by the Household Chaplain to that Fa∣mous Bishop.

This I laid open to the Lords, and it would have made any Man ashamed, but Mr. Pryn, who had delivered upon Oath, that it was a Paper of my Chappel Furniture at Aberguilly, contrary to his Conscience, and his own Eye-sight of the Paper.

And for 〈◊〉〈◊〉, I never either gave, or received the Communion, but in Ordinary Bread. At Westminster I knew it was sometimes used, but as a thing indifferent. As for the Slur here given to that Reverend Dead Bishop of Winchester, it might well have been spa∣red; he deserved far better usage for his Service to the Church of England, and the Protestant Cause.

The Fourth Charge, was the Publishing the Book of Recreations: * 16.509 And it was ushered in with this Scorn upon me, That I laboured to put a Badge of Holiness, by my Breath, upon Places; and to take it away from Days. But I did neither; the King commanded the Printing of it, as is therein attested, and the Warrant which the King gave

me, they have: And though at Consecrations I read the Prayers, yet it was God's Blessing, not my Breath, that gave the Holyness. And for the Day, I ever laboured it might be kept Holy, but yet free from a Superstitious Holyness. And First, it was said, That this was done of purpose to take away Preaching. But First, there is no Proof of∣fered for this. And Secondly, 'tis impossible: For till the Afternoon Service and Sermon were done; no Recreation is allowed by that Book; nor then to any but such as have been at both. Therefore it could not be done to take it away. Thirdly, the Book names none but Lawful Recreations: Therefore if any unlawful be used, the Book gives them no Warrant. And that some are Lawful (after the Pub∣lick Service of God is ended) appears by the Practice of Geneva, where after Evening Prayer, the Elder Men Bowl, and the Younger Train. And Calvin says in express Terms, That one Cause of the Institution of the Sab∣bath * 16.510 was, that Servants might have a Day of rest and remission from their Labour: And what time of the Day fit, if not after Evening Pray∣er? And what Rest is there for able Young Men, if they may use no Recreation? Then it was urged, That there was great Ryot and Disorder at Wakes kept on the Lords Day. That is a very sufficient Cause to regulate and order those Feasts, but not quite to take them away. I make no doubt for my part, but that the Feast of the De∣dication was abused by some among the Jews; and yet Christ was so far from taking it away for that, as that he honoured it with his own Presence. S. John 10. As for the Paper which was read con∣taining * 16.511 three Causes why that Book was Published, that was a Note ta∣ken for my own Private Use and Memory.

Then came in Mr. Pryn, who said, that the Lord Chief Justice Ri∣chardson had made an Order in his Circuit against these Wakes, and was forced to revoke it. This was done by Authority, as is before answered; to which I refer my self. Here 'tis added, to help fill up the Noise: But Mr. Pryn says, That all the Gentlemen in the Country Petitioned on the Judges behalf. No; there was a great Faction in Sommersetshire at that time, and Sir Robert Philips and all his Party writ up against the Judge and the Order he made, as was apparent by the Certificates which he returned. And Sir Robert was well known in his time to be neither Popish, nor Prophane. He says far∣ther, That William then Earl of Pembrooke was out of Town, and the Book Printed in the Interim by my Procurement. But for this last, here's not one Word of Proof offered, and so I leave it.

The Fifth Charge was, that some Ministers were punished for not * 16.512 reading this Book. Witnesses for this were produced.

1. The First was Sir Nathaniel Brent; who says, he had Charge from me to call for an account of not reading this Book, both in my Province at my Visitation, and in my Diocess. His Majesty having Command∣ed this, I could do little, if I had not so much as inquired what was done: And he confesses, that for my Province he gave time to them which had not read it, and then never asked more after it. So here was no eager Prosecution. But then he says, that three in my Diocess stood out, and asked time. And confesses that I granted it: But adds,

that when he asked more time for them, I denyed; and that they were then suspended ab Officio only. I thought I had reason to deny, when I saw they did but dally by asking time. And it was then evident, that in the Diocess of other Bishops far more than Three were pu∣nished, and their Punishment greater.

However, this my proceed∣ing was far from Rigour. And this was the Answer that I gave Mr. Brown, who in the Summ of his Charge, instanced in this Parti∣cular against me.

2. The Second witness was Mr. Culmer, one of the Three Ministers that was suspended. He says, That he was suspended by Sir Nathaniel Brent, and that when he came to me about it, I said, If you know not how to Obey, I know not how to Grant your Petition. Truly, my Lords, finding him both Wilful and Ignorant, I cannot tell what I could say less. He says, that his Patron took away his Benefice. Why, my Lords, he had none; he was only a 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and, God knows, unfit for that. So being Suspended from his Office, this must needs be done. He says, he was not absolved till the Scots came in, and that he was Conformable in all things else. For the time of his Absolution, I leave that to the Record: But for his Conformity in other * 16.513 things, 'tis more than ever I heard of any.

This I can say for him, he is good at Purchasing a Benefice: For he offered a Servant of mine One Hundred and Fifty Pound, so he could procure me but to Name him to the Parliament for Chartham in Kent. Since, I have heard he is as good at doing Reverence in the Church: For he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Body of the Ca∣thedral * 16.514 at Canterbury at Noon-Day, as will be Justified by Oath. And for this very Particular, the Book of Recreations, he inform∣ed at the Council-Table against a Gentleman of Quality, for say∣ing, * 16.515 it was unfit such Books should be sent, for Ministers to read in the Church. And was himself laid by the Heels for the Falshood of this Information. So he is very good at the point of Consci∣ence too, that can refuse to read the Book, as being unfit, and complain to have another Punished for saying 'tis so.

3. The Third Witness is Mr. Wilson. He says, That I sent to Sir Nath. Brent to Suspend him. That is true, but it was when he would neither Obey, nor keep in his Tongue. He says, his Living was Sequestred for almost Four Years. But it was not for Not Reading this Book. For himself confesses it was done in the High-Commission; and that for Dilapidations, in Not Repairing his House.

4. The Fourth Witness was one Mr. Snelling, a Minister in the Di∣ocess of Rochester. All that was done against this Man was openly in the High-Commission Court. And there he was Censured for other things, as well as for this. Himself confesses his open refusing to Bow at the Name of Jesus, though the Canon of the Church Com∣mand it. I kept him off from being Sentenced a long time, and when he was Sentenced he confesses I was not present. He says, somewhat was expunged out of his Brief. If it were, it was with the consent of his Councel; which in that Court was ordinary. Howso∣ever

it cannot touch me: For those things were done at Informati∣ons, where I was not present. He says, that when I heard of the Nature of his Defence, I said, If any such Defence were put in, it should be burnt. This was upon just Complaint of the Judge then present at Informations, affirming it was against all the course of that Court. He says, there is no Penalty mentioned in that Decla∣ration. And I say his Obedience and other Mens should have been the more free and chearful. Well, I pray God keep us in the mean, in this business of the Sabbath, as well as in other things, that we run not into a Jewish Superstition, while we seek to shun Profaneness. This, Calvin hath in the mean time assured me, That * 16.516 those Men who stand so strictly upon the Morality of the Sabbath, do by a gross and carnal Sabbatization, three times out-go the Superstition of the Jew.

Here it was inferred, that there was a Combination for the doing of this in other Dioceses. But no proof at all was offer'd. Then Bi∣shop Mountague's Articles, and Bishop Wrenn's were Read, to shew that Inquiry was made about the Reading of this Book. And the Bishop of London's Articles Named, but not Read. But if I were in this Combination, why were not my Articles Read? Because no such thing appears in them; and because my Articles gave so good content, that while the Convocation was sitting, Dr. Brown∣rigg and Dr. Holdsworth came to me, and desired me to have my Book confirmed in Convocation, to be general for all Bishops in future, it was so moderate and according to Law. But why then (say they) were other Articles thought on, and a Clause that none should pass without the Approbation of the Arch-Bishop? Why; other were thought on, because I could not in Modesty press the Confir∣mation of my own, though solicited to it. And that Clause was added, till a standing Book for all Dioceses might be perfected, that no Quaere in the Interim might be put to any, but such as were according to Law.

The Sixth Charge was about Reversing of a Decree in Chancery (as * 16.517 'tis said) about Houses in Dr: Walton's Parish, given, as was said, to Superstitious Vses.

1. The First Witness was Serjeant Turner. He says, He had a Rule in the King's Bench for a Prohibition in this Cause. But by Reason of some defect (what; is not mentioned) he confesses he could not get his Prohibition. Here's nothing that reflects upon me. And if a Prohibition were moved for; that could not be personally to me, but to my Judge in some Spiritual 〈◊〉〈◊〉 where it seems this Cause depended, and to which the Decree in Chancery was directed. And indeed this Act which they call a Reversing, was the Act and Seal of Sir Nath. Brent my Vicar General. And if he violated the Lord Keeper's Decree, he must Answer it. But the Instrument being then produced, it appeared concurrent in all things with the Decree. The Words are, Juxta scopum Decreti hac in parte in Curiâ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 factum, &c.

2. The Second Witness was Mr. Edwards. And wherein 〈◊〉〈◊〉 con∣curs with Serjeant Turner, I give him the same Answer. For

that which he adds, that Dr. Walton did let Leases of these Houses at an undervalue, and called none of the Parishioners to it: If he did in this any thing contrary to Justice, or the Will of the Donor, or the Decree; he is Living to Answer for himself; me it concerns not. For his Exception taken to my Grant, (of Confir∣mation I think he means) and to the Words therein, Omnis & Om∣nimoda, &c. 'Tis the Ancient Stile of such Grants, for I know not how many Hundred Years; no Syllable innovated or altered by me.

Then followed the Charge of Mr. Burton and Mr. Pryn, about * 16.518 their Answer, and their not being suffer'd to put it into the Star-Chamber. Which though Mr. Pryn pressed at large before, yet here it must come again, to help fill the World with Cla∣mour. Yet to that which shall but seem new I shall Answer. Two things are said. (1.) The one, That they were not suffered to put in their defence, Modo & Forma, as it was laid. There was an Order made openly in Court to the Judges, to Expunge Scanda∣lous Matter. And the two Chief Justices did Order the Expung∣ing of all that which was Expunged, be it more or less: As ap∣pears in the Acts of that Court. (2.) The other is, that I procured this Expunging. The Proofs that I procured it were these. 1. First, because Mr. Cockshot gave me an Account of the business from Mr. Attorney. I had Reason to look after the business, the whole Church of Eng∣land being scandalized in that Bill, as well as my self. But this is no Proof, that I either gave direction or used any solicitation to the Re∣verend Judges, to whom it was referred. 2. Secondly, because I gave the Lords thanks for it: It was openly in Court: It was after the Expunging was agreed unto. And what could I do less in such a Cause of the Church, though I had not been personally concerned in it? 3. Thirdly, because I had a Copy of their Answer found in my Study. I conceive it was not only fit, but necessary for me to have one, the Nature of the Cause considered. But who interlined any passages in it with black Lead, I know not. For I ever used Ink, and no black Lead all my Life. These be strange Proofs that I pro∣cured any thing.

Then Mr. Pryn added, That the Justice and Favour which was af∣forded Dr. Leighton, was denyed unto him: As far as I remember, it was for the putting in of his Answer under his own Hand. This, if so, was done by Order of the Court, it was not my Act.

The last Charge followed. And that was taken out of the Preface * 16.519 to my Speech in Star-Chamber. The Words are, That one way of Go∣vernment * 16.520 is not always either fit or safe, when the Humors of the People are in a continual Change, &c. From whence they inferred, I laboured to reduce all to an Arbitrary Government. But I do humbly conceive, no construction can force these Words against me for an Arbitrary Government. For the meaning is, and can be no other, for some∣times a stricter, and sometimes a remisser holding and ordering the Reins of Government; yet both according to the same Laws, by a different use and application of Mercy and Justice to Offenders.

And so I Answer'd to Mr. Brown, who charged this against me as one of my ill Counsels to his Majesty. But my Answer given is

Truth. For it is not said, That there should not be One Law for Government, but not One way in the Ordering and Execution of that Law. And the Observator upon my Speech (an English Author, * 16.521 and well enough known, though he pretend 'tis a Translation out of Dutch) though he spares nothing that may be but carped at, yet to this passage he says 'tis a good Maxim, and wishes the King would follow it. And truly, for my part, I Learned it of a very wise and an able Governour, and he a King of England too, it was of Hen. 7. of * 16.522 whom the Story says, that in the difficulties of his Time and Cause, he used both ways of Government, Severity and Cle∣mency, yet both these were still within the compass of the Law. He far too Wise, and I never yet such a Fool, as to imbrace Arbi∣trary Government.

CAP. XXXVI.

THis day I received a Note from the Committee, that they intend∣ed * 16.523 to proceed next upon the remainder of the Seventh, and upon the Eighth and Ninth Original Articles. Which follow in haec Verba.

The Eighth Article.

8. That for the better advancing of his Trayterous Purpose and De∣sign, he did abuse the great Power and Trust his Majesty re∣posed in him; and did intrude upon the Places of divers great Officers, and upon the Right of other his Majesty's Subjects; whereby he did procure to himself the Nomination of sundry Per∣sons to Ecclesiastical Dignities, Promotions and Benefices belong∣ing to his Majesty and divers of the Nobility, Clergy and others; and hath taken upon him the commendation of Chaplains to the King; by which means, he hath preferred to his Majesty's Service, and to other great Promotions in the Church, such as have been Popishly affected, or otherwise Vnsound and Corrupt both in Do∣ctrine and Manners.

The Ninth Article.

9. He hath for the same Trayterous and Wicked intent, chosen and imployed such Men to be his Chaplains, whom he knew to be Notoriously disaffected to the Reformed Religion, grosty ad∣dicted to Popish Superstition, and Erroneous and Vnsound both in Judgment and Practice; and to them, or some of them, he hath committed the Licensing of Books to be Printed, by which means, divers False and Superstitious Books have been Publish∣ed, to the great Scandal of Religion, and to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of many of his Majesty's Subjects.

The Fourteenth Day of my Hearing.

At the ending of the former days Charge, I was put off to this * 16.524 day, which held. The First Charge was concerning Mr. Damport's leaving his Benefice in London, and going into Holland. * 16.525

1. The First Witness for this was Quaterman, a bitter Enemy of * 16.526 mine; God forgive him. He speaks, as if he had fled from his Mini∣stry here for fear of me. But the Second Witness Mr. Dukeswell says, that he went away upon a Warrant that came to Summon him into the High Commission. The Truth is, my Lords, and 'tis well known, and to some of his best Friends, that I preserved him once before, and my Lord Veer came and gave me Thanks for it. If after this he fell into danger again, Majus Peccatum habet; I cannot preserve Men that will continue in dangerous courses. He says farther (and in this the other Witness agrees with him) That when I heard he was gone into New-England, I should say my Arm should reach him there. The Words I remember not. But for the thing, I cannot think it fit that any Plantation should secure any Offender against the Church of Eng∣land. And therefore if I did say my Arm should reach him, or them so offending, I know no Crime in it; so long as my Arm reached no Man but by the Law.

2. The Second Witness Mr. Dukeswell adds nothing to this, but that he says, Sir Maurice Abbot kept him in before. For which Te∣stimony I thank him. For by this it appears, that Mr. Dam∣port was a dangerous Factious Man, and so accounted in my Pre∣decessor's Time, and it seems Prosecuted then too, that his Brother Sir Maurice Abbot was fain, (being then a Parishioner of his) to labour hard to keep him in.

The Second Charge was concerning Nathaniel Wickens, a Servant * 16.527 of Mr. Pryns.

1. The First Witness in this Cause was William Wickens, Father to Nathaniel. He says, his Son was Nine Weeks in divers Prisons, and for no Cause but for that he was Mr. Pryn's Servant. But it appears apud Acta, that there were many Articles of great Misdemeanour against him. And afterwards himself adds, That he knew no Cause but his refusing to take the Oath Ex Officio. Why, but if he knew that, then he knew another Cause, beside his being Mr. Pryn's Ser∣vant. Unless he will say all Mr. Pryn's Servants refuse that Oath, and all that refuse that Oath are Mr. Pryn's Servants. As for the Sentence which was laid upon him and the Imprisonment, that was the Act of the High-Commission, not mine. Then he says, That my Hand was first in the Warrant for his Commitment. And so it was to be of course.

2. The Second Witness was Sarah Wayman. She says, that he re∣fused to take the Oath. Therefore he was not committed for being Mr. Pryn's Servant. She says, that for refusing the Oath, he was threatned he should be taken pro Confesso: And that when one of the Doctors replyed, that could not be done by the Order of the

Court, I should say, I would have an Order by the next Court Day. 'Tis manifest in the Course of that Court, that any Man may be taken pro Confesso, that will not take the Oath, and answer. Yet seeing how that party of Men prevailed, and that one Doctors doubt∣ing might breed more Difference, to the great Scandal and Weak∣ning of that Court, I publickly acquainted his Majesty and the Lords with it. Who were all of Opinion, that if such Refusers might not be taken pro Confesso, the whole Power of the Court was shaken. And hereupon his Majesty sent his Letter under his Signet, to com∣mand us to uphold the Power of the Court, and to proceed. She says farther, that he desired the sight of his Articles, which was denyed him. It was the constant and known Course of that Court, that he might not see the Articles till he had taken the Oath, which he refused to do.

3. The Third Witness was one Flower. He agrees about the bu∣siness of taking him pro Confesso. But that's answerd. He adds, that there was nothing laid to his Charge, and yet confesses that Wickens desired to see the Articles that were against him. This is a pretty Oath. There were Articles against him, which he desired to see, and yet there was nothing laid to his Charge.

4. Then was produced his Majesty's Letter sent unto us. And here∣in the King requires us by his Supream Power Ecclesiastical to pro∣ceed, &c. We had been in a fine case, had we disobeyed this Com∣mand. Besides, my Lords, I pray mark it; we are enjoyned to pro∣ceed by the King's Supream Power Ecclesiastical; and yet it is here urged against me, that this was done to bring in Popery. An Excel∣lent new way of bringing in Popery by the King's Supremacy. Yea, but they say, I should not have procured this Letter. Why? I hope I may by all Lawful ways preserve the Honour, and just Power of the Court in which I sat. And 'tis expressed in the Letter, that no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was done, than was agreeable to the Laws and Customs of the Realm. And 'tis known that both an Oath, and a taking pro Confesso in point of refusal, are used both in the Star-Chamber, and in the Chancery.

5. The last Witness was Mr. Pryn, who says, That his Man was not suffered to come to him, during his Soarness when his ears were Crop∣ped. This Favour should have been asked of the Court of Star-Chamber, not of me. And yet here is no Proof that I denyed him this, but the bare Report of him, whom he says, he employed. Nor do I remember any Man's coming to me about it.

The Third Charge followed, it was concerning stopping of Book * 16.528 from the Press, both Old and New, and expunging some things out of them.

1. The first Instance was about the English Bibles with the Geneva Notes. The Bibles with those Notes were tolerated indeed both in Queen Elizabeths and King James his Time; but allowed by Autho∣rity in neither. And King James said plainly, That he thought the * 16.529 Geneva Translation was the worst, and many of the Notes very Partial, Vntrue, Seditious, and savouring too much of Dangerous and Traite∣rous Conceits. And gave Instance. This passage I then read to the Lords: And withal told them, that now of late these Notes were more commonly used to ill purposes, than formerly, and that that

was the Cause why the High-Commission was more careful and strict against them than before.

Here Michael Sparks the Elder came in as Witness, and said, he was called into the High Commission about these Books: But he confesses, it was not only for them. He says, the restraint of those Bibles was for the Notes. But he adds, as he supposes. And his Supposal is no Proof. Besides, he might have added here also, that the restraint was not for the Notes only: For by the numerous coming over of Bibles, both with and without Notes from Amsterdam, there was a great and a just fear conceived, that by little and little, Printing would quite be carried out of the Kingdom. For the Books which came thence, were better Print, better Bound, better Paper, and for all the Charges of bringing, sold better Cheap. And would any Man Buy a worse Bible Dearer, that might have a better more Cheap? And to preserve Printing here at home, as well as the Notes, was the Cause of stricter looking to those Bibles. And this appears by a Letter of Sir William Boswell's his Majesty's Agent in the Low Coun∣treys; the Letter written to me, and now produced against me: But makes for me, as I conceive. For therein he sends me word of two Im∣pressions of the Bible in English, one with Notes, and the other with∣out: And desires me to take care to regulate this business at home. What should I do? Should I sleep upon such Advertisements as these, and from such a hand? Especially since he sends word also, that Dr. Amyes was then Printing of a Book wholly against the Church of England. So my Care was against all underminings, both at home and abroad, of the Established Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England, for which I am now like to suffer. And I pray God that point of Arminianism, Libertas Prophetandi, do not more Mis∣chief in short time, than is expressible by me.

2. The Second Instance was about the New Decree of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, concerning Printing. Four Articles of this Decree were read, namely, the 1, 2, 18, 24. What these are, may be seen in the Deecree: And as I think that whole Decree made Anno 1637. use∣ful and necessary: So, under your Lordships Favour, I think those Four Articles as necessary as any.

Mr. Waly and Mr. Downes, two Stationers, Witnesses in this Par∣ticular, say, That they desired some Mitigation of the Decree, and that Judge Bramston said, he could not do it without me. I saw my Lord Chief Justice Bramston here in the Court but the other Day; why was not he examined, but these Men only, who oppose all Regu∣lating of the Press, that opposes their Profit? And sure that grave Judge meant, he could not do it alone without the consent of the Court. Or if he would have me Consulted, it was out of his Ju∣dicious Care for the Peace of this Church, almost Pressed to Death * 16.530 by the Liberty of Printing. The Chief Grievance they Expressed against the new Licensing of Books, was only for matter of Charges. But that is provided for in the Eighteenth Article. And Mr. Downes takes a fine Oath, which was, that he makes no doubt, but that all was done by my Direction; and yet adds, that he cannot say it. So he swears that, which himself confesses he cannot say. And manifest it is in the Preface, that this Decree was Printed by Order of the Court, and so

by their Command sent to the Stationers Hall: And the end of it was to suppress Seditious, Schismatical and Mutinous Books; as ap∣pears in the First Article.

3. The Third Instance was, That I used my Power to suppress Books in Holland. This was drawn out of a Letter which John le Mare, one of the Prime Preachers in Amsterdam, writ to me; expres∣sing therein, that since the Proclamation made by the States, no Man durst meddle with Printing any Seditious Libels, against either the State or Church of England. Where's the Fault? For this Gentleman did a very good Office to this Kingdom and Church, in procuring that Proclamation: For till this was done, every discontented Spi∣rit could Print what he pleased at Amsterdam, against either: And if he had any Direction from me about it (which is not proved) I neither am, nor can be sorry for it. And the Fear which kept Men in from Printing, proceeded from the Proclamation of the States, not from any Power of mine.

4. The Fourth Instance was in the Book of Martyrs. But that was but named, to Credit a base Business, an Almanack made by one Mr. * 16.531 Genebrand: In which he had left out all the Saints, Apostles and all; and put in those which are named in Mr. Fox: And yet not all them neither; for he had left out the Solemn Days, which are in Fox, as Feb. 2. Feb. 25. Mar. 25. And Cranmer Translated to Mar. 23.

In this Particular Mr. Genebrand, Brother to this Almanack-maker, witnesseth, that the Queen sent to me about this New Almanack. If her Majesty did send to me about it (as 'tis probable she would disdain the Book) is that any Crime in me? Could I prevent her Majestys sending, who could not know so much as that she would send? He says, his Brother was acquitted in the High-Commission, but charged by me that he made a Faction in the Court. If I did say so, surely, my Lords, I saw some practising by him in this new-found way. He says, the Papists bought up a great number of these Almanacks, and burnt them. It seems he could not hinder that, nor I neither; unless it shall not be Lawful for a Papist to buy an Almanack. For when he hath bought him, he may burn him if he please.

But since the Book of Martyrs was named, I shall tell your Lordships how careful I was of it. It is well known, how easily Abridgments, by their Brevity and their Cheapness, in short time work out the Authors themselves. Mr. Young the Printer laboured me earnestly and often for an Abridgment of the Book of Martyrs. But I still with∣stood it (as my Secretary here present can Testifie) upon these two Grounds. The one, lest it should bring the large Book it self into disuse. And the other, lest if any Material thing should be left out, that should have been charged as done of purpose by me; as now I see it is in other Books. And I humbly pray your Lordships cast your Eyes upon the Frontispiece of the Book of Martyrs, Printed An: 1642. since this Parliament began, and when I was safe enough from having any Hand in the Business; and there you shall see as dangerous Pictures as have been charged upon me, or any my Chap∣pel Windows.

Upon Occasion of Mr. Genebrand's Calendar, Mr. Pryn took occa∣sion to tell the Lords, that I had made Notes upon the Calendar in

the Missal. I desired they might be read: It was thought too tedi∣ous. They were nothing but some Additions of my own reading to the Occurrences on some Days. And because the Calendar in the Missal was open and large, I thought fit to Write them there.

5. The Fifth Instance is in Dr. Pocklinton his Censure of * 16.532 ....... and of Flaccius Illyricus. And that this Book was Licensed by my Chap∣lain Dr. Bray. And he was Censured in this Honourable House for that and like slips of his. Then it was inferred at the Bar, That it must be taken as my Act, if it were done by my Chaplain. But Infer∣ences are no sworn Proof: And, I conceive, no Man can by Law be punished criminally for his Servants Fact; Unless there be Proof that he had a hand in it. Then it was urged, but without any Proof too, that Dr. Pocklinton was preferred by me. To which I shall answer when Proof is made: And if I had, 'tis far enough from Treason.

6. The next Instance was, about the calling in of Thomas Beacons Disputation of the Mass. The Witness Mr. Pryn. He says, the Book * 16.533 was Licensed, and that a Papist thereupon said, doth my Lord of Canter∣bury License such Books? That I was informed of these Words, and the Book called in the next Day. First, Mr. Pryn is single in this part of the Testimony for the Words. Secondly, if any Papist did say so, it was not in my Power to stop his Mouth; and they which License Books, must indure many and various Censures, as the Readers of them stand affected. Thirdly, if any Papist did so speak, I have reason to think it was to do me a Mischief, as much as in him lay. Fourthly, this is a very bold Oath; For he swears, that I was Inform∣ed of these Words. He was not present to hear it, and then he can have it but by Hearsay, and no Religion teaches him to swear that for Truth, which he doth but hear. Lastly, the Book was called in, because it was slipt out contrary to the late Decree for Printing. Yea, but Mr. Pryn Swears, and so doth Michael Sparks the other Wit∣ness, * 16.534 that the Book was sent to the Printer before the Decree. But first, Sparks his Oath is uncertain; for he says Mr. Pryn sent him the Book before the Decree, and then by and by after, says, it was about that time. Now the Book is somwhat large, so that it might be sent him before the Decree, and yet not be Printed till after, and that a good space too. And Secondly, Mr. Pryn himself confesses, the Book was sent when the Decree was in agitation.

7. The Seventh Instance was about Arminianism, as maintained by me against the Declarations of both Houses of Parliament, and of King James, concerning Vorstius and Bertius. First, I have nothing to do to defend Arminianism, no Man having yet charged me with the abetting any point of it. Secondly, King James his Declaration is very Learn∣ed: But under Favour, he puts a great deal of difference between Vor∣stius and Bertius: And his Majesty's Opinion is clear with the Article of the Church of England, and so Expressed by himself: And to which I ever Consented. And the Passage in the Conference at Hampton-Court * 16.535 was then read to the Lords, and yet for the Peace of Christendom, and the strengthning of the Reformed Religion, I do heartily wish these Differences were not pursued with such Heat and Animosity, in re∣gard that all the Lutheran Protestants are of the very same Opinions,

or with very little difference from those which are now called Armi∣nianism.

And here comes in Michael Sparks; who says, He was called into the High-Commission about a Book of Bishop Carletons. I cannot pun∣ctually remember all Particulars so long since. But he confesses the Business was in the High-Commission. And so not singly chargable a∣gainst me. Besides, he is single in this Business. He says, he was Eleven Years in the High-Commission, and never Sentenced.

This is more than I know. But if it be so, he had better luck than some Honester Men. For a bitterer Enemy to his power, the Church-Government never had.

He was Mr. Pryn's Printer. He says, I was a Dean then, and he thinks of Hereford. I was never Dean of Here∣ford. But howsoever, this is a dangerous Oath; let him think of it. He Swears that I was a Dean then; and a High-Commissioner; or else what had I to do in the Business? Now it is well known I was never a High-Commissioner, till I had been a Bishop some Years. For the Book it self, Sparks says nothing what was the Argument of it: But (so far as I remember) it was expresly against the King's Declara∣tion.

And so I Answer'd Mr. Brown, when he summed up the Evidence against me in the House of Commons. And though in his Reply he seemed to deny this, yet I remember no Proof he brought for it.

8. The last Instance was pregnant, and brought forth many Parti∣culars. As First, Dr: Featly's Parallels against Bishop Mountague. * 16.536 But this was Still-born; at least it says nothing of me. Secondly, * 16.537 Mr. Pryn's Perpetuity, and against Dr: Cosens, both burnt. But he doth not say absolutely burnt, but as he is informed, and he may be informed amiss. And howsoever he says, it was done by the High-Commission, not by me. Thirdly, some Sheets of Dr. Succliff's Book * 16.538 Prohibited the Press at Oxford. I hope Oxford is able to give an Ac∣count for it self. And whereas it was here said at the Bar: They hoped I would shew some repressing of the contrary part. I would satisfie their Hopes abundantly, could I bring Witnesses from Oxford, how even and steddy a Hand I carried to both parts, Fourthly, Mr. * 16.539 Burton questioned about his Book called The seven Vials. But himself confesses, that upon Sir Henry Martin's Information, that, as that Cause was laid, the High-Commission had no power in it, he was dismissed. Fifthly, That about his Book, Intituled Babel no Bethel; he was que∣stioned * 16.540 at a Court out of Term. This was very usual, whensoever the Court was full of Business, to hold one Court-day out of Term. This is Warranted by the Commission. And warning of it was always publickly given the Court-day before, that all, whom it concerned, might take notice of it, and provide themselves. Sixthly, he says, he was there * 16.541 railed at by Bishop Harsnet. 'Tis more than I know that Bishop Harsnet railed at him; but if he did, I hope I am not brought hither to Answer all Mens faults. Seventhly, he says, he claimed the Petition * 16.542 of Right, yet was Committed. This is more than I know or believe; yet if it were so, it was done by the High-Commission Court, not by me. He says next, that he could never be quiet. But I am sure, my * 16.543 Lords, the Church for divers Years could never be in quiet, for him and his Associates. Lastly, they say, some Passages against Arminia∣nism * 16.544

were left out of two Letters, one of Bishop Davenants, and the other of Bishop Halls, sent to be Printed. First, here is no Proof at all offer'd, that I differ'd in any thing from the Doctrine expressed in those Letters. And Secondly, for the leaving out of those passages, it was (it seems) done to avoid kindling of new flames in the Church of England. And it appeared on the other side of the Paper, which was produced against me, and so Read to the Lords; that these Passages were left out by the express Order from those Bishops themselves, under Bishop Hall's own Hand, and with Thanks to Dr: Turner, then my Chaplain, for his Letter to them. And here this days Business ended. And I received Command to attend again the Twentieth of the same Month.

CAP. XXXVII. The Fifteenth Day of my Hearing.

THis day I came again to the House. A day or two before, as * 16.545 now also, the Landing place at Westminster was not so full of People; and they which were there, much more civil towards me * 16.546 than formerly. My Friends were willing to perswade me, that my Answer had much abated the edge of the People, saving from the violent and factious Leaders of the Multitude, whom it seems nothing would satisfie but my Life (for so I was after told in plain terms, by a Man deeply interessed in them;) when I presently saw Quaterman coming towards me, who, so soon as he came, fell to his wonted Rail∣ing, and asked aloud, what the Lords meant, to be troubled so long and so often, with such a base Fellow as I was, they should do well to Hang me out of the way. I heard the Words with grief enough, and so left them and him in the Hands of God. My Servants were earness to have me complain to the Lords. I remembred my late Complaint about the Pamphlets had no redress; and so forbare it. They not∣withstanding, out of their Zeal, complained to Mr. Lieutenant of the Tower; who presently went forth, and said he would school him. But I hearkned no more after it.

When I came to the Bar, Mr: Nicolas began with great violence, and told the Lords, the business grew higher and higher against me. What the Business did, will after appear; but I am sure he grew higher and higher, and from this time forward, besides the violence of Ex∣pression, gave me such Language, as no Christian would give a Jew. But God, I humbly thank him, blessed me with Patience; and so I made my Ears Obedient. That which made him say the Business grew higher and higher, was this. Upon my often calling to have the Oaths at the Coronation of King James and King Charles compared, some of them repaired again to my Study at Lambeth, to search for all such Copies of Coronation-Books as could there be found. In this dili∣gent

and curious search

(For Mr. Pryn's Malice made it)

they found some Papers concerning Parliaments, no other (I praise God for it) than such, as with indifferent construction might (I hope) well pass, especially considering what occasion led me, and what Command was upon me. And as I have been told by Able and Experienced Men, they would have been nothing, had they been found in any, but this troublesom and distracted time about the Rights of Parlia∣ments, (as 'tis said.) Howsoever, I was most unfortunate they should be now found, and I had not left them a Being, but that I verily thought I had destroyed them long since. But they were unhappily found among the heaps of my Papers. And so

An Answer to the Remonstrance made June: 17: 1628. (which is * 16.547 Sixteen Years since) was made the First Charge against me.

And the Second Charge was, A Paper concerning a Declaration, Jan: * 16.548 28: 1628. To both which I then Answer'd; but because these are urged more than once, to help fill the People with new Clamour, and because they are more closely pressed against me at the last day of my Hearing; and because Mr. Brown in his Summary Charge, laid and charged all these Papers together; to avoid tedious repetition, I will also make my whole and entire Answer together, when that time comes.

The Third Charge of this day was, A Letter of a Jesuit to his Su∣periour, * 16.549 found in my Study, dated Mar: 1628. Let the Letter be dated when it will, I hope the Arch-Bishop may get and keep the Letters of any Jesuits or others. How shall I be able to know or prevent their Plots upon the Religion by Law Established, if this may not be done? Yet this I desire all Men to take notice of, that this Letter was not directed to me. I was then Bishop of London: The Letter was found in a search. But when by all possible care taken by the High-Commission the Author could not be found, I had (as I hum∣bly conceive) great Reason to keep it. And I then humbly desired, the whole Letter might be Read. There was in it, that Arminianism (as 'twas urged) was their Drug, and their Plot against us, &c. The Jesuit seeing a Fire kindling about these Opinions, might write what he pleased to help on his Cause. Yet this Drug, which he says is theirs, is the received Opinion of all the Lutherans, and they too Learned Protestants to use their Drugs. And if it be their Drug, why do the Dominicans so Condemn it? Nay, why doth the Master of the Sentences, and the School after him, for the most, determin rigid∣ly against it? And whereas 'tis said, That these Men had Instruments at the Duke's Chamber Door. That belongs not to me, I was not Porter there. As for that Power which I had (called by Mr. Nicolas the Command of his Ear) I used it as much as I could to shut such In∣struments thence. Beside, 'tis barely said, no Proof at all offer'd, that such Instruments were about the Duke's Chamber-Door. Other Papers were found in my Study, above sixty at the least, expressing my continued Labours for some Years together, to Reconcile the divided Protestants in Germany, that so they might go with united Forces against the Romanists.

Why are not these produced too? Would not Christianity and Justice have my Innocence cleared, as well as my Faults accused?

The Fourth Charge was Bishop Mountagues Preferment. The Parliament (they say) called him in Question, and the King called in his Book; yet, in Affront to the Parliament, that he was preferr'd by me. * 16.550 No: It was then publickly known in Court (whether now remem∣bred or no, I cannot tell) that he was preferred by my Lord Duke; but being a Church Business, the King Commanded me to signifie his Pleasure to the Signet Office. And the Docket (which is all the Proof here made) mentions him only by whom the Kings Pleasure is signified, not him that procures the Preferment. So the Docket in this Case no Proof at all.

The Fifth Charge was a Paper Intituled, Considerations for the * 16.551 Church. Three Exceptions against them. The Observation of the King's Declaration, Art 3. The Lecturers, Art 5. And the High-Commission and Prohibitions, Art 10, 11. The Paper I desired might be all Read. Nothing in them against either Law or Religion. And for Lectu∣rers a better care taken, and with more Ease to the People, and more Peace to the Church, by a Combination of Conformable Neigh∣bouring Ministers, in their turns, and not by some one Humorous Man, who too often mis-leads the People. Secondly, my Copy of * 16.552 Considerations came from Arch-Bishop Harsnet, in which was some sour Expression concerning Emanuel and Sidney Colleges in Cam∣bridge, which the King in his Wisdom thought fit to leave out. The King's Instructions upon these Considerations, are under Mr. Baker's Hand, who was Secretary to my Predecessor. And they were sent to me to make Exceptions to them, if I knew any, in regard of the Ministers of London, whereof I was then Bishop. And by this, that they were thus sent unto me by my Predecessor, 'tis manifest, that this account from the several Dioceses to the Arch-Bishop, and from him to his Majesty once a Year, was begun before my time. Howsoever, if it had not, I should have been glad of the Honour of it, had it begun in mine. For I humbly conceive, there cannot be a better or a safer way to preserve Truth and Peace in the Church, than that once a Year every Bishop should give an account of all greater Occurrences in the Church to his Metropolitan, and he to the King. Without which, the King, who is the Supream, is like to be a great Stranger to all Church Proceedings.

The Sixth Charge was about Dr: Sibthorp's Sermon, that my Prede∣cessor * 16.553 opposed the Printing of it, and that I opposed him to Affront the Parliament. Nothing so, my Lords. Nothing done by me to op∣pose, or affront, the One or the Other. This Sermon came forth when the Loan was not yet settled in Parliament. The Lords, and the Judges, and the Bishops, were some for, some against it. And if my Judgment were Erroneous in that Point, it was mis-led by Lords of great Honour and Experience, and by Judges of great knowledge in the Law. But I did nothing to affront any. 'Tis said, that I inserted into the Sermon, that the People may not refuse any Tax that is not unjustly laid. I conceive nothing is justly laid in that kind but according to Law; Gods and Mans. And I dare not say, the People may refuse any thing so laid. For Jus Regis, the Right of a King, (which is urged against me too) I never went farther than the Scriptures lead me; Nor did I ever think, that Jus

Regis, mentioned, 1: Sam: 8: is meant of the Ordinary and just Right of Kings, but of that Power which, such as Saul would be, would assume unto themselves, and make it right by Power. * 16.554

Then they say, I expunged some things out of it. As first, The Sabbath, and put instead of it the Lords Day. What's my Offence? Sabbath is the Jews Word, and the Lords-Day the Christians. Second∣ly, about Evil Counseilors to be used as Haman. The Passage (as there Expressed) was very Scandalous, and without just Cause, upon the Lords of the Council. And they might justly have thought I had want∣ed Discretion, should I have left it in. Thirdly, that I expunged this, that Popery is against the first and the second Commandment. If I did it, it was because it is much doubted by Learned Men, whether any thing in Popery is against the first Commandment, or denies the U∣nity of the God-head. And Mr. Perkins (who Charges very home * 16.555 against Popery) lays not the Breach of the first Commandment upon them.

And when I gave Mr. Brown this Answer. In his last Reply, he asked why I left out both? Why, I did it because its be∣ing against the second is common and obvious, and I did not think it worthy the standing in such a Sermon, when it could not be made good against the first.

But they demanded, why I should make any Animadversions at all upon the Sermon? It was thus. The Sermon being presented to his Majesty, and the Argument not common, he committed the Care of Printing it to Bishop Mountain, the Bishop of London, and four o∣ther; of which I was one. And this was the Reason of the Ani∣madversions now called mine. As also of the Answer to my Predeces∣sors Exceptions (now Charged also) and called mine. But it was the Joint Answer of the Committee. And so is that other Particular al∣so, In which the whole Business is left to the Learned in the Laws. For though the Animadversions be in my Hand, yet they were done at and by the Committee, only I being puny Bishop, was put to write them in my Hand.

The Seventh Charge was Dr: Manwaring's Business and Preferment. * 16.556 It was handled before, only resumed here to make a Noise, and so passed it over.

The Eighth Charge was concerning some Alterations in the Prayers * 16.557 made for the Fifth of November, and in the Book for the Fast, which was Published An: 1636. And the Prayers on Coronation Day.

1. First for the Fast-Book: The Prayer mentioned was altered, as is Expressed; but it was by him that had the Ordering of that Book to the Press, not by me. Yet I cannot but approve the Rea∣son given for it, and that without any the least approbation of Merit. For the Abuse of Fasting, by thinking it Meritorious, is the thing left out; whereas in this Age and Kingdom, when, and where, set Fastings of the Church are cryed down, there can be little fear of that Erroneous Opinion of placing any Merit in Fasting.

2 Secondly, for the Prayers Published for the Fifth of November, and Coronation Day. The Alterations were made either by the King himself, or some about him when I was not in Court. And the Books sent me with a Command for the Printing, as there altered. I made stay, till I might wait upon his Majesty. I found him re∣solved

upon the alterations; nor in my judgment could I justly ex∣cept against them. His Majesty then gave Warrant to the Books themselves with the alterations in them, and so by his Warrant I commanded the Printing. And I then shewed both the Books to the Lords, who Viewed them, and acknowledged his Ma jesty' Hand, with which, not his Name only, but the whole Warrant was written.

And here I humbly desired three things might be observed, and I still desire it. First, with what Conscience this passage out of my Speech in the * 16.558 Star Chamber was urged against me (for so it was, and fiercely by Mr. Nicolas) to prove that I had altered the Oath at the King's Coronation, because the Prayers appointed for the Anniver∣sary of the Coronation were altered.

Which is absolute Nonsence.

Secondly, he Charged me that the Word Antichristian was left out. But that is visibly untrue, for it is left in. Thirdly, that though it be in, yet that the Alteration takes it off from the Papist, as also their Rebellion. Neither: For the Change is this, That Antichristian Sect; altered into The Antichristian Sect of them which, &c. and, whose Reli∣gion is Rebellion; altered into who turn Religion into Rebellion. By which it is manifest that the alteration takes off neither Imputation from the Papist, but moderates both. And for ought I yet know, 'tis ne∣cessary it should. For if their Religion be Rebellion, see what it will produce. Is not this the Syllogism? The Religion of the Papist is Rebellion: But Christianity is the Religion of the Papist: Therefore Christianity is Rebellion. I may not inlarge; but you may see more, if you please, in my Speech in the † 16.559 Star-Chamber.

And when Mr. Brown in the Summ of his Charge pressed these Altera∣tions hard against me, he did not so much as mention, that I had the King's both Warrant and Command to all that I did in that Parti∣cular: And besides, urged this as a great Innovation, because the Prayers mentioned had continued unaltered for the space of above Thirty Years. Not remembring therewhile, that the Liturgy of the Church Established by Act of Parliament, must be taken away, or altered, though it hath continued above Fourscore. Nay, and Episcopacy must be quite abolished, though it have continued in the Church of Christ above Sixteen Hundred.

The Ninth Charge was from Sir Edward Hungerford, who came to * 16.560 Lambeth to have a little Book Licensed to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The Author was Sir Anthony Hungerford, whether Sir Edward's Grandfather or his Uncle, I remember not the Relation. He says, he came to my Chap∣lain Dr: Bray to License it. And that Dr: Bray told him there were some harsh Phrases in it, which were better left out, because we were upon a way of winning the Papists. First, I hope I shall not be made answerable for my Chaplains Words too. And Secondly, I hope there is no harm in winning the Papists to the Church of England: Especially if so ea∣sie a Cure, as avoiding harsh Language would do it. He says, my Chaplain expressed a dislike of Guicciardin's Censure of Pope Alexander the Sixth. Sure if the Censure be false, he had reason to except a∣gainst it; if true, yet to Publish such an unsavoury Business to the Common-People ........ He says, he came and complained to me, and that I told him I was not at leisure, but left it to my Chaplain. So the

Charge upon me was, That my Chaplain was in an Errour concerning this Book, and I would not Redress it. To this I answerd: First, that my Chaplain was Dead, and I not knowing the Reasons which mo∣ved him to refuse Licensing this Book, can neither confess him to be in an Errour, nor yet justifie him. Secondly, for my own refusing to meddle with it. Sir Edward took me in a time of business, when I could not attend it. Thirdly, if I had absolutely refused it, and left it to my Chaplain, I had done no more than all my Predeces∣sors did before me. And Dr. Featly then witnessed to the Lords, that Arch-Bishop Abbot, my immediate Predecessor, and to whom the Doctor was Household Chaplain, would never meddle with Licen∣sing Books, but ever referred them to his Chaplains: And Dr. Mock∣et, another of his Chaplains (well known to Dr. Featly) suffered for a Book sharply; yet not one Word said to my Predecessor about it. Fourthly, as the Liberty of the Press is in England, and of the Books which are tendred to the Press, the Arch-Bishop had better Grind, than take that Work to his own Hands, especially consider∣ing his many and necessary Avocations. Lastly, no Man ever com∣plained to me in this kind, but this Gentleman only. So it is one only single Offence, if it be any.

But how this or the rest should be Treason against Sir Edward Hungerford, I cannot yet see. And so I answered Mr. Brown; who in his Summary Charge forgot not this: But Mr. Nicolas laid load upon me in his Reply, in such Language as I am willing to forget.

The Tenth Charge was out of a Paper of Considerations to Dr. * 16.561 Potter, about some few passages in his Answer to a Book Intituled Charity mistaken. The Business this. Dr: Potter writ to me for my Advice: I used not to be Peremptory; but put some few things back to his farther consideration. Of which, three were now Charged upon me. The first was, he used this phrase Believe in * 16.562 the Pope. I desired him to consider of (In) And in this I yet know not wherein I offend. The Second, was this Phrase, The Idol of * 16.563 Rome. I advised him to consider this Phrase too, that Men might not be to seek what that Idol was.

And here Mr: Nicolas cryed out with vehemency, That every Boy in the Street could tell the Pope was the Idol. I had not Dr: Potter's Book now at hand; and so could not be certain in what Sense the Doctor used it; but else, as many at least, think the Mass the Idol of Rome, as the Pope: Un∣less Mr: Nicolas his Boys in the Streets think otherwise, and then I cannot blame him for following such mature Judgments.

The Third was, That I bid him consider whether the Passage p. 27. (as * 16.564 I remember) did not give as much Power to the Parliament in matter of Doctrine, as the Church.

But my Answer to this I shall put off to the Charge against me concerning Parliaments, because there Mr. Brown began with this. The two former he Charged also, and I answered them as before. But he omitted, that I obtained of the Lords the reading of Dr. Potter's Letter to me, by which he drew from me those Things which I determined not, but only put to his Second Thoughts and Consideration. In which way (I humbly conceive) I cannot be in Crime, though I were in Errour. Here ended the Business of this Day, and I was Ordered to attend again June 27.

CAP. XXXVIII. The Sixteenth Day of my Hearing.

THis day I appeared again; And the first Charge laid against me, * 16.565 was my Chaplain Dr: Bray's Expungings out of Dr: Featly's Ser∣mons. The same Charge ad Verbum which was before, and I give it * 16.566 the same Answer. These Repetitions of the same things, being only * 16.567 to increase Clamour, and to fill more Mens Ears with it.

The Second Charge, was certain Expunctions of some things * 16.568 against the Papists in Dr: Clark's Sermons. The Witness which Swore to the passages left out, was one Mr: White a Minister, and it seems some near Acquaintance of Dr: Clark's. But First, this Wit∣ness is single. Secondly, he brought only a Paper, in which he had written down what was Expunged; but Dr: Clark's Sermons he brought not with it: So 'tis not impossible he might be mistaken: Howsoever, I not having the Book, could not possibly make an ab∣solute and a perfect Answer. Thirdly, this Witness confesses, that Dr: Weeks, then Chaplain to my Lord of London, had the view of Dr: Clark's Sermons, and took Exceptions against some passages, as well as my Chaplain Dr: Haywood did. So it seems there was cause for it. Fourthly, I Answer, that for this, and for all other of like Nature, my Chaplain must Answer for his own Act, and not I. He is Living, and an Able Man; I humbly desire he may be called to his Account. For 'tis not possible for me to tell your Lordships, upon what grounds he did Expunge these many and different passages, which are instanced against me. Lastly, in all the passages of Dr: Clark's Sermons, it is not any where distinguished, which were Expunged by my Chaplain, and which by Dr: Weeks: So that the Charge in that behalf, is left very uncertain.

For the passages themselves, as they are many, so they are such as may easily be mistaken, the most of them. And whether Dr: Clark handled them in such manner as was not justifiable, either against Arminius or the Papists, cannot possibly be known, till each place in the Book be Examined for the Thing, and my Chaplain Dr: Haywood for the Meaning.

This made a great noise in Mr: Brown's Summary Charge against me, he alledging, that two and twenty Passages about Points of Popery were dashed out of Dr: Clark's Sermons. To which I Answer'd, that I conceived my Chaplain would be able to make it good, there were two hundred left in for two and twenty left out. And that they which were left out, were not some way or other justifiable against the Papists, as set down and expressed by him. And if so, they are better out than in. For we gain nothing by urging that against the Papists, which, when it comes to the Touch, cannot be made good against them.

One Passage is here added out of Dr. Featly's Sermons, p. 225. Where he inveighs against too much imbellishing and beautifying the Church, and not the Souls of Men, &c. First, if there be not a care to beautifie the Soul, let Men profess what Religion they will, 'tis a just Exception, and I believe no fault found with that. But Se∣condly, for the over-much beautifying of the Church, 'tis a Point that might well be left out. Little necessity, God knows, to Preach or Print against too much adorning of Churches among us, where yet so many Churches lye very nastily in many places of the King∣dom, and no one too much adorned to be found. Nay, the very Consecration of Churches cryed down (as is before expressed.) And this Opinion, that no Place is Holy but during the Service in it, made Mr. Culmer, though a Minister, to piss in the Cathedral Church of Canterbury: And divers others to do so, and more, against the Pil∣lars in St: Paul's nearer hand, as may daily be both seen and smelt, to the shame of that which is called Religion.

Here Mr: Nicolas would fain have shovell'd it to the out-side of the Church (which had been bad enough) but it was the inside I spake of, and the thing is known.

Then an Instance was made in a Book of Dr: Jones. The Wit∣ness that any thing was Expunged out of this, was only Mr: Chetwin. And he confesses that this Book was Licensed by Dr: Baker, and he my Lord of London's Chaplain, not mine. Here my Friends at the Bar infer, that Dr: Baker was preferred by me. First, that's not so, he was preferred by his own Lord. Secondly, if he had been prefer∣red by me, it could have made no Charge, unless proof had been made that I preferred him for abusing Dr. Jones his Book. And for the Docket, which is the only Proof offer'd that I preferred him, I have already shewed, that that is no Proof. Yea, but they say, Dr: Baker was imployed by me as one of my Visitors. And what then? Must I be answerable for every fault that is committed by every Man that I employ in my Visitation, though it be a fault committed at another time and place, though I humbly desire Dr. Baker may An∣swer for himself, before I acknowledge any fault committed by him?

And though I conceive this Answer abundantly satisfactory for any thing that may concern me, yet Mr. Brown omitted not this Instance against me.

The Third Charge was personally against my self, and taken * 16.569 out of my * 16.570 Speech in the Star-Chamber. The words these. The Altar is the greatest place of God's Residence upon Earth, greater than the Pulpit; for there 'tis Hoc est Corpus meum, this is my Body; but in the other it is at most, but Hoc est Verbum meum, this is my Word: And a greater Reverence is due to the Body, than the Word of the Lord. Out of this place, Mr: Nicolas would needs inforce, that I maintain∣ed Transubstantiation; because I say There, 'tis Hoc est Corpus meum. First, I perceive by him, he confounds (as too many else do) Tran∣substantiation with the Real Presence, whereas these have a wide diff∣erence. And Calvin grants a Real and True Presence, yea, and he grants Realiter too; and yet no Man a greater Enemy to Transubstan∣tiation than he. As I have proved at large in my Book against Fisher, * 16.571 and had leave to Read the Passage therein to the Lords. And

Mr. Perkins avows as much. And Secondly, the Word (There) makes nothing against this. For after the Words of Consecration are past, be the Minister never so Unworthy, yet 'tis infallibly Hoc * 16.572 est Corpus meum to every worthy Receiver. So is it not Hoc est Ver∣bum meum, from the Pulpit to the best of Hearers, nor by the best of Preachers since the Apostles Time.

And as Preaching goes now, scarce is any thing heard from many in two long Hours, that sa∣vours of the Word of God.

And St. Paul tells us, 1 Cor. 11. of * 16.573 a great Sin committed in his Time, of not discerning the Lord's Body, when Unworthy Communicants received it. Where was this? Why it was There, at the Holy Table or Altar, where they Received, yet did not discern. I hope for all this St. Paul did not maintain Transubstantiation.

Mr. Brown in his Summary Charge pressed this also upon me. I answer'd as before, and added, that in all Ages of the Church, the Touchstone of Religion was not to Hear the Word Preached, but to Communicate. And at this day, many will come and hear Sermons, who yet will not receive the Com∣munion together. And as I call the Holy Table the greatest place of God's Residence upon Earth; so doth a late Learned Divine of this * 16.574 Church, call the Celebration of the Eucharist, the Crown of Publick Service; and the most solemn and chief work of Christian Assemblies; and he a Man known to be far from affecting Popery in the least. And all Divines agree in this, which our Saviour himself Teaches. * 16.575 St. Mat. 26. That there is the same effect of the Passion of Christ, and of this Blessed Sacrament Worthily Received.

Another passage taken out of my * 16.576 Speech was; That due Reverence be given to God and to his Altar. Hence Mr. Nicolas infers again: This Reverence is one joint Act, therefore 'tis Divine to the Altar, as well as to God, and so Idolatry. First, the very next words in my Speech are, that this Reverence to the Altar comes far short of Divine Worship. What can prevent an Objection, if such plain words cannot? Second∣ly, having thus plainly expressed it; he may infer too if he will, that I do not then Worship God. For this Reverence is one joint Act; but 'tis confessed, that 'tis not Divine Worship to the Altar, and therefore not to God.

But Thirdly, this Gentleman, by his Favour, understands not the Mysteries which lye hid in many parts of Di∣vinity.

In this for one. For when this Reverence is performed, 'tis to God as to the Creator, and so Divine: But 'tis only toward, not to the Altar, and so far short. And though in outward performance it be one joint Act, yet that which is not separated, is, and must be distinguished one from the other.

To make a good Work acceptable to God, there must * 16.577 be both Faith and Charity: They cannot be separated one from the other; what, shall they not therefore be distinguished? He that speaks (saith St. Aug.) by one joint Act sends out his Voice and his Word; separated they cannot be, shall not they be distinguish∣ed therefore? But I have lived long enough, and taken pains to small purpose, if Mr. Nicolas or any Lay-Man else, at his by and leisure Hours, from a busie Profession, shall be able to Teach me in that which I have laboured all my Life. And God bless the

poor Bishops and Clergy of England, if falling into a Storm (as I now am) they must have such Judges as Mr. Nicolas.

The Fourth Charge, Is the Licensing of Sales, and other Books which * 16.578 had Popery in them, by my Chaplain Dr. Haywood. 1. To this Mr. Pryn (who is the single witness) says, That he tender'd a Bill to the then Lord Keeper against my Chaplain for Licensing this Book, and that his Lordship refused it. If the Lord Keeper Coventry refused his Bill, I believe, were he living, he would assign just Cause why he did it. But whatever Cause he had, it concerns not me, that he rejected the Bill. Mr. Pryn says farther, That this Book of Sales was Printed heretofore, but purged first by Dr. James; but Licensed now by Dr. Haywood, not according to that Purgation, but with all the Points of Popery in. For this he pro∣duces Mr. Oaks, whose Son printed it. And says farther, That his Correcter at the Press found fault with some passages, and thereupon he was sent to Dr. Haywood, who returned answer (as they say) That if he Li∣censed it, he would justifie it. And that his Son told him this. First, My Lords, this Under-Testimony of Mr. Oakes produced by Mr. Pryn, is nothing but a Hearsay from his Son, who is now dead, and cannot be Examined, and while he was living ran away and would not be Ex∣amined. Secondly, this was a most notable piece of Villany practi∣sed against my Chaplain, and thorough his sides against me. It was thus, My Lords. Whether the Bill were rejected or no, I cannot tell; but the Complaint of Printing this Book came publickly into the Star-Chamber. And then was the first time that ever I heard of it. I then humbly desired their Lordships that Dr. Haywood might answer what∣ever he had done amiss, either there or where they pleased. The Court presently commanded Mr. Atturny Bankes to call all Parties be∣fore him, examine them thoroughly, and then give his Account what he found; that the Court might proceed farther according to Justice. Dr. Haywood appeared, and shewed Mr. Atturney how he had Corre∣cted Sales in all Popish Points before he Licensed it. But young Oakes, and he which brought Sales to be Licensed (who was then thought to be some Jesuited Recusant, and, as I remember, Lodged for that time of Printing, in Oakes his House) ran both away, or hid their Heads, and would not be found. And this was a meer Plot of this Recusant, if not Priest, to have Sales Printed, with all his Points of Popery in him, to work mischief to my Chaplain and my self. And young Oakes was in all likelihood well payed for his pains. This Account Mr. Atturney brought into that Court, and this Relation Dr. Haywood (who I obtained might be after sent for) attested at this Barr.

One Circumstance my old decayed Memory mistook. For I thought, and so at first told the Lords, that for this Clamor raised upon him in this way, I did soon after dismiss him my House. But after, I found that he was gone out of my House before. Howsoever I left him, without any Mediation, to the Justice of the Court. And here I may not forget that which I then observed to the Lords, that where∣as 'tis urged, that many Points of Popery have passed the Press; 'tis no wonder, if such Art be used as was here to get out Sales. And this farther is observable, that all these Quotations of Popish Opinions, men∣tioned here to fill up the noise, are out of four or five Books at the most, of which more are out of this Sales than all the rest.

And call∣ed

in he was, as soon as known. Which Mr. Brown in the Summ of his Charge acknowledges.

2. After Sales, the next Instance was in a Book Intituled, Christ's Epistle to the Devout Reader. Four particular Points were urged out of this: But neither I, nor my Chaplains had ought to do with it. For it was Licensed at London House by Dr. Weeks. Nor was there ever any complaint brought to me to have it called in: Nor was any such Proof so much as offer'd.

3. The Third Instance was of a Book called the Female Glory, where Mr. Pryn (who is single again) said that Dr. Heylin answered Mr. Bur∣ton, and justified all the Passages in this Book. And added, that this was by my direction. But upon my Motion at the Barr concerning the boldness of this Oath, Mr. Pryn recalled himself, and said that I ap∣pointed him to answer Mr. Burton. But it is one thing to appoint him to answer Mr. Burton: And another to direct him to justifie all passages in the Female Glory.

4. The Fourth Instance was in a Letter sent to me from one Crox∣ton, a young Divine in Ireland. He was bred in St. John's College in Oxford. At the Lord Mount-Norris his Intreaty I sent Croxton into Ireland to be his Chaplain. If he miscarried there, I could not help it, nor hinder his writing of a Letter to me, nor pre∣seribe what he should write in it. But, to my remembrance, I ne∣ver heard of any Miscarriage of his in matter of Religion. And whether he be living or dead, I know not. That Letter indeed hath a Cross at the top of it. But then was another Letter of his shewed without a Cross, in which he calls Rome Monstrum A∣bominandum. Howsoever I conceive all this is nothing to me.

5. The Fifth Instance was a Book, which they said was Licensed by Dr. Weeks. And if so, then not by my Chaplain. But upon peru∣sal, I find no License Printed to it, nor to any of the other, but only to Sales, which is answered.

6. The Sixth Instance was in Bishop Mountague's Books, the Gagg, and the Appeal. Here they said, that Dr. White told Dr. Featly, that five or six Bishops did allow these Books. But he did not name me to be one of them. Then Mr. Pryn urged upon his Oath, that these Books were found in my Study. And I cannot but bless my self at this Argument. For I have Bellarmine in my Study; Therefore I am a Papist: Or I have the Alcaron in my Study; Therefore I am a Turk, is as good an Argument as this; I have Bishop Moun∣tague's Books in my Study; Therefore I am an Arminian. May Mr. Pryn have Books in all kinds in his Study, and may not the Arch∣bishop of Canterbury have them in his? Yea, but he says, there is a Letter of the Bishops to me, submitting his Books to my Censure. This Letter hath no date, and so belike Mr. Pryn thought he might be bold both with it and his Oath, and apply it to what Books he pleas'd. But as God would have it, there are Circumstances in it as good as a Date. For 'tis therein expressed, that he was now ready to remove from Chichester to Norwich. Therefore he must needs speak of sub∣mitting those his Books to me, which were then ready to be set out, which were his Origines Ecclesiasticae, not the Gagg, nor the Appeal,

which are the Books Charged, and which were Printed divers Years before he was made a Bishop; and my Receit indorsed upon it is Mar. 29. 1638. And I hope Mr. Nicolas will not call this the Colour of an Answer, as he hath called many of the rest given by me.

7. The Seventh Instance was in a Book Licensed by Dr. Martin, then my Chaplain in London-House. This Book Mr. Pryn says, was purposely set out to Countenance Arminianism, as if it had been some Work of Moment, whereas it was answered twice in the Queens Time. If Dr: Martin did this, 'tis more than I remember; nor can I so long after give any Account of it. But Dr: Martin is Living and in Town, and I humbly desired he might be called to answer. He was called the next Day, and gave this Account.

The Account is wanting; a Space left for it, but not filled up.

Mr. Pryn says farther, that after this he Preached Arminianism at S. Paul's Cross. Why did not Mr. Pryn come then to me, and acquaint me with it? Which neither he nor any Man else did. And I was in Attendance at Court, whither I could not hear him. And the Charge which came against him upon the next Days Hearing, was this and no more; That one then Preached at the Cross Vniversal Redemption; but he that gave Testimony, knew him not; only he says, one told him 'twas Dr: Martin.

8. The last Instance was of a Bible commonly Sold, with a Popish Table at the end of it. This is more than I know, or ever heard till now; nor was any Complaint ever brought to me of it. And I cannot know all things that are done abroad for Gain; for that will teach them to conceal, as well as move them to act. Yet one of the Popish Heads mentioned in that Table, was Confirmation, which is commanded in our Church Liturgy, and ratified by Law.

Here this day ended, and I was ordered to appear again July 4. * 16.579 That Day I received a Note, under Mr. Nicolas his Hand, that they meant to proceed upon the 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14th. Original Arti∣cles, and the Sixth and Seventh Additionals. The last Warrant for other Articles, came under Serjeant Wild's Hand, and Mr. Nicolas signing this, it seems, mistook. For the Eighth and Ninth Original Articles are in part proceeded on before. Now they go forward with these, and then on to the rest, which I will write down seve∣rally as they come to them.

The same Day, being Thursday, all my Books at Lambeth were by Order of the House of Commons taken away by Mr. ....... Se∣cretary to the Right Honourable the Earl of Warwick, and carried I know not whither, but are (as 'tis commonly said) for the use of Mr: Peters. Before this time, some good Number of my Books were delivered to the use of the Synod, the Ministers which had them giving no Catalogue under their Hands, which or how many they had. And all this was done contrary to an Order of the Lords, bearing Date Novemb. 9. 1642. for the safe keeping of my Books there: And before I was Convicted off any Crime. This Day also I received an Order, which put off my Hearing to the next Day.

CAP. XXXIX. The Seventeenth Day of my Hearing.

THis Day I appeared again: And the First Charge against me * 16.580 was, that I had preferred none to Bishopricks, Deaneries, prebends, and Benefices, but Men Popishly affected, or otherwise unworthy. And * 16.581 some they named. * 16.582

1. As First, Dr: Manwaring, Disabled by the Parliament.

2. Secondly, Mr: Mountague, Excepted against by Parliament. But for these, no Proof was now brought. They referred themselves to what was said before, and so do I. And where they go to prove only by Dockets, I desire it may still be remembred that the Docket is a full Proof who gave Order for drawing the Bill at the Signet Office: But no Proof at all who procured the Preferment.

3. Thirdly, Bishop Corbet. But the Earl of Dorset got my Lord Duke of Buckingham to prefer him, to make way for Dr. Duppa, his deserving Chaplain into Christ-Church. Nor was any thing Charged against Dr: Corbet, but that he was preferred by me.

4. Fourthly, Bishop Pierce: Against whom there was no Proof of∣fered neither. And he is living to answer it, if any be.

5. Nor was there now any Proof offered against Bishop Wren, who was named also; at the least not till he was made a Bishop. So if I did prefer him, it seems I did it when nothing was laid against him. And if after he had his Preferment, he did any thing un∣worthily, that could not I foresee; and he is living to answer it.

6. The Sixth was Bishop Lindsy, a Man known to be of great and universal Learning, but preferred by the then Lord Treasurer Portland, not by me. Him they Charged with Arminianism. The Witnesses two: The First, Mr. Smart; he is positive: He was his Fellow Prebendary at Durham. There was Animosity between them.

And Smart, not able to Judge of Arminianism.

Secondly, Mr. Wal∣ker, who could say nothing, but that he heard so much from some Ministers, and Dr. Bastwick.

So here is as Learned a Man as Chri∣stendom had any of his time, Debased in this great and Honoura∣ble Court, by Ignorance, and a Hearsay. And that, when the Man is gone to that which should be his Quiet, the Grave.

7. The Seventh was Arch-Bishop Neile, a Man well known to be as true to, and as stout for the Church of England established by Law, as any Man that came to Preferment in it. Nor could his great Enemy Mr. Smart say any thing now against him, but a Hearsay from one Dr. Moor of Winchester. And I cannot but profess, it grieves me much, to hear so many Honest and Worthy Men so used, when the Grave hath shut up their Mouths from answering for them∣selves.

8. The next was Dr: Cosin, to be Dean of Peterborough. I named Four of his Majesty's Chaplains to him, as he had Commanded me.

And the King pitched upon Dr. Cosens, in regard all the Means he then had, lay in, and about Duresm, and was then in the Scots Hands; so that he had nothing but Forty Pound a Year by his Head∣ship in Peter-House to maintain himself, his Wife and Children.

9. The Ninth was Dr. Potter, a known Arminian, to the Deanery of Worcester. What Proof of this? Nothing but the Docket. And what of the Crime? Nothing but Dr. Featly's Testimony; who says no more but this, That Dr. Potter was at first against Arminianism, (that's Absolute) But afterwards he defended it, as he hath heard: (there's a Hearsay.)

10. The Tenth was Dr: Baker.

11. The Eleventh Dr: Weeks. Both very Honest and Able Men; but Preferred by their own Lord, the Lord Bishop of London.

12. The Twelfth was Dr: Bray. He had been my Chaplain above Ten Years in my House; I found him a very Able and an Honest Man, and had reason to Prefer him to be able to Live well; and I did so. Here is nothing objected against him, but his Expungings, and not Expungings of some Books; which if he were Living, I well hope he would be able to give good Account for.

13. The Thirteenth Dr: Heylin. He is known to be a Learned and an Able Man; but for his Preferment, both to be his Majesty's Chaplain, and for that which he got in that Service, he owes it under God to the Memory of the Earl of Danby, who took care of him in the University.

14. After these, they named some, whom they said I preferred to be the King's Chaplains. The Witness here Mr. Oldsworth, the Lord Chamberlain's Secretary. He says, the Power and Practice of na∣ming Chaplains was in the Lord Chamberlain for these 25. Years. And I say, 'tis so still, for ought I know. He says, that in all things con∣cerning which the Lord Chamberlain's Warrant went in this Form; These are to will and require you, &c. that there his Lordship did it without consulting the King; and that the Warrant for Chaplains run all in this Form. First, this is more than I know or ever heard of till now. Secondly, be it so; yet 'tis hard to deny the King to hear Men Preach before they be sworn his Chaplains,

if his Majesty desire it, since it argues a great care in the King, especially in such a Factious time, as began to overlay this Church.

Thirdly, he confesses, that he knows not who put the King upon this way; but believes that I did it. He is single, and his belief only is no Evidence.

And whosoever gave the King that Advice, deserved very well both of his Majesty and the Church of England: That none might be put about him in that Service, but such as himself should approve of. But that which troubled this Witness, was another thing. He had not Money for every one that was made Chaplain; nor Money to get them a Month to wait in; nor Money to change their Month, if it were inconvenient for their other Occasions; nor Money for sparing their Attendance, when they pleased. In which, and other things, I would he had been as careful of his Lord's Honour, as I have been in all things. For 'tis well known in Court, I obser∣ved his Lordship as much as any Man.

The Men which are instanced in, are Dr: Heylin. But he was

preferred to that Service by my Lord the Earl of Danby. Then Dr. Potter. But the Lord Keeper Coventry was his means. Dr. Cosens was preferred by Bishop Neile, whose Chaplain he had been many Years, and he moved the Lord Chamberlain for it. Dr: Lawrence was my Lord Chamberlain's own Chaplain, and preferred by himself; and in all likelyhood, by Mr. Oldsworth's means: For he was Fellow of Magdalen College in Oxford, as Mr. Oldsworth himself was, and he once (to my Knowledge) had a great Opinion of him. Dr. Haywood in∣deed was my Chaplain; but I preferred him not to his Majesty, till he had Preached divers times in Court with great Approbation; nor then, but with my Lord Chamberlain's Love and Liking. As for Dr. Pocklington, I know not who recommended him; nor is there any Proof offered that I did it.

15. Then they proceeded to my own Chaplains. They name Four of them: First Dr. Weeks. But he was never in my House, ne∣ver medled with the Licensing of any Books, till he was gone from me to the Bishop of London: So he is charged with no Fault, so long as he was mine. The Second, Dr: Haywood. But he is charged with nothing but Sales, which was a most desperate Plot against him, as is before shewed. The Third was Dr. Martin. Against him came Mr. Pryn, for his Arminian Sermon at S. Pauls Cross. But that's answered before. And Mr. Walker, who said, he proposed Arminian Questions to divers Ministers. Belike, such as were to be examined by him. But he adds, as these Ministers told him. So 'tis but a Hear∣say. And say he did propose such Questions; may it not be fit enough to try how able they were to answer them? The Fourth was Dr. Bray. Against him Dr. Featly was again produced, for that which he had expunged out of his Sermons. But when I saw this so often incul∣cated to make a noise, I humbly desired of the Lords, that I might ask Dr. Featly one Question: Upon leave granted, I asked him, Whe∣ther nothing were of late expunged out of a Book of his written against a Priest? and desired him to speak upon the Oath he had ta∣ken. He answered roundly, that divers passages against the Anabap∣tists, and some in defence of the Liturgy of the Church of England were expunged: I asked, by whom? He said, by Mr. Rouse and the Committee, or, by Mr. Rouse or the Committee. Be it which it will, I observed to the Lords, that Mr. Rouse and the Committee might expunge Passages against the Anabaptists, nay, for the Liturgy establish∣ed by Law; but my Chaplains may not expunge any thing against the Papists, though perhaps mistaken.

From thence, they fell upon Men, whom they said I had prefer∣red to Benefices. They named but Two. Dr: Heylin was one again, whom I preferred not. The other was Dr: Jackson, the late Presi∣dent of Corpus Christi College in Oxford. Dr: Featly being produced, said, Dr: Jackson was a known Arminian. If so to him, 'tis well: The Man is Dead, and cannot answer for himself. Thus far I can for him, without medling with any his Opinions. He was very Ho∣nest, and very Learned, and at those Years he was of, might deserve more than a Poor Benefice.

16. Here Mr: Pryn came in again, and Testified very boldly, that I gave many Benefices, which were in the Gift of the Master of the

Wards: And all Preferments, only to such Men as were for Ceremonies, Popery and Arminianism. For the First of these two, the Business was thus: There arose a Difference between the then Lord Keeper Coven∣try, and the Lord Cottington, then Master of the Wards, about the dis∣posing of those Benefices. It grew somewhat high, and came to Hearing by the King himself: His Majesty, upon Hearing, gave the right of Sealing to the Lord Keeper, but for the time, till more might appear, reserved the Giving to himself; that he might have some of those lesser Preferments to bestow on such Ministers as attended upon his Navy then at Sea. I never gave any one of these Benefices in my Life. And that this Story is of Truth, the Lord Cottington is yet living, and can Witness it.

And this very Answer I gave to Mr. Brown, who in summing up the Charge laid this also upon me, and without mentioning what Answer I gave to it.

For the Se∣cond, that I preferred none but such Men. 'Tis known I preferred Bishop Hall to Exeter; Dr. Potter to Carlile; Dr. Cook to Bristol first, and then to Hereford; That I gave Dr. Westfield the Archdeaconry of S. Albans; that I was Dr. Fells means for Christ-Church; and Dr. Higgs his for the Deanery of Litchfield; that I setled Dr. Downing at Hackney; and Mr. Herrick at Manchester, when the Broad Seal for∣merly given him was questioned: That I gave two of my own Benefi∣ces to Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Taylor, two of the now Synod; an Hospital to Dr: Jackson of Canterbury; and a Benefice to his Son in Law, at his Suit: I could not Name all these upon the sudden, yet some I did; and no one of them guilty of this Charge in the least.

Mr. Brown in his Summary said, I could name but one or two. And when in my Answer made in the House of Commons, I specified more, among which Mr: Palmer was one: Mr. Brown said in his Reply, that Mr: Palmer had indeed his Benesice of my giving, so himself told him; but it was at the Entreaty of a great Noble-Man. Say it were; Mr. Palmer was then a stranger to me: Some body must speak, and assure me of his Wants and Worth, or I cannot give. But if upon this I give it freely, is it worth no thanks from him, be∣cause a Noble-Man spake to me? Let Mr. Palmer rank this Grati∣tude among his other Vertues.

17. From hence they stepped over into Ireland, and objected my preferring of Dr: Chappel to be Master of the College at Dublin. Here the first Witness is Mr. Walker. He says, that all his Scholars were Arminians. This is a great sign, but not full Proof. He says, that Dr. Chappel was at First fierce against them, but afterward changed his Mind. Dr. Featly said the like of Dr. Potter. Some say Arminius him∣self was at first Zealous against those Opinions, but studying hard to confute them, changed his own Mind.

Take heed, Mr. Walker, do not Study these Points too hard.

For my own part, Dr. Chap∣pel was a Cambridge Man, altogether unknown to me, save that I re∣ceived from thence great Testimony of his Abilities, and fitness for Government, which that College then extreamly wanted: And no Man ever complained to me, that he favoured Arminianism.

The other Witness was Dr. Hoyle, a Fellow of the College in Dublin. He says, that the Doctor did maintain in that College Justifi∣cation by Works; and in Christ-Church Arminianism. In this he is

single: But if it be true, why did not the Lord Primate of Armagh Punish him? for he says he knew it. That he opposed some things in the Synod. And it may be there was just Cause for it. Lastly, he says, the late Lord Deputy liked not the Irish Articles; but gave them an Honourable Burial, as (he says) the Lord Primate himself con∣fessed. I am a stranger to all this; nor doth Dr. Hoyle charge any thing against me; but says, that they which did this, were supposed to have some Friend in England. And surely their Carriage was very ill, if they had none.

18. Then were Letters read of my Lord Primate's to me, in which is Testified my Care of the Patrimony of that Church. And then a Paper of Instructions given by me to the Lord Deputy at his first going into that Kingdom. For the First; though it be thrust in here, among matters of Religion, yet I pray your Lordships to consider, 'tis about the Patrimony of that Church only. And I thank them heartily for producing it. For in this Letter is a full confession of my Lord Pri∣mate's, that the motion of getting the Impropriations from his Majesty (formerly objected against me) proceeded from him, as I then plead∣ed: And the Letter was read. For the Second; my Lord Deputy, a little before his first going into Ireland, asked me what Service I would command him for the Church there? I humbly thanked him, as I had reason, and told him I would bethink my self, and give him my Thoughts in Writing: These are they which are call∣ed Instructions. They are only for the good of that poor Church, as your Lordships have heard them. This was all; and herein my Lord shewed his Honour, and I did but my Duty.

Though I very well understand, why this Paper is produced against me.

After this they proceeded to the Eleventh Original Article, which follows in haec Verba.

11. He in his own Person, and his Suffragans, Visitors, Surrogates, Chancellors, or other Officers by his Command, have caused divers Learned, Pious and Orthodox Preachers of God's Word, to be Silenced, Suspended, Deprived, Degraded, Excommunicated, or otherwise Grieved and Vexed, without any just and lawful Cause; whereby, and by divers other means, he hath hindred the Preach∣ing of God's Word, caused divers of his Majesty's Loyal Subjects to forsake the Kingdom, and Increased and Cherished Ignorance and Prophaneness among the People, that so he might the better facilitate the way to the effecting of his own Wicked and Traite∣rous Design of Altering and Corrupting the true Religion here Established.

1. The First Instance to make good this Article, was a Repetition of some Lecturers before-named. But when they thought they had made Noise enough, they referred the Lords to their Notes; and so did I to my former Answers.

2. The Second Instance was out of some Articles of Bishop Mounta∣gue and Bishop Wrenn, and their Account given to me. Bishop Wrenn, Art: 16: Speaks of the Afternoon Sermons being turned into Catechising. And Art: 5: (of his Account I take it) that no Lecture in his Diocess after, &c.

It was made plain to the Lords, that this was spoken of some single and factious Lecturers, and that they had their Lectures Read by a Company of Learned and Orthodox Ministers by turns. As ap∣peared by the Munday Sermon at Burye, during that Learned Bishop's time. Nor were any forbid to Preach in the Afternoon, so the Ca∣techising were not omitted, before it, or with it. And the Bishop is Living to Answer it, if ought were then done amiss by him. In all which he did nothing, as any Deputy or Surrogate of mine, but as Diocesan of the Place. As for the Yearly Account to the King, ac∣cording to his Royal Instructions in that behalf; though it were pressed here again to multiply noise, yet nothing being new, I gave my Answer as before, and to that I refer my self.

3. The Third Answer was concerning Mr. Lee of Wolverhampton. The Evidence was a Letter of my Secretary Mr. Dell, written by my Command, to my Visitors there, to this Effect, That whether there were Cause or no, they should either punish Mr. Lee, or bring him into the High-Commission. Had the Words or the Sense been thus, they might well say, It was hard for the Judge before whom the Party was to Answer, to write thus. But I called to have the Letter read again, and the Words were these, If there were found against him that which might justly be Censured, then they should punish, &c. And the Reason why this strict care was taken, was because the Dean of Windsor his Ordinary complained unto me, that Mr. Lee's Carriage was so Facti∣ous there, that he could contain him in no Order. If he were a Man after this approved at Shrewsbury (as Mr: Walker witnesses) I hope the Proceedings at Wolverhampton did him good. But, my Lords, had it so fallen out, that my Secretary had forgotten my Instructions, and himself too, and expressed himself amiss, shall that slip of his, (had it been such) be imputed to me? I believe your Lordships would not willingly answer for every Phrase of your Secretaries Letters, which yet you command them to write.

4. The last Instance, was the Sentence in the High-Commission against Mr: Barnard, for Words about Pelagian Errors and Popery. First, if he were Sentenced in the High-Commission, it was the Act of the Court, and not mine; as has been often said. Secondly, no Proof is offer'd that he was Sentenced for those Words only. Thirdly, the Recan∣tation (howsoever refused by him, as Mr. Pryn says it was) makes mention of four Points for which he was Censured, of which these words are one. But not the words themselves, but his Unjust and Scandalous Application of them to me, which deserved them not. And lastly, Dr: Cumber, Master of Trinity College in Cambridge, was Prosecutor against him; which Office, so Grave and Worthy a Man would not (I suppose) have undertaken, had there not been great and just Cause for it.

Hence they proceeded to the Sixth Additional Article, which fol∣lows in these Words,

That whereas divers Gifts and Dispositions of divers Summs of Mo∣ney were heretofore made by divers Charitable and well disposed Persons, for the buying in of divers Impropriations, for the Main∣tenance of Preaching the Word of God in several Churches; the

said Arch-Bishop about Eight Years last past, wilfully and malici∣ously caused the said Gifts, Feoffments, and Conveyances, made to the uses aforesaid, to be overthrown in his Majesty's Court of Ex∣chequer, contrary to Law, as things dangerous to the Church and State, under the specious pretence of buying in Appropriations; whereby that Pious Work was suppressed and trodden down, to the great Dishonour of God, and Scandal of Religion.

This Article is only about the Feoffments. That which I did was this. I was (as then advised upon such Information as was given me) clearly of Opinion, that this was a cunning way, under a Glorious pretence, to overthrow the Church-Government, by getting into their power more dependency of the Clergy, than the King, and all the Peers, and all the Bishops in all the Kingdom had. And I did con∣ceive the Plot the more dangerous for the fairness of the pretence; and that to the State, as well as the Church. Hereupon not malici∣ously (as 'tis charged in the Article) but Conscientiously I resolved to suppress it, if by Law it might be done. Upon this, I acquainted his Majesty with the thing, and the danger which I conceived would in few Years spring out of it. The King referred me to his Attorney and the Law. Mr. Attorney Noye, after some pause upon it, proceeded in the Exchequer, and there it was by Judicial Proceeding and Sentence overthrown. If this Sentence were according to Law and Justice; then there's no fault at all committed: If it were against Law, the fault, what e're it be, was the Judges, not mine; for I soli∣cited none of them. And here I humbly desired, that the Lords * 16.583 would at their leisure read over the Sentence given in the Exche∣quer, which I then delivered in; but by Reason of the length it was not then read: Whether after it were, I cannot tell. I desired like∣wise, that my Councel might be heard in this, and all other points of Law.

1. The First Witness was Mr. Kendall: He says, that speaking with me about Presteen, I thanked God that I had overthrown this Feoffment.

2. The Second Witness Mr. Miller says, he heard me say, They would have undone the Church, but I have overthrown their Feoffment. These two Witnesses prove no more than I confess: For in the manner aforesaid, I deny not but I did my best in a Legal way to over∣throw it. And if I did Thank God for it, it was my Duty to do so, the thing being in my Judgment so pernicious as it was.

3. The Third Witness was Mr. White, one of the Feoffees. He says, that coming as Councel in a Cause before me; when that Business was done, I fell bitterly on him as an underminer of the Church. I remember well his coming to me as Councel about a Benefice. And 'tis very likely I spake my Conscience to him, as freely as he did his to me; but the Particulars I remember not; nor do I remember his coming afterwards to me to Fulham; nor his offer to change the Men or the Course, so the thing might stand. For to this I should have been as willing as he was; and if I remember right, there was order ta∣ken for this in the Decree of the Exchequer. And his Majesty's Plea∣sure

declared, that no Penny so given should be turned to other use. And I have been, and shall ever be as ready to get in Impropriations, by any Good and Legal way, as any Man (as may appear by my La∣bours about the Impropriations in Ireland.) But this way did not stand either with my Judgment or Conscience.

1. First, because little or nothing was given by them to the present Incumbent, to whom the Tythes were due, if to any; that the Parishioners which payed them, might have the more cheerful Instruction, the better Hospitality, and more full Relief for their Poor.

2. Secondly, because most of the Men they put in, were Persons disaffected to the Discipline, if not the Doctrine too of the Church of England.

3. Thirdly, because no small part was given to School-Masters, to Season Youth ab Ovo, for their Party: And to Young Students in the Universities, to purchase them and their Judgments to their side, against their coming abroad into the Church.

4. Fourthly, because all this Power to breed and maintain a Faction, was in the Hands of Twelve Men, who were they never so Honest, and free from Thoughts of abusing this Power, to fill the Church with Schism, yet who should be Successors, and what use should be made of this Power, was out of Humane reach to know.

5. Because this Power was assumed by, and to themselves, without any Legal Authority, as Mr. Attorney assured me.

He farther said, that the Impropriation of Presteen in Radnorshire, was specially given to St: Antolins in London: I say the more the pity, considering the poorness of that Country, and the little Preaching that was among that poor People; and the plenty which is in London. Yet because it was so given, there was care taken after the Decree, that they of St: Antolins had consideration, and I think to the full. He says, that indeed they did not give any thing to the present Incumbents, till Good Men came to be in their Places. Scarce one Incumbent was better'd by them. And what then?

In so many places not one Good Man found? Not one Factious enough against the Church, for Mr: White to account him Good?

Yet he thinks I disposed these things afterwards to Vnworthy Men.

Truly, had they been at my disposal, I should not wittingly have given them to Mr. White's Worthies.

But his Majesty laid his Command upon his Attorney, and nothing was done or to be done in these things, but by his direction. For Dr. Heylin, if he spake any thing amiss concerning this Feoffment, in any Sermon of his, he is Living to Answer it; me it concerns not.

Mr. Brown in the Summ of the Charge omitted not this. And I Answer'd as before. And in his Reply he turned again upon it, that it must be a Crime in me, because I projected to overthrow it. But, under favour, this follows not. For to project (though the word Projector sound ill in Eng∣land) is no more than to forecast, and forelay any Business. Now as 'tis lawful for me, by all good and fit Means, to project the Set∣tlement of any thing that is good; so is it as lawful by good and Legal means, to project the overthrow of any thing that is cunningly or apparently Evil. And such did this Feoffment appear to my Under∣standing,

and doth still.

As for reducing of Impropriations to their proper use, they may see (if they please) in my Diary (whence they had this) another Project to buy them into the Churches use: For given they will not be. But Mr. Pryn would shew nothing, nor Mr. Nicolas see any thing, but what they thought would make against me.

Here this day ended, and I was Commanded to Attend again, July 15. But was then put off to July 17. which day held. * 16.584

CAP. XL. The Eighteenth Day of my Hearing.

THis day they charged upon me the Twelfth Original Article; * 16.585 which follows in these words, * 16.586

He hath Trayterously endeavoured to cause Division and Discord between the Church of England and other Reformed Churches; and, to that end, hath Suppressed and Abrogated the Priviledges and Im∣munities, which have been by his Majesty and his Royal Ancestors granted to the French and Dutch Churches in this Kingdom; and divers other ways hath expressed his Malice and Disaffection to those Churches; that so by such dis-union, the Papists might have more advantage for the overthrow and extirpation of both.

The First Charge is, That I deny them to be a Church: For they say, that I * 16.587 say plainly in my Book against Fisher, that No Bishop, no Church. Now * 16.588 'tis well known, they have no Bishops, and therefore no Church. The Pas∣sage in my Book is an Inference of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Jerom's Opinion, no Declara∣tion of my own. And if they or any other be agrieved at St. Jerom for writing so, they may Answer him. Mr. Nicolas added, that this was seconded by Bishop Mountague's Book, which Mr. Pryn (carefully) * 16.589 witnessed was found in my Study, and Licensed by Dr. Braye: Is this Ar∣gument come again, that Bishop Mountague's Book was in my Study?

Leave it for shame.

But they have now left me never a Book in my Study; so I cannot make them any fuller Answer, without view∣ing the place, than themselves help me to by their own Confession. Which is, that he adds this Exception, that none but a Bishop can Ordain, but in Casu Necessitatis, which is the Opinion of many Learn∣ed and Moderate Divines.

Yet this is very considerable in the Business, whether an inevitable Necessity be cast upon them, or they pluck a kind of Necessity upon themselves.

The Second Charge is out of a Letter of mine to Bishop Hall, * 16.590 upon a Letter which he had formerly sent me. In which it seems, is something about the Case of Necessity in point of Ordination, which (they say) I disliked. And it seems I disliked upon good ground. For

he had given me power under his Hand, to alter what I would in that which he sent unto me. I would not take that power, but writ back to him what passages I thought might be better expressed, if it could agree with his Judgment also. Hereupon he sent me another Letter of Jan. 18. 1639. In which he altered those things which I put to his farther Consideration. Could any thing be more fairly carried? And this Letter was read to the Lords. Yea, but they say, I disliked the giving of this Title Antichrist to the Pope. No, I did not simply dislike it, but I advised Bishop Hall, if he thought it good, not to affirm it so positively. And the Reason I gave was this. That King James being pressed upon a great occasion, that he had main∣tained that the Pope was Antichrist, which might much trouble, if not quite cross some Proceedings much desired by that Prudent King: His Majesty made Answer: I maintain it not as a point of Faith, but as a probable Opinion: And for which I have more grounds than the Pope hath for his Challenge of Temporal Power over Princes. Let him recall this Opinion, and I'll recall that. This I writ to the Bishop, but left him free to do what he pleased.

Here Mr. Nicolas fell extream foul upon me, in so much, that I could not but wonder at their patience which heard him. Among other Titles bestowed upon me, many and gross, he called me over and over again, Pander to the Whore of Babylon. I was much moved; and humbly desired the Lords, that if my Crimes were such, as that I might not be used like an Arch-Bishop, yet I might be used like a Christian: And that were it not for the Duty which I owe to God and my own Innocency, I would desert my Defence, before I would indure such Language in such an Honourable Presence. Hereupon some Lords shewed their dislike, and wished him to leave, and pursue the Evidence.

Mr. Brown in summing up the Charge made this a great matter, The denial of the Pope to be Antichrist. But I did not deny it, nor declare any Opinion of my own: And many Protestants, and those very Learned, are of Opinion that he is not. 'Tis true I did not, I cannot approve foul Language in Controversies. Nor do I think * 16.591 that the calling of the Pope Antichrist, did ever yet Convert an Un∣derstanding Papist. And sure I am, Gabriel Powel's Peremptoriness (to say no worse) in this Point, did the Church of England no Good, no Honour in Foreign parts: For there he affirms, That he is as certain that the Pope is Antichrist, as that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Redeemer of the World. As for the thing it self, I left it free to all Men to think as their Judgment guided them: As appears by the Licensing of Dr. Featly's Sermons, where he proves the Pope, in his Opinion, to be Antichrist. Where he calls him also the * 16.592 Whore of Babylon: Which surely I should never have suffer'd to be Printed, had I been her Pander. And for Bishop Hall, I only told him what King James had said, and left him to make what use he pleased of it.

The Third Charge was out of a Paper, which Bishop Hall, about * 16.593 the time when he wrote his Book in defence of Episcopacy, sent unto me, containing divers Propositions concerning Episcopal Govern∣ment: In which, either he or I, or both say, (for that Circumstance

I remember not) That Church-Government by Bishops is not alterable by Humane Law. To this I answer'd, that Bishops might be regulated and limited by Human Laws, in those things which are but Incidents to their Calling. But their Calling, so far as it is Jure Divino, by Divine Right, cannot be taken away. They charge farther, that I say this is the Doctrine of the Church of England. And so I think it is. For Bishop Bilson set out a Book in the Queen's time, Intituled, The Perpetual * 16.594 Government. And if the Government by Bishops be Perpetual, as he there very Learnedly proves thorough the whole Book, it will be hard for any Christian Nation to out it. Nor is this his Judgment alone, but of the whole Church of England. For in the Preface to the * 16.595 Book of Ordination, are these words. From the Apostles time, there have been three Orders of Ministers in the Church of Christ, Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Where 'tis evident, that in the Judgment of the Church of England, Episcopacy is a different, not Degree only, but Order, from Priesthood, and so hath been reputed from the Apostles times. And this was then Read to the Lords. And the Law of England is as full for it, as the Church. For the Statute in the eighth of the Queen, abso∣lutely * 16.596 confirms all and every part of this Book of Ordination. Where also the Law calls it, The high Estate of Prelacy. And Calvin (if my * 16.597 old Memory do not fail me) upon those words of St. John, As my Father sent me, so send I you, &c. says thus upon that place, Eandem illis imponit Personam ac idem Juris assignat. And if our Savi∣our Christ, put the same Person upon the Apostles, and assigned to them the same Right, which his Father gave him; it will prove a sour work to throw their Successors the Bishops out of the Church after Sixteen Hundred Years continuance.

And in the mean time cry out against Innovation.

For either Christ gave this Power to his Apostles only; and that will make the Gospel a Thing Temporary, and confined to the Apostles Times: Or else he gave the same Power, though not with such Eminent Gifts, to their Successors also, to pro∣pagate the same Gospel to the end of the World, as St. Paul tells us he did, Ephes. 4. Now all the Primitive Church all along, gives Bi∣shops * 16.598 to be the Apostles Successors, and then it would be well thought on, what Right any Christian State hath (be their Absolute Power what it will) to turn Bishops out of that Right in the Church which Christ hath given them.

The Fourth Charge was an Alteration made in a Brief, for a third * 16.599 Collection for the distressed Ministers and others in the Palatinat. The Queen of Bohemia was pleased to do me the Honour to write to me about this; and because two Collections had been before, her Majesty desired, that this third might be only in London, and some few Shires about it. I out of my desire to relieve those distressed Protestants, and to express my Duty to the Queen, became an humble Suitor to his Ma∣jesty, that this Collection also might go thorough England, as the rest had done. And 'tis acknowledged by all, that this I did. Now the Witnes∣ses which Accuse me for some Circumstances in this business, are two.

1. The First is Mr. Wakerly. He says, that Mr. Ruly (who was employed by the Queen of Bohemia about this Collection) was roughly used by me upon occasion of this Clause put into the Brief, and which he says I caused to be altered. This first is a bold Oath; for Mr. Wakerly was

not present, but Swears upon Hearsay. Secondly, what kindness I shewed him and the Business, is mentioned before; and if for this kindness he had been practising with Mr. Wakerly about the Brief (as I had probable Reason to suspect) I cannot much be blamed, if I altered my Countenance towards him, and my Speech too; which yet these Witnesses (for the other agrees in this) have no Reason to call rough Carriage, only upon Mr. Ruly's unthankful Report.

He says, That these words, the Antichristian Yoak, were 〈◊〉〈◊〉 out. First, this is more than I remember; and the Briefs I had not to com∣pare; nor is there any necessity, that two Briefs coming for the same thing, with some Years distance between, should agree in every Phrase or Circumstance. Secondly, if I did except against this pas∣sage, it was partly because of the fore-recited Judgment of King James, of which I thought his Son King Charles ought to be tender: And partly, because it could move nothing but Scorn in the common Adversary, that we should offer to determine such a Controversie by a Broad Seal. I remember well, since I had the Honour to sit in this House, the naming of Tithes to be due Jure Divino, cast out the Bill; A Prudent Lord asking the Peers, whether they meant to determine that question by an Act of Parliament? The other part of the Clause which they say was altered, was the Religion which we with them profess: Whence they infer, because (with them) was left out, that I would not acknowledge them of the same Religion; which follows not. For we may be, and are of the same Religion; and yet (agree) not with them in those Opinions, in which we differ from them. And Mr. Wakerly confesses, that the Words as alter'd, are, That they are Persecuted for their Religion; and their Religion is the Protestant Re∣ligion, and so is ours. And therefore I could have no intention to make the Religions different, but the Opinions under the same Religion.

For Mr: Wakerly, he is a Dutchman born; and how far the Testi∣mony of an Alien may be of force by the Law, I know not: And a bitter Enemy to me he hath ever shewed himself, since I com∣plained to the King and the Lords, that a Stranger born and bred, should be so near a Secretary of State, and all his Papers and Cyphers, as he was known to be to Mr. Secretary Coke: A thing which few States would indure: And how far the Testimony of such a Canker'd Enemy should be admitted, let the World judge. Admitted he was.

2. The Second Witness was Mr: 〈◊〉〈◊〉. He acknowledges my im∣provement of the Collection, and my great readiness therein; which doubt∣less I should not have shewed, had I accounted them of another Re∣ligion. He says, there was no Alteration but in that Clause, and that implies a manifest difference. But that is but in his Judgment, in which I have already shewed that Wakerly is mistaken, and so is he. Beside, he comes here as a Witness of the Fact, not as a Judge of my Inten∣tions or Thoughts. He adds, That, if he remember well, the Alteration was drawn by me. But, if he do not remember well, what then? Sure∣ly here's no Evidence to be grounded upon Ifs. Here upon the point of Antichrist, Mr. Nicolas stiled me as before, and was furious till he foamed again; but I saw a necessity of Patience.

Mr. Brown

also in his Summary Ch followed this Business close. But I gave it the same Answer.

The Fifth Charge, and the last under this Article, was the calling * 16.600 in of a Book, An. 1637. shewing the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church in the Palatinat; but called in only because against Arminianism. The single Witness Michael Sparks. He says, this Book was called in, but he knows not by whom, nor mentions he for what. But he says, The Pursevants which searched for it, were mine. He means such as belonged to the High-Commission; for other than such I had none. And there was cause enough for calling in the Book, without think∣ing of Arminianism.

But what is the Reason, why here's nothing urged against me, about Abrogating the Immunities and Priviledges of the French and Dutch Churches, which fill the Body of this Article? Why, I con∣ceive there may be two Reasons of it. One, because there was taken by Mr. Pryn, among other Papers for my Defence, a Letter * 16.601 under Queen Elizabeth's own Hand, to the Lord Pawlet Marquess of Winchester, then Lord Treasurer, in which she expresses her wil∣lingness, that those Strangers, distressed in and for point of Con∣science, should have Succour and free Entertainment; but should conform themselves to the English Liturgy, and have that Tran∣slated into their own Language. And they knew, I would call to have this Letter produced, proved, and read. And had this Let∣ter been stood unto, they had never been able to do the Church of England half the harm they have since done. The other was, be∣cause they found by their own search against me, that all which I did concerning those Churches, was with this Moderation, that all those of their several Congregations, in London, Canterbury, Sandwich, Norwich, or elsewhere, which were of the second Descent, and born in England, should repair to their several Parish Churches, and Conform themselves to the Doctrine, Discipline, and Liturgy of the Church of England, and not live continually in an open Separation, as if they were an Israel in AEgypt, to the great distraction of the Natives of this Kingdom, and the assisting of that Schism which is now broke forth. And as this was with great Moderation, so was it with the joint Approbation of his Ma∣jesty and the Lords of his Council, upon the Reasons openly given and debated: And all this before I proceeded to do any thing. As appears apud Acta.

Then they went to the Thirteenth Original Article; which here follows.

He hath Trayterously and Wickedly endeavoured to reconcile the Church of England with the Church of Rome, and for the ef∣fecting thereof, hath Consorted and Confederated with divers Popish Priests and Jesuits, and hath kept secret Intelligence with the Pope of Rome, and by himself, his Agents or Instruments, Treated with such as have from thence received Authority and In∣struction: He hath permitted and countenanced a Popish Hierarchy, or Ecclesiastical Government, to be Established in this Kingdom. By all which Trayterous and Malicious Practices, this Church and

Kingdom have been exceedingly indangered, and like to fall under the Tyranny of the Roman See.

The Seventh Additional Article.

That the said Arch-Bishop at several times within these Ten Years last past, at Westminster, and elsewhere within this Realm, con∣trary to the known Laws of this Land, hath endeavoured to advance Popery and Superstition within the Realm. And for that End and Purpose hath wittingly and willingly received, harboured and relie∣ved divers Popish Priests and Jesuits, namely one called Sancta Clara, alias Damport, a dangerous Person, and Franciscan Fri∣ar, who having written a Popish and Seditious Book Intituled De∣us, Natura, Gratia, wherein the Thirty nine Articles of the Church of England established by Act of Parliament, were much Traduced and Scandalized; the said Arch-Bishop had divers Confe∣rences with him, while he was in writing the said Book, and did also provide Maintenance and Entertainment for one Monsieur S. Giles, a Popish Priest, at Oxford; knowing him to be a Popish Priest.

The First Charge (they say) was to be laid as a Foundation, and it * 16.602 was, That I was generally reputed a Papist in Heart, both in Oxford, and since I came thence.

1. The first Witness for this was Dr. Featly. He says, There was such an Opinion of me Thirty Years since there. But he says, he never heard any Popish Opinion maintained by me. So here's nothing of Knowledge: And if I should say, that above Thirty Years ago, there was an Opinion, that Dr. Featly then in Oxford, was a Puri∣tan; this could make no Proof against him; nor can his saying that I was reputed a Papist, make any Proof against me. He says far∣ther, That one Mr. Russel, who had been bred in S. John's College, told him, in Paris, That I maintained some Catholick Opinions. First, Mr. Nicolas would have it, that this Mr. Russel was my Scholar: But that the whole College can witness it is not so; nor had he ever any relation to me, in the least Degree. After his Father's Death, he left the College, and went beyond Sea; where the Weak Man, (for such he was) lost his Religion. Secondly, Dr. Featly says ex∣presly, that Mr. Russel said, I was no Papist; which, for the Counte∣nance of his own Change, he would never have said, had he thought me one. Thirdly, if he did say that I maintained some Catholick Opinions; yet he named none, by which there might be Tryal and Judgment, whether they were such or no, in the Sense he meant them. Lastly, Mr. Perkins, in his Reformed Catholick, sets down divers Opi∣nions in which they of Rome and we agree: Shall he be a Papist for this? Or shall not that which is Lawful for him, be as Lawful for me?

2. The Second Witness was one Harris. He says, that Mr. Ire∣land, (who was some time Student of Christ-Church in Oxford, and after School-Master at Westminster) told him that I would leave the Church of England. This is a bare Report from Mr. Ireland, with whom I never had any Acquaintance, nor was scarce in his Compa∣ny twice in all my Life. Nor is it in my Power to hinder what Mr.

Ireland will say, or Mr. Harris from him. He says, That one that called himself Leander, came over on purpose to make this Reconciliation. If he did (which is more than I know, or believe) I think he would hardly make such a one, as Harris is reported to be, acquainted with it. But howsoever, if he did come with that purpose, was it in my Power to hinder his coming? And here is no Proof offered that I did help on his Purpose, or so much as know of it. He says, he often Petitioned me for Relief, but had none. It may be, I well knew he deserved none: And your Lordships know that by Law I might not afford him any. Had I given him any, I should now have heard it with both Ears. For I am informed he is a Priest, and Condemn∣ed in a Praemunire, and was let out of Prison, on purpose to be a Witness against me. And having set that which is aforesaid, un∣der his Hand, is now slipped away, and gone. Who got him out of Prison for this good purpose, I know not; but fure somewhat there is in it, for your Lordships see his Testimony is now read, but he appears not.

3. The Third Witness was Sir Nathaniel Brent (now absent, but came in the next Day) He says, I was esteemed Popishly Affected in Oxford; and he gave Three Instances very carefully, to prove it. The First was, That in the Divinity School there, I maintained the Ne∣cessity of Baptism. I did so; and my Predecessor Arch-Bishop Abbot was then Vice-Chancellor, and present, and approved my Opinion; and my Grace passed for my Degree to be Batchellour of Divinity without any one Man's Opposition. He says, That Mr. Dale of Merton College, then shewed him all my Supposition taken out of Bellar∣min. This is a bold and a dangerous Oath: He might Swear that Mr. Dale shewed him in Bellarmin, that which he said was my Sup∣position: But that he shewed him all my Supposition there, is a strange Oath for a Man of Learning and Law to make, and in such a Presence. Besides, I have my Supposition, which I then made, yet by me; and if my Tenet of that Question be the same with Bellar∣min's, or that there be any Line taken out of him, but what I cite for my own advantage against him, I will utterly forfeit my Repu∣tation of any Learning to your Lordships. His Second Instance was, That I was acquainted with one Mr: Brown, Fellow of Corpus Christi College in Oxford, who was suspected to be a Papist, and after his Death proved to be one by a Book that was found in his Study, proving that a Man might be a Roman-Catholick, and yet go to Church and Conform in England. I was acquainted with this Man; he was a very good Scholar and an Honest man, and a good Protestant, for ought I know. For the Tract found after his Death among his Papers, that's no Proof: For Scholars get all the Papers they can, especially such as belong to their own Profession. And the more strange the Opini∣nions are, the more do they labour to get them. Nor is it any Proof that the Tract was of his making, because written in his own Hand, as 'tis urged. For the Argument being so foul and dangerous, it could not be safe for him, nor any way fit, to commit it to any other to write for him. Nor is there any Proof that I knew he had such a Tract by him; neither indeed did I. The Opinion is very base and unworthy, and was first broached by the Jesuit Azorius, * 16.603

and it seems some of his Fellows had inlarged him, and made this Tract out of his Principles. His Third Instance was, That I Petiti∣oned King James in this Business. I was complained of to King James by a great Person, That I had inward Acquaintance with this Man. Hereupon, my waiting Month being June, and not long after the Complaint made, I took Occasion in my first Sermon to confute this Opinion, and then Petitioned his Majesty that it might be examined, that such an Imputation might not lie upon me. His Majesty referred it to the Lords Arch-Bishop of * 16.604 Canterbury, Bishops of London, Win∣chester and Duresm; where after full examination I was Acquitted.

The Second Charge was, that the same Opinion was held of * 16.605 me beyond the Seas, That I was a cunning Promoter of the Roman Cause. And here the Witnesses are the same, which were produced before; Mr. Challoner, who told over his old Tale again of I know not what Plot he heard from a Jesuit: Nothing but Hearsay at the best. And it savours like an Almanack de Post Facto,

or rather of somwhat else, which I will spare to name, because he is upon his Oath.

The other Witness is Mr. Anthony Mildmay, who also tells over his Old Tale of his Father Fitton. But he was out of the way again, and appeared not till the next Day, with Sir Nathaniel Brent. So here's a Repetition again of the same Witnesses, and the same things, to multiply the Noise.

Only Noble Sir Henry Mildmay appeared not the Second time; but whether it were because he had enough at his first appearance; or whether his Face was scratched then (as since Men say it was) I cannot tell.

The Third Charge was, That I had a damnable Plot, to reconcile the * 16.606 Church of England with the Church of Rome. If to reconcile them with the maintenance of Idolatry, it were a damnable Plot indeed. But if Christian Truth and Peace might meet and unite together, all Christendom over; were that a Sin too? Were I able to Plot and ef∣fect such a Reconciliation, I would think my self most Happy, whatever I suffered for it. But how is this damnable Plot proved? Pope Gregory writ a Letter to his Nuncio in Spain, and a Letter also to King Charles; which Letter is Printed: Copies of these Letters were found in my Study. Could I hinder the Pope from writing to whom he pleased? Shall not I get Copies of any Letters I can, to see what practising is abroad for private Interest? Shall it be Lawful for all my Predecessors to get and keep Copies of such Letters by them, and shall it be Unlawful for me only? And here I produced Mr. Dobson, an ancient Servant to my Predecessors, who witnessed that Arch-Bi∣shop Bancroft had store of them, and kept them all his Time. Nor do I know, how this Charge can fall upon me: For there is no one Word in any of the Letters produced, that Reflects upon me, or any Plot of mine. Nor indeed had I ever any such to Reflect upon.

The Fourth Charge is, That I had a Hand in the Plot for sending * 16.607 the King, when he was Prince, into Spain, to be perverted in his Religion. They follow their Proof of this out of my Diary: And they begin with my Friendship with the Lord Duke of Buckingham, who wait∣ed on the Prince in this Journey. And first they urged my Diary at June 9. 1622. where I mention, that there were then Particulars, which

are not for Paper. But the Words, which lead these in, were his en∣trance upon a near Respect to me, the particular Expressions where∣of were not for Paper: Nor Word, nor Thought, of either Plot or Po∣pery. Then they urged June 15. 1622. where 'tis said, that I became C. that is, Confessor to the Lord Duke. First, if my Lord Duke would Honour me so much as to make me his Confessor, as I know no Sin in it, so is it abundantly Proof, that the Passages before mentioned were not for Paper. Should I venture them so, there's never a Person of Honour present, but would think me most unworthy of that Trust. Next, they pressed June 13. 1623. where I confess, that I received Let∣ters from my Lord Duke out of Spain. I did so; and I then held it great Honour to me, and do so still. But then, and long before, it was known to all Men whither he was gone, and with whom: Nay, it was commonly known to all Men of Quality hereabout within three or four Days: And till it was so commonly known, I knew it not. Yea, but then they inforced out of Feb. 17. 1622/3. That the Prince and the Marquess of Buckingham set forward very Secretly for Spain. And Feb. 21. that I writ to his Lordship into Spain. 'Tis true, they went away that Day, and very secretly; but I neither did, nor could set it down, till afterwards that I came to know it. And then so soon as I came to know it, which was about the 21th. I did write. To these was Cunningly (how Honestly let all the World Judge) pieced a Passage out of a Letter of mine to Bishop Hall. But that Letter was read, at my humble motion to the Lords, and the Date of it was in 1634. So, many Years after this Business of Spain. And the Pas∣sage mentioned, was only about King James his manner of defending the Pope to be Antichrist, and how he salved it while the Prince was in Spain. But King James related it after. Nor could any Words of that Letter be drawn to the King's going thither, much less to any knowledge I had of it.

The Fifth Charge was concerning his Majesty's Match with France. * 16.608 And here again they urge my Diary at Mar. 11. 1625. That the Duke of Buckingham was then and there employed. And at May 19. and 29. that I then writ Letters to him. First, my Lords, I hold it my great Honour, that my Lord Duke would write to me, and give me leave to write to him. Secondly, I have committed some Error in these Let∣ters, or none. If none, why are they Charged? If any, why are they not produced, that I may see what it is, and answer it?

The Sixth Charge was, That I was an Instrument of the Queens. * 16.609 This they endeavoured to prove by my Diary in Three Places. First, at Aug. 30. 1634. Vpon occasion of some Service done, she was graciously pleased to give me leave to have immediate Access unto her, when I had Occasion. This is true, and I most humbly Thanked her Majesty for it: For I very well knew what belonged to Addresses at Second Hand in Court. But what Crime is in this, that the Queen was plea∣sed to give me Access unto her, when I had Occasion? Here's no Word of Religion. Secondly, at May 18. 1635. Where 'tis said, that I gave her Majesty an account of some thing committed to me. If her Majesty sent or spake to me to do any thing, as it seems she did, shall I want so much Duty as to give her an Account of it? So belike I must be unmannerly with her Majesty, or lye open to no less than a

Charge of high Treason. Thirdly, at April 3. 1639. 'Tis made a great matter, that I should then dispatch a great business for the Queen, which I understood she would not move for her self: And that for this her Majesty gave me great Thanks. Mr. Nicolas his Inference upon this, was, that they conceive wherefore. But his Conceit makes no Evidence: He must not only conceive, but prove wherefore, before it can work any thing against me. As for Religion, as there is no Word of it in my Diary, so neither was it at this time thought on. Her Majesty would there∣in have moved for her self. But it seems it must be a Crime if I be but Civil and Dutiful towards the Queen, though it be but thrice mentioned in so many Years.

The Seventh Charge was, that I forbad Ministers Praying for the * 16.610 Queens Conversion, and punished others. The First Witness, Mr. Rat∣cliff, says, that Sir Nath. Brent gave it in Charge at Bow Church in my Visitation. The more to blame he, if so he did. Yea, but he says it was by my Command delivered unto him by Sir John Lambe. Was it so? How doth Mr. Ratcliff know that? He doth not express. He was not present, when I spake with Sir John Lambe. And if Sir Nath. Brent told him of it, 'tis but Hearsay. And Sir Nath. having been so ready a Witness against me, why is he not examined to this Particular? And as for the Paper which was shewed, it appears plainly there, that it was no Paper of Instructions sent to my Vi∣sitors by me, but of particular Informations to me: Of which one was, that the Queen was prayed for in a very Factious and Scandalous Way. And this appeared, when that Paper was read. And this I re∣ferred to my Visitors, as I not only might, but ought: Not forbid∣ding the Prayers, but the Scandalous manner of them. The Second Witness was Mr. Pryn. Who says, That one Mr. Jones was punished for praying for the Queen. He was punished in the High-Commission for scandalous Abusing the Queen, under a Form of Praying for her, and for divers other Articles that were against him.

And this An∣swer I gave to Mr. Brown, who forgot not this in summing up my Charge.

The Eighth Charge was, That I punished Men for Praying to pre∣serve * 16.611 the Prince. No, God forbid. The High-Commission Book was shewed, and that there in the Year 1634. one Mr. Howe was Cen∣sured for it. I got this Act of the High-Commission to be read to the Lords: His Prayer went thus, That God would preserve the Prince in the true Religion, of which there was cause to fear. Could this Prayer have any other Operation upon the People, than to make them think his Majesty was careless in the Education of the Prince, especially in point of Religion? And this was so Grievous and Graceless a Scandal cast upon a Religious King, as nothing could be greater. Upon the mat∣ter, it was the shew of a Prayer for the Prince, but was indeed to de∣stroy the King in the Hearts of his People. And had I not there con∣sented to his Punishment, I had deserved to be punished my self.

Mr. Brown, when he repeated the Summ of the Evidence, laid this Charge upon me, but spake not one Word (to my Remembrance) of this Answer given to it.

The Ninth Charge, That I did Extol Queen Mary's Days. The Proof * 16.612 for it was taken out of the Preface to the Statutes of the Vniversity of

Oxford. I took a great deal of pains about those Statutes, and might justly have expected Thanks for it, not such an Accusation. But as for the Preface, it was made and Printed at Oxford: I medled not with it. I could trust the University with little, if not with the ma∣king of a Preface. If they have done any thing amiss in it, let them answer it. The Passage was about certain Offers made to amend those Confused Old Statutes, both in Ed. 6. and Queen Mary's Days; but no Effect came of the pains then taken, Recruduit Labor, says the Preface. So that this I can answer for them: There's not a Word spoken of Religion, but of Manners only, and that as much in relation to the Times of Princes following, as Hers. For the Words, to my remembrance, are Interim optandâ Temporum Foelicitate, &c. And that Interim cannot be restrained to Queen Mary's Days only, but must include the whole Interim, or middle distance of Time to that pre∣sent in which I setled the Body of their Statutes, that is, all Queen Elizabeth's and King James his Days; which I think no Man can de∣ny was, Optanda Temporum Foelicitas.

Here Mr. Nicolas confessed there was no down-right Proof against * 16.613 me. That was his Phrase: But he added, that was not to be expect∣ed in such a Work of Darkness. Then he produced a Paper found in my Study, Printed at Rome. So were divers of my Books Printed there: What of this? They may Print what they will at Rome, I cannot hinder it: And I may have and keep whatever they Print, no Law forbidding it. Then he shewed a Letter sent unto me from Mr. Graves. The Gentleman is at this present Fellow of Merton College in Oxford, a great Traveller, and a Man of great Worth. As far as I remember, his Letter came to me from Alexandria. It was fit to be sent, and kindly received; as by me it was. I desired it might be read. Then were mentioned Sir William Boswell's Letters, and the Papers sent by Andreas ab Habernfeld, about a great Plot to destroy the King and Religion, and that I concealed these Papers.

I might have been amazed at the Impudence of this Charge above all the rest. Diaboli Impudentia, the Devils Impudence, and no less, as S. Augustin speaks in another Case.

Did I conceal these Papers? * 16.614 First, the same Day that I received them, I sent them by an Express to his Majesty. I had a speedy Answer from his Majesty, and that I re∣turned with equal speed to his Majesty's Agent Sir William Boswell, as I was commanded. * 16.615 And this Mr. Pryn, and Mr. Nicolas knew. For Mr. Pryn took all these Letters and Pa∣pers from me, when he searched me at the Tower; and out of them made his Book cal∣led Rome's Masterpiece: Excepting the Slan∣ders, which he hath Jugled in of his own. So soon as his Majesty came home, I humbly besought him, that he would be pleased to appoint a time, and call some Lords to him to hear and examine the Business, and this Examination continued till I was Committed. What was after done, I cannot account for. Besides, my Lords, it ap∣pears by those Paprs, that my Life was sought for, because I would

not give way to the Change of Religion; and Mr. Pryn himself hath Printed this; and yet now Mr. Nicolas, from his Testimony, presses these Papers against me. But the King, and the Lords, and both Se∣cretaries of State then present, can witness, that I took all the Care and Pains above-mentioned, to have it sifted to the Bottom.

Not∣withstanding all this, Mr. Nicolas falls upon this Plot again upon the next Day of my Hearing, as if nothing had been said unto it: And was so shameless, as to say, that I followed this Business so long as I thought the Plot was against the Puritans: But so soon as I found it was against the Papists, I kept it secret, till Mr. Pryn discovered it in his search of my Papers. Where, First, there's no one Word in all the Papers to make me, or any Man think the Puritans were con∣cerned in it. And Secondly, I did not sleep upon the Receipt of these Papers, till I had sent them to his Majesty. But I had reason to keep the Papers as safe as I could, considering how much they justifie me against these foul Calumnies put upon me.

Then followed the Charge of Sancta Clara's Book, alias Monsieur St: * 16.616 Giles: So they expressed it; and I must follow the way they lead me. First then, they Charge that I had often Conference with him, * 16.617 while he was writing his Book Intituled Deus, Natura, Gratia. No, he never came to me, till he was ready to Print that Book. Then some Friends of his brought him to me. His Suit then was, That he might Print that Book here. Upon Speech with him, I found the Scope of his Book to be such, as that the Church of England would have little Cause to thank him for it: And so absolutely deny∣ed it. Nor did he ever come more at me after this, but twice or thrice at most, when he made great Friends to me, that he might Print another Book, to prove that Bishops are by Divine Right. My Answer then was, that I did not like the way which the Church of Rome went, in the Case of Episcopacy. And howsoever, that I would never give way, that any such Book should be Printed here from the Pen of a Romanist; and that the Bishops of England were able to defend their own Cause and Calling, without calling in Aid from Rome; and would in due time. Maintenance he never had any from me, nor did I then know him to be a Priest. Nor was there any Proof so much as offered in contrary to any of this.

2. Secondly, they did specially except against a Passage in the Licen∣ser, and another at the end of the Book. The Book was Printed at Lions, where I could not hinder the Printing, either of the whole, or any part. This might have been something, had I Licensed it here: But that I constantly denyed.

3. Thirdly, They produced a Letter written to me from Venice, by one Mr: Middleton, Chaplain there to the Right Honourable the now Earl of Denbigh, his Majesty's Ambassadour. Therein he writes, That S: Clara was Homo nequissimus, and that one Monsieur S: Giles was the Author of that Book. That Clara and S: Giles were the same Per∣son, is but Mr: Middleton's Opinion. Such News as he there heard, some true, some false, he thought fit to write unto me: And he being absent, here's no Proof upon Oath, that they are one and the same Person. And I hope a young Man's Letter from Venice, or any other place, signifying only such things as he hears, shall not stand for good

Evidence in a Case of Life. And he was mainly deceived in this Par∣ticular, as appears: First, Because what Clara is, I know not: But Monsieur S. Giles is a great Scholar, and a Sober Man; and one that gave the late L. Brooke so good Content, that he allow'd him One Hundred Pound a Year during his Life. Secondly, Because 'tis com∣monly known that Clara is an English man, and S. Giles a French man born and bred.

Thirdly, Because their own Article, upon which * 16.618 they bring this Charge, acknowledges them two distinct Persons. Fourthly, Because both Mr. Pryn and Mr. Nicolas had Monsieur S. Giles before them in Examination, and could not but know him to be a French man. As appears by a Warrant given to him by Mr. Pryn to secure him after his Examination. Which Warrant follows in these words:

These are to Certifie those whom it may concern, That the Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to prosecute the Archbishop of Canterbury, have examined and received Satisfaction from Mon∣sieur S. Giles, a Domestick Servant to the Resident of Venice; and therefore he is no farther to be examined or molested concerning the same

This License came to my Hands since my Answering was past; so I could not then shew it. Monsieur S: Giles was never the Man that gave me notice of any of this; not so much as that he had been Ex∣amined: But my Secretary Mr: Dell came to hear of it by chance, and went to him, and had this Copy (with some labour) from him, and will make Oath it is a true Copy. This is not the thankfullest part at ever S. Giles played, considering my Carriage towards him.

4. Then they charged upon Monsieur S. Giles directly, That I knew him to be a Priest, and yet maintained him at Ox∣ford. The Case was this: Mr: S: Giles was * 16.619 in good Place about the Queen's Majesty at her first coming: Here he did so good Ser∣vices to this State, that he lost himself in France, and durst not go thither when the French were sent away. All this while the Man was unknown to me, till his Majesty one day at St. James's told me this, and that he was a Priest, and that it lay upon him in Honour to allow him some Main∣tenance; and prescribed me a way how to order it, that he might receive One Hundred Marks a Year as from him: And gave me Charge, if the Pension were at any time behind, I should acquaint him with it. After this Mr. S: Giles by his Friends Petition'd his Ma∣jesty, that being a Stranger, he might live in Oxford, to have the use of the Library there, being resolved to meddle no more with the Controversies of the Time; but to apply himself to Metaphysical Learn∣ing. His Majesty was desirous to have him plac'd in some College, to save Charges: But this I most humbly deprecated, because it might be dangerous to the Youth there, and scandalous to his Majesty, the Church, and the University; and dangerous to my self, being Chancellor. To the rest I submitted: So he was left to place himself in some Town-House, as he could. And for this his Majesty gave me his

Warrant, which Mr. Pryn in his Search took from me. But here fol∣lows the true Copy of it.

Charles Rex.

CAnterbury, Mr: S: Giles by serving us and this State, hath lost all his hopes in France, and desires to spend his time here at his private Studies. I would have you think upon some way for his Maintenance, and to place him in Oxford, that he may have use of that Library, which he much desires. And you may so order it, that his Profession in Religion may do no harm.

And according to this direction of his Majesty I did take Order; but with assurance from himself, and with Spies upon him there, be∣side the special care of the Vice-Chancellor, that he should not Con∣verse with young Students, nor Exercise his Priestly Office, nor do any thing against the Laws. Nor did I ever hear, that he failed in any of these Assumptions.

5. Then they produced one Mr. Broad, who testified, that while S: Giles lived at Oxford, some Doctors came to him. Doctors were able to deal well enough with him; but all resort of young Scholars was forbidden. He says farther, that Mr: S: Giles should say, that the Bishops of England were Cordially of his Religion, but that he feared their Rigidness would spoil all. First, this is but a Report of his Speech. Secondly, why was not S: Giles at his Examination asked, whether he said it or no? And if he did, what ground he had for it? At the most, 'twas but his Opinion of the Bishops, who were never the more Cordial to Popery, for his thinking so.

And Thirdly, I doubt it appears by this time, that all is overthrown, or near it, not by the Rigidness, but by the over-remisness of some Bishops, who never would believe any danger could come from the Godly, as they were called.

6. Lastly, What's the Reason of this great Endeavour, upon nothing but News in a Letter, to make S: Clara, and Mr. S: Giles, to be one and the same Man?

Doubtless, nothing but an Hydropical Thirst after my Blood.

For resort of Priests to Lambeth, was usual in both my last Predecessors Times, Bancroft's and Abbot's. And some lay in the House and had Relief. This was proved to the Lords by two Ancient Servants of that House. Neither of which have been done in my Time. Arch-Bishop Abbot made a Warrant (this War∣rant was shewed) to secure Mr. Preston an English Priest, upon a * 16.620 Command of King James: Why may not I a French one, by the Warrant of King Charles? King James justified Bishop Bancroft for doing this, when he was Bishop of London, and no Privy Counsel∣lor: And may not I do it, being Arch-Bishop and Privy Counsellor, with as much Privity of the King and the State, as he did? But to let these pass, why should I say, here was a Thirst for Blood? I'll tell you why? The Statute of 27 Eliz. makes it Felony without Benefit of * 16.621 Clergy, to Maintain or Relieve any Romish Priest Born in England, or any other of her Majesty's Dominions, knowing him to be such. Now they had laid their Article, that I had given Maintenance to one Mounsieur * 16.622

S. Giles, a Popish Priest at Oxford, knowing him to be such. But when upon Examination of S. Giles, they found him to be a French Man, and so not within the Statute. (As the words of that Statute are most plain, and so is Sir Edw. Coke's Judgment upon them, both * 16.623 which I then read to the Lords) I say when they saw this, then they cast about how to make S. Clara and Mr. S. Giles to be one Man. And though * 16.624 they could find no shadow of Proof of a thing that is not, but a Letter of News from Venice, yet against their own Knowledge and Conscience, they give that in Evidence to reach my Life any way.

Here Mr: Nicolas, so soon as he discovered whither I tended, would have broken me off, saying, they did not urge it for that now, they were not yet come to it. I Replyed, if they came to it after, I would be at the pains to Answer again: But since it concerned my Life, I would not slip it now, nor leave it unanswer'd in any Circum∣stance. So I went on, but they never mentioned it after; and by this way meant certainly to have involved me within the Law, Clara be∣ing an English Man Born.

God of his Mercy grant, that this Thirst after my Blood lye not too heavy another day upon their Souls. Mr. Brown in Summing up the Charge, fell upon this also. I made a brief Answer out of that which is aforesaid: Yet after, in his Reply, he fell upon this Letter of Mr. Middleton's, and cites his News for Evidence, that S. Clara and Mr. S. Giles were the same Man. Which I much wonder, so Able and Grave a Man as he is, should swallow from Mr. Pryn, who doubtless (being present) was angry to see himself so laid open in the House of Commons.

At last came in the last Charge of this Day: That a Cardinal's Hat * 16.625 was offer'd unto me. My Diary quoted for this, at Aug. 4. & 21. 1633. I could hinder no Offer, unless I could Prophesie what each Man came about, and so shun them. But why is not my Answer there set down, expressed too? My Answer was, That somewhat divelt in me, which would not suffer me to accept that, till Rome were other than now it is. Besides, I went presently to his Majesty, and acquainted him with it: Which is all that * 16.626 the Law requires at my Hands. And his Majesty very Prudently and Religiously (yet in a calm way, the Persons offering it, having Relation to some Embassador) freed me speedily of that, both Trouble and Danger. They urged further out of the Papers of Andreas ab Habernfield (which Mr. Pryn took from me in his search) That Signior Con had power to offer me a Cardinal's Hat. The words which they cite, are (for I could never get sight of those Papers since) Mandatum habuit offerre, sed non obtulit. What Power he had to make me such an Offer, I know not; but themselves confess he did not offer it. Nor had I ever any Speech with him, during all the time he stayed here. I was solicited as much by Ho∣nourable Friends to give him Admittance to me at Lambeth, with Assurance he should speak nothing about Religion, as ever I had about any thing in my Life. I still refused, and could not perswade my self to do other; and yet could not but inwardly (In Verbo Sacerdotis,

this is true) condemn my self of gross Incivility for refusing. For which yet now I see I am much bound to God for that Unmannerli∣ness. Had I held a Correspondence with him, though never so Inno∣cent, where had I now been? Besides, I would not have it forgot∣ten, that if to offer a Cardinal's Hat, or any like thing, shall be a suf∣ficient Cause to make a Man guilty of Treason, it shall be in the power of any Romanist, to make any English Bishop a Traytor when he pleases: A Mischief not to be indured. And thus this long and tedious Day ended; and I had order to Attend again on July 24. which I did accordingly.

CAP. XLI. The Nineteenth Day of my Hearing.

THis day they went on with the same Article. And the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 * 16.627 Charge was, My denying the Pope to be Antichrist: The * 16.628 Proofs; The Alteration of the Clause in the Letters Patents, for the Palatinat; and the Letters between Bishop Hall and me. These Proofs * 16.629 are Answer'd before, and repeated here only to make a Noise. Nor did I in any of these deny the Pope to be Antichrist. For, to forbear that word, for some both Temporal and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Respects, is one thing; and to deny the thing it self is another.

The Second consists of a great many Particulars, and most of * 16.630 them urged before, repeated only to help to make the Ignorant cla∣morous and wild against me. God forgive them this Practice.

1. The First Particular was Shelford's Book: The whole Book. And Mr. Pryn very gravely said, that this Book and the other two following, were found in my Study. Is he not yet ashamed of this Argument? May I have no Book in my Study, but I must be of the same Judg∣ment with the Author in all things? The Author is altogether un∣known to me. The Book was Licensed at Cambridge. So nothing faulty in me, but the having of the Book in my Study.

2. The Second was, Dr. Heylin's Book against Mr. Burton. This Book was Printed by my Command (they say) And in it is a Pas∣sage for Absolute Obedience to Kings. p. 229. This was before also. And * 16.631 I did Command the Printing of the Book; but gave no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to put any thing unjustifiable into it. This Passage I caused to be read to the Lords, and the Doctor there says no more than what he Learned of King James in the Conference at Hampton Court. But if any thing be amiss, he is ready to Answer it. But I find not one word in him, that this Absolute Obedience ought to be in any thing that is against Law.

That's one of Mr. Nicolas his Stretches.

3. The third Particular is Bishop Mountague's Appeal, p. 141. But nothing hence charged upon me, but only, that the Book was found in my Study. I would Mr. Pryn could find any Books there now.

4. The Fourth was, That divers Books of like nature were Licensed by my Chaplains. But none was of all they then named, but Dr. Heylin's, and Sales; of which your Lordships have heard the Plot how it came to be Licensed. And for Dr. Heylin, he is ready to make all good, which he hath therein done.

5. The Fifth Particular is, That the Homilies which are Authorised in the Church of England, make the Pope Antichrist, p. 216. And the Babylonish Beast of Rome, p. 316. But First, This is nothing against me, till it be proved, (which yet is not done) That I have positive∣ly denied the Pope to be Antichrist. And Secondly, I do not con∣ceive, that the Article of the Church of England, which confirms the * 16.632 Homilies, doth also confirm every Phrase that is in them. Nor, Thirdly, Do I conceive that the Homilies in those places which are cited, do make the Pope the great Antichrist. For, in the first place, the Words are, To the beating down of Sin, Death, the Pope, the Devil, and all the Kingdom of Antichrist: Which Words cannot possibly im∣ply, that the Pope is that Antichrist. In the second place, he is only called the Babylonical Beast of Rome; which Phrase doth not necessa∣rily signifie The Great Antichrist. For the Beast so often mentioned in the * 16.633 Revelation, is no where called the Babylonical Beast of Rome.

And if that Beast do stand for the Great Antichrist, (I say If, because those Scriptures are very dark) then ‖ 16.634 the Beast is primarily the Ro∣man Empire in the Judgment of the Geneva Noters. And that there should be two great Antichrists, is more than any man hath yet said. Here Mr. Nicolas was up again with Pander to the Whore of Babylon, and his other foul Language; not remembring all this while, (which yet I was loath to mind him of) that one of his zea∣lous Witnesses against the Whore of Babylon, and all her Superstitions, got all his Means (which are great) by being a Pander to other lewd Women; and loved the business it self so well, as that he was (not long since, men say) taken in Bed with one of his Wife's Maids. Good Mr. Nicolas, do not dispense with all Whores, save the Whore of Babylon.

6. The Sixth Particular was, the Articles of Ireland, which call the Pope the Man of Sin. But the Articles of Ireland bind neither this Church, nor me. And some Learned Protestants do not understand that noted place of the Apostle, 2 Thess. 2. as meant of Antichrist, or * 16.635 the Pope.

7. The Seventh and Last Particular is, a Repetition of Sancta Clara and Mr. S. Giles; and the Letter of News, (which were News indeed) to make them one Man; though this were Answered at large but the last Day; and Sir Ed. Hungerford's Testimony brought up again. It's a sign Mr. Nicolas hath indeed no down-right right Proof (as he said be∣fore) that so tumbles up and down in repeating the same things.

The Third Charge is, that I say in my Book, That the Religion of * 16.636 the Church of Rome and ours is all one. This is spoken only in oppo∣sition * 16.637 to other Religions, in regard of Christianity. The Words are, Nor do the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Re∣ligion; for the Christian Religion is the same to both, &c. And the like passage to this is in my * 16.638 Speech in the Star-Chamber. And these Passages were read to the Lords. So that either Papists must be

denied to be Christians, or else this Charge can work nothing against me.

The Fourth Charge is out of Chouneus his Book, p. 45, & 46. Licensed by my Chaplain Dr. Braye, where (they say) 'tis said, That Rome is a True * 16.639 Church, and differs not in Fundamentals. And that at the High Commission, when this Book was question'd by some, I did say that the Church of Rome and the Protestants did not differ in Fundamentals, but in Circumstances. And this latter part was testified by Mr. Burton and one Mr. Lane, who said they were present. First, Suppose this be false, and that they do differ in Fundamentals; yet this then is but my Errour in Divinity, no Practice to overthrow Religion. Secondly, I suppose, if I did so say, I did not Err: For the Foundations of Christian Religion are the Articles of the Creed, and the Church of Rome denies no one of them: Therefore there is no difference in the Fundamentals. If they of Rome differ in Exposition of some of these, that must needs be a Superstructure upon, or beside the Article, not the Article or Founda∣tion it self. Nor did I follow my own Judg∣ment herein, but * 16.640 Calvin's; who says ex∣presly, That in despight of Antichrist, the Foun∣dations of the Church remain'd in the Papacy it self, that the Church might not wholly perish. And this Passage was then read to the Lords. Third∣ly, These two Learned Witnesses, (as they would be reputed) are quite mistaken in their very Terms. For they report me, as if I said, Not in Fundamentals, but in Circumstantials; whereas these are not Membra opposita, * 16.641 but Fundamentals and Superstructures, which may sway quite beside the Foundation. And this though not the on∣ly, yet is a main Failing in the Roman Fabrick; in which many things are built upon unwarrantable Tradition, as is expressed in my † 16.642 Book at large, and their many Superstitions named; and that Passage read also to the Lords. For though they differ not in the prime Foundati∣ons, ‖ 16.643 yet they in many things grate close upon them, and in some things fall beside them, to no small Hazard of their own Souls. As for Circumstantials, it seems these Men have forgotten, or never knew, that many times Circumstantials in Religion do quite destroy the Foun∣dation. For Example: The Circumstances are these: Quis? Quid? Vbi? Quibus Auxiliis? Quomodo? Quando?

1. Quid? What a Man believes? And that contains Fundamen∣tals, and in the first place.

2. Vbi? Place, a meer Circumstance; yet to deny that Christ took our Flesh of the B. Virgin, and that in Judaea, denies the Foun∣dation, and is flat Judaism.

3. Quibus Auxiliis, By what Helps a Man believes, and in some measure obeys as he is commanded? For to believe that a Man doth this by the strength of Nature only, and not by Aid and Assistance of Grace, is with the Pelagian to deny the Foundation, and to overthrow the Grace of Christ.

4. Quando? When? That's Time, a meer Circumstance: Yet to deny that Christ is already come in the Flesh, denies the Foundation utterly, and is flat Judaism, and an inseparable Badge of the great Antichrist, 1 John 4. And in the Case of the Resurrection, to say * 16.644 'tis past already, (which is Time) St. Paul tells us, 2 Tim. 2. is no less * 16.645

than the Overthrow of the Faith. And the Rule is general, That some Circumstances Dant Speciem, give the very Kind and Form to a Moral Action.

This for their Ignorance; but for the Malice of their Oath, * 16.646 I leave them to God's Mercy. Here Mr. Brown, when he summed up the Evidence against me, fell upon this, and said, that when I gave divers Instances what dangerous Errors Circumstances did sometimes breed in Religion, I gave no Instance in any point of Popery. But to this I Answered, First, That it was not mate∣rial what Instances I made, so I was able to make some. Second∣ly, That it was not possible for me, or perhaps a readier Man, to have all Instances so present with his Memory. Thirdly, If an In∣stance in Popery, rank Popery will serve the turn, you may take it in Transubstantiation: That is either a Fundamental Point, or it is not: If it be not Fundamental, why did the Papist put the Pro∣testant to Death for it? And why did the Protestant suffer Death? If it be Fundamental (as it seems by both sides it was accounted) it is upon the bare Circumstance of Quomodo? How Christ is pre∣sent in the Sacrament.

As for that which was said in the beginning of this Charge, That Rome is a True Church: I ever did, and ever must grant it, that such it is Veritate Entis, in the Truth of it's Entity and Being. For as I have said against Fisher, Ens & Verum, Being and True are converti∣ble * 16.647 one with another. And every thing that hath a Being, is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance; but a Right or an Or∣thodox Church I never said it was, either in Doctrine or Manners. As a Thief is a true Man in Verity of his Essence, that is, he is a Crea∣ture indued with Reason; but it doth not therefore follow that he is a true Man Veritate Moris, in his Life and Conversation.

And this I answered first to the Lords, and after to Mr. Brown's Summary Charge, who in his last Reply said two things: First, That when I said Rome was a True Church, I spake it generally without this Distincti∣on. But this is quite beyond the Proof; for no Witness says so. Besides, it is manifest by distinction of Fundamentals from other Doctrines, (acknowledged by both the Witnesses) that I did not speak it absolutely, but plain enough to any ordinary Understand∣ing. Secondly, (which I was very sorry to hear from so grave a Man) he added, That there was no Truth of a Church, but in the Verity of Doctrine and Manners; and that in Veritate Entis a Company of Turks were a True Church. Now God be merciful to us, whither are we posting? 'Tis known that the Greek Word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifies Church, signifies also in Heathen Authors, any kind of Company or Congregation of Men, Turks if you will. But in Ec∣clesiastical Writers, and among all Christians the Word Church is used only (and so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 too) for a Company of Men which profess the Faith of Christ, and are Baptized into his Name. And will any Man say that a Company of Turks are such a Church in Veritate Entis, in the Verity of this Being; as all the World knows Papists are? Or if he will not speak de Ente tali, but change the Suppositum, he may say what he please. But I was very much troubled to hear this, and from him.

I had almost forgot that * 16.648 Mr. Nicolas here pressed the Authority of the Homilies upon me

again, where 'tis said, That the Bishop of Rome and their Adherents are not the true Church. But the Answer is easie: For I say as the Homily doth, and as it means too in that place. Namely, that the Church of Rome is not the true, that is, not the Catholick Church, nor the Head thereof. But there is a great deal of difference between the Church, and a Church: The one is the General, the other a Particular. The Church it cannot be; A Church it is, and a true one too, in the Sense before specified. Upon occasion of this Mr. Nicolas his Mouth was open again, and said, That at the beginning I reckon'd up some that I had Converted: But if this were my Opinion, and that if this might stand for good, I might Convert the Devil and all. My Ears had been so beaten with his Language, that I was pa∣tient, and left him to insult. And to help on this business, while he was in these loud Expressions, the E. of Pembrook came to Mr. Burton to the Bar, and in my hearing desired him to repeat the Testimony he had given; which Mr. Burton did, and his Lordship seemed to be much pleased with it. Not long before, when the News was come hot to the House, that York was taken; when I came at Five in the Afternoon to make my Answer, I was no sooner come to the Bar, but the same Lord came and sat just before me, and there with much Joy told Mr. Lieutenant the News. I presume he did it in favour to me, because he thought it would put me in very good Heart, being then instantly to begin to make my Answer. God forgive this Lord; for I have deserved in my time far better of him, if he understood him∣self, or any Man else.

The next Charge was out of Dr. Packlinton's Altare Christianum, * 16.649 p. 49, 50. where he speaks (they say, for I now have not his Book) of a Happiness that the Bishops of England can derive their Succession from St. Peter; which in great Scorn Mr. Nicolas called the Archbishop's Pedigree. First, If there be any Crime in this, Dr. Pocklinton is to Answer it, not I. Secondly, He may scorn what he will; but Wise Men know, 'tis a great Honour to the Church of England, and a great Stopple in the Mouths of the Romanists, that her Bishops can derive their Calling successively from St: Peter; especially consi∣dering, how much they stand upon personal Succession. Thirdly, Dr. Pocklinton in this says no more for me and the Bishops than * 16.650 St. Augustin urged for him∣self and his Brethren against the Donatists in the same words, save that St. Aug. begins at St. Peter, and descends to his own time; and the Dr. begins at his own time, and ascends to St. Peter.

But it seems an Upstart Clergy without a Calling will serve Mr. Nicolas well enough.

The Sixth Charge was, That Books were written of purpose to main∣tain * 16.651 these Opinions; and such Men as writ them only preferred. He na∣med Mr. Shelford, Mr. Butterfield, Dr. Cosins and Dr. Pocklinton. This hath been Clamoured upon already; if any have set out un∣worthy Books, they may be called to account for it: I hope I shall not answer for all the Divines in the Kingdom.

They whom I preferred, were Worthy and Able Men, and it will not be in the Power of Mr. White's Centuries, to Blast a Man of them among

any that know them.

For these that are named, Mr. Shelford I know not; Mr. Butterfield I saw punished in the High-Commission: Neither of them preferred, that I know.

The two last, by whom∣soever they were preferred, deserved all the Preferment they had, and more.

The Seventh Charge is out of my Diary at June: 15: 1632. where * 16.652 'tis said, that I preferred Mr: Secretary Windebank, my old Friend. And here Mr. Nicolas laid all the Correspondency open, which (he said) that Gentleman had with the Popes Agents, with Priests and Jesuits, and when he had made him this way as foul as he could, then I must be guilty of all, for preferring such a Man to the King. This Gentleman was indeed my ancient Friend: In my many Years Ac∣quaintance with him, I saw nothing in him, but Honesty and Worth: If when he was preferred, he deceived my Opinion, he is living to answer for himself. Many, in all Ages have been preferred to Princes, which do not answer the Hopes and Desires of them which prefer them; and yet they not made answerable for them neither: But whether he did fail in any Publick Trust or no, I am not his Judge. Yea; but some Letters were found from his Son Thomas, what Entertain∣ment be had in Foreign parts for his Father's sake. But these Letters were read to the Lords, and there is not one Word in them, that relates to me: And 'tis both likely and fit, the Son of a Secretary of State, should be worthily used in his Travels. Yea; but his Son Christopher was * 16.653 at Rome, and sent thither to Insinuate himself with the Pope: So An∣dreas ab Habernfeld writes in the Papers which Sir William Boswell sent over to me. If he did send his Son to that end, then I disco∣vered his Plot, for I caused those Papers to be examined by the King and the Lords, as is before related. Besides, in my Poor Judgment the Pope must be a very simple Man,

(it may be Mr. Nicolas thinks him so, compared with himself)

that a Youth of Seventeen at the most, should insinuate himself to Fish any thing out of him for his Fathers Service. Lastly, he pressed, that my Interest continued with Mr. Secretary in all these Courses of his. 'Tis well known in Court the old Interest did not continue between us; but for old Friendships sake, I will not be drawn to say more. As for his releasing of any Priests, he must give an account of that himself. But for my self, I was so careful in this Particular, that I never put my Hand, though Publick at Council-Table, or Star-Chamber, to any Release in all my time. I might be named as present, when such Release was made (which I could not avoid) but act in any I did not. Nay, I was so careful that I refused to set my Hand to any License to Travel, lest if any Young Man should be perverted abroad in his Travels, any thing might be imputed to me. And this all the Clerks of the Council can Witness.

But I see no Wariness, no Care, can prevent the Envy and the Malice of the Many, and the Mighty.

The Eighth Charge was, my Correspondence with Popish Priests. And * 16.654 for Proof of this, they produced divers Witnesses.

1. The First Witness was one Wadsworth, one of the Common Mes∣sengers used to attach such Persons. He says, that Smith, aliàs Fludd, bragged to him, that he had acquaintance with me. Here's nothing but a Bragging Report of Smith, who what he is I know not. So here's

no Proof. He says, that Four Pound was sent to himself to free him out of Prison, and that Davis told him it came from me. This is but a Hearsay from Davis, as the former was from Smith. But say, my Lords, if I did send him Four Pound to free him out of Prison, doth he not now very thankfully reward me for it? The Truth is, my Lords, I did send him Four Pound: And the Motive that made me send it, was because I heard he was a Convert from Popery to be a Protestant, and that his Imprisonment was as much for that as for any thing else. And this was attested to the Lords, by my Servant Mr. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, who was one of them that moved me for him.

2. The Second Witness was Francis Newton, another Messenger. He says, that when he had taken Henry Mors a Priest, he should have been carried to a private Committee; that he disliked it, and Complained to Mr. Secretary Cook, who (he says) sent him to me; and that when he came to Lambeth, Mr. Dell told him, I was in my Garden with Sir To∣by Matthew. My Servant Mr. Dell being appointed my Solicitor was now present in Court, and denyed all this. And well he might, for Sir Toby was never in my Garden with me in all his Life. And if Mr. Dell told him, that I would not meddle in the Business, (as he says he did) Mr. Dell must give the Account for it, not I. Yet if there were a Reference of this Mors to a private Committee, the hindring of that was more proper to Mr. Secretary, than to me. Howsoever, here was no hurt done. For he confesses that Mors was sent back to Newgate. And if (as he farther says) he was discharged by Mr. Secretary Windebank, that is nothing to me. He says, he was informed by Stukely, that Smith aliàs Fludd, was acquainted with me. But if he were but informed so himself, that's no Proof to inform your Lord∣ships. He says, that Brown a Priest was dismissed out of the High-Com∣mission. Thus it was, He was called in thither, for very foul Un∣cleanness. In process of this Business, he there openly confessed himself a Priest. Hereupon that Court sent him to Newgate.

What became of him after, I know not, save that I know he was strictly examined by Mr. Pym and others concerning me.

This Newton, upon what Grudge I know not, calls me Rogue, and all to naught, in all Companies; and with so much I acquainted the Lords.

3. The Third Witness was Tho. Mayo, a Messenger also. He says, that Sir Toby Matthew was accounted a Priest when he was in parts beyond the Seas, and that he saw him in Coach with me, and that he went over with me in my Barge. First I gave in Two Exceptions against this Witness. One that he was a Man of no Conscience, for he had shifted his Religion from Protestant to Papist, and back again three or four times: Which was a thing known. The other was, that he kept a Brothel House at this present: And that his Fellow Wadsworth knew this, and called him Pimping Knave, saying, he kept a Brace of Wenches at this time in his House. And these Words he spake of him but the Fifth of this present July, in the Bull Tavern in the Palace-Yard. So I thought him no fit Witness. But he was heard for all this.

And afterwards, Wadsworth meeting my Servant Mr. Snath, he told him, that he did say so to Mayo, and wondred how I should come to hear it.

Being admitted, and saying as he did, I told the Lords, that he began with a very bold Oath, and like a shifter

of his Religion. For I had Four of my Servants there, Three of which usually attended me, when I went and returned from Court, Mr. Dell, Mr. Snath, Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Dobson, and they all attested the con∣trary; and I never went, but one of these at least was with me. Besides, he is single in this Testimony. He says, that he saw Sir Toby several times in my House. But he confesses withal, that he never saw him near me. For my own part I cannot say, that ever he was within my Doors. But if he, or others of his Quality, do come to pry out any thing in my House, how is it possible for me to hinder it? My Porter could not see it written in their Foreheads, who they were. He says, That one Price was often seen at my House. But he doth not say, he was seen with me, or there with my Knowledge. He says, That one Leander was Reported to have been my Chamber-Fellow in Oxford. First, this is but a Report, and so no Evidence. Secondly, if he were my Cham∣ber-Fellow in Oxford, when we were Boys together, I am sure he was then no Priest, and he was but a Boy when he left the College. He confesses, that I gave Order to observe who, and how many re∣sorted to Embassadours Houses, and Signior Conn's, and says, he thought I could prove it. But I believe he would never have con∣fessed it, but that he knew I could prove it. And thereupon I shew∣ed the Lords many Papers certifying me what Numbers were found resorting to each place respectively. And Thomas Mayo's Hand to many of those Papers. He says, he took one Peter Wilford and brought him to me to Whitehall, while Sir Jo. Lambe was with me. But he confesses withal that Wilford then shewed Mr. Secretary Windebank's Warrant to Discharge him: And then what could I do to him? Nay, I have some Cause to think he would never have apprehended him, had he not known he had that Warrant. Lastly, he says, that once at the Star-Chamber I told him he was too quick and nimble for me. And I hope it is no Treason if I did say so. Nor could I mean he was too quick in apprehending Priests, for I found both him, and his Fellows after Crosse's Death slow enough at that: But if I said so, it was because I could not tell how to trust his Shifting and his Wyliness.

4. The Fourth Witness was Elizabeth Graye, Wife to another Mes∣senger. And this is a very fine Witness. For first, she says, Her Husband was committed by my Means. And then with a Breath she says, She doth not know by whom he was committed, but she thinks by Secre∣tary Windebank and me. But since she doth not know, but think only; I hope her Thinking can be no Evidence. She says, that she delivered me a Petition, and that I flung it away, saying, I would not meddle with any Priest-catching Knave. The Witness single, and I doubt doating, and the Words far from Treason.

5. The Fifth Witness was John Cooke, a Messenger too, and one that for his Misdemeanour had stood in the Pillory. This I urged against him, as unfit to witness against me:

My Witness that saw him in the Pillory, was so threatned, that he sent me word he durst not come.

I may not say from whom this Threatning came. But the thing was so true, that Cooke himself confessed it, but excu∣sed the Cause; And his Testimony received. He told how Fisher the Jesuit was taken by Graye: That when he was brought to the Council-Table,

Secretary Cooke and I went to the King to know his Pleasure about him: That we brought back word from his Majesty to the Lords, that he should be Banished. All this while here's no hurt done. Then he says, that notwithstanding this Order of his Majesty, Graye and he met Fisher at Liberty, by a Warrant from Secretary Windebank: That hereupon Graye repaired to Secretary Cooke, and to me, and that Dell told him I would not meddle with it. My Secretary must answer this, I remember it not. But if Mr. Dell received any such Answer from me, that I would not meddle with it; there were two apparent Rea∣sons for it. One, that I would not meddle with it alone, his Ma∣jesty's Order being to all the Lords. The other, that Fisher was the Man I had written against, and Men would have been apt to say, that when I could not answer, I sought means to destroy: So I no way fit (alone at least) to meddle with him of all Men. He says, that Graye was committed to the Fleet, for Railing on me in my own House. Yet he confesses, that he was not committed by me. And I presume your Lordships will think there was Cause of his Com∣mitment, if he did Rail upon me. And 'tis confessed by Mr. Pryn * 16.655 (though he had then received no Answer from my self) that he said he saw now how the Game went, and hoped e're long to see better Days, &c. He says, that Smith, alias Fludd, desired Sir Kenelm Digbye, as he was going to Lambeth, to tell me that he could not Dine with me that Day, but desired his Business might be remembred. No such Man ever Dined at my Table, to my knowledge. And if any Priest would say so to Sir Kenelm, how could I possibly hinder it? And Sir Kenelm, when this Cooke was Examined, was a Prisoner in Winchester-House; why was not he Examined to sift out this Truth? If Truth be in it.

6. The Sixth Witness was John Thresher, a Messenger too: He says, that he took Mors and Goodwin, two Priests; and that Secretary Windebank took away his Warrant, and dismissed them, saying, he would speak with me about it. And that when he came to me, I was angry with him about the Warrant. Mr. Secretary Windebank will, I hope, be able to answer for his own Actions. Why he dismiss'd the Priests I know not; But he had great Reason to take away his Warrant: And I a greater Reason to be angry with him for it. For no Warrant can issue from the High-Commission Court, but under three of their Hands at least. Now Thresher having gotten my Hand to the Warrant, never goes for more Hands, but proceeds in his Office, upon this unwarrantable Warrant. Had not I Reason to be offended at this? He says, that at the same time I said that Graye was an ill-tongued Fel∣low, and that if he kept him Company, I should not regard him. I had good Cause to say this and more, considering how Graye had us'd me. And I believe no Arch-Bishop would have born his Words. Lastly, he says, that by a Warrant from me he Arrested Sir Toby Matthewe, and that the Earl of Strafford stayed him from going to Prison, saying, he should answer it before the Lords. Here by the Witness himself it appears that I did my Duty. And Sir Toby did appear before the Lords, as was * 16.656 assumed he should. In the mean time, I was com∣plained of to the Queen: And a great Lady (who perhaps made the Complaint) stood by, and made her self Merry to hear me chid:

The Queen was pleased to send to the Lords, and Sir Toby was releas∣ed. Where my Fault was in all this, I do not yet see.

7. The last of these famous Witnesses was Goldsmith. Who says nothing, but that one Day before the High-Commission Court began, I forewarned the Messengers of that Court of Graye, in regard he was openly spoken against at the Council-Table. Which, all things considered, I had great Reason to do. He says likewise, that then Graye's Wife tender'd me a Petition, which I rejected, saying, I would meddle with no Priest-catching Knaves. I think his Carriage deserv'd no better of me, than to reject his Petition: But as for the Words I cannot own them; let the Goldsmith look to it that he have not Forged them. And I * 16.657 would very willingly know whether when the Apostle required, that an Accusation should not be received against an Elder, but under two or three Witnesses, 1 Tim. 5. he had any meaning they should be such * 16.658 as these?

The Ninth Charge was about the ordering of Popish Books that were * 16.659 seized, and the disposing of them. The sole Witness here is John Eger∣ton. He says, These Books were delivered to Mr. Mattershead, Register to the High-Commission. And I say so too; it was the constant Course of the High-Commission, to send them thither, and have them kept in that Office, till there was a sufficient number of them, and then to burn them. Yea, but he adds, that Mattershead told him they were re-delivered to the Owners: This is but a Report, and Mattershead is dead, who should make it good.

And though this be but a single Witness, and of a dead Man's Report; yet Mr. Browne thought fit to Summ it up with the rest. But surely if any Books were redelivered to the Owners; it was so ordered by the High-Com∣mission, in regard the Books were not found dangerous: From me, Mattershead had never any such Command.

Lastly, he says, he met Sir Toby Matthew twice at Lambeth. But he confesses, he never saw him with me; and then me it cannot concern.

The Tenth Charge was concerning the Priests in Newgate; the * 16.660 Witnesses are Mr. Deuxel, and Francis Newton. They both agree, and they say, that the Priests there had the best Chambers, and Liberty to go abroad without Keepers. I hope these Men do not mean to make the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Keeper of Newgate. If any Man gave them this Liberty, he is to be blamed for it, not I, who never knew it till now. Nor do either of these Witnesses say, that they called on me for remedy, or ever did so much as acquaint me with it. And they say this was Twelve Years since; and I had been Arch-Bishop but Seven Years when I was Committed.

The Eleventh Charge was about words in my Epistle Dedicatory be∣fore * 16.661 my Book against Mr. Fisher. The Words these, For, to my re∣membrance, I have not given him, or his, so much as course Language. So the Charge is because I have not given ill Words. And here Mr. Nicolas fell foul upon me again for taking such care, that the Whore of Babylon may have nothing but good Words, &c. But First, my Lords, I have always thought, and do still, that ill Language is no Proof against an Adversary: All the good it can do is, it may bring Scorn upon the Author, and work hardness of Heart in the Ad∣versary, whom he doth, or should labour to Convert. And this I

learned of two eminent Fathers in the Church, a 16.662 Gregory Nazienzen, b 16.663 and S. Augustin. The First would not use it, no not against the Arrians, who (as he saith) made open War against the Deity of Christ. Nor would the other against the same Adversaries. The one accounts it Ignorance, though a Fashion taken up by many; and the other loss of time. And here I desired the Lords, that I might read what immediately followed this Passage, which was granted: And there, as their Lordships did, so may the Reader see, if he please, that though my Words were not uncivil, yet in the Matter I fa∣voured neither him, nor his. And to avoid Tediousness, thither I re∣fer the Reader. With this, that sometimes Men apt enough to ac∣cuse me, can plead for this Moderation in their own Cases, and tell each other that * 16.664 Christ will not own bitterness in maintaining any way, though consonant to his Word. And † 16.665 another finds just Fault both with Papists, and Martin Marr-Prelat, for this reproachful Language. And yet it must be a Crime in me not to use it.

The Last Charge was the Commitment of one Ann Hussy to the * 16.666 Sheriff of London. The Business was this. She sent one Philip Bam∣bridge to tell me of I know not what Plot against the King (nor I think she neither.) Bambridge came to White-Hall toward the Even∣ing, and could make nothing of this dangerous Plot. Yet because it pretended so high, I sent him presently to Mr: Secretary Windebank; I being the next Morning to go out of Town. The Business was call∣ed to the Council-Table. When I came back, I was present there. Bambridge produced Ann Hussy, but she could make nothing appear. She says, I thought she was out of her Wits. Not so, my Lords; but I did not think she was well in them; nor do I yet. And whereas she complains of her Imprisonment, it was her own desire she might be com∣mitted to the Sheriff; and Mr. Hearn (my Councel here present) was assigned by the Lords to take her Examination. Therefore if any Par∣ticular in this Charge stick with your Lordships, I humbly desire Mr. Hearn may supply my want of Memory. But it passed over, as well it might. Here this Day ended, and I was ordered to attend again, July 29.

CAP. XLII. The Twentieth, and the Last Day of my Hearing.

THis Day I appeared again, and they proceeded upon the Four∣teenth * 16.667 Original Article, which Follows in these Words. * 16.668

Art. 14. That to preserve himself from being questioned for these, and other his Traiterous Courses; he hath laboured to subvert the Rights of Parliaments, and the ancient Course of Parliamentary Proceedings, and by false and malicious Slanders to incense his Majesty against Parliaments. By which Words, Councels and Actions, he hath Traiterously, and contrary to his Allegiance, la∣boured to alienate the Hearts of the King's Liege People from his Majesty, to set a Division between them, and to ruine and de∣stroy his Majesty's Kingdoms. For which they do Impeach him of High-Treason against our Soveraign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity.

The First Charge of this Day was Prefaced with a Note out * 16.669 of my Diary, at May 8. 1626. That the Duke of Buckingham was that Day impeached to the Lords by the House of Commons. And at May 25. The difference arising in the House of Peers about the Earl of Arundel's Commitment to the Tower without a Cause declared. No use made of these, but that I then Bishop of S. Davids took notice of these things. * 16.670 Then the Charge followed; and the First of it was, That I then be∣ing of the Lords House, and so to be one of the Duke's Judges, made a Speech for him, and Corrected his Speech in some particulars; and of a Judge made my self an Advocate. Which Mr. Nicolas said was a great Offence. I saw not these Papers, and therefore can say no∣thing, what is, or is not under my Hand. But to the thing it self, I say first, that if in that Speech any particular Fault had been found, impeaching any Right or Power of Parliament, that I must have an∣swered; but none is charged, but only the bare making of one Speech, and the mending of another. And this is a very poor Ar∣gument of any Enmity against Parliaments. Secondly, seeing no Fault is charged upon me in particular, it was but the Office of a poor Friend, to a great one, to whom being so much bound as I was, I could not refuse so much Service, being intreated to it. And Thirdly, I do humbly conceive, that so long as there was nothing done against Law, any Friend may privately assist another in his Difficulties. And I am perswaded, many Friends in either House, do what they justly may, when such sad Occasions happen.

And this Answer I gave to Mr. Brown, when he Summed up my Charge in the House of Commons.

But Mr. Brown did not begin with this, but with another, here omitted by Mr. Nicolas; though he had pressed it before in the

Fifteenth day of my Hearing, Dr. Potter writ unto me for my ad∣vice in some Passages of a Book writ by him, (as I remember against a Book Intituled Charity mistaken.) I did not think it fit to amend any thing with my own Pen; but put some few things back to his Second Thoughts, of which this was one, That if he express him∣self so, he will give as much Power to the Parliament in Matters of Do∣ctrine, as to the Church. This, Mr. Brown said, took away all Au∣thority from Parliaments, in that kind. But, under Favour, this takes away nor all, nor any that is due unto them. Not all, for my Words are about giving so much Power: Now he that would not have so much given to the one, as the other, doth not take away all from either. Not any that is due to them: For my Words not medling simply with Parliamentary Power (as appears by the Comparative Words so much) my Intention must needs be to have Dr. Potter so to consider of his Words, as that, that which is proper to the Church, might not be ascribed to Parliaments. And this I conceive is plain in the very Letter of the Law. The Words of the * 16.671 Statute are, Or such as shall hereafter be Ordered, Judged, or determined to be Heresy, by the High Court of Parliament in this Realm, with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation. Where 'tis manifest, that the Judging and Determining Part, for the Truth or Falshood of the Doctrin, is in the Church. For the Assent of the Church or Clergy cannot be given but in Convocation, and so the Law requires it. Now Assent in Convocation cannot be given, but there must preceed a Debate, a Judging, a Voting, and a Determining. Therefore the Determining Power for the Truth or Falshood of the Doctrine, Heresie, or no Heresie, is in the Church: But the Judging and determining Power for binding to Obedience, and for Punishment, is in the Parliament, with this Assent of the Clergy. Therefore I humbly conceive, the Parliament cannot by Law, that is, till this Law be first altered, Determine the Truth of Doctrine without this Assent of the Church in Convocation. And that such a Synod and Convocation as is Chosen and Assembled as the Laws and Customs of this Realm require.

To this Mr. Brown, in his Reply upon me in the House of Com∣mons, said Two Things. The one, that this Branch of the Statute of one Eliz. was for Heresie only, and the Adjudging of that; but med∣led not with the Parliaments Power in other matters of Religion. If it be for Heresie only, that the Church alone shall not so Determine Heresie, as to bring those grievous Punishments which the Law lays upon it, upon the Neck of any Subject, without Determina∣tion in Parliament; then is the Church in Convocation left free also in other matters of Religion, according to the First Clause in Mag∣na Charta, which establishes the Church in all her Rights. And her main and constant Right, when that Charter was made and con∣firmed, was Power of Determining in matters of Doctrine and Disci∣pline of the Church. And this Right of the Clergy is not bounded or limited by any Law, but this Clause of 1. Eliz. that ever I heard of.

The other was, that if this were so, that the Parliament might not meddle with Religion, but with the Assent of the Clergy in Convocation,

we should have had no Reformation. For the Bishops and the Clergy dissented. First, it is not (as I conceive) to be denyed, that the King and his High Court of Parliament may make any Law what they please, and by their Absolute Power may change Religion, Chri∣stianity into Turcism if they please (which God forbid.) And the Subjects, whose Consciences cannot obey, must flye or indure the Penalty of the Law. But both King and Parliament, are sub gra∣viori Regno, and must Answer God for all such abuse of Power. But beside this Absolute, there is a Limited Power, Limited, I say, by Natural Justice and Equity, by which, no Man, no Court, can do * 16.672 more, than what he can by Right. And according to this Power, the Church's Interest must be considered, and that indifferently, as well as the Parliaments. To apply this to the Particular of the Reformation. The Parliament in the beginning of Queen Eliza∣beth would not indure Popish Superstition, and by Absolute Pow∣er Abolished it, * 16.673 without any Assent of the Clergy in Convo∣cation. And then in her first Year, An. 1559. She had a Visi∣tation, and set out her Injunctions, to direct and order such of the Clergy as could conform their Judgments to the Refor∣mation.

But then so soon as the Clergy was settled, and that a Form of Doctrine was to be agreed upon, to shew the difference from the Roman Superstition, a Synod was called, and in the Year 1562. the Articles of Religion were agreed upon, and they were determi∣ned and confirmed by Parliament, with the Assent of the Clergy in Convocation; and that by a just and orderly Power. Nor is the Absolute Power of King and Parliament any way unjust in it self, but may many ways be made such, by Misinformation, or other∣wise. And this gives the King and the Parliament their full Power, and yet preserves this Church in her just Right. Just and acknow∣ledged by some that loved her not over well. For the * 16.674 Lord Brook tells us, That what a Church will take for true Doctrine, lies only in that Church. Nay, the very Heathen saw clearly the Justice of this: For † 16.675 M. Lucullus was able to say in Tully, That the Priests were Judges of Religion, and the Senate of Law.

The Second Proof is, That I made two Speeches for the King, to be spoken or sent to the Parliament that then was; and that they had some sour and ill Passages in them.

These Speeches were read to the Lords; * 16.676 and had I now the Copies, I would insert them here, and make the World Judge of them. First, I might shuffle here, and deny the * 16.677 making of them:

For no Proof is offer'd, but that they are in my Hand; and that is no necessary Proof: For I had then many Papers by me written in my own Hand, which were not my making, though I transcribed them, as not thinking it fit to trust them in other Hands. But, Secondly, I did make them, and I followed the Instructions which were given me as close as I could to the very Phrases; and being commanded to the Service, I hope it shall not now be made my Crime that I was trusted by my Soveraign. Third∣ly, As I did never endeavour to imbitter the King this way; so the smart Passages which Mr. Nicolas says are there, I hope will not be thought such, when 'tis consider'd whose Mouth was to utter them,

and upon what occasion: Yet if such they shall be thought, I am heartily sorry for them, and humbly desire they may be pass'd by: However, they can make no Proof that I am an Enemy to Parlia∣ments.

And this Answer I gave Mr. Brown in the House of Com∣mons, for he there omitted it not.

The Third Proof that I am an Enemy to Parliaments, is the Te∣stimony * 16.678 of one Mr. Bland. A forward Witness he hath been against me in other Particulars. Here he says, That Sir Sackvil Crowe shewed him a Paper, in which were fifteen or sixteen Passages concerning Parlia∣ments, with some sour Aspersions to boot; and that this Paper was Sub∣scribed W. Laud. First, my Lords, This Man is but a single Witness. Secondly, he says, he had this Paper from Sir Sackvil Crowe; and he is now in Turkey, and cannot be produced, that the Truth may be known. Thirdly, As I never gave Sir Sackvil any such Paper, so had he come by any such, 'tis more than probable some body else might have seen it beside Mr. Bland, to make a second Witness. Fourthly, This is a very bold Oath; for he Swears, The Paper was Subscribed with my own Hand, W. Laud: Whereas I being then Bishop of S. Davids, never writ my Name to any thing other than Guil. Meneven. Let him bethink himself of this Oath, Ne quid gravius dicam. Besides, it may be consider∣ed too, that this, with some Particulars mentioned by Mr. Bland, was charged in the First Additional Article, and now brought in upon the Fourteenth Original; partly to confound me, that I might not see how, or against what to defend my self; and partly to make me secure, be∣cause they had quite passed over the first Additional. But especially, * 16.679 because they had therein charged me, that these Propositions of mine had caused that Parliament to be Dissolved: And yet in the same Ar∣ticle, and within three Lines, 'tis said expresly, that my Propositions were deliver'd to my 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Duke of Buckingham after that Parliament was Dissolved.

So this Article hangs as well together as Mr. Bland's Testimony concerning it. Mr. Brown pressed this also hand against me; but I answered according to the Summ of that which is above∣written.

And as for the Particular said to be in that Paper, (were it mine, as it is not) or were the Words thought Treasonable, (as well they cannot be) yet the Statute of Queen Mary makes it, that no * 16.680 Words, nor Writings, nor Cipherings, nor Deeds, shall be Treason, but only such as are within the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. and no other. And this Statute I then read to the Lords, though I conceive there was no need of it.

The Fourth Proof was out of my Diary, at June 15. 1626. The * 16.681 Words these: Post multas agitationes privata Malitia in Ducem Buckin∣hamiae superavit & suffocavit omnia publica negotia; nihil actum est, sed Parliamentum solutum. And this was applied first by Mr. Nicolas, and after by Mr. Brown, as if I had charged this private Malice upon the Parliament. But this is utterly mistaken:

For I spake not this of the Parliament, but of some few particular Men, some of the House, Men well enough known to the World;

and more, not of the House, but Sticklers at large, who went between, and did very ill Offices, and so wronged both the King and the Parliament; which is no new thing in England. That my Words there cannot be meant of the Par∣liament, is two ways apparent. First, in that I say, Privata Malitia.

Private Malice did it; but name not the Parliament, nor charge any thing upon it. Secondly, Because had I spoken this of the Parlia∣ment, it could not have been called Private, but Publick Malice; no∣thing being more publick in this Kingdom, than what is done in and by the Parliament.

The Fifth Proof was, That a Proclamation for calling in of the Re∣monstrance * 16.682 was found in my Study: And Mr. Nicolas said, they conceived I had a Hand in it. It was as lawful for me to have and keep this Pro∣clamation, as for any other Subject. And their Conceit that I had a Hand in it, is no Proof. Mr. Nicolas says, That my Preferments fol∣lowed very quick upon this; and infers, that I was preferred for my ill Services in this kind. But all the Proof that he brings for this his un∣charitable Inference, is the comparing of the Times; and I shall be con∣tent to be tried by that. For by his own acknowledgment this Procla∣mation came out June 16. 1622. I being then Bishop of S. Davids: And he confesses I was not made Bishop of Bath and Wells till June 20. 1626. full Four Years after; nor a Privy-Counsellor till April 29. 1627. which was Five Years after. Whereas Rewards for such Services are found to come much quicker.

And Mr. Brown, when he made his Summary Charge, slighted this, and passed it over.

The Sixth Proof of my Enmity to Parliaments, was a Paper of * 16.683 Reasons, Mr. Nicolas said, against Parliaments. But First, when this Paper was shewed and read to the Lords, it was found otherwise, and was but a Paper of Hopes and Fears, which were conceived of a Parli∣ament: Not Reasons against them. Secondly, these Fears and Hopes, were not of a Parliament then in being, but of one in deliberation, whether it should be or not at that time; which all Men know is often disputed, and without offence. And any considering Man may privately do it, for his own use and tryal of his Judgment. Thirdly, in this deliberation, I was not the Author of these Fears and Hopes, but an Amanuensis to higher Powers, in regard their Hands were slower; though Commanded also to set down my own Opinion, which I did. Fourthly, I was then either a Counsellor, or a Sworn Servant to the King, and required upon my Oath, to deliver truly, both my Fears and my Hopes; and I durst not Perjure my self. And I hope the keeping of my Oath, and doing my Duty in that kind, shall not now prejudice my Life. Fifthly, these Fears and Hopes what-ever they contain, did relate to the being or not being of that one Parlia∣ment only, as appears in the very Paper it self; and the Hopes pre∣vailed, and that Parliament sate.

And this Answer I gave to Mr. Brown, who made all the use of this Paper that could be a∣gainst me.

Here Mr. Nicolas brings in Mr. Bland again, who says, that the four last Heads in this Paper, were in that Paper also which was shewed him. This single Witness hath an Excellent Memory, that can remember four Heads of a Paper punctually Sixteen Years ago. I asked why he did not complain of me then, when his Memory was fresher, and his Witness Sir Sackvill Crowe nearer? 'Twas replyed, He durst not for my Greatness. Why, but he knows well enough, that Parliaments, when they have a just Cause of Proceeding, do neither fear nor spare

any Man's Greatness. And is it probable, that they which spared not the Duke of Buckingham's Greatness, would have feared mine, being then a poor Bishop of Bath and Wells? And a Parliament was held again in the very next Year, 1627. So that he wanted not opportuni∣ty to complain. Nor can I believe any Opinion of my supposed Greatness stopped him. Let him look into himself.

Then Mr. Nicolas told the Lords with great vehemency, what Ve∣nom there was in this Paper, which he said was in every Particular. A right Spider I see now he is, Venom out of any thing.

Here is a void space left, I suppose with design to have the Paper (here mentioned) to be inserted. Which was not done.

The Seventh Proof was out of my Diary at March, 1628. Where * 16.684 the words are, that the Parliament which was dissolved March 10: 1628. sought my Ruin.

This had been a better Argument to prove Par∣liaments an Enemy to me, than me to them.

But nothing can be meant by this, but that my Ruin was sought in that Parliament by some particular Men, whose Edge was too keen against me. And this appears in my Diary at June 14. preceeding; at which time I was put into a Remonstrance, which had I been found any way guilty, must needs have ruin'd me. But by God's Blessing, the very same day I did clearly acquit my self in open Parliament, of all the Aspersions cast upon me about Dr. Manwaring's Sermons.

This Particular Mr. Brown charged upon me, and I Answer'd as before. But Mr. Nico∣las did not touch upon it this day.

The Eighth Proof, that I was an Enemy to Parliaments, was * 16.685 taken from some Marginal Notes, which I had made upon a printed Speech of Sir Benjamin Rudyards, which he spake in the Parliament held An. 1627. Mr. Nicolas named Four; but Mr. Brown in Summing up my Charge, insisted only upon Two. The Word Reducing: And the Aim of Gaining from the King. Sir Benjamin Rudyard is my old Acquaintance, and a very worthy Member of that House, both now and then. But be a Man never so Worthy, may he not use some Phrase amiss? Or if he do, may not I or another observe, yea check at it, but by and by I must be an Enemy to Parliaments? Is there any Argument in this, I said a Gentleman in the House of Commons used an ill Phrase in a Speech of his in that House, therefore I am an Enemy to the Parliament in which he spake it? Say I am mistaken, and not he, and that the Phrase is without Exception; yet this is but my Error in Judgment, no Proof of Enmity, either to the Parliament, or him that spake it. That which I said was this. First, that the word Reducing, as there placed, was a hard Phrase. Let any Man view that Speech considerately, and tell me whether it be not so: Secondly, that I disliked the word Gaining, being between the King and his People in Parliament. For (as I humbly conceive) there will always be work enough for both to joyn for the Publick Good; and well it can never be, if they which should so joyn, do labour only to gain one from another. For if the King shall labour to gain upon the Liberty or Property of the Subject; or the Subjects in Parliament, labour to gain from the just Power and Prerogative of the King, can any

Prudent Man think the Publick can thrive there-while? Yea, but they say, that my Marginal Note upon this Phrase was, that this Gaining was the Aim of the lower House. If my Note be so, yet that cannot be otherwise understood, than that according to this Expression, this must be their Aim.

And the Reason why I found fault with the Phrase was, because I saw this must follow out of it. So, under Fa∣vour,

I was not so bold with this Gentleman, as he was with the House in using this Speech.

The next Proof was, that I found fault with Eight Bills that were then * 16.686 in the House. This is a very poor Proof of my Enmity to Parliaments, that I disliked some Bills proposed in them: Though there be no Proof of this urged at all, save only, that I writ the time May 27. 1628. upon the Paper where the Bills were mentioned. And I hope to mention the time when any Bills were proposed, is not to dislike the Bills. But say I did dislike them, what then? It is lawful for any Member of the House (and such was I then) to take Exceptions which he thinks are just against any Bill, before it pass. And shall not that which is Lawful for any Man to do, be Lawful for me? Beside, almost all Bills are put in by private Persons. The House is not interessed in them, till they are Passed and Voted by them: So that till then, any Man may spend his Judgment upon the Bill, without any wrong at all to the Parliament.

Mr. Brown saw this well enough, and therefore vouchsafed not so much as to name it.

The Tenth Proof was, that I made an Answer to the Remon∣strance * 16.687 set out by Parliament, An. 1628. This was pressed before, and here 'tis laid hold of on all Hands; to make as full a Cry as it can against me.

Mr. Nicolas presses it here aloud (as he doth all things) and Mr. Brown lays it close in Summing up the Charge.

My Answer the same to both. First, they charge me, that I made * 16.688 that Answer to the Remonstrance which came forth, An. 1628. I did this by the King's Command, and upon such Instructions as were given me. And as I obeyed the Command, so did I closely pursue my In∣structions. And I durst do no other, for I was then upon my Oath as a Sworn Counsellor, and so employed in that Service. And I hope no Man will conceive, that I would without such a Com∣mand have undertaken such a kind of Service. Yea, but they * 16.689 say, it doth not appear that I had any such Command: Yes, that ap∣pears as plainly as that I made it. For they bring no Proof that I made it, but because the Indorsement upon that Paper is in my Hand, and calls it my Answer: And the same Indorsement says, I made it by his Majesty's Command. So either the Indorsement is no sufficient Proof for the one, or if it be, 'tis sufficient for both; And must needs witness the one for me, with the same strength that it doth the other against me. For a kind of Confession that Indorsement is, and must therefore not be broken, but be taken with all its Qualities. Third∣ly, * 16.690 they say, there are some sour and bitter Passages in the Answer. 'Tis more than I perceived, if it be so. Nor was any Sourness intended. And I hope no such Passages found in it, the Person con∣sidered, in whose Name the Answer was made. The Expressions indeed might have been too big for a Subject's Mouth. Fourthly, they * 16.691 say, I was displeased that this Answer was not Printed; but all the Proof

they brought for it is, that it is written upon the Paper, that there was an Intention to Print it, but that I know not what hinder'd it.

But this Ar∣gument can never conclude: John a Nokes knows not who hindred the Printing of a Jewish Catechism in England; therefore he was displeased the Catechism was not Printed. But I see every Foot can help trample him that is down.

Yea, but they Instanced in three Particulars, which they charged severally upon me. The first Par∣ticular * 16.692 was, That by this Remonstrance, they sought to fill our Peoples Hearts more than our Ears. A second was, that they swelled to that big∣ness, * 16.693 till they brake themselves. But neither of these strike at any Right or Priviledge of Parliaments; they only Tax some Abuses, which were conceived to be in the Miscarriage of that one Parlia∣ment. And both these Particulars were in my Instructions. And though I have ever Honoured Parliaments, and ever shall, yet I can∣not think them Infallible. General Councils have greater Promises than they, yet they may Err.

And when a Parliament, by what ill Acci∣dent so-ever, comes to Err, may not their King tell them of it? Or must every Passage in his Answer be sour, that pleases not?

And for that Remonstrance, whither it tended let the World judge, the Office is too dangerous for me. The third Particular, was the Ex∣cusing * 16.694 of Ireland, and the growth of Popery there, of which that Remon∣strance, An. 1628. complained. This was in the Instructions too. And I had Reason to think, the King and his Council understood the State of Ireland, for Religion and other Affairs, as well as other Men. And I was the more easily led into the belief, that Religion was much at one State in Ireland, in Queen Elizabeth's and King James his time, and now; because ever since I understood any thing of those Irish Affairs, I still heard the same Complaints that were now made. For in all these times they had their Romish Hierarchy: Submitted to their Government: Payed them Tythes: Came not to the Protestant Churches: And Rebelled under Tyrone under pretence of Reli∣gion. And I do not conceive they have gone beyond this now.

If they have, let them Answer it, who have occasioned it.

But to prove this great new growth of Popery there, they produced, first a Proclamation from the State in Ireland, dated April 1. 1629. Then a Letter of the Bishop of Kilmore's to my self, dated April 1. 1630. Thirdly, a Complaint made to the State there, An. 1633. of this growth, so that I could not but know it. Most true, when these Informations came I could not but know it: But look upon their Date, and you shall find that all of them came after this Answer was made to the Remon∣strance, and therefore could not possibly be foreseen by me, without the Gift of Prophesie. Then they produced a Letter of the Earl of Straffords, in which he Communicated to me, Mar. 1633. that to mould the Lower House there, and to rule them the better, he had got them to be chosen of an equal number of Protestants and Papists.

And here Mr. Maynard, who pressed this point of Religion hard upon me, be∣gan to fall foul upon this Policy of the Earl of Strafford, and him∣self yet brake off with this, But he is gone.

Then he fell upon me as a Man likely to approve those ways, because he desired the Letter might be communicated to me. This Letter was not written to me, as appears by the Charge it self: For if it had, no Man else

needed to communicate it to me. And I would fain know, how I could help any of this? If that Lord would write any thing to me himself, or communicate any thing to another that should acquaint me with it, was it in my power to hinder either of these? And there were other Passages in this Letter, for which, I conceive, his Lordship de∣sired the Communication of that Letter to me, much more than the Particular urged, which could no way relate unto me.

And Mr. Brown in his Summ said very little, if any thing, to this Business of Ireland.

After this Mr. Nicolas, who would have nothing forgotten, that * 16.695 might help to multiply Clamour against me, fell upon five Particu∣lars, which he did but name, and left the Lords to their Notes. Four of these Five were handled before. As First, the words, If the Par∣liament prove peevish. Secondly, that the King might use his own Power. Thirdly, the violation of the Petition of Right. Fourthly, the Canons. Fifthly, that I set Spyes about the Election of Parliament-Men in Glocester-shire; and for this last, they produced a Letter of one Allibon to Dr. Heylin. To the four first, I referred the Lords to their Notes of my Answers, as they did. To this last, that Mr. Allibon is a meer Stranger to me, I know not the Man. And 'tis not likely I should employ a Stranger in such a Business. The Letter was sent to Dr. Heylin, and if there were any discovery in it of Juglings there in those Elections, (as too often there are;) and if Dr. Heylin sent me those Letters, as desirous I should see what Practices are abroad; what fault is there in him or me for this?

Then Mr. Nicolas would not omit that which he thought * 16.696 might disgrace and discontent me, though it could no way be drawn to be any Accusation: 'Twas out of my Diary, at Oct: 27. 1640. this Parliament being then ready to begin. The Passage there is, That going into my upper Study to send away some Manuscripts to Oxford, I found my Picture which hung there privately, fallen down upon the Face, and lying on the Floor; I am almost every day threatned with my Ruin, God grant this be no Omen of it. The Accident is true; and having so many Libels causelesly thrown out against me; and hearing so many ways as I did, that my Ruin was Plotted, I had Reason to apprehend it. But I apprehended it without Passion, and with looking up to God, that it might not be Ominous to me.

What is this Man Angry at? Or why is this produced?

But though I cannot tell why this was produced, yet the next * 16.697 was urged only to Incense your Lordships against me: 'Tis in my Diary again, at Feb. 11. 1640. Where Mr. Nicolas says confidently I did Abuse your Lordships, and Accuse you of Injustice. My Lords, what I said in my Diary appears not; if it did appear whole and altogether, I doubt not but it alone would abundantly satisfie your Lordships. But that Passage is more than half burnt out (as is * 16.698 to be seen) whether of purpose by Mr. Pryn, or casually, I cannot tell; yet the Passage as confidently made up, and read to your Lordships, as if nothing were wanting. For the thing it self, the close of my words is this: So I see what Justice I may expect, since here's a Resoluti∣on taken, not only before my Answer, but before my Charge is brought up against me. Which Words can traduce no Man's Justice. First, be∣cause they depend upon an If: If the Parliament-Man there mentio∣ned

told me Truth, that such a Resolution was taken. And Se∣condly, because it can be no Justice in any Men, be the Sentence never so moderate in it self, to take up a Resolution what Sentence shall pass, before Answer given, or Charge put in: For else a Man may be punished first, and tryed after, which is contrary * 16.699 to all Rules of Justice. And therefore if such a Resolution were taken (as I believe not) I might well say that which followed after.

Then was produced a Paper concerning the Subsidies or Aids * 16.700 which had been given in divers Parliaments, in which it is said, at the be∣ginning of it, that Magna Charta had an obscure Birth, and was Fo∣stered by an Ill Nurse.

I believe that no Man that knows Mr. Ni∣colas, thinks that he spakes softly upon this.

No, he spake loud enough; What Laws would I spare, that spake thus of Magna Charta? First, here is no Proof offered that this Paper is my Col∣lection, but only that it is in my Hand: By which Argument (as is said before) I may be made the Author of any thing: And so may any Scholar that is able and willing to inform himself. Secondly, the main Draught of that Paper is not in my Hand, though some Notes upon it be. Thirdly, there are Littleton, and other Lawyers quoted in that Paper, Authors which I never read. Nor is this now any disgrace to Magna Charta, that it had an obscure Birth: For say the Difficulties of the times brought it obscurely forth; that's no blemish to the Credit and Honour to which it hath for many Ages attained. Not only their Laws, but the greatest Empires that have been in the World, some of them have had obscure beginnings. Witness the Roman Empire. Fourthly, what if our Stories agree upon it, that it had an obscure Birth, and a worse Nurse? What if some Law Books (which Mr. Nicolas never read) and those of good account, use almost the same Words of Magna Charta, which are in that Paper? Shall the same Words be History and Law in them, and Treason in me? And some∣what * 16.701 certainly there is in it,

that Mr. Brown, when he gave his Summary Charge against me, First to the Lords, and after in the House of Commons, quite omitted this Particular. Sure I believe he found no∣thing was in the Paper, but known Truth, and so passed it over, else he would ne∣ver have denyed a Vindicaton to Magna Charta.

After all this Mr. Nicolas concludes with a Dream, which he * 16.702 says was mine. The Dream (he says) was, that I should come to great∣er Preferment in the Church, and Power in the State, than any Man of my Birth and Calling had done before me, but that in the end I should be Hanged. First, my Lords, if I had had any such Dream, 'tis no Proof of any thing against me. Dreams are not in the Power of him that hath them, but in the unruliness of the Phansie, which in broken sleeps * 16.703 wanders which way it pleases, and shapes what it pleaseth. But this Dream is brought in as the Fall of my Picture was, to make me a Scorn to your Lordships and the People. And to try whether any

thing will yet at last break my Patience. This Dream is Reported here according to Mr. Pryn's Edition of my Diary, somewhat diffe∣rent from that which Mr. Pryn Printed in a former Book of his; but the beginning and the end agree. From Mr. Pryn, Culmer hath taken and Printed it. And Mr. Pryn confessed before the Lords, that one Mr. Badger an Attorney at Law, a Kinsman of mine, told it him. The Truth, my Lords, is this. This Badger Married a near Kinswo∣man of mine; he was a notorious Separatist, and so nearer in Affecti∣on to Mr. Pryn, than to me in Alliance. This Man came one day to me to Lambeth, and told me privately (which was more Manners than usually the Bold Man had) that he heard I had such a Dream when I was Young, in Oxford: I protested to him there was no such thing, and that some Malicious Fellow or other had set him on work to come and Abuse me to my Face. He seemed satisfied; but going to Visit Mr. Pryn then in the Tower, he told it him; and Mr. Pryn, without further Proof, Prints it in the next Book he set out. When I saw it in Print, and found that some in Court took notice of it, I resolved to acquaint his Majesty how I was used; and meeting with the Earl of Pembroke, then Lord Chamberlain, and my great Friend as he pretended (the King being not then come forth of his Chamber) I told his Lordship how I was used; and when the King came forth I told it him also. But the Earl of Pembroke, then present in the House, and called up by them for a Witness, forgetting the Circum∣stances, but remembring the thing, took it upon his Honour, that I said nothing of Mr. Pryn's Printing it, but that I told him abso∣lutely I had this Dream. Now God forgive his Lordship. I was much troubled in my self to hear him take it upon his Dishonour, (for so it was) and yet unwilling (knowing his Violence) to con∣test with him in that place, and in my Condition; and observing what Spleen he hath lately shewed against me, I stood a little still to gather up my self. When Mr. Nicolas, before I could make any re∣ply, fell on with great earnestness, and told the Lords, that the fore∣part of my Dream was found true, to the great hurt both of Church and State; and that he hoped they would now make good the latter: That I might be Hanged. To which I Answer'd, That I had not forgot∣ten our Saviour's Prediction, St. John 16. That in the World we should * 16.704 be sure to meet with affliction. Nor his Prayer: Father forgive these Men, for they know not what they do, St. Luke 23. No, nor is that out of my * 16.705 Memory which St. Paul speaks, 1 Cor. 4. De Humano Die. But for the Publick, with this I shall conclude. God of his Infinite Mercy Bless the King and his People with Love, and Peace, and Piety, and Plenty, which is the worst I ever wished or endeavoured, whatsoever it shall please God shall become of me, to whose Blessed Will and Pleasure, in all Humility I submit my self. And here ended this last day of my Tryal. But before I went from the Bar, I made three Motions to the Lords: The one, That I might have a day to make a Recapitulation of this long and various Charge, or of the chief Heads of it, that it might appear in a Body together. The other, That after this, my Councel might have a day to speak to all Points of Law, incident to my Cause. The third, That they would be pleased to remember that I had pleaded the Act of Oblivion

to the Thirteenth Original Article. Mr. Nicolas said, they would acquaint their House with it. And the Lords promised to take all in∣to Consideration. And so I was dismissed Sine Die.

But here I may not go off from this Dream so, since Mr. Pryn hath Printed it at the end of my Diary. Where he shamelesly says, This Dream was Attested from my own Mouth, at my Tryal in the Lords House. For I have set down all that pass'd exactly. Nor did I then give any Attestation to it; only before I could gather up my self, to Answer the Earl of Pembroke in a fitting manner, and not to hurt my self, Mr. Nicolas fell upon me with that Unchristian bit∣terness, as diverted me from the Earl, to Answer him. But once for all, and to satisfie any Man that desires it, That is all true which I have here set down concerning this Dream, and upon my Christianity and hope of future Salvation, I never had this Dream nor any like it, nor did I ever tell it this Lord, or any other, any other way, than in Relation to Badger and Pryn, as is before related. And surely if I had had such a Dream, I should not have had so little Discretion, as to tell it any Man, least of all, to pour it into that Sieve the Earl of Pembroke. For that which follows, and wherein his Charity and Words are almost the same with those of Mr. Nicolas, I give him the same Answer, and (forgiving him all his most Unchristian and Insatiable Malice against me) leave my self in the Hands of God, not in his.

I Received an Order from the Lords, that if I had a mind to make a * 16.706 Recapitulation (as I had formerly desired) of my long and various Charge, I should provide my self for it against Munday next (this Order came upon Friday) and that I should give in my Answer the next Morning what I meant to do. The next day, in Obedience to * 16.707 this Order, I gave in my Answer; which was, Humble Thanks that I might have liberty to make it, referring the day to their Honoura∣ble Consideration; with this, that Munday next was a very short time for such a Collection. Upon this Answer, an Order was presently made, that I should provide to make my Recapitulation upon Munday September the Second. And about this time, (the certain day I know not) it was Resolved in the House of Commons, that according to my Plea I should enjoy the benefit of the Act of Oblivion, and not be put to Answer the Thirteenth Original Article, concerning the Scottish Business. And truly, I bless God for it, I did not desire the benefit of that Act, for any Sense of Guiltiness which I had in my self; but, in Consideration of the Times, and the Malice of the now Potent Faction, which being implacable towards me, I could not think it Wisdom, to lay by any such Power as might help to secure me. Yet in the former part of this History, when I had good Reason to think I should not be called to Answer such General Articles, I have set down my Answer to each of them, as much as Generals can be Answer'd. And thereby I hope my Innocency will appear to this Thirteenth Article also.

Then came Munday, Sept. 2. and, according to the Order of the * 16.708 Lords, I made the Recapitulation of my whole Cause, in matters of greatest Moment, in this form following. But so soon as I came to the Bar, I saw every Lord present with a New Thin Book in Folio

in a blue Coat. I heard that Morning that Mr. Pryn had Printed my Diary, and Published it to the World to disgrace me. Some Notes of his own are made upon it. The first and the last are two desperate Untruths, beside some others. This was the Book then in the Lords Hands, and I assure my self, that time picked for it, that the sight of it might damp me, and disinable me to speak: I confess I was a little troubled at it. But after I had gathered up my self, and looked up to God, I went on to the Business of the Day, and thus I spake.

CAP. XLIII. My Recapitulation.

Mr. Lords, my Hearing began March 12. 1643/4. and continued to the end of July. In this time I was heard before your Lordships, with much Honour and Patience, Twenty Days; and sent back without Hearing, by reason of your Lordships greater Em∣ployments, Twelve Days. The rest were taken up with providing the Charge against me.

And now, my Lords, being come near an end, I am, by your Grace and Favour, and the leave of these Gentlemen of the Honou∣rable House of Commons, to represent to your Lordships and your Memories, a brief Summ of my Answers to this long and various Charge: In which I shall not only endeavour, but perform also all possible Brevity. And as with much Thankfulness I acknowledge my self bound to your Lordships for your Patience: So I cannot doubt, but that I shall be as much obliged for your Justice, in what I am innocent from Crime; and for your Clemency, in what the common Frailty of Mankind hath made me Err. And I Humbly desire your Lordships, to look upon the whole Business with Honourable Care of my Calling; of my Age; of my long Imprisonment; of my Sufferings in my Estate; and of my Patience in and through this whole Affliction: The Sequestration having been upon my Estate above Two Years. In which notwithstanding, I may not omit to give Thanks for the Relief which my Petitions found, for my present ne∣cessities in this time of my Hearing, at your Honourable Hands.

1. First then, I humbly desire your Lordships to remember the gene∣rality, and by occasion of that, the incertainty of almost every Article charged upon me, which hath cast me into great streights all along in making my Defence.

2. Next, That your Lordships will be pleased to consider, what a

short space, upon each Days Hearing, hath been allowed me to make my Answer, to the many Charges in each several Day laid against me. Indeed, some Days scarce time enough to peruse the Evidence, much less to make, and then to review and weigh my Answers. Especially considering (to my greatest Grief) that such a Charge should be brought up against me, from so Great and Honourable a Body as the Commons of England. In regard of which, and all other sad Occasions, I at first did, and do still in all Humility desire, that in all Particulars concerning Law, my Councel may be heard before your Lordships proceed to Sentence, and that a Day may be assigned for my Councel accordingly.

3. Thirdly, I heartily pray also, that it may be taken into your Honourable Consideration, how I have all manner of ways been sift∣ed to the very Bran, for that (what e're it amounts to) which stands in Charge against me.

(1) The Key and use of my Study at Lambeth, Books and Papers taken from me.

(2) A Search upon me at the Tower, made by Mr. Pryn, and One and Twenty Bundles of Papers, prepared for my Defence, taken from me, and not Three Bundles restored to me again. This Search made before any Particular Articles were brought up against me. My very Pockets searched; and my Diary, nay, my very Prayer-Book taken from me, and after used against me: And that in some Cases, not to prove, but to make a Charge: Yet I am thus far glad, even for this sad Accident. For by my Diary your Lordships have seen the Passages of my Life: And by my Prayer-Book the greatest Secrets between God and my Soul: So that you may be sure you have me at the very bottom: Yet blessed be God, no Disloyalty is found in the one; no Popery in the other.

(3) That all Books of Council-Table, Star-Chamber, High-Commissi∣on, Signet-Office, my own Registeries, and the Registeries of Oxford and Cambridge, have been most exquisitely searched for matter against me, and kept from me and my use, and so affording me no help towards my Defence.

4. I humbly desire your Lordships to remember in the Fourth Place, That the things wherein I took great Pains, and all for the Publick Good and Honour of this Kingdom and Church, without any the least Eye to my own Particular, nay, with my own great and large Expences, have been objected against me as Crimes. As namely, the Repair of S. Pauls, and the Setling of the Statutes of the Vniversity of Oxford.

(1) For S. Pauls, not the Repair it self, they say (no, for very shame they dare not say that, though that be it which Galls the Faction) but the Demolishing of the Houses which stood about it. Yea, but without taking down of these Houses, it was not possible to come at the Church to repair it, which is a known Truth. And they were taken down by Commission under the Broad Seal. And the Tenants had Valuable Consideration for their several Inter∣ests, according to the number of their Years remaining: And ac∣cording to the Judgment of Commissioners named for that purpose, and named by his Majesty and the Lords, not by me. Nor did I

ever so much as sit with them about this Business. And if the Commission it self were any way Illegal (as they urge it is) that must reflect upon them, whose Office was to Draw and Seal it; not on me, who understood not the Legality or Illegality of such Commissions; nor did I desire that any one circumstance against Law should be put into it, nor is any such thing so much as offer∣ed in Proof against me. And because it was pressed, that these Hou∣ses could not be pulled down but by Order of Parliament, and not by the King's Commission alone: I did here first read in part, and after∣wards, according to a Salvo granted me, deliver into the Court Three Records, two in Ed. 1. Time, and one in * 16.709 Ed. 3. Time, in which are these Words; Authoritate nostra Regali, prout opus fuerit, cessantibus quibuscunque Appellationum & Reclamationum diffugiis, Juris, Scripti, aut Patriae strepitu procedatis, Nova AEdificia quae, &c. amoveri, & divelli peni∣tus faciatis, &c. And a little after, Quousque per nos cum deliberatione & avisamento nostri Consilii super hoc aliter fuerit Ordinatum, &c. Here's no staying for a Parliament; here's no Recompence given; here's Barring of all Appeal, nay all remedy of Law, though written. And all this by the King's own Authority, with the Advice of his Council. And is a far more moderate way taken by me, yet under the same Au∣thority, and for the removal of far greater Abuses, and for a more noble End, become Treason?

(2) As for the Statutes of Oxford, the Circumstances charged against me are many, and therefore I craved leave to refer my self to what I had already answered therein.

5. Fifthly, Many of the Witnesses brought against me in this Business are more than suspected Sectaries and Separatists from the Church, which by my place I was to punish, and that exas∣perated them against me, whereas by † 16.710 Law no Schismatick ought to be received against his Bishop. And many of these are Witnesses in their own Causes, and pre-examined before they come in Court. At which pre-examination I was not present, nor any for me, to cross-interrogate. Nay, many Causes which took up divers Days of Hearing in Star-Chamber, High-Commission, and at Council-Table, are now upon the sudden easily overthrown, by the Depositions of the Parties themselves. And upon what Law this is grounded, I humbly submit to your Lordships. And such as these, are the Causes of Mr. Pryn, Mr. Burton, Mr. Wilson, Alderman Chambers, Mr. Vassal, Mr. Waker, Mr. Huntly, Mr. Foxlye, and many other. Where I humbly represent also, how impossible it is for any Man, that sits as a Judge, to give an account of all the several Motives which directed his Conscience in so divers Causes, and so many Years past, as these have been; and where so many Witnesses have been Examined, as have been here produced against me: My Lords, above a Hundred and Fifty Witnesses, and some of them, Three, Four, Six Times over, and Mr. Pryn I know not how often. Whereas the Civil Law says expresly, that the * 16.711 Judges should moderate things so, that no Man should be oppressed by the multitude of Wit∣nesses, which is a kind of Proof too, that they

which so do, distrust the truth and goodness of their Cause. Besides, my Lords, in all matters which came before me, I have done nothing to the uttermost of my Understanding, but what might conduce to the Peace and Welfare of this Kingdom, and the maintenance of the Doctrine and Discipline of this Church established by Law; and under which God hath blessed this State, with so great Peace and Plenty, as other Neighbouring Nations have looked upon with Admiration. And what Miseries the overthrow of it (which God in Mercy for∣bid) may produce, he alone knows.

6. Sixthly, my Lords, there have been many and different Char∣ges laid upon me about Words. But many of them (if spoken) were only passionate, and hasty: And such, upon what occasion soever drawn from me (and I have had all manner of Provocations put upon me) may among humane Errours, be pardoned unto me, if so it please your Lordships. But for such as may seem to be of a higher Nature, as those witnessed by Sir Henry Vane the Elder, I gave my Answer again now fully to the Lords, but shall not need to re∣peat it here.

7. Then, my Lords, for my Actions; not only my own, but other Mens have been heavily Charged against me in many Particulars, and that Criminally, and I hope your Lordships will think Illegally. As Secretary Windebank's, Bishop Montague's, my Chaplains, Dr. Hei∣lyn's, Dr. Cosens, Dr. Pocklinton's, Dr. Dove's, Mr. Shelford's, and divers others: And many of these Charges look back into many Years past. Whereas the Act made this present Parliament, takes no no∣tice of, nor punishes any Man, for any thing done and past at the Council-Table, Sar-Chamber, or High-Commission; much less doth it make any thing Treason. And out of this Act I am no way Except∣ed. Besides, (as I have often Pleaded) all Acts done in in the Star-Chamber, at Council-Table, High Commission, or Convocation; are all Joynt Acts of that Body, in and by which they were done; and cannot by any Law be singly put upon me, it being a known Rule of the Law, Refertur ad universos quod publice fit per Majorem Partem. And * 16.712 Mr. Pryn himself can stand upon this Rule against the Independents, and tell us, that the Major Voice, or Party, ought to over-rule and bind the less. And he quotes † 16.713 Scripture for it too. In which place, that which is done by the Major part, is ascribed to all; not laid upon any one, as here upon me. And in some of these Courts, Star-Chamber especially, and Council-Table, I was accompa∣nied with Persons of great Honour, Knowledge and Experience, Judges, and others; and 'tis to me strange, and will seem so to Fu∣ture Ages, that one and the same Act shall be Treason in me, and not the least Crime, nay, nor Misdemeanour in any other. And yet no Proof hath been offered that I Solicited any Man to concur with me, and almost all the Votes given preceeded mine, so that mine could lead no Man.

8. After this I answered to divers others Particulars, as namely to the Canons, both as they concerned Aid to the King, and as they looked upon matters of the Church and Religion.

9. To the Charge about Prohibitions.

10. To the base Charge about Bribery. But pass them over here

as being answered before; whither I may refer the Reader now, though I could not the Lords then.

11. My Lords, after this came in the long, and various Charge of my Vsurping Papal Power, and no less than a design to bring in all the Corruptions of Popery, to the utter overthrow of the Protestant Religion established in England: And this they went about to prove.

(1) By my Windows in the Chappel: An Argument as brittle as the Glass in which the Pictures are.

(2) By Pictures in my Gallery; which were there before the House was mine, and so proved to your Lordships.

(3) By Reverence done in my Chappel: As if it were not due to God, ospecially in his Church: And done it was not to any other Person or Thing.

(4) By Consecration of Churches: Which was long before Popery came into the World. As was also the care of safe laying up of all Hallowed and Sacred things. For which, I desire your Lordships I may read a short Passage out of Sir Walter Rawley's History. The rather because written by a Lay-Man, and since the Times of * 16.714 Reformation.

But this Mr. Maynard excepted against, both as new Matter, and because I had not the Book present, though the Paper thence tran∣scribed was offered to be attested by Oath, to be a true Copy. But though I could not be suffered to read it then, yet here it follows.

So Sacred was the moveable Temple of God, and with such Reve∣rence guarded and transported, as 22000 Persons were Dedicated to the Service and Attendance thereof, of which 8580 had the peculiar Charge, according to their several Offices and Functions, the Particulars whereof are in the Third and Fourth of Numbers. The Reverend care which Moses the Prophet and chosen Servant of God * 16.715 had, in all that belonged even to the outward and least Parts of the Tabernacle, Ark and Sanctuary, witnessed well the inward and most humble Zeal born toward God himself. The Industry used in the Framing thereof, and every and the least part thereof, the curious Workmanship thereon bestowed, the exceeding Charge and Expence in the Provisions, the Dutiful Observance in lay∣ing up and preserving the Holy Vessels, the Solemn removing thereof, the Vigilant Attendance thereon, and the Provident De∣fence of the same, which All Ages have in some Degree imita∣ted, is now so forgotten and cast away in this superfine Age, by those of the Family, by the Anabaptists, Brownists, and other Secta∣ries; as all Cost and Care bestowed and had of the Church, where∣in God is to be Served and Worshipped, is accounted a kind of Po∣pery, and as proceeding from an Idolatrous Disposition. Insomuch as Time would soon bring to pass (if it were not resisted) that God would be turned out of Churches into Barns, and from thence again into the Fields and Mountains, and under the Hedges; and the Office of the Ministery (robbed of all Dignity and respect) be as contemptible as those Places; all Order, Discipline and Church Government, left to newness of Opinion and Mens Fancies: Yea, and soon after as many kinds of Religions would spring up, as there are Parish-Churches, &c.

Do ye not think some body set Mr. May∣nard

on to prohibit the Reading out of this Passage, as foreseeing whither it tended? For I had read one third part of it, before I had the stop put upon me.

(5) But they went on with their Proof, By my Censuring of Good Men; that is, Separatists and Refractory Persons.

(6) By my Chaplains Expunging some things out of Books, which made against the Papists. It may be, if my Chaplains (whom it concerns) had Liberty to answer, they were such Passages as could not be made good against the Papists; and then 'tis far better they should be out than in. For as S. * 16.716 Augustin obser∣ved in his, and we find it true in our time, the Inconvenience is great, which comes to the Church and Religion by bold Affirmers. Nay, he is at a satis dici non potest, the Mischief is so great as cannot be expressed.

(7.) Then by altering some things in a Sermon of Dr: Sybthorp's. But my Answer formerly given will shew I had cause.

(8.) By my preferment of unworthy Men: So unworthy, as that they would be famous both for Life and Learning, were they in any other Protestant Church in Christendom. And they are so Popishly affected, as that having suffered much both in State and Reputation (since this Persecution of the Clergy began; for less it hath not been) no one of them is altered in Judgment, or fallen into any li∣king with the Church of Rome.

(9.) By the Overthrow of the Feoffment: But that was done by Judg∣ment in the Exchequer, to which I referred my self. And if the Judgment there given be right, there's no fault in any Man: If it were wrong, the fault was in the Judges; not in me: I solicited none of them.

(10.) By a Passage in my Book, where I say, The Religion of the Papists * 16.717 and Ours is one: But that's expressed at large, only because both are Christianity; and no Man I hope will deny that Papists are Chri∣stians. As for their notorious Failings in Christianity, I have in the same Book said enough to them.

(11.) By a Testimony of Mr. Burton's and Mr. Lane's, that I should say, We and the Church of Rome did not differ in Fundamentals, but in Circumstantials. [This I here followed at large; but, to avoid tedious repetition, refer my Reader to the place where 'tis an∣aswered.]

(12.) By my making the Dutch Churches to be of another Religion. But this is mistaken (as my Answer will shew the Reader;) And if they do not make themselves of another Religion, I shall never endeavour to make them.

(13.) By a Pack of such Witnesses, as were never produced against any Man of my Place and Calling; Messengers and Pursevants, and such as have shifted their Religion to and again; Pillory-men and Bawds: And these the Men that must prove my Correspondence with Priests.

12. In the midst of these, upon occasion of the Ceremonies at the Coronation, it was pressed against me, That I had altered the King's Oath.

(14.) And last of all, That I had shewed my felf an Enemy to Parlia∣ments. [Upon both these, I did very much enlarge my self: But here also, that I may not be a burden in repeating the same thing, I desire the Reader to look upon them in their proper places, where I doubt not but my Answer will give him full satisfaction, that I did not the one, nor am the other.]

But, my Lords, there are other strange Arguments produced against me, to prove my Compliance with Rome, which I most humbly de∣sire your Lordships may not be forgotten.

1. As first, my Lords, it hath been Charged upon me, That I made the Oath recited in the first of the late Canons, one Clause whereof is this: That I will never give my Consent to subject this Church to the Vsurpations and Superstitions of the Church of Rome. Whence the Ar∣gument drawn against me must be this, and can be no other: That I did endeavour: to bring in Popery, because I made and took a so∣lemn Oath, never to give my Consent to subject this Church of Eng∣land to the Usurpations and Superstitions of the Church of Rome. I beseech your Lordships mark the force of this Argument: And they which follow are as pregnant against me.

2. Secondly, My Book against Fisher hath been charged against me; where the Argument must lie thus: I have endeavoured to advance Popery, because I have written against it: And with what strength I have written, I leave to Posterity to judge, when the Envy which now over-loads me, shall be buried with me. This I will say with St. Gregory Nazianzen (whose Success at Constantinople was not much unlike mine here, save that his Life was not sought) I * 16.718 never labou∣red for Peace to the Wrong and Detriment of Christian Verity, nor I hope ever shall. [And let the Church of England look to it; for in great Humility I crave to write this (though then was no time to speak it) That the Church of England must leave the way it's now going, and come back to that way of Defence which I have followed in my Book, or She shall never be able to justifie Her Separation from the Church of Rome.]

3. Thirdly, All the late Canons have been charged against me; and the Argument which is drawn from thence, must lie thus: The Third of these Canons for suppressing the Growth of Popery, is the most full and strict Canon that ever was made against it in the Church of England: Therefore I that made this Canon to keep it out, am guilty of endeavouring to bring it in.

4. Fourthly, I have by my Industry, and God's great Blessing upon my Labours, stayed as many from going, and reduced to the Church of England as many that were gone to Rome, as I believe any Minister in England can truly say he hath done: I named them be∣fore, and had Scorn enough put upon me for it, as your Lordships could not but both see and hear; where the Argument lies thus: I converted many from Popery, and setled them in the Religion established in England: Therefore I laboured to bring in Popery; which out of all doubt can be no sober Man's way.

5. Fifthly, The Plot discovered to Sir William Boswell and my self, by Andreas ab Habernfield, hath been charged against me: That Plot for altering of Religion, and by what ways, your Lordships have

heard already, and is to be seen at full in Rome's Master-piece. Now * 16.719 if this Plot in the Issue proved nothing but a confused Information, and no Proof of any Particular, as indeed it did; What's become of Rome's Master-piece? But if it had any reality in it, as it appeared to be a sad Plot, not only to me, but to all Men that saw the short Propositions which were first sent, with an absolute Undertaking to prove them; then it appears expresly, that I was in danger of my Life, for stiffly opposing the bringing in of Popery; and that there was no hope to alter Religion in England, 'till I was taken out of the way. And though in conclusion the Proofs failed, yet what was consulted, and it seems resolved concerning me, is plain enough. And then the Argument against me lies thus: There's no hope to bring in Popery, 'till I am taken out of the way; therefore I did labour to bring it in. Do not these things, my Lords, hang hand∣somly together?

6. Lastly, There have been above Threescore Letters and other Papers, brought out of my Study into this Honourable House; they are all about composing the Differences between the Lutherans and the Calvinists in Germany. Why they should be brought hither, but in hope to charge them upon me, I know not; and then the Ar∣gument will be this: I laboured to reconcile the Protestants in Ger∣many, that they might unanimously set themselves against the Papists; therefore I laboured to bring Popery into England.

Now that your Lordships have heard the Arguments, and what Proof they make against me, I must be bold to put you in Mind of that which was said here at the Barr, April 16. 1644. That they did not urge any of these particular Actions as Treason against me; but the Result of them all together amounted to Treason. For answer to which, I must be bold to tell your Lordships, That if no Particular which is charged upon me be Treason, the Result from them cannot be Trea∣son, which will appear by these Reasons following:

1. First, The Result must be of the same Nature and Species with the Particulars from which it rises. But 'tis confessed no one of the Particulars are Treason: Therefore neither is the Result that rises from them. And this holds in Nature, in Morality, and in Law.

In Nature, and that both for Integral and Essential Parts; for neither can the Body of a Bear, and the Soul of a Lion result into a Fox; nor the Legs of a Bull, the Body of a Horse, and the Head of an Ass, result into a Man.

In Morality, and that is seen both in Vertues and Vices: For nei∣ther can many Actions of Liberality, Meekness and Sobriety, rise up into a Result of Fortitude; neither can many Actions of Malice, Drunkenness and Covetousness, result into Treason.

In Law 'tis so too: For be there never so many particular Crimes, yet there is no Law in this Kingdom, nor any where else that I know, that makes a Result of different Crimes to be Treason, where none of the Particulars are Treason by Law. So this imaginary Result is a Monster in Nature, in Morality, and in Law; and if it be nourished, will devour all the Safety of the Subject of England, which now stands so well fenced by the known Law of the Land.

And therefore I humbly desire your Lordships, not for mine, but for the Publick's sake, to weigh this Business well, before this Gap be made so wide, as there will hardly be Power left again to shut it.

2. My Second Reason is joined to the Answer of an Objection: For when this Result was spoken of, it was added, That the Parti∣culars charged against me, are of the same kind, and do all tend to the Subversion of Law and Religion, and so become Treason. But, first, suppose that all the Particulars charged do tend to the subver∣sion of Law, yet that cannot make them to be all of one kind: For all Crimes tend more or less to the Overthrow of Vertue; yet no Man can say, that all Crimes are of the same kind. Secondly, be they of the same, or different kinds; yet neither all, nor any of these charged against me, do tend to the subversion of the Law: For 'tis one thing to break, dislike, or speak against some particular Laws, and quite another to labour the Subversion of the whole Body of the Law and the Frame of Government. And that I have done this by Con∣spiracy, or Force, or any overt Action, is not so much as offered in proof. And for the breach of any particular Law, if I be guilty, I am to be punished by the Sanction of that Law which I have broken.

3. Thirdly, Whereas it hath been said, That many Actions of the same kind make a Habit. That's true. But what then? For first, the Actions urged against me, are not of the same kind, but exceed∣ing different. Secondly, if the Habit be Treasonable, then all those particular Actions which bred that Habit, must be several Trea∣sons, as well as the Result or Habit it self; whereas it hath been granted all along, that my particular Actions are not Treasons. And, thirdly, a Habit in it self, neither is nor can be Treason; for all Treason is either Thought, Word, or Overt Act; but no Habit is either of these: Therefore not Treason. For a * 16.720 Habit is that in the Soul which enclines the Powers of it, and makes a Man apt and ready to think, speak, or do that to which he is habituated. So an ill Habit against Soveraign Power, may make a Man apt and for∣ward to fall into Treason; but Treason it is not.

4. Fourthly, Nor can this Result be Treason at the Common Law, by which alone, I conceive, there is no Treason at all at this day in England: For the main end of that excellent Statute of 25 Edw. 3. was for the Safety of the Subject, against the manifold Trea∣sons which variously fell upon them by the Common Law, and bounded all Treasons, and limited them to the things expressed to be Treason in and by that Statute. And in all times of difficulty since, recourse hath still been had to that Statute. And to that Statute I refer my self, with this: That this Result must be some∣thing within this Statute, or some other known Statute, or else it cannot be Treason. And no Proof at all hath been so much as offered, that this Result is Treason by any Law.

My Lords, I do with all humble submission desire, That when the Reply is made to this matter of Fact, a Day may be assigned for my Councel to be heard in matter of Law, in all and every Particular which they shall find necessary for my just Defence.

And now, my Lords, I do in all Humility lay my self low at God's Mercy-seat, to do with me as he pleases; and, under God, I shall rely upon your Lordships Justice, Honour and Clemency, of which I cannot doubt. And without being farther tedious to your Lordships (who have with very Honourable Patience heard me through this long and tedious Tryal) I shall conclude with that which St. Augustine said to Romanianus, a Man that had tryed both Fortunes as well as I: * 16.721 If the Providence of God reaches down to us (as most certain it doth) Sic tecum agi oportet sicut agitur. It must so be done with thee (and so with me also) as it is done. And under * 16.722 that Providence, which will, I doubt not, work to the best to my Soul that loves God, I repose my self.

Here ended my Recapitulation, and with it the Work of that Day: And I was ordered to appear again the Saturday following, to hear Mr: Brown Sum up the whole Charge against me. But upon Tuesday, Septemb: 3: this was put off, to give Mr: Brown more time, to Wed∣nesday, * 16.723 Septemb: 11.

On Wednesday, Septemb: 4. as I was washing my Face, my Nose * 16.724 bled, and something plentifully, which it had not done, to my re∣membrance, in forty Years before, save only once, and that was just the same Day and Hour, when my most Honourable Friend the Lord Duke of Buckingham was killed at Portsmouth, my self being then at Westminster. And upon Friday, as I was washing after Dinner, my * 16.725 Nose bled again. I thank God I make no superstitious Observation of this or any thing else; yet I have ever used to mark what and how any thing of note falls to me. And here I after came to know, that upon both these Days in which I bled, there was great agitation in the House of Commons, to have me Sentenced by Ordinance; but both times put off, in regard very few of that House had heard either my Charge or Defence.

CAP. XLIV.

ON Wednesday September 11. Mr. Brown made in the Lords House, * 16.726 a Summ or Brief of the Charge which was brought against me, and touched by the way at some things in my Recapitulation. But in regard I might not Answer him, I took no perfect Notes, but stood still, and possessed my Soul in Patience; yet wondring at the bold, free, frequent, and most false Swearing that had been against me. When Mr. Brown had ended, I humbly desired again, that my Councel might be heard in Point of Law. And they were hereupon Ordered to deliver in Writing under their Hands, what Points of Law they would insist upon, and that by Saturday September 14. * 16.727

This day my Councel, according as they were Ordered, delivered into the Lords House, these two Points following, by way of Questi∣on. First, Whether in all, or any the Articles charged against me, * 16.728 there be contained any Treason by the Established Laws of this Kingdom? Secondly, Whether the Charge of the said Impeachment * 16.729 and Articles, did contain such Certainty and Particularity, as is re∣quired by Law, in a Case where Treason is charged? This day I Pe∣titioned the Lords, that my Councel might have access to, and take Copies of all such Records as they thought necessary for my De∣fence, which was Granted and Order'd accordingly.

My Councel's Quaeries having been formerly sent down to the House of Commons, they were there referred to a Committee of Lawyers to consider of; and on September 27. Friday, they were earnestly called * 16.730 upon to hasten their Report. And on Friday Octob. 4. Mr. Nicolas * 16.731 made a great noise about me in the House, and would have had me presently Censured in the House; and no less would serve his turn, but that I must be Hanged, and was at Sus. per Coll. till upon the Reasons before given, that if they went on this way, they must Con∣demn me unheard; this violent Clamour ceased for that time. And a Message was sent up to the Lords for my Councel to be heard, as touching the first Question concerning Treason; but not concerning any Exception that they shall take against the Articles in point of cer∣tainty. This Message the Lords took into present Consideration, and Order'd it accordingly. And appointed the Friday following, being Octob. 11. for my Councel to be Heard, and my Self to be present. * 16.732

This day according to this Order of the Lords, I and my Councel attended. My Councel were Mr. Hern, and Mr. Hales of Lincolns-Inn, and Mr. Gerrard of Grays-Inn. When we were called into the House, and the Lords setled in their places, Mr. John Hern (who was the Man that spake what all had resolved on) delivered his Argument very freely * 16.733 and stoutly, proving that nothing which I have either said or done according to this Charge, is Treason, by any known Esta∣blished Law of this Kingdom. The Ar∣gument follows in these words, according to the Copy which Mr. Hern himself delive∣red me.

My Lords,

THE Work of this Day, we humbly conceive, is in many * 16.734 respects of very great and high Concernment.

• 1. In that it concerns Matter of Life, a Thing of the highest Consequence.
• 2. The Life of an Arch-Bishop, a Person who had attained the highest Dignity conferred in the Church of England.
• 3. Those Happy Laws, many Years since Enacted and Confirm∣ed by several Parliaments, to be the Boundaries what was Treason; a Crime before so various, as it had no Bounds; and so Odious, that the punishment of it was an Infamous Death, a total Confiscation, with a Brand of Infamy to all Posterity.
• 4. In that the Charge against him moves from no less a Body than the whole Commons of England, which presents him now a Prisoner at this Bar before your Lordships, in the High and Su∣pream Court of Judicature in Parliament.

And if any thing shall fall from us, subject to any doubtful Con∣struction, we shall humbly crave your Lordships Pardon, and Leave to make our Explication: For as there is upon us a Duty to be wary, not to offer any thing which may minister just Offence; so neither may we be unfaithful to omit what may justly tend to our Client's Defence.

The Charge against him, we find to be made up of two seve∣ral * 16.735 parcels of Articles, Exhibited by the Honourable House of Commons.

• 1. The First, in Maintenance of their Accusation, whereby he * 16.736 stands charged with High Treason.
• 2. The latter, Intituled farther Articles of Impeachment of High Treason, and divers high Crimes and Misdemeanours, for all which Matters and Things they have Impeached him of High Treason and other high Crimes and Misdemeanours, tending to the Subversion of Religion, Laws and Liberties, and to the utter Ruine of this Church and Common-wealth.

Concerning this Charge, and the Arch-Bishop's Defence, he hi∣therto * 16.737 made before your Lordships, (we by your Lordships Com∣mand Assigned his Councel) neither have nor could (by Reason of the mixt Charge, without distinguishing what was thereby intended to be a Charge of Treason, and what of Misdemeanour only) be farther useful to him, than to Advise the Form of his Plea and Answer, which we received from him, as to all the Matters of Fact, to be a Not Guilty.

We have not in all or any the Facts Charged or Evidenced against him, in any sort intermedled. But the same, (how proved and how appliable to the Charges, without mention of any of them) shall wholly leave to your Lordships Notes and Memories.

What Defence he hath offered hitherto, hath been wholly his own: He without us in that; and we without consulting him in the work of this day.

Wherein, having received your Lordships Commands, we did pre∣sent in writing the Points in Law we then humbly conceived fit for us to insist upon.

• I. Whether in all, or any the Articles charged against him, there * 16.738 was contained any Treason by the Established Laws of this Kingdom?
• II. Whether the Charge of the said Impeachment and Articles, did contain such certainty and particularity, as is required by Law in a Case where Treason is charged?

But being enjoyned by your Honourable Order, to speak only to * 16.739 the former: We shall, as in Duty becomes, conform thereunto.

For our Method herein shall follow the course holden in the Re∣ply, * 16.740 made upon the whole Articles, whereby we conceived the Charges contained in them, were reduced to these three Generals.

1. A Trayterous Endeavour to Subvert the Fundamental Laws of * 16.741 the Realm; and instead thereof, to introduce an Arbitrary and Ty∣rannical Government against Law; contained in the first Original and first Additional Articles.

2. Secondly, A Trayterous Endeavour to Subvert God's True Re∣ligion by Law Established; and instead thereof, to set up Popish Superstition and Idolatry; this contained in the seventh Original and seventh Additional Articles.

3. Thirdly, That he laboured to Subvert the Rights of Parlia∣ment, and the Ancient course of Parliamentary Proceedings, and by False and Malicious Slanders to incense his Majesty against Par∣liaments. And this contained in the fourteenth Original and tenth Additional Articles.

All other the Articles, we humbly conceive to be but Instances, conducing and applied to some of those Generals.

Concerning those three General Heads of the Charge, we shall crave leave to propose two Questions to be debated.

1. Whether there be at this day any other Treason, than what is * 16.742 Declared by the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. Cap. 2. or Enacted by some subsequent particular Statute; which we humbly conceive, and shall endeavour to satisfie your Lordships, there is not any.

2. Whether any the Matters in any of the Articles charged, con∣tain any of the Treasons declared by that Law, or Enacted by any subsequent Law; which we likewise conceive they do not. And for the clearing of both these shall humbly insist; That,

1. An endeavour to Subvert the Laws, An endeavour to Subvert Religion, A labouring to Subvert the Rights of Parliaments,

Are not Treasons, either within the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. or by any other particular Statute.

2. That not any of the Particulars, instanced in any other the Ar∣ticles, is a Treason within the Statute 25 Ed. 3. or any other Statute.

And to make good our Tenet upon our first Question, shall humbly * 16.743 offer,

That before this Statute of 25 Ed. 3. Treasons at the Common Law

were so general and uncertain, that almost any Crime, by Inferen∣ces and Constructions, might be, and was often extended to be a Treason; in so much, as we find in 22^o. of the Book of Assize, Kil∣ling the King's Messenger was Treason. And in the Parliament Roll, 21 Ed. 3. Numero 15. accroaching the Royal Power (where∣in every Excess was subject to a Construction of Treason) was Treason; for which divers having suffered, the Commons in Parlia∣ment, finding how mischievous and destructive it was to the Subject, Petitioned it might be bounded and declared. And this, not to give any Liberty, but to give Bounds to it; one while it being * 16.744 construed an Accroachment of Royal Power, as in the Case of the Earl of Lancaster temp. Ed. 2. for being over Popular with the People; and in the same King's Reign to Spencer, for being over Gracious with the King.

The sense of these and other Mischiefs by the uncertainty of Treason, brought on this * 16.745 Law of 25 Ed. 3. and the benefit of it to the Subject, says Sir Ed. Coke upon his Collections of the Pleas of the Crown, begot that Parliament the Name of Parliamentum Benedictum, and that, except Magna Charta, no other Act of Parliament had more Honour given it by the King, Lords, and Commons. And this Law hath been in all Times the Rule to Judge Treasons by, * 16.746 even in Parliament; and therefore in the Par∣liament Roll 1 H. 4. Num. 144. the Tryal * 16.747 and Judgment in Cases of Impeachment of Treason is prayed by the Commons, might be according to the Ancient Laws; and in * 16.748 the Parliament Roll 5 H. 4. Num. 12. in the Case of the then Earl of Northumberland, this Statute of 25 Ed. 3. was the Guide and Rule by which the Lords Judged in a Case endeavoured to have been extended to be a Treason, the same to be no Treason. * 16.749

And it is, as we conceive, very observable; That if at any time the * 16.750 Necessity or Excess of the Times produced any particular Laws in Parliament, for making of Treasons not contained in that Law of 25 Ed. 3. yet they returned and fixed in that Law.

Witness the Statute of 1 H. 4. Cap. 10. whereby all those Facts which were made Treasons mean between in the divided time of R. 2. were reduced to this of Ed. 3.

In the time of H. 8. wherein several Offences were Enacted to be Treasons; not contained in the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. the same were all swept away by the Statute of 1. Ed. 6. Cap. 12.

And again, wherein the time of Ed. 6. several Treasons were Enacted, they were all Repealed, and by Act made 1 Mariae 1. none other Offence left to be Treason, than what was contained and declared by the Statute of 25 Ed. 3.

And from 1 H. 4. to Queen Mary, and from thence downward, we * 16.751 find not any Judgment hath been given in Parliament, for any Treason not declared * 16.752 and contained in that Law, but by Bill.

Thus in succession of all Times, this Statute of 25 Ed. 3. in the * 16.753 Wisdom of former Parliaments, hath stood and been the constant fixed Rule for all Judgments in Cases of Treason.

We shall now observe, what Offences are in and by that Law de∣clared to be Treasons; whereby your Lordships will Examine, whe∣ther you find any of them in the Charge of these Articles: For which purpose we shall desire this Statute of 25. Ed. 3. be Read.

The Treasons by that Act declared; are,

• 1. Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King, Queen, or * 16.754 Prince, and declaring the same by some Overt Act.
• 2. Murdering the Chancellor, Treasurer, &c.
• 3. Violating the Queen, the King's Eldest Daughter, or the Prince's Wife.
• 4. Levying War against the King.
• 5. Or Adhering to the King's Enemies, within the Realm or without, and declaring the same by some Overt Act.
• 6. Counterfeiting the Seals and Coin.
• 7. Bringing in Counterfeit Coin.

Next, we shall lay for a ground; that this Act ought not be Con∣strued * 16.755 by Equity or Inference.

• 1. For that it is a declarative Law, and no Declaration ought to * 16.756 be upon a Declaration.
• 2. It was a Law provided to secure the Subject, for his Life, Li∣berty, and Estate; and to admit Constructions and Inferen∣ces upon it, were to destroy the Security provided for, by it.
• 3. It hath been the constant Opinion in all Times, both in Parlia∣ment * 16.757 and upon Judicial Debates; that this Act must be lite∣rally construed, and not by Inference or Illation: Nor would it be admitted in a Particular declared by this Law to be Treason; which a Man would have thought might have been consistent with it.

Counterfeiting the Coin of the Kingdom, is by this Law de∣clared * 16.758 Treason.

Washing, Filing and Clipping the Coin, is an abuse, an aba∣sing, * 16.759 and not making it Currant: Yet in 3 H. 5. when the Question was in Parliament, whether that Offence was Treason within the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. It is declared by a special Act then made, 3 H. 5. * 16.760 cap. 6. That forasmuch as before that time, great doubt and ambi∣guity had been; whether those Offences ought to be adjudged Trea∣son, or not, in as much as mention is not thereof made in the De∣claration of the Articles of Treason by that Statute of 25 Ed. 3. the same was by that particular Act made Treason, which before was none, and counterfeiting of Foreign Coin made Currant here, an equal mischief with counterfeiting of the Coin of this Realm; yet because the words of the Statute are his Mony, this not Treason until the Act * 16.761 of 1 Mariae cap. 6. made it so. And Sir Ed. Coke in his Book be∣fore

mentioned, saith, a compassing to Levy War, is not a Treason within that Law, unless it proceed into Act; but only to Compass the Death of the King: Yet if a Constructive Treason should be admitted, it might happily without any great straining be inferred, that compassing to Levy War, is in some sort a compassing of the King's Death; and of this Kind many more Instances may be given.

So that the result of all this is, that whatsoever is not declared * 16.762 to be a Treason within the Letter of this Law; may not be ad∣judged a Treason, by Inference, Construction, or otherwise.

Having done with this First, we now shall come to our Second Question.

Whether any the Matters in all, or any the Articles Charged, * 16.763 contain any the Treasons declared by that Law, or Enacted by any subsequent Law; wherein, although the Charges may appear to be Great and Enormous Crimes; yet we shall en∣deavour, and hope to satisfie your Lordships, the same nor any of them, are Treasons by any established Law of the Kingdom: For clearing whereof, we shall pursue the Order first proposed.

First, that an Endeavour to subvert Fundamental Laws, is not Treason by any Law in this Kingdom Established; and particular Act to make it Treason there is none; so as we must then return to apply those former general Observations of that Act of 25. Ed. 3. to this Particular; and shall add for Reasons,

• 1. That it is not comprized within any the Words of that Law, nor may by any Construction or Inference be brought with∣in it, for the Reasons formerly alledged.
• 2. Because an Endeavour to subvert Laws, is of so great a Lati∣tude and Uncertainty, that every Action not Warranted by Law, may be thereby extended to be a Treason.

In the Sixth Report, in Mildmays Case Fol. 42. where a Conveyance * 16.764 was made in Tail, with a Proviso, if he did go about or attempt to discontinue the Entail, the same should be void: It was resolved the Proviso was void; and the principal Reason was, that these Words attempt or go about, are Words uncertain and void in Law. * 16.765 And the Words of the Book are very observable; viz. God defend that Inheritances and Estates of Men should depend upon such incertain∣ties; for that Misera est Servitus ubi Jus est vagum, & quod non defi∣nitur in Jure quid fit conatus; and therefore the Rule of the Law doth decide this point. Non efficit conatus nisi sequitur effectus; and the Law doth reject Conations and goings about, as things uncertain which cannot be put in issue: These are the Words of the Book. And if so consi∣derable in Estates, your Lordships, we conceive, will hold it far more considerable in a Case of Life, which is of highest Consequence.

And if it should be said this Law of 25. Ed. 3. takes notice of * 16.766 Compassing and Imagining: We answer, it is in a Particular decla∣red by that Law to be Treason, in Compassing the death of the King. But this of Endeavouring to subvert Laws, not declared by that or any other Law to be a Treason.

And if it should be granted, that this Law might in any Case ad∣mit

any other Fact to be Treason by Inference or Construction; other than is therein particularly declared; which we conceive it cannot.

Yet it is not Imaginable, that a Law introduced purposely to limit and ascertain Crimes of so high Consequence, should by Constru∣ction or Inference be subject to a Construction of admitting so * 16.767 uncertain and indefinite a thing, as an endeavour to subvert the Law is, it being not comprised within the Letter of that Law.

• 3. That the Subversion of the Law is an impossible thing; there∣fore an Endeavour to do an act which cannot be effected, cannot be Treason
• 4. That in all times the Endeavouring to subvert the Laws hath been conceived no determinate Crime, but rather an Ag∣gravation only of a Crime, than otherwise. And therefore hath been usually joyned as an Aggravation or result of Crimes below Treason.

As appears in the Parliament Roll, 28 H. 6. num. 28. to num. 47. * 16.768 in the Case of the Duke of Suffolk, where the Commons, having in Parliament preferred Articles of Treason against him, did not make that any part of their Charge. Yet in the same Parliament, and within few Days after; the First being in February, the latter in March: Exhibiting other Articles against him, they therein Char∣ged all the Misprisions, Offences and Deeds therein mentioned, to have been the cause of the Subversion of Laws and Justice, and the Execution thereof; and nigh likely to tend to the Destruction of the Realm: So as it appears, it was then conceived an Offence of another Nature, and not a Treason.

And it appears as well by the Articles exhibited in Parliament, * 16.769 21 H. 8. against Cardinal Woolsey, as by Indictment in the Kings Bench against Ligham 23 H. 8. Rot. 25. That the Cardinal did En∣deavour to subvert Antiquissimas Leges hujus Regni, Vniversum{que} hoc Regnum Angliae Legibus Imperialibus Subjugare; which although it be a Charge of subverting the ancient Laws of the Kingdom, and to introduce new and Arbitrary Laws; yet neither upon the Arti∣cles or Indictment, was the same imputed to be Treason; but ended in a Charge of a Premunire.

And if it shall be said that Empson 1 H. 8. had Judgment, and Died for it, upon an Indictment in London; We answer, * 16.770

• 1. This was not the Substance of the Indictment, but only an * 16.771 Aggravation.
• 2. And if Charged, it is with an actual subverting, not with an Endeavour to subvert the Laws; and is joyned with di∣vers other Offences.
• 3. Which is a full Answer; The Indictment upon which he was Tryed, was Paschae 2 H. 8. at Northampton, and was for Le∣vying War against the King, a Treason declared by the Law of 25 Ed. 3. upon which he was Convicted and Suf∣fered; and no proceeding upon the other Indictment ever had.

And as to the second General Charge, of Endeavouring to subvert * 16.772 Religion:

This no more than that former of subverting the Laws is any Treason, within any Law established in this Kingdom.

And herein, as to the Charge of the Endeavour, we shall rely upon what hath been already said upon the former.

With this further:

That until that happy Reformation, begun in the time of King Edward VI. there was another Frame of Religion established by Law; which was conceived until then to have been the True Reli∣gion; and any Endeavour to Change or Alter it, prosecuted with great Extremities. Yet was not any Attempt to alter it, conceived to be a Treason; but several especial Acts of Parliaments were made for particular Punishments, against Persons who should at∣tempt * 16.773 the Alteration thereof; Witness the Statute of 5 R. 2. Cap. 5. and 2 H. 5. Cap. 7.

In which latter, although mention is made of endeavouring to * 16.774 destroy and subvert the Christian Faith; yet was not the Offence made or declared to be Treason. And at this day, Heresie, of what kind so∣ever, is not punishable, but according to the old course of the Law. * 16.775

And we may add the Statute of 1 Edw. 6. Cap. 12. that of 1 Ma∣riae 12. which makes it but Felony to attempt an Alteration of Re∣ligion by force: The worst kind of Attempt certainly.

To the third and last general Charge, Labouring to subvert the Rights of Parliaments. To the Labouring to do it, we shall add nothing to what hath been said to the Charge of Endeavour, in the two former; only thus much we shall observe:

That in the Parliament of 11 R. 2. amongst the many Articles preferred against the Duke of Ireland, and others, the 14th Article contains a Charge much of this Nature; viz. That when the Lords and others in divers Parliaments, had moved to have a good Government * 16.776 in the Realm, they had so far incensed the King, that he caused divers to * 16.777 depart from his Parliament; so that they durst not, for fear of Death, ad∣vise for the good of the Kingdom. Yet when the Lords came to single out the Articles, what was, or was not Treason, That, although a Charge transcending this, was none of the Articles by them declared to be Treason.

My Lords,

Having done with these Generals, it remains only that we apply * 16.778 our selves to those other Articles which we conceive were insisted upon, as Instances conducing, and applied to some of the Generals we have handled.

Wherein if the Generals be not Treason, the Particular Instances cannot be; and on the other side, if the Instances fall short of Treasons, the application to those Generals cannot make them Treasons.

We shall only single out Two Particulars, and in those be very brief, in that most which hath been said to the former Generals, is appliable to them, inasmuch as none of them is declared to

be a Treason, by the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. or by any other Law enacted.

1. The first of these in the 10th Original Article, viz. That he * 16.779 hath Traiterously endeavoured to reconcile the Church of England with the Church of Rome. Which if it be any Treason, must be a Treason within the Statute of 5 Jac. Cap. 4. whereby is provided, That if any Man shall put in practice to Reconcile any of his Maje∣sty's Subjects to the Pope, or See of Rome, the same is enacted to be Treason; which we conceive clearly is none of this Charge.

• 1. First, For that here only is Charged an Endeavour; there a * 16.780 Putting in Practice.
• 2. Here a Reconciling of the Church of England with the Church of Rome; there a Reconciling some of his Majesty's Sub∣jects to the See of Rome: And a Reconciling with, may as well be a Reducing of that of Rome to England, as England to Rome.

The Second, in the 7th additional Article, for wittingly and * 16.781 willingly Receiving and Harbouring divers Popish Priests and Jesuits, namely, Sancta Clara and Monsieur St. Gyles.

Which Offence, as to the Harbouring Priests and Jesuits born within his Majesty's Dominions, by the Statute of 27 Eliz. Cap. 2. is made Felony, not Treason; and extends only to Priests English born, which these are not charged to be.

My Lords,

We have now gone through those Articles, wherein, we con∣ceive, the Treasons Charged were intended; and have endeavoured to make it appear. That none of the Matters in any of the Articles Charged, are Treason within the Letter of any Law.

And if not so; then they cannot, by Inference or Parity of Rea∣son, be heightned to a Treason.

It is true, the Crimes, as they are laid in the Charge, are great and many.

Yet if the Laws of this Realm, which have distinguished Crimes, and accordingly given them several Names, and inflicted Punish∣ments, raise none of these to a Treason;

That we humbly conceive will be worthy of your Lordships Con∣sideration * 16.782 in this Case; and that their Number cannot make them exceed their Nature: And if they be but Crimes and Misdemeanours apart, below Treason or Felony, they cannot make a Treason by putting them together.

Otherwise, the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. which we have so much in∣sisted upon, had been fruitless and vain; if after all that exactness, any Number of Misdemeanours (in themselves no Treason) should by complication produce a Treason, and yet no mention made of it in that Law; much less any Determination thereby, that any Number, or what Number, and of what Nature of Crimes, below Treason, should make a Treason.

It is true, my Lords,

That by the Statute of 25 Ed. 3. there is a Clause in these Words:

It is accorded, That if any other Case, supposed Treason, which is not * 16.783 therein specified, doth happen before any Justices, the Justices shall tarry without any going to Judgment of the Treason, until the Cause be shewed and declared before the King and his Parliament, Whether it ought to be judged Treason, or Felony.

And that hereby might seem to be inferred, That there should be some other Treasons than are mentioned in that Law, which may be declared in Parliament.

But, my Lords, we shall observe,

1. If such Declaration look only forward, then the Law making * 16.784 it Treason preceeds the Offence, and is no more than an Enacting Law.

If it look backward to the Offence past, then it appears by the * 16.785 very Clause it self, of 25 Edw. 3. it should be at the least a Felony at the Common Law; and that a Crime, or Crimes, below a Felony, were never intended to be by this Law to be declared, or to be heightned to a Treason. And we find not any Crime declared Treason with a Retrospect, unless it were a Felony before: And in the late Case of * 16.786 the Earl of Strafford, Attainted by Bill, there is a Treason within * 16.787 this Law charged, and declared by the Bill of his Attainder to have been proved.

2. Secondly, We are not now in case of a Declaration of a Trea∣son; but before your Lordships only upon an Impeachment; and in such case, we * 16.788 humbly conceive, the Law already esta∣blished, as it hath been, so it will be the Rule.

Thus, my Lords, we have gone through * 16.789 that Part which belongs to us, directed us by your Lordships; viz.

Whether in all or any the Articles ex∣hibited before your Lordships, there is con∣tained any Treason, by any established Law of this Kingdom; without medling at all with the Facts, or Proof made of them; which, together with our weak Endeavours, we humbly submit to your Lordships great Judgment: And for any Authorities cited by us, are ready (if so Commanded) to produce them.

Here this Day ended; and I had a few Days rest. But on Tuesday, October 22. being a Day made Solemn for Humiliation, my * 16.790 Chamber at the Tower was searched again for Letters and Papers: But nothing found.

After this, there went up and down, all about London and the Suburbs, a Petition for the bringing of Delinquents to Justice; and some Preachers exhorted the People to be zealous in it, telling them it was for the Glory of God, and the Good of the Church. By this means, they got many Hands of Men which little thought what they went about.

In this Petition, none were named but my self and the Bishop of Ely; so their Drift was known to none but their own Party; and was undoubtedly set on foot to do me mischief. Whose Design this was, God knows; but I have cause to suspect Mr. Pryn's Hand in it. This barbarous way of the Peoples clamouring upon great Courts of Justice, as if they knew not how to govern themselves and the Causes brought before them, is a most unchristian Course, and not to be endured in any well-governed State. This Petition, with a Multitude of Hands to it, was delivered to the House of Commons, on Munday, Octob. 28. Concerning which, I shall observe this, That * 16.791 neither the Lord Mayor nor the Sheriffs made any stop of this Illegal and Blood-thirsty Course, though it were publickly known, and the People exhorted to set Hands to it in the Parish-Churches. What this, and such-like Courses as these, may bring upon this City, God alone knows, whom I humbly pray to shew it Mercy.

CAP. XLV.

THis Day, being All-hallan-day, a Warrant came to the Lieute∣nant, * 16.792 from the House of Commons, to bring me to their Barr, to hear the Evidence formerly summed up, and given against me in the Lords House. I knew no Law nor Custom for this; for though our Votes, by a late Act of Parliament, be taken away, yet our Ba∣ronies are not: And so long as we remain Barons, we belong to the Lords House, and not to the Commons. Yet how to help my self I knew not; for when the Warrant came to me, the Lords House was risen; and I was commanded to the House of Commons the next Morning, before the Lords came to Sit: So I could not Petition them for any Priviledge. And had I done it, I doubt it would have been interpreted for an Endeavour to make a Breach between the Houses. And should I have under any Pretence refused to go, Mr. Lieutenant would have carried me.

Therefore, on Saturday, Novemb. 2. I went, according to the War∣rant, * 16.793 to the House of Commons. So soon as ever I was come to the Barr, Mr. Speaker told me, There was an Ordinance drawn up, to Attaint me of High Treason; but, that they would not pass it, 'till they had heard a Summary of the Charge which was laid against me; and, that I was sent for to hear it also. I humbly besought them, that my Councel and my Solicitor (who were always present with me in the Lords House) might stand now by me: But it would not be granted. Then Mr. Brown, by Order from the Speaker, delivered the Collection and Sum of the Charge against me; much at one with that which he formerly made in the Lords House. Now I took Notes of it as exactly as I could. He had no sooner done, but Mr. Speaker pressed me to make Answer presently. I humbly be∣sought the House I might not be put to that, the Charge being long and various; but that I might have Time; and, that my

Councel might be heard for Matter of Law: I was commanded to withdraw. And when I was called in again, I received an Order peremptory, to Answer the Munday sev'n-night after, To such Things as the Reporter was mistaken in. But not a word of Hearing my Councel. I returned to my Prison.

This Wednesday, Novemb. 6. I got my Prayer-Book, by the help of * 16.794 Mr. Hern and Mr. Brown, out of Mr. Pryn's hands, where it had been ever since the last of May, 1643.

Munday, Novemb. 11. I came to the House of Commons again; and * 16.795 according to their peremptory Order, made my Answer to the Sum∣mary Charge which Mr. Brown made against me. But here I shall advertise the Reader, That to avoid troublesom and tedious Repe∣tition, I shall not set down my Answer at large, as there I spake it; because there is nothing in it but what is in my former Answers, the Beginning and the End only excepted. But it was necessary for me then to make a whole and an entire Answer, because the House of Commons had then heard no Part of my Defence. But, I presume, the Charitable Reader will look upon my Answers in their proper place, rather than be troubled a second time with the same thing. Yet because Mr. Brown went a different way in his Summary, from the Charge largely given, I shall represent a Skeleton of my Answer, with all the Limbs of it entire, that it may be seen, as it were, together; though I report nothing which hath been already said. And thus I began:

Mr. Speaker, I was here Novemb. 2. It was the first time that ever * 16.796 I came within these Doors: And here then you gave me the most uncomfortable Break-fast that ever I came to; namely, That this Honourable House had drawn up an Ordinance against me of High Treason; but that before they would proceed farther, I should hear the Sum of the Charge which was against me; which was the cause I was sent for then. And to give my Answer to that which was then said, or rather mistaken in saying and inferring, is the cause of my coming now.

1. And first, Mr. Speaker, I give Thanks to this Honourable House, that they have given me leave to speak for my self. 2. Secondly, I do humbly desire, if any Word or Thing should be mistaken, or unad∣visedly expressed by me (which shall be sore against my Will) I may have liberty to re-call and expound my self. 3. Thirdly, That you will favourably consider into what Straits I am cast, that after a long and tedious Hearing, I must now come to answer to a Sum, or an Epitome of the same Charge; which how dangerous it may be for me, all Men that know Epitomes, cannot but un∣derstand.

Mr. Speaker, I am come hither to make a Brief of my Answer to a Sum of my Charge; wherein I may receive as much Detri∣ment by my own Brief, for want of larger Expression; as by the other of my Charge, by omission or mistake. Yet since your Com∣mand is upon me, I shall, without farther Preface (which I conceive would be as tedious to you, as to me troublesom) address my self, and with as much Brevity as the many Heads of the Charge will bear. And that my Answer may be the clearer, both to this Honou∣rable

House, and to the Gentleman who reported the Charge, I shall follow every thing in the same order he proceeded in. So far forth at least, as an old slow Hand could take them, a heavy Heart observe them, and an old decayed Memory retain them.

This worthy Gentleman hath pressed all things as hardly against me, as the Cause can any way bear: That was his Duty to this Honourable House, and it troubles me not. But his Carriage and Ex∣pressions were civil towards me, in this my great Affliction: And for this I render him humble and hearty Thanks; having from other Hands pledged my Saviour in Gall and Vinegar, and drunk up the Cup of the Scornings of the People to the very bottom.

This Gentleman began with four Generals, which he said I com∣plained of, and I say I had cause so to do. The first Complaint was, * 16.797 That I had lain three Years in Prison before I was heard. And this, he said, was my own fault, because I delayed the putting in of my full An∣swer when I was called. But herein he is quite mistaken. For I could not answer till I was called, and I was not called in three Years: Nor then could I plead to more Articles than were put to me. [Nor did this delay Three Months, of the Three Year. Yet this Gentleman in his Reply, said still, it was my Fault, because I did not Petition to be brought to Hearing. But this, under Favour, is a Weak∣er Reason than the former. For the condition of the Times considered, neither my Councel, nor my other Friends, nor my self; could think that a fit or a discreet way. Besides, it is well known, that had I Petitioned, I could not have been Heard, my Business being in a man∣ner cast aside, till Mr. Pryn's Malice, actuated by a Search into my own Papers, undertook it.] The Gentleman said, my Second Com∣plaint * 16.798 was, That my Papers were Seized: But he said that was done by Authority. And I never denyed that. But that which he added is much mistaken, namely, that I ever Seized any Man's Papers without Authority, or by my own Power; but what was done in that kind, was by the Joynt Authority of that Court, in which I then sat. Nor was my Complaint general, that my Papers were Seized; but that the Papers prepared for my Defence were taken from me, and not restored when I needed them, and Petitioned for them. He said, my Third Complaint was, That many of the Wit∣nesses * 16.799 produced against me were Separatists. I did indeed complain of this, and I had abundant Cause so to do. For there was scarce an active Separatist in England, but some way or other his Influence was into this Business against me. And whereas, the Gentleman said, the Witnesses were some Aldermen, and some Gentlemen, and Men of Qua∣lity. That's nothing; for both Gentlemen, and Aldermen, and Men of all Conditions, (the more's the pity) as the Times now go, are Separatists from the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of Eng∣land Established by Law. And I would to God some of my Judges were not. My Fourth Complaint he said was, of the excessive Num∣ber * 16.800 of the Witnesses. And he added, that if I would not have so many Witnesses, I should not have given occasion for it, by Com∣mitting so many Crimes. But First, whether I have committed so many Crimes as are urged against me, is yet in Question. And Se∣condly, 'tis one thing to give Cause, and another thing to give Oc∣casion:

For an Occasion may be taken, when 'tis pretended as gi∣ven. And so I hope it will be found in my Case. But the thing here mistaken is, That these are all said to be Legal Witnesses, whereas almost all of them have, at some time or other, been before me as their Judge, either at Star-Chamber, or Council-Table, or High-Commission, or as Referee. And then I humbly desire it may be considered. First how impossible it is for a Judge to please all Men. Secondly, how improbable it is, that Witnesses displeased should be indifferent in their Testimony. And Thirdly, how hard it is to convince a Man by such interessed Witnesses, now (upon the mat∣ter) becoming Judges of him that Judged them. And (as * 16.801 S. Au∣gustin speaks) Quomodo potest, how is it possible for one that is Conten∣tious and Evil, to speak well of his Judge?

From these Generals the Gentleman passed to the Particulars of the Charge; and he caused the 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Original Articles, and the 7. Additional to be read. That done, he divided the Charge into two main Heads: The one, an Endeavour in me to subvert the Laws of the Kingdom: And the other, a like Endea∣vour to alter the true Protestant Religion into Popery. The Evidence given in the Lords House began at the Laws, and ended in Religi∣on; but this Gentleman in his Summ, both there and here, began with Religion, and ended with the Laws.

The Charge concerning Religion, he said, would bear two Parts, * 16.802 the Ceremonial and the Substantial part of Religion.

(1) And he professed he would begin at the Ceremonial, where ha∣ving First charged in general, the Statute of the 3 and 4 of Ed. 6. 6. 10. for the destruction of Images; he gave these particular Instan∣ces following, to shew my Intention to alter Religion.

1. The setting up of Coloured Glass with Pictures in the Windows of my Chappel; the Communion-Table Altar-wise; Candlesticks thereon, with Reverence and Bowings.

2. A Bible in my Study with the Five Wounds of Christ wrought upon the Cover in Needle-Work.

3. Three Pictures in my Gallery: The Ecce Homo, the Four La∣tin Fathers, and the History (S: John: 10.) of the True Shepherd en∣tring in by the Door, and the Thief by the Window.

4. The Crucifix hung up in the Chappel at White-Hall on Good-Friday: And what happened there upon Dr: Brown's coming in, and doing Reverence.

5. The Copes and Bowings used in Cathedral Churches since my time.

6. The Ceremonies used at his Majesty's Coronation.

7. The Abuses in the Universities, especially Oxford.

• 1. The Titles given me from thence.
• 2. Divers Particulars in the new Statutes.
• 3. Images countenanced there, by me, in divers Chappels.
• 4. The Picture of the Virgin Mary, at S: Mary's Church-Door.
• 5. Nothing to be done without me in Congregations.

8. The Ceremonies in some Parish-Churches; and some punished for neglect of them. Instances in some of Beckinton, some of Lew∣is, and in Mr: Chancy of Ware.

9. That I preferred no Men, but such as were active for the Ceremonies.

10. Passages expunged out of Books, if contrary to these Courses; as that in Dr. Featly's Sermons concerning Images.

11. Bibles with Pictures in them.

12. The severe Punishment of Mr. Workman of Gloucester; only for a Sermon against Images.

13. Words spoken to take Bishop Jewell's Works and the Book of Martyrs out of some Parish-Churches.

14. The Consecration of Cree-Church, and S. Giles in the Fields. In all which, as I humbly conceive, here's nothing (especially my Answers being taken to them) that can co-operate to any alteration of Religion. Nor is there any Treason, were all that is urged true.

(2) From hence, Mr. Speaker, this worthy Gentleman passed over from the Ceremonies, to those things which he said concerned the Substance of Religion. In which, the Particulars which he Char∣ged were these:

1. A doubtfulness, if not a denyal of the Pope's being Antichrist.

2. Dislike of the Name, the Idol of Rome.

3. The alteration of some passages in the Publick Prayers appoint∣ed for Novemb. 5. and the Coronation Day.

4. The Antichristian Yoak left out of the Brief for the Palatinat, with an expression, as if we and those Reformed Churches were not of the same Religion.

5. That Men were punished for Praying for the Queen, and the Prince.

6. That the Church of Rome is a true Church.

7. That the Communion-Table or Altar is the Chief Place: For there's Hoc est Corpus meum.

8. Restraint of all Books against Popery. Instances in a Book of Bishop Carleton's. One tendred by Sir Edward Hungerford. Dr. Clarke's Sermons. Dr. Jones. None called in but Sales. That I my self did expunge some Passages out of a Sermon of Dr. Sibthorp's. Popish Books seized, re-delivered to the Owners. That for these I must answer for my Chaplains, since John Arch-Bishop of York was fined for his Commissary's Act against the Bishop of Durham; who having a Patent, could not so easily be put out of his Place, as I might change my Chaplains.

9. Three Ministers in my Diocess suspended for not reading the Book of Recreations on the Lord's Day.

10. The Feoffment for buying in of Impropriations overthrown, to the hindrance of Preaching, and Scandal to Religion.

11. Incroachment upon the Lord Chamberlain, for naming of Chap∣lains to the King; and upon the Master of the Wards for giving of Benefices.

12 Familiarity with Priests and Jesuits, S. Clara and Monsieur S. Giles.

13. The Testimonies of Mr. Challonor, Sir Henry Mildmay, and his Brother Mr. Anthony; what Opinion was held of me beyond the Seas, for my cunning introducing of Popery.

14. That an Offer was made unto me to be a Cardinal. And thus far this Gentleman proceeded in points of Religion.

But because there hath passed divers things done at and by the Council-Table, the Courts of Star-Chamber, and High-Commission, and in Convocation; and because many more things so done, are to come in the next Head concerning the Law; I humbly crave leave, for avoiding tedious Repetition, to say it once for all, That no act done by any of these, either by full Consent or major Part, which involves the rest, ought to be charged singly against me. And that for these Reasons following:

1. First, because this is not Peccare cum Multis: For they meet not there in a Relation as Multi; but as Vnum Aggregatum; as Bodies made one by Law. And therefore the Acts done by them, are Acts of those Bo∣dies, not of any one Man sitting in them. And in this Sense a Parlia∣ment is one Body consisting of many; and the Acts done by it are Acts of Parliament. For which (should any of them prove amiss) no one Man is answerable, though many times one Man brings in the Bill.

2. Secondly, because I could sway no Man's Vote in any of those Places, (though this hath been often urged against me, as an Over Potent Member) for my Vote was either last, or last save one, in all these Places. So I could not lead. Nor is there any so much as shew of Proof offered, that I moved, or prepared any Man to a Sen∣tence one way or other, in any one of these Courts or Places.

3. Thirdly, because in those Courts of Judicature, there was the Assistance of able Judges, Lawyers, and Divines for direction. And how can that be a Treason in me, which is not made so much as a Misdemeanour in any of the rest?

4. Fourthly, because the Act of this present Parliament, which hath taken away the Star-Chamber, and the High-Commission, and bounded the Council-Table, looks forward only, and punishes no Man for any Act past; much less doth it make any Man's Actions done in them to be Treason: And I am no way excluded from the Benefit of that Act.

5. Lastly, because in all my Proceedings, both in the High-Com∣mission and elsewhere, I kept strictly to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England Established by Law, against both Papist and other Sectaries. And under this Government, and Doctrine of this Church, it hath pleased God, now for above Fourscore Years toge∣ther, to Bless this Kingdom and People above other Nations. And I pray God if we forsake the one, it prove not a Cause to deprive us of the other.

And now, Mr. Speaker, I shall follow this worthy Gentleman, as * 16.803 he went on to the Second General Head, the Subversion of the Laws. And here, when he had caused the 1, 2, 3, 5, and 14. Original Ar∣ticles to be read, as also the 2, 9, and 10. Additionals; He then said, that I had laboured this Subversion by my Counsels and by my Actions.

(1.) By my Counsels First; Of which he gave Three Instances.

1. The Vote of the Council-Table to Assist the King in Extraordi∣nary ways; if the Parliament should prove peevish and refuse. And this out of my Diary, at Decemb. 5. 1639.

2. The Passage in the Epistle before my Speech in Star-Chamber, Not one Way of Government, since the Humours of the People were in continual Change.

3. A Speech at Council-Table, That now the King might use his own Power, &c. Witnessed only by Sir Henry Vane the Elder.

(2.) From my Counsels, proceed was made to my Actions: Where the Particulars were,

1. That I attempted to set Proclamations above the Law.

2. That I was for all Illegal Projects at the Council-Table: In∣stanced in Inclosures, in the Ship-Money, and Sir John Corbett's Com∣mitment.

3. The taking down of the Houses about St. Paul's, with the large Commission for the Repair of the West-End.

4. The stopping of Two Brewers in their Trade, being in Westmin∣ster, and pretended to annoy the Court.

5. Things done by me as Referee: Instanced in a Case between Rich and Pool, and another of one Symmes.

6. Obstructing the Course of Law, by sending to Judges: In∣stanced in the Parishioners of Beckington; in the Case of Ferdinando Adams; in Sir Henry Martyn's Case, about an Attorney at Law; Judge Richardson's Words, in Mr. Huntley's Case; and Baron Tre∣vers Words, in Grafton's Case.

7. The punishing Men that came in a Legal Way: Instanced in the Case of New-comin and Burrowes; that I said in the High-Commis∣sion, I hoped to see the Clergy exempt again the next hundred Years; the two Church-wardens of Chesham, with Words concer∣ning Sir Thomas Dacres.

8. The Case of Prohibitions; and Mr. Wheeler's Note out of a Sermon of mine concerning them.

9. That no Pope ever claimed so much Jurisdiction; not from the King.

10. The Canons; and I the main Man; the over-grown Member again.

11. The Statutes of Oxford enforced a second time; Nevill's Case of Merton-College instanced in.

12. Books Printed that are against the Law: Instanced in Cowell's Interpreter, and Dr. Manwaring's Sermons.

13. The Alteration of the King's Oath at his Coronation.

14. My Enmity to Parliaments. To all which, as I then gave sufficient Answers, so I hope the Courteous Reader hath found them at large in their several Places. And for this last concerning Parliaments, I humbly and heartily desire, that this may be taken notice of, and remembred, That there is not, in any one of these Paper-Proofs produced against me, any one thing that offers to take away any Rights of Parliaments, rightly understood; much less any that offers to take away Parliaments themselves: Which is a conti∣nued Mistake all along this particular Charge. And if any rash or unweighed Words have fallen from me, yet these cannot be exten∣ded to the disannulling of Parliaments, or their Priviledges in any kind, which I defended in Print long since, before I could foresee any of this Danger threatning me: It is in my Book * 16.804 against Fisher.

It was read in the Lords House, and I humbly desire I may read it here. And it was read.

After this, it was inferred by this worthy Gentleman, what a great Offender I was, and greater than Cardinal Woolsey. Mr. Speaker, I have seen the Articles against the Cardinal, and sure some body is mistaken; for some of them are far greater than any thing that is pro∣ved against me. In which (I thank Christ for it) my Conscience is at peace, whereas the Cardinal confessed himself guilty of them all; and yet no thought of Treason committed: And a Premunire was all that was laid upon him.

Then he gave a touch, That * 16.805 in Edward III.'s time, there was a Complaint, That too much of the Civil Government was in the hands of the Bishops; and that in the 45th Year of his Reign, they were put out, and Lay-men put in. But first, this concerns not me. Se∣condly, the late Act of this Parliament hath taken sufficient Order with that Calling, for medling in Civil Affairs. Thirdly, the time is memorable when this was done: It was in the Forty and fifth Year of Edward III. That's enough.

Mr. Speaker, I shall draw towards an end. Yet not forgetting what Ordinance you told me was drawn up against me; If that which I have now said may any way satisfie this Honourable House to make stay of it, or to mitigate it, I shall bless God and you for it. And I humbly desire you to take into consideration, my Calling, my Age, my former Life, my Fall, my Imprisonment, long and strict; That these Considerations may move with you. In my Prosperity (I bless God for it) I was never puffed up into Vanity, whatever the World may think of me. And in these last full four Years du∣rance, I thank the same God, * 16.806 Gravem Fortunam constanter tuli, I have with decent Constancy born the weight of a pressing Fortune: And I hope God will strengthen me unto, and in the end of it.

Mr. Speaker, I am very * 16.807 aged, considering the Turmoils of my Life; and I daily find in my self more Decays than I make shew of; and the Period of my Life, in the Course of Nature, can∣not be far off. It cannot but be a great Grief unto me, to stand at these Years thus Charged before ye: Yet give me leave to say thus much without Offence, Whatsoever Errours or Faults I may have committed by the way, in any my Proceedings, through Human In∣firmity; as who is He that hath not offended, and broken some Sta∣tute-Laws too by Ignorance, or Misapprehension, or Forgetfulness, at some sudden time of Action? Yet if God Bless me with so much Memory, I will die with these Words in my Mouth: That I never intended, much less endeavoured the subversion of the Laws of the King∣dom; nor the bringing in of Popish Superstition upon the true Protestant Religion, Established by Law in this Kingdom.

And now, Mr. Speaker, having done with the Fact, I have but this one thing to put to the Consideration of this Honourable House. My Charge hath been repeated, I confess, by a very worthy and a very able Gentleman. But Ability is not absolute in any. The Evidence given against me before the Lords, was (as by the Law it ought to be) given in upon Oath: But the Evidence now summed up, and presented to this Honourable House, is but upon the Collection and

Judgment of one Man, how able or intire soever; and what he conceived is proved against me, is but according to his Judgment and Memory; which perhaps may differ much from the Opinion and Judgment of the Judges themselves, who heard the Evidence at large: Nor was this Gentleman himself present every Day of my Hearing; and then for those Days in which he was absent, he can report no more here, than what others have reported to him. So for so much, his Repetition here is but a Report of a Report of Evidence given: And at the best but a Report of Evidence, and not upon Oath. And, I suppose, never any Jurors, who are Tryers of the Fact in any Case, Civil or Criminal, did ever ground their Verdict upon an Evidence only Reported before them, and which themselves heard not.

And if this manner of Proceeding shall be thought less conside∣rable in my Person; yet I humbly desire it may be thoroughly weighed in the prudent Judgment of this Honourable House, the great Preserver of the Laws and Liberties of the Subject of England, how far it doth or may trench upon these in future Consequences, if these great Boundaries be laid loose and open.

And because my Infirmities are many and great, which Age and Grief have added to those which are naturally in me, I most humbly desire again, That my Councel may be heard for point of Law, ac∣cording to the former Concession of this Honourable House: For I assure my self, upon that which hath been pleaded to the Lords, That no one, nor all of the things together which are charged against me, if proved (which I conceive they are not) can make me guil∣ty of High Treason, by any known Established Law of this King∣dom.

The Sum of all is this: Upon an Impeachment arising from this House, I have pleaded Not Guilty. Thereupon Issue hath been joined, and Evidence given in upon Oath. And now I must humbly leave it to you, your Wisdom and Justice, Whether it shall be thought Fit, and Just, and Honourable, to Judge me here, only upon a Report, or a Hearsay, and that not upon Oath.

CAP. XLVI.

HEre ended the heavy Business of this Day. I was exceeding faint with speaking so long; and I had great pain and soreness in my Breast for almost a Fortnight after; then, I thank God, it wore away. I was commanded to withdraw, and to attend the * 16.808 House again on Wednesday, Novemb. 13. which I did. Then Mr. Brown made a Reply to my Answer: The Reply had some great Mistakes in it; but else was for the most part but a more earnest Affirming of what he had delivered. And I conceived I was not to Answer to his Reply, but that he was to have the last Speech: For so it was always carried, during my Hearing in the Lords House. Therefore being dismissed, I went away: And I was no sooner gone, but the House called for the Ordinance which was drawn up against me, and without Hearing my Councel, or any more ado, Voted me Guilty of High Treason. And yet, when I came that Day to the House, all Men, and many of the House themselves did much magnifie my An∣swer before given: I will forbear to set down in what Language, be∣cause it was high; and as no time can be fit for Vanity, so least of all was this time for me: And Vain I must needs be thought, should I here relate what was told me from many and good Hands. But it seems the Clamour prevailed against me.

On Saturday, Novemb. 16. this Ordinance was passed the House of * 16.809 Commons suddenly, and with so great deliberation, as you have heard, was transmitted to the Lords; and by them the Debate concerning it put off to Friday, Novemb. 22. Then the Earl of Pembroke began more * 16.810 fully to shew his canker'd Humour against me; how provoked, I pro∣test I know not, unless by my serving him far beyond his Desert. There, among other course Language, he bestowed (as I am infor∣med) the Rascal and the Villain upon me. And told the Lords, they would put off giving their Consent to the Ordinance, till the Citizens would come down, and call for Justice, as they did in my Lord Straf∣ford's Case. Was there not Justice and Wisdom in this Speech? * 16.811 Hereupon the Business was put off to Saturday, Novemb. 23. and then to Friday, Novemb. 29. But then upon Thursday, Novemb. 28. Mr. Strowd came up with a Message from the Commons, to quicken the Lords in this Business: And at the end of his Message, he let fall, That they should do well to agree to the Ordinance, or else the Multitude would come down and force them to it. At this, some Lords very honourably took Exception; and Mr. Strowd durst not bide it, that this was any part of the Message delivered him by the House of Commons. But the matter was passed over, and Mr. Strowd not so much as checked. This, it may be, was thought seasonable by some, to hearten on the Violence of the Earl of Pembroke.

The Business not long heard on Friday, was put off again to Munday Decemb. 2. and the House of Lords put into a Committee, to examine * 16.812 Particulars by their Notes: The Earl of Northumberland on the Wool-Sack during the Debate, which continued, more or less, some

Days. Where their own Notes failed, they called to Mr. Brown, Clerk of their House, for his. But at last, finding him very ready and quick for any thing that was Charged against me, but loth to be known what Answer I gave to any Point, some Lords observed it. And it did after appear, that the Notes which he put to the Lords, were not the Notes which himself took, but that he had a Copy given him, (whether by Mr. Pryn or any other, I know not) and I was informed that the Earl of Warwick had another Copy of the very same. This is marvellous Just and Honourable in that Earl: And most Christian-like in Mr. Brown. It may be, he learned it out of the Notes which his Father-in-Law takes at Sermons.

Upon Munday December 16. there was (the Times considered) a * 16.813 very full House of Lords; about Twenty present, and my Business largely debated, and ready to come to the Question. I wish with all my Heart it had, while the House was so full. But the Earl of Pem∣broke fell again into his wonted violence: And asked the Lords what they stuck at? And added; what, shall we think the House of Commons had no Conscience in passing this Ordinance? Yes, they knew well enough what they did. One of the Wits hearing this Excellent Passage of the Earl's; Protested, If ever he lived to see a Parliament in Bedlam, this Prudent Earl should be Speaker, if he were able to procure him the Place.

In the mean time this Unhappy Clamour of his, put the Business * 16.814 off again to the next day, being Tuesday; Then there were but four∣teen Lords in the House. My Business was assumed, and proposed in three Questions, and I was Voted Guilty of the Fact in all three. Namely, Guilty of endeavouring to Subvert the Laws: To Over∣throw the Protestant Religion: And that I was an Enemy to Parlia∣ments. Then it being put to the Judges, whether this were Trea∣son or no; the Judges unanimously declared, that nothing which was charged against me was Treason, by any known and established Law of the Land, with many things to and fro concerning this Business.

On Tuesday Christmas-Eve, the Lords had a Conference with the * 16.815 Commons about it. In which they declared, that they had diligently weighed all things that were charged against me, but could not by any one of them, or all, find me guilty of Treason. And therefore desired that the Argument made by my Councel might be Answered. And if it could be made appear unto them by any Law, to be Treason, they would then proceed farther, as in Honour and Justice they should find fit. Then came Christmas-day, the last Wednesday in the Month, * 16.816 and a most Solemn Fast kept on it, with as Solemn an Ordinance for the due observance of this Fast, and against the manner of keeping of that day in former Superstitious Times. A Fast never before heard of in Christendom.

After this Conference, Mr. Serjeant Wild speaking freely to some Friends about this Business, told them, he wonder'd the Lords should so much distrust their Judgments, as to desire a Conference about it. To see how good Wits agree! Surely, I believe he was of the Earl of Pembroke's Councel, or the Earl of his, they jump so together. It seems in these Mens Opinions, the House of Commons can neither Err in Conscience nor Judgment. Howsoever, that House thought it fit

the Lords should be satisfied, that I was by Law guilty of High Trea∣son. And to that end sent up a Committee, Jan: 2. 1644. to make * 16.817 proof of it to their Lordships. At this Meeting two Judges were present, Justice Reeves, and Judge Bacon. The Managers of the bu∣siness against me, were three Lawyers, Mr: Brown, Serjeant Wild, and Mr: Nicolas. Neither my self nor any of my Councel there. What this will effect upon the Lords, Time must discover, as it doth the effects of other Eclipses. And thus far I had proceeded in this sad History by Jan: 3: 1644. The rest shall follow as it comes to my Knowledge. * 16.818

H: W: Next day, the Arch-Bishop receiving the News, that the Bill of Attainder had passed in the House of Lords, broke off his Histo∣ry, and prepared himself for Death. I shall therefore supply the History from the Accounts of Mr: Rushworth, and Dr: Heylin.

A short Supplement to the preceeding History, taken from the Historical Collections of John Rushworth, par: 3: vol: 2: p: 834.

THE Reasons of the Commons for the Attainder of the Arch-Bishop, were at a Conference Jan. 2. by Serjeant Wild, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Nicolas, communicated to the Lords; who there∣upon, on the 4th of January, passed the Ordinance of Attainder; whereby it was Ordained, that he should suffer Death, as in Cases of High Treason. And on the 6th of January it was Ordered by both Houses; that he should suffer accordingly on Friday the 10th. But on the 7th, the Lords at a Conference, acquainted the Commons, with a Letter and Petition from the Arch-Bishop, and a Pardon to him from the King, dated the 12th of April 19 Car. of which he desired the benefit; but the same was over-ruled and rejected. His Petition was, that in case he must Die, Dr: Stern, Dr: Heywood, and Dr: Martin, might be permitted to be with him, before and at his Death, to Ad∣minister Comfort to his Soul; and that the manner of his Execution might be altered to Beheading. To which the Lords agreed; but the Commons then refused both; only granted, that Dr. Stern, and Mr. Marshal, and Mr. Palmer, should go to him; and one or both of the latter, to be constantly present, whilst Dr. Stern was with him. But the next day, upon another Petition of his, setting forth Reasons, from his being a Divine, a Bishop, one that had had the Honour to sit in the House of Peers, and of the King's Most Honourable Privy-Coun∣cil, &c. Praying in those regards, not to be exposed to such an Igno∣minious Death; the Commons consented to remit the rest of the Sen∣tence, and that he should suffer Death by being Beheaded. Accord∣ingly on the 10th of January, he was conducted from the Tower to

the Scaffold on Tower-Hill; where being arrived, holding a Paper in his Hand, he spake to the People as followeth.

Then followeth the Arch-Bishop's Speech and Prayer, and other Circum∣stances of his Execution, verbatim, as they were Printed in a Pamphlet of three Sheets in 4to, London, 1644.

A Larger Supplement to the preceeding History, taken out of Dr: Heylin's Cyprianus An∣glicus,: or, his Life of Arch-Bishop Laud. Pag: 527, &c.

THE Bill of Attainder of the Arch-Bishop, passed in the House of Commons November 13. 1644. But yet the Business was not done; for the Lords stuck at it: Some of which, having not extin∣guished all the Sparks of Humanity, began to find themselves Com∣passionate of his Condition, not knowing how soon it should or might be made their own, if once disfavoured by the Grandees of that Po∣tent Faction. For the Ordinance having been Transmitted to the House of Peers, and the House of Peers deliberating somewhat long upon it, it was Voted on December 4. That all Books, Writings, and Evidences, which concerned the Tryal, should be brought before the Lords in Parliament; to the end, that they might seriously and distinctly con∣sider of all Particulars amongst themselves, as they came before them. But meaning to make sure work of it, they had in the mean time (after no small Evaporations of Heat and Passion) prepared an Ordi∣nance, which they sent up unto the Lords, importing the displacing of them from all those Places of Power and Command which they had in the Army. Which being found too weak to hold, they fall upon another and a likelier Project, which was to bring the Lords to sit in the Commons House, where they were sure they should be in∣considerable both for Power and Number. And to effect the same with more speed and certainty, they had recourse to their Old Arts, drawing down Watkins with his General Muster of Subscriptions, and putting a Petition into his Hands, to be tendred by him to the Houses, that is, themselves: Wherein it was required amongst other things, That they should vigorously proceed unto the Punishment of all Delin∣quents; and that for the more quick dispatch of Publick Business of State, the Lords would please to Vote and Sit together with the Com∣mons. On such uncertain Terms, such a ticklish Tenure, did they then hold their Place and Power in Parliament, who so officiously complied with the House of Commons, in depriving the Bishops of their Vote, and the Church's Birth-Right. And this was it which helped them in that time of need. And yet not thinking this device sufficient to fright their Lordships to a present compliance, Strowd was sent up with a Message from the House of Commons, to let them

know, That the Londoners would shortly bring a Petition, with 20000 Hands to obtain that Ordinance. By which stale and com∣mon Stratagem, they wrought so far on some weak Spirits, the rest withdrawing themselves, (as formerly in the Case of the Earl of Strafford) that in a thin and slender House, not above six or seven in number, it was pass'd at last. The day before they pass'd the Ordinance for Establishing their New Directory; which in effect, was nothing but a total Abolition of the Common-Prayer-Book; and thereby shewed unto the World, how little hopes they had of setling their new Form of Worship, if the Foundation of it were not laid in the Blood of this Famous Prelate, who had so stoutly stood up for it, against all Novellism and Faction, in the whole course of his Life. It was certified by some Letters to Oxon, and so reported in the Mer∣curius Aulicus of the following Week, That the Lord Bruce (but better known by the Name of the Earl of Elgin) was one of the Number of those few Lords, which had Voted to the Sentence of his Con∣demnation: The others which concurred in that fatal Sentence, be∣ing the Earls of Kent, Pembroke, Salisbury, and Bullingbrook, toge∣ther with the Lord North, and the Lord Gray of Wark. But what∣soever may be said of the other six, I have been advertised lately from a very good Hand, that the said Lord Bruce hath frequently disclaimed that Action, and solemnly professed his detestation of the whole Pro∣ceedings, as most abhorrent from his Nature, and contrary to his known Affections, as well unto his Majesty's Service, as the Peace and Preservation of the Church of England.

This Ordinance was no sooner passed, but it revived many of those Discourses which had before been made on the like occasion, in the Business of the Earl of Strafford.— Here we have a new-found Treason, never known before, nor declared such by any of his Maje∣sty's Justices, nor ever brought to be considered of by the King and his Parliament; but only Voted to be such, by some of those Members which sate at Westminster, who were resolved to have it so for their private Ends. The first Example of this kind, the first that ever suffered Death by the Shot of an Ordinance, as himself very well ob∣served in his Dying Speech upon the Scaffold, (though purposely o∣mitted in Hind's Printed Copy) to which now he hastneth.

For the passing of the Ordinance being signified to him by the then Lieutenant of the Tower; he neither entertained the News with a Stoical Apathy, nor wailed his Fate with weak and Womanish La∣mentations, (to which Extreams most Men are carried in this Case) but heard it with so even and so smooth a Temper, as shewed, he neither was ashamed to Live, nor afraid to Die. The time between the Sentence and Execution, he spent in Prayers and Applications to the Lord his God, having obtained, though not without some diffi∣culty, a Chaplain of his own to Attend upon him, and to assist him in the work of his Preparation; though little Preparation needed to re∣ceive that Blow, which could not but be welcome, because long ex∣pected.— On the Evening before his Passover, the Night before the dismal Combat betwixt him and Death, after he had re∣freshed his Spirits with a moderate Supper, he betook himself unto his Rest, and Slept very soundly, till the time came, in which his

Servants were appointed to Attend his Rising. A most assured sign of a Soul prepared.

The fatal Morning being come, he first applied himself to his pri∣vate Prayers, and so continued, till Pennington and others of their Publick Officers, came to conduct him to the Scaffold; which he ascended with so brave a Courage, such a chearful Countenance, as if he had mounted, rather to behold a Triumph, than be made a Sa∣crifice; and came not there to Die, but to be Translated. And though some Rude and Uncivil People, Reviled him as he pass'd along, with opprobrious Language, as loth to let him go to the Grave in Peace, yet it never discomposed his Thoughts, nor disturb'd his Patience. For he had profited so well in the School of Christ, that when he was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatned not, * 16.819 but committed his Cause to him that Judgeth Righteously. And as he did not fear the Frowns, so neither did he covet the Applause of the Vul∣gar Herd; and therefore rather chose to read what he had to speak unto the People, than to affect the ostentation, either of Memory or Wit, in that dreadful Agony: Whether with greater Magnanimity than Prudence, I can hardly say. As for the matter of his Speech, besides what did concern himself and his own Purgation, his great care was to clear his Majesty and the Church of England, from any in∣clination to Popery; with a perswasion of the which, the Authors of the then present Miseries had abused the People, and made them take up Arms against their Soveraign. A Faithful Servant to the last: By means whereof, as it is said of Sampson in the Book of Judges, That the Men which he slew at his Death, were more than they which he * 16.820 slew in his Life: So may it be affirmed of this Famous Prelate, That he gave a greater Blow unto the Enemies of the Church and the King, at the Hour of his Death, than he had given them in his whole Life before. But this you will more clearly see by the Speech it self, which followeth here according to the best and most perfect Copy, delive∣red by his own Hands unto one of his Chaplains, and in his Name pre∣sented to the King by the Lord John Bellasis at the Court in Oxon.

The Speech of the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canter∣bury, spoken at his Death, upon the Scaffold on the Tower-Hill, Jan. 10. 1644.

Good People,

THIS is an uncomfortable Time to Preach; yet I shall begin with a Text of Scripture, Heb. 12. 2. Let us run with Patience the Race which is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the Author and Fi∣nisher of our Faith; who for the Joy that was set before him, endu∣red the Cross, despising the Shame, and is set down at the right Hand of the Throne of God.

I have been long in my Race, and how I have looked to Jesus the Author and Finisher of my Faith, he best knows. I am now come to the End of my Race, and here I find the Cross, a Death of Shame. But the Shame must be despised, or no coming to the Right Hand of God. Jesus despised the Shame for me, and God forbid but that I should despise the Shame for him. I am going apace (as you see) towards the Red-Sea, and my Feet are now upon the very Brink of it; an Argument, I hope, that God is bringing me into the Land of Promise; for that was the way through which he led his People. But before they came to it, he instituted a Passover for them, * 16.821 a Lamb it was, but it must be eaten with Sour Herbs. I shall obey, and labour to digest the Sour Herbs, as well as the Lamb. And I shall remember it is the Lord's Passover: I shall not think of the Herbs, nor be angry with the Hand that gathereth them, but look up only unto him, who instituted that, and governs these. For Men can have no more Power over me, than what is given them from above. * 16.822 I am not in Love with this Passage through the Red-Sea, for I have the Weakness and Infirmities of Flesh and Blood plentifully in me; and I have prayed with my Saviour, Vt transiret Calix iste, That this Cup of Red Wine might pass from me; but if not, God's Will (not mine) be done: And I shall most willingly drink of this Cup, as deep as he pleases, and enter into this Sea; yea, and pass through it in the way that he shall lead me.

But I would have it remembred (Good People) that when God's Servants were in this Boisterous Sea, and Aaron amongst them, the Egyptians which persecuted them, (and did in a manner drive them into the Sea) were Drowned in the same Waters, while they were in pursuit of them. I know my God, whom I serve, is as able to deli∣ver * 16.823 me from * 16.824 the Sea of Blood, as he was to deliver the Three Chil∣dren from the Furnace; and (I humbly thank my Saviour for it) my Resolution is now as theirs was then; they would not Worship the Image the King had set up, nor will I the Imaginations which the Peo∣ple are setting up; nor will I forsake the Temple and the Truth of God, to follow the Bleating of Jeroboam's Calves in Dan and Bethel. And as for this People, they are at this Day miserably misled, (God

of his Mercy open their Eyes that they may see the right way) for at this Day, the Blind lead the Blind, and if they go on, both will cer∣tainly * 16.825 fall into the Ditch. For my self, I am (and I acknowledge it in all Humility) a most grievous Sinner many ways, by Thought, Word and Deed: I cannot doubt but God hath Mercy in store for me (a poor Penitent) as well as for other Sinners. I have now, and upon this sad Occasion, ransacked every corner of my Heart; and yet (I thank God) I have not found (among the many) any one Sin, which deserves Death by any known Law of this Kingdom: And yet hereby I charge nothing upon my Judges; for if they proceed upon Proof (by valuable Witnesses) I, or any other Innocent, may be justly Condemned. And (I thank God) though the weight of my Sentence be heavy upon me, I am as quiet within, as ever I was in my Life. And though I am not only the First Arch-Bishop, but the First Man that ever died † 16.826 by an Ordinance in Parliament; yet some of my Predecessors have gone this way, though not by this means. For Elphegus was hurried away, and lost his Head by the Danes, and Simon Sudbury in the Fury of Wat Tiler and his Fellows. Before these, St. John Baptist had his Head Danced off by a lewd Woman; and St. Cyprian, Arch-Bishop of Carthage, submitted his Head to a persecuting Sword. Many Examples, (Great and Good) and they teach me Patience; for I hope my Cause in Heaven will look of another Dye than the Colour that is put upon it here. And some Comfort it is to me, not only that I go the way of these Great Men in their several Generations; but also that my Charge (as foul as it is made) looks like that of the Jews against St. Paul, Act. 25. 8. for he was Accused for the Law and the Temple, i. e. Religion: And like that of S. Stephen, Act. 6. 14. for breaking the Ordinances which Moses gave, i. e. Law and Religion, the Holy Place and the Temple, ver. 13. But you will then say, Do I then compare my self with the Integrity of St. Paul and St. Stephen? No, far be that from me. I only raise a Comfort to my self, that these great Saints and Servants of God, were laid at in their Time, as I am now. And it is memorable, that St. Paul, who helped on this Accusation against St. Stephen, did after fall under the very same himself. Yea; but here is a great Clamour, that I would have brought in Popery: I shall answer that more fully by and by. In the mean time, you know what the Pharisees said against Christ himself; if we let him * 16.827 alone, all men will believe in him, & venient Romani, and the Romans will come, and take away both our Place and Nation. Here was a cause∣less cry against Christ, that the Romans would come: And see how just the Judgment was; they Crucified Christ for fear lest the Ro∣mans should come; and his Death was it which brought in the Ro∣mans upon them, God punishing them with that which they most feared. And I pray God, this Clamour of venient Romani, (of which I have given no cause) help not to bring them in. For the Pope never had such an Harvest in England since the Reformation, as he hath now upon the Sects and Divisions that are amongst us. In the mean time, by Honour and Dishonour, by good Report and evil Report, as Deceivers and yet true; am I passing through this World, 2 Cor. 6. 8. Some Particulars also I think it not amiss to speak of.

And First, this I shall be bold to speak of the King our Gracious Soveraign. He hath been much traduced also for bringing in of Popery; but in my Conscience (of which I shall give God a very present Account) I know him to be as free from this Charge as any Man living; and I hold him to be as sound a Protestant (according to the Religion by Law Established) as any Man in this Kingdom; and that he will venture his Life as far and as freely for it. And I think I do, or should know, both his Affection to Religion, and his Grounds for it, as fully as any Man in England.

The Second Particular, is concerning this great and Populous Ci∣ty (which God bless.) Here hath been of late a Fashion taken up to gather Hands, and then go to the great Court of this Kingdom, (the Parliament) and Clamour for Justice; as if that Great and Wise Court, before whom the Causes come, (which are unknown to many) could not, or would not do Justice but at their appointment. A way which may endanger many an Innocent Man, and pluck his Blood upon their own Heads, and perhaps upon the City's also: and this hath been lately practised against my self, the Magistrates stand∣ing still, and suffering them openly to proceed from Parish to Parish, without any Check. God forgive the Setters of this, (with all my Heart I beg it) but many well-meaning People are caught by it. In St. Stephen's Case, when nothing else would serve, they stirred * 16.828 up the People against him. And Herod went the same way when he had killed St. James: Yet he would not venture on St. Peter, till he found how the other Pleased the People. But take heed of having * 16.829 your Hands full of Blood; for there is a time, (best known to himself) * 16.830 when God (above other Sins) makes Inquisition for Blood; and when that Inquisition is on foot the Psalmist tells us, that God re∣members, * 16.831 (that's not all) he remembers and forgets not the Complaint of the Poor. That is, whose Blood is shed by Oppression, ver. 9. Take heed of this: It is a fearful thing to fall into the Hands of the Living * 16.832 God; but then especially, when he is making Inquisition for Blood. And (with my Prayers to avert it) I do heartily desire this City to remember the Prophesie that is expressed, Jer. 26. 15.

The Third Particular is the Poor Church of England. It hath Flourished, and been a shelter to other Neighbouring Churches, when Storms have Driven upon them. But, alas! now it is in a Storm it self; and God only knows whether, or how it shall get out. And (which is worse than the Storm from without) it is become like an Oak cleft to Shivers with Wedges made out of it's own Body, and at every Cleft Profaneness and Irreligion is entring in, while (as Prosper speaks in his Second Book de Contemptu Vitae, cap. 4.) Men that introduce Profaneness, are Cloaked over with the Name, Religionis imaginariae, of Imaginary Religion. For we have lost the Substance, and dwell too much in Opinion: And that Church, which all the Jesuites Machinations could not Ruine, is fallen into Danger by her own.

The last Particular (for I am not willing to be too long) is my self. I was Born and Baptized in the Bosom of the Church of England Established by Law; in that profession I have ever since lived, and in that I come now to Die. This is no time to dissemble with God,

least of all in matters of Religion: And therefore I desire it may be remembred, I have always lived in the Protestant Religion esta∣blished in England, and in that I come now to Die. What Clamours and Slanders I have endured for labouring to keep an Uniformity in the external Service of God, according to the Doctrine and Disci∣pline of the Church, all Men know, and I have abundantly felt.

Now at last I am Accused of High-Treason in Parliament, a Crime which my Soul ever abhorred. This Treason was Charged to con∣sist of two Parts, An Endeavour to subvert the Laws of the Land, and a like Endeavour to overthrow the true Protestant Religion Established by Law. Besides my Answers to the several Charges, I protested my Innocency in both Houses. It was said, Prisoners Protestations at the Bar, must not be taken. I can bring no Witness of my Heart, and the Intentions thereof; therefore I must come to my Protesta∣tion, not at the Bar; but my Protestation at this Hour and Instant of my Death; in which I hope all Men will be such Charitable Christians, as not to think I would Die and Dissemble, being In∣stantly to give God an Account for the Truth of it. I do therefore here in the Presence of God and his Holy Angels take it upon my Death, that I never Endeavoured the subversion of Law or Religi∣on: And I desire you all to remember this Protest of mine for my Innocency in this, and from all Treasons whatsoever. I have been Ac∣cused likewise as an Enemy to Parliaments: No; I understand them, and the Benefit that comes by them too well to be so. But I did mislike the Misgovernments of some Parliaments, many ways, and I had good Reason for it. For Corruptio Optimi est Pessima, there is no Corruption in the World, so bad as that which is of the Best Thing within it self; for the better the thing is in Nature, the worse it is Corrupted. And that being the Highest Court, over which no other hath Jurisdiction, when it is misinformed or misgoverned, the Subject is left without all Remedy. But I have done: I forgive all the World, all and every of those Bitter Enemies which have per∣secuted me; and humbly desire to be forgiven of God First, and then of every Man, whether I have offended him or not; if he do but conceive that I have. Lord do thou forgive me, and I beg forgive∣ness of him. And so I heartily desire you to joyn in Prayer with me.

Which said, with a distinct and audible Voice he Prayed as followeth.

O Eternal God and Merciful Father, look down upon me in Mercy, in the Riches and fulness of all thy Mercies look down upon me: But not till thou hast nailed my Sins to the Cross of Christ, not till thou hast bathed me in the Blood of Christ, not till I have hid my self in the Wounds of Christ, that so the Punishment due unto my Sins may pass over me. And since thou art pleased to try me to the utmost, I humbly beseech thee, give me now in this great Instant, full Patience, proportiona∣ble Comfort, and a Heart ready to Die for thine Honour, the King's Happiness, and the Churches Preservation. And my Zeal to this (far from Arrogancy be it spoken) is all the Sin (Humane Frailty excepted, and all the Incidents thereunto) which is yet known to me in this Particular for which I now come to suffer; I say in this Particular

of Treason. But otherwise my Sins are many and great: Lord Pardon them all, and those especially (whatever they are) which have drawn down this present Judgment upon me. And when thou hast given me strength to bear it, do with me as seems best in thine own Eyes: And carry me through Death, that I may look upon it in what Visage soever it shall ap∣pear to me. Amen. And that there may be a stop of this Issue of Blood in this more than miserable Kingdom, (I shall desire that I may Pray for the People too, as well as for my self) O Lord I beseech thee give Grace of Repentance to all Blood-Thirsty People; but if they will not Repent, O Lord confound all their Devices, defeat and frustrate all their Designs and Endeavours upon them, which are, or shall be contrary to the Glory of thy Great Name, the Truth and Sincerity of Religion, the Establishment of the King and his Posterity after him in their just Rights and Priviledges, the Honour and Conservation of Parliaments in their just Power, the Preserva∣tion of this poor Church in her Truth, Peace and Patrimony, and the settle∣ment of this distracted and distressed People under their Ancient Laws, and in their Native Liberty. And when thou hast done all this in meer Mercy to them, O Lord fill their Hearts with Thankfulness, and with Re∣ligious Dutiful Obedience to thee and thy Commandments all their Days. Amen, Lord Jesu, Amen. And receive my Soul into thy Bosom, Amen.

Our Father which art in Heaven, &c.

The Speech and Prayer being ended, he gave the Paper which he read into the Hands of Stern his Chaplain, permitted to Attend him in his last Extremity: Whom he desired to Communicate it to his other Chaplains, that they might see in what manner he left this World; and so Prayed God to shew his Blessings and Mercies on them. And taking notice that one Hind had employed himself in writing the Words of his Speech as it came from his Mouth, he desired him not to do him wrong in Publishing a False or Imperfect Copy. This done, he next applied himself to the Fatal Block, as to the Haven of his Rest. But finding the way full of People, who had placed themselves upon the Theatre to behold the Tragedy, he desired he might have room to Die, beseeching them to let him have an end of his Miseries which he had endured very long. All which he did with so serene and calm a Mind, as if he rather had been taking order for a Noble-Man's Fu∣neral, than making way for his own. Being come near the Block, he put off his Doublet, and used some Words to this Effect, God's Will be done; I am willing to go out of this World, none can be more willing to send me. And seeing through the Chinks of the Boards, that some People were got under the Scaffold about the very Place where the Block was seated, he called to the Officer for some Dust to stop them, or to remove the People thence, saying, It was no part of his De∣sires that his Blood should fall upon the Heads of the People. Never did Man put off Mortality with a Better Courage, nor look upon his Bloody and Malicious Enemies with more Christian Charity. And thus far he was on his way toward Paradise, with such a Primitive Magnanimity, as Equalled if not Exceeded the Example of the

Ancient Martyrs, when he was somewhat interrupted by one of those who had placed himself on the Scaffold, not otherwise worthy to be Named, but as a Firebrand brought from Ireland to inflame this * 16.833 Kingdom. Who finding that the Mockings and Revilings of Malici∣ous People, had no power to move him, or sharpen him into any discon∣tent or shew of Passion, would needs put in and try what he could do with his Spunge and Vinegar; and stepping to him near the Block, he would needs propound unto him some impertinent Questions, not so much out of a desire to learn any thing of him, but with the same purpose as was found in the Scribes and Pharisees in propounding Questions to our Saviour; that is to say, either to in∣trap him in his Answers, or otherwise, to expose him to some disadvantage with the standers by. Two of the Questions he made Answer to, with all Christian Meekness. The first Que∣stion was, What was the Comfortablest Saying which a Dying Man would have in his Mouth? To which he Meekly made Answer, Cupio dissolvi & esse cum Christo. Being asked again, What was the fittest Speech a Man could use to express his Confidence and Assurance? He answered with the same Spirit of Meekness, That such Assurance was to be found within, and that no words were able to express it rightly. But this not satisfying this Busie Man, (who aimed at something else, as is probable, than such satisfaction) unless he gave some Word or Place of Scripture, whereupon such Assurance might be truly founded; he used some words to this effect, That it was the Word of God concerning Christ, and his dying for us. But then finding that there was like to be no end of the Troublesom Gentleman, he turned away from him, applying himself directly to the Executioner, as the Gentler and Discreeter Person. Putting some Money into his Hand, he said unto him, without the least distemper or change of Counte∣nance, Here, Honest Friend, God forgive thee and I do, and do thy Office upon me with Mercy. And having given him a Sign when the Blow should come, he kneeled down upon his Knees, and Prayed as fol∣loweth; viz.

Lord I am coming as fast as I can; I know I must pass through the shadow of Death, before I can come to see thee; but it is but Umbra Mortis, a meer shadow of Death, a little darkness upon Nature; but thou by thy Merits and Passion hast broke through the Jaws of Death. * 16.834 The Lord receive my Soul, and have Mercy upon me, and bless this Kingdom with Peace and Plenty, and with Brotherly Love and Charity, that there may not be this effusion of Christian Blood amongst them, for Jesus Christ his sake, if it be thy will.

Then laying his Head upon the Block, and praying silently to himself, he said aloud, Lord receive my Soul; which was the Signal given to the Executioner; who very dexterously did his Office, and took off his Head at a blow, his Soul ascending on the Wings of An∣gels into Abraham's Bosom, and leaving his Body on the Scaffold to the care of Men. And if the Bodies of us Men be capable of any Happiness in the Grave, he had as great a share therein as he could desire, his Body being accompanied to the Earth with great Multi∣tudes

of People, whom Love, or Curiosity, or remorse of Consci∣ence, had drawn together purposely to perform that Office, and decently Interred in the Church of Alhallow Barking, (a Church of his own Patronage and Jurisdiction) according to the Rites and Cere∣monies of the Church of England. In which it may be noted as a thing remarkable, That being whilst he Lived, the greatest Champi∣on of the Common-Prayer-Book here by Law Established, he had the Honour being Dead, to be Buried by the Form therein prescribed, after it had been long disused, and almost reprobated in most Churches of London.

Hitherto Dr. Heylin.

[The same day that the House of Lords passed the Ordinance of Attainder against the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, (viz. Jan. 4.) they likewise passed an Ordinance, that the Book of Common-Prayer should be laid aside, and for Establishing the Directory for Publick Worship, which had been framed by the Assembly of Divines. Rushworth, par. 3. vol. 2. pag. 839.]

H. W. On the Arch-Bishop's Coffin was nailed a little Brass-Plate, with his Arms, and this Inscription Engraven thereon.

In hac Cistuli conduntur Exuviae Gulielmi Laud Archiepiscopi Can∣tuariensis; qui Securi percussus, Immortalitatem adiit Die X. Januarij, AEtatis suae LXXII. Archiepiscopatûs XII.

In the Year 1663 his Body was removed from All-Hallows Church in London, and, being carried to Oxford, was there Solemnly deposi∣ted July 24. in a little brick Vault, near to the Altar of the Chappel in St. John Baptist's College.

The Arch-Bishop's Last Will and Testament.

In Dei Nomine, Amen.

I William Laud, by God's great Mercy and Goodness, Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, being in perfect Health, (tho' at this time a Prisoner in the Tower of London, God knows for what) in due and serious Consideration of Humane Frailty, do hereby Make, Ordain and Declare, this my Last Will and Testament, in Manner and Form following.

And First, in all Humility and Devotion of a contrite Heart, I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 beg of God Pardon and Remission of all my Sins, for and through the Merits and Mediation of Jesus Christ my alone Saviour. And though I have been a most Prodigal Son; yet my hope is in Christ, that for his sake, God (my most merciful Creator) will not cast off the Bowels of Compassion of a Father. Amen, Lord Jesus. In this Hope and Confidence I render up my Soul with Comfort, into the Mercies of God the Father, through the Merits of God the Son, in the Love of God the Holy Ghost: And I humbly pray that most Blessed and Glorious Trinity, One God, to prepare me in that Hour of Dissolution, and to make me wait every Moment when my Changing shall come, and in my Change, to receive me to that Rest which he * 16.835 prepared for all them that Love and Fear his Name. So, Amen: Lord Jesu, Amen.

Whomsoever I have in the least degree Offended, I heartily ask God and him Forgiveness. And whosoever hath Offended me, I pray God forgive them, and I do. And I hope and pray, that God will forgive me my many Great and Grievous Transgressions against him. Amen.

For my Faith, I Die as I have Lived, in the True Orthodox Pro∣fession of the Catholick Faith of Christ, foreshewed by the Prophets, and Preached to the World by Christ himself, his Blessed Apostles and their Successors; and a True Member of his Catholick Church, with∣in the Communion of a Living part thereof, the present Church of England, as it stands Established by Law.

Secondly, I leave my Body to the Earth, whence it was taken, in full assurance of the Resurrection of it from the Grave at the last day. This Resurrection I constantly believe my Dear Saviour Jesus Christ will make happy unto me his poor and weary Servant. And for my Burial, tho' I stand not much upon the place, yet if it conveniently may be, I desire to be Buried in the Chappel of St. John Baptist's College in Oxford, underneath the Altar or Communi∣on-Table there. And should I be so unhappy as to die a Prisoner; yet my earnest desire is, I may not be buried in the Tower. But wheresoever my Burial shall be, I will have it private, that it may not waste any of the poor Means which I leave behind me to better Uses.

Thirdly, For my Worldly Estate, I Will, that my Debts be pre∣sently paid, which at this time I praise God are very small. Then for St: Paul's Church, it grieves me to see it at such a stand. And tho' I have, besides my pains, given largely towards it, and the Re∣pairs thereof; yet I leave it a Blessing of 800 l. which will be truly paid in for that Work, if ever it go on, while the Party trusted with it lives. But my Executors are not charged with this; 'tis in safe, but other Hands.

Item, I take the boldness to give to my Dread and Dear Soveraign King Charles (whom God bless) 1000 l. and I do forgive him the Debt, which he owes me, being 2000 l. and require, that the Tal∣lies for it be delivered up.

Item, I give to St: John's College in Oxford, where I was bred, all my Chappel-Plate, gilt or party-gilt: All my Chappel-Furniture, all such Books as I have in my Study at the time of my Death, which they have not in their Library, and 500 l. in Money, to be laid out upon Lands. And I Will, that the Rent of it shall be equally di∣vided to every Fellow and Scholar alike, upon the 17th: day of October,: every fourth Year. Something else I have done for them already, according to my Ability: And God's everlasting Blessing be upon that Place and that Society for ever— I give to the Right Ho∣nourable George Lord Duke of Buckingham his Grace, my Chalice and Patin of Gold; and these I desire the young Duke to accept, and use in his Chappel, as the Memorial of him who had a Faithful Heart to love, and the Honour to be beloved of his Father. So God bless him with wise and good Counsels, and a Heart to follow them.

By Father and Mother, I never had Brother nor Sister; but by my Mother many. They were all Ancient to me, and are Dead; but I give to their Children as followeth.

Legacies— To his Brother Dr: Robinson's Children, Scil: * 16.836 Henry and John, and Lucie, and Elizabeth Wife to Dr: Baily. To Dr: Cotsford, Son of his Sister Amie. To Dr: Edward Layfield, Son of his Sister Bridget. To Eliz: Holt, Daughter of his Sister Bennet. To William Bole, Son of his Sister Elizabeth. To his Sister Briget's Daughter, Wife to Mr: Snow. To his Chaplains. Rings * 16.837 rich, or Watches. To the Poor of several places he had reference to, 5 l. each. To Canterbury, Lambeth, and Croydon, 10 l. each.

To the University of Oxford, where I was Bred, and to the Town of Reading, where I was Born, I have already— in perpetuity, as God hath made me able.

Item, I give to so many of my Servants, as did continue my Ser∣vants till the time that the Storm fell on me, as followeth.

—Among the rest, to Mr: Cobb my Organ that is at Croydon, my Harp, my Chest of Viols, and the Harpsichon that is at Lambeth.

The remainder of my Estate, above that which is given, or shall be added to this my Will, I charge my Executor (as he will Answer me at the Bar of Christ) that he lay out upon Land, as far as it will

go; and then settle it by some sure course in Law to such Uses, and under the same Conditions, as I have setled my Land at Bray upon the Town of Reading.

Of which, 50 l. per Annum, to be setled on the Town of Ock∣ingham, 50 l. on Henly upon Thames, 50 l. on Wallingford, and 50 l. on Windsor, to the Uses aforesaid for ever. If it rise to less; that there be an even abatement to all these places. But if it purchase more, (as, says he, it needs must, if I be well dealt with) all above 200 l. per Annum, he gives to Dr: Baily, and his Son William after him, and his Heirs for ever.— He held a Lease of Barton-Farm (near Winchester) of the Cathe∣dral Church of Winchester, taken in his Servant Richard Cobb's Name, Rent 370 l. per Annum, of which, he gives (during the Lease) 50 l. per Annum to the City of Winchester, for the binding out of Apprentices; the rest to several Nephews and Servants. And if (says he) the Cathedral Church of Winche∣ster be: suffered to enjoy its Lands, I leave the power of re∣newing this Lease to Dr: Richard Baily, he paying Mr: Rich. Cobb 100 l. for his pains taken for me in this Purchase, &c.

Item, I give to my Successor (if the present Troubles in the State leave me any) my Organ in the Chappel at Lambeth; Provided, that he leave it to the See for ever. Likewise, I give him my Barge, and Furniture to it. As for the Pictures in the Gallery at Lambeth, I leave them to Succession; as well those that I found there, as those which I have added. But in case the Arch-Bishoprick be dissolved, (as 'tis threatned) then I Will, that my Executor add the Organ, the Barge, and such Pictures as are mine, to my Estate; that is, if they escape Plundering.

Item, I give to my Servant * 16.838 Mr: R: C: (besides what already) 50 l. if he deal truly with my Estate.

By this Will I do revoke all former Wills; and do charge my Exe∣cutor (as he will Answer me before Christ) that he perform my Will punctually in all Particulars, which the Rapine of the Time shall not have Plundered from him, or the Violence of the Time over-ruled him.

Item, I do lay upon Dr: Baily above Named, the charge of all my Papers and Paper-Books, if they can escape the Violence of the Time. And I give him an English Bible in 4to, cover'd with Murry-leather, in which are some brief Notes upon the Liturgy; and a Note-Book in Folio, in which is my Catalogue of Books in relation to my course of Study, and my Directory to almost all my other Papers and Books: All which Papers and Paper-Books I give him also. But with this Provi∣so, that he burn all that he thinks not fit to use himself, that my Weak∣ness (whatever it be) be not any Man's Scorn; and my Diligence, I am sure, cannot.

Then he makes Dr: Baily his sole Executor, and gives him 200 l. for his pains. But adds,— If he shall not be Living at the time of my Death, or shall die before he make due Probat of

this my Will, then Mr: John Robinson of London, Merchant. And if he die, then Mr: Edward Layfeild. And if he die, then Dr: Tho: Walker, Master of Vniversity College.

And my express Will is; that whatsoever my Estate amounts unto, my Executor shall have no more of it, than is particularly and by Name given him in this my Will.

And I do heartily pray my Executor to take care, that my Book written against Mr: Fisher the Jesuit, may be Translated into Latin, and sent abroad; that the Christian World may know, see and judge of my Religion. And I give unto him that Translates it, 100 l.

He makes the Bishops, Juxon, Curle, Wren and Duppa, Over∣seers of his Will, and gives them for their pains 10 l. apiece.

Thus I forgive all the World, and heartily desire forgiveness of God and the World: And so again commend and commit my Soul into the Hands of God the Father who gave it, in the Merits and Mercies of my Blessed Saviour Jesus Christ who Redeemed it, and in the Peace and Comfort of the Holy Ghost who Blessed it; and in the Truth and Unity of his Holy Catholick Church, and in the Com∣munion of the Church of England, as it yet stands Established by Law.

I most willingly leave the World, being weary at the very Heart of the Vanities of it, and of my own Sins, many and great, and of the grievous Distractions of the Church of Christ almost in all parts of Christendom: Which Distractions God in his good time make up, who well knows upon what many of them are grounded.

For the Mony to bear the Charge of those Legacies expressed in my Will, and other Intendments; I have, for fear of the present Storm, committed it to honest, and (I trust in God) safe Hands. And I doubt not, but they will deliver the Mony in their several Custodies to my Executor for the Uses expressed. But I forbear to Name them; lest the same Storm should fall on them, which hath driven me out of all I have considerable in my own Possession, &c. Jan: 13: Anno: 1643.

Probat: 8: Jan: 1661. by Dr: Baily.

Several Passages of Arch-Bishop Laud's Conference with Fisher the Jesuit, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Londin. 1639. Fol. referred to in the preceding History.

I.

Pag. 211.

IN some Kingdoms there are divers Businesses of greatest Conse∣quence, which cannot be finally and bindingly ordered, but in and by Parliament. And particularly the Statute-Laws, which must bind all the Subjects, cannot be made and ratified, but there.—And again, as the Supreme Magistrate in the State Civil, may not abrogate the Laws made in Parliament, though he may dispense with the Sanction, or Penalty of the Law, quoad hic & nunc, as the Lawyers speak.

II.

Pag. 171.

John Capgrave, one of your own, and Learned for those Times; and long before him William of Malmesbury tells us, that Pope Vrban the Second, at the Council * 16.839 held at Bari in Apulia, accounted my worthy Predecessor S. Anselm, as his own Compeer, and said, he was as the Apostolick and Patriarch of the other World. (So he then termed this Island.) Now the Britains having a Primate of their own, (which is greater than a Metropolitan) yea a Patriarch if you will, he could not be appealed from, to Rome, by S. Gregory's own Doctrine.

III.

Pag. 278.

The Doctrine it self is so full of Danger, that it works strongly, both upon the Learned and Unlearned, to the Scandal of Religion, and the Perverting of Truth. For the unlearned First, how it works upon them by whole Countries together, you may see by what hap∣pened in Asturia, Cantabria, Galaecia; no small parts of Spain. For there the People (so he * 16.840 tells me that was an Eye-Witness, and that since the Council of Trent) are so addicted to their Worm-eaten and De∣formed Images, that when the Bishops commanded New, and Handsomer Images to be set up in their rooms, the poor People cryed for their Old, would not look up to their New, as if they did not represent the same thing. And it works upon the Learned too, more than it should. For it wrought so far upon Lamas himself, who bemoaned the former pas∣sage, as that he delivers this Doctrine, That the Images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints, are not to be Worshiped, as if there were any Divinity in the Images, as they are Material things made by Art; But only as they represent Christ and the Saints; for else it were Idolatry.

So then belike, according to the Divinity of this Casuist, a Man may Worship Images, and ask of them, and put his Trust in them, as they represent Christ and the Saints: For so there is Divinity in them, though not as things, yet as Representers. And what I pray did, or could any Pagan-Priest say more than this? For the Proposition resolved is this; The Images of Christ and the Saints, as they represent their Exemplars, have Deity or Divinity in them. And now I pray, A. C. do you be Judge, whether this Proposition do not teach Idola∣try? And whether the Modern Church of Rome be not grown too like to Paganism in this Point? For my own part, I heartily wish it were not. And that Men of Learning would not strain their Wits to spoil the Truth, and rent the Peace of the Church of Christ, by such Dangerous, such Superstitious Vanities. For better they are not; but they may be worse. Nay, these and their like have given so great a Scandal among us, to some ignorant, though (I presume) well-meaning Men, that they are afraid to Testifie their Duty to God, even in his own House, by any outward Gesture at all. Insomuch, that those very Ceremonies, which by the Judgment of Godly and Learned Men, have now long continued in the Practice of the Church, suffer hard Measure for the Romish Superstitions sake.

IV.

Pag. 292.

And for the Calvinists, if they might be rightly understood, they also maintain a most True and Real Presence, though they cannot permit their Judgment to be Transubstantiated. And they are Pro∣testants too. And this is so known a Truth, that Bellarmin confesses it. lib. 1. de Euchar. cap. 2. s. quinto dicit.—For the Calvinists, at least they which follow Calvin himself, do not only believe, that the true and real Body of Christ is received in the Eucharist; but that it is there, and that we partake of it Verè & Realiter, (which are Cal∣vin's * 16.841 own Words;) And yet Bellarmin boldly affirms, that to his read∣ing, no one Protestant did ever affirm it. And I, for my part, cannot believe but 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had read Calvin, and very carefully, he doth so frequently and so mainly oppose him. Nor can that place by any Art be shifted, or by any Violence wrested from Calvin's true mean∣ing of the Presence of Christ in and at the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, to any Supper in Heaven whatsoever. But most manifest it is, that quod legerim, for ought I have read, will not serve Bellarmin to excuse him. For he himself, but in the very Chapter going before, quotes four places out of Calvin, in which he says expresly, That we receive in the Sacrament the Body and the Blood of Christ verè, truly. So Calvin says it four times, and Bellar∣min quotes the places; and yet he says in the very next Chapter, That never any Protestants said so, to his Reading. And for the Church of England, nothing is more plain, than that it believes and teaches the true and real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

V.

Pag. 376.

Secondly, if the Religion of the Protestants be in Conscience a

known false Religion, then the Romanists Religion is so too; for their Religion is the same. Nor do the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion, (for the Christian Religion is the same to both) but they differ in the same Religion; and the difference is in certain gross Corruptions, to the very endangering of Salvation, which each side says the other is guilty of.

VI.

Pag. 377.

After these Reasons thus given by him, A. C. tells me, That I nei∣ther do, nor can prove any Superstition or Error to be in the Roman Religion. What, none at all? Now truly, I would to God from my Heart this were true, and that the Church of Rome were so happy, and the whole Catholick Church thereby blessed with Truth and Peace. For I am confident such Truth as that, would soon either command Peace, or confound Peace-Breakers. But is there no Superstition in Adoration of Images? None in Invocation of Saints? None in Ado∣ration of the Sacrament? Is there no Errour in breaking Christ's own Institution of the Sacrament, by giving it but in one kind? None about Purgatory? About Common-Prayer in an unknown Tongue none? These and many more, are in the Roman Religion, (if you will needs call it so) and 'tis no hard work to prove every of these to be Errour, or Superstition, or both.

VII.

Pag. 320.

For a Church may hold the Fundamental Point Literally, and as long as it stays there, be without controul; and yet Err grosly, dan∣gerously, nay, damnably, in the Exposition of it. And this is the Church of Rome's Case. For most true it is, it hath in all Ages maintained the Faith unchanged in the expression of the Articles them∣selves: But it hath in the Exposition both of Creeds and Councils, quite changed and lost the Sense and the Meaning of some of them. So the Faith is in many things changed, both for Life and Belief, and yet seems the same. Now that which deceives the World is, that because the Bark is the same, Men think this old decayed Tree is as sound as it was at first, and not weather-beaten in any Age. But when they can make me believe that Painting is true Beauty, I'll believe too, that Rome is not only Sound, but Beautiful.

VIII.

Pag. 128.

For the Church may import in our Language, The only True Church; and perhaps, (as some of you seem to make it) the Root and the Ground of the Catholik. And this I never did grant of the Roman Church, nor ever mean to do. But a Church can imply no more, than that it is a Member of the whole. And this I never did, nor ever will deny, if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church, I granted also; but not a Right, as you impose upon me. For Ens and Verum, Being and True, are convertible one with another; and every thing that hath a Being, is truly that Being

which it is, in truth of Substance. But this Word Right is not so used; but it is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions: And in this Sense, every thing that hath a true and real Being, is not by and by Right in the Conditions of it. A Man that is most Dishonest, and Unworthy the Name, a very Thief (if you will) is a True Man, in the Verity of his Essence, as he is a Creature Endued with Reason; for this none can steal from him, nor he from himself; but Death. But he is not therefore a Right, or an Upright Man. And a Church that is exceeding Corrupt, both in Manners and Doctrine, and so a Dishonour to the Name, is yet a True Church in the verity of Es∣sence, as a Church is a Company of Men, which profess the Faith of Christ, and are Baptized into his Name; but yet it is not there∣fore a Right Church, either in Doctrine or Manners. It may be you meant cunningly to slip in this Word Right, that I might at unawares grant it Orthodox: But I was not so to be caught. For I know well, that Orthodox Christians are Keepers of Integrity, (so St. Augustin) and * 16.842 Followers of right Things; of which the Church of Rome at this Day is neither. In this Sense then no Right, that is, no Orthodox Church at Rome.

IX.

Epist. Dedicat. circa med.

For, to my remembrance, I have not given him, or his, so much as Course Language. But on the other side, God forbid too, that your Majesty should let both Laws and Discipline sleep, for fear of the Name of Persecution, and in the mean time, let Mr. Fisher and his Fellows, Angle in all parts of your Dominions for your Subjects. If in your Grace and Goodness you will spare their Persons, yet I humbly beseech you see to it, That they be not suffered to lay either their Weels, or Bait their Hooks, or cast their Nets in every Stream, lest that Tentation grow both too general, and too strong. I know they have many Devices to work their Ends; but if they will needs be Fishing, let them use none but Lawful Nets: Let's have no dissol∣ving of Oaths of Allegiance, no Deposing, no Killing of Kings, no blowing up of States to settle Quod Volumus, That which fain they would have in the Church; with many other Nets, as dangerous as these. For if their Profession of Religion were as good as they pretend it is, if they cannot compass it by good means, I am sure they ought not to attempt it by bad: For if they will do evil that good may come thereof, the Apostle tells me, Their Damnation's just, Rom. 3. 8.

Now, as I would humbly beseech your Majesty to keep a serious Watch upon these Fishermen, which pretend S. Peter; but Fish not with his Net. So, &c.

X.

A Passage out of the Conference at Hampton-Court, referred to in the preceding History.

Pag. 28.

Upon the first Motion, concerning falling from Grace, the Bishop of London took occasion to signifie to his Majesty, how very many in these days, neglecting Holiness of Life, presumed too much of persisting of Grace, laying all their Religion upon Predestination,

if I shall Saved, I shall be Saved; which he termed a desperate Do∣ctrine, shewing it to be contrary to good Divinity, and the True Doctrine of Predestination, wherein, we should Reason rather ascenden∣do, than descendendo; thus; I Live in Obedience to God, in Love with my Neighbour, I follow my Vocation, &c. therefore I trust that God hath Elected me, and Predestinated me to Salvation: Not thus, which is the usual course of Argument; God hath Predestinated and chosen me to Life; therefore though I sin never so grievously, yet I shall not be damned: For whom he once loveth, he loveth to the End. Whereupon, he shewed his Majesty out of the next Article, what was the Doctrine of the Church of England, touching Predesti∣nation, in the very last Paragraph, Scil. We must receive God's Pro∣mises in such wise as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture, and in our doings, that the Will of God is to be followed, which we have expresly declared unto us in the Word of God. Which part of the Arti∣cle his Majesty very well approved. And after he had, after his man∣ner, very singularly discoursed on that place of Paul, Work out your * 16.843 Salvation with fear and trembling; he left it to be considered, whether any thing were meet to be added, for the clearing of the Doctor his doubt, by putting in the Word often, or the like; as thus, We may often depart from Grace: But in the mean time wished that the Do∣ctrine of Predestination might be very tenderly handled, and with great discretion; lest on the one side God's Omnipotency might be called in question, by impeaching the Doctrine of his eternal Prede∣stination; or on the other side a desperate Presumption might be ar∣reared, by inferring the necessary certainty of standing and persist∣ing in Grace.

XI.

A Passage out of the Arch-Bishop's Speech in Star-Chamber, at the Censure of Pryn, Burton, and Bastwick, referred to in the Preceding History.

Pag. 36.

The Learned make but Three Religions to have been of old in the World, Paganism, Judaism, and Christianity; and now they have ad∣ded a Fourth, which is Turcism, and is an absurd mixture of the o∣ther three. Now if this ground of theirs be true (as 'tis generally received) perhaps it will be of dangerous consequence, sadly to avow, that the Popish Religion is Rebellion. That some Opinions of theirs teach Rebellion, that's apparently True; the other would be thought on; to say no more.

XII.

A Passage out of the New Statutes of the Cathedral and Metropoli∣tical Church of Christ in Canterbury, drawn by the Arch-Bishop, and prescribed to that Church by the King, 1636.

Cap. 34. de Celebratione Divinorum.

Statuimus etiam; ut nullus Canonicorum & aliorum in Choro Mini∣strantium, Divinorum Officiorum tempore, absque Insignibus Choro &

Gradui convenientibus, Chorum ingrediatur. Singuli verò, cujuscunque fuerint Gradûs aut Ordinis, in ingressu Chori Divinam Majestatem devotâ mente adorantes, humiliter se inclinabunt versùs Altare (prout antiquis quarundam Ecclesiarum Statutis cautum novimus) & dein conversi, Decano quoque debitam Reverentiam exhibebunt. Quòd si contigerit aliquem ex quacunque causâ de loco in locum transire in Choro; Reverentiam similiter in medio Chori, tam versùs Altare, quàm versùs stallum Decani (si prae∣sens fuerit) exhibebit, tum in eundo, tum in redeundo, toties quoties.

XIII.

A Passage out of Arch-Bishop Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae, con∣cerning Prohibitions, referred to in the preceding History.

Pag. 326, 327. edit. Londin.

Jamque Juris Regni periti, ut sui commodi Causâ Regia for a multitu∣dine * 16.844 litium & Infinitate replerent, plerasque Causas & Controversias ab Ar∣chiepiscopali & Episcopali Audientiâ ad sua Judicia vocabant; & Ecclesi∣asticam Jurisdictionem decimarum, Matrimoniorum & Testamentorum atque ultimarum Voluntatum, finibus & cancellis concludere volebant; in quibus etiam saepe ejus potestatem Prohibitionibus Regiis coercebant & impedi∣ebant. Tum illa Provisionum Statuta & Brevia de Praemunire, si Praela∣ti ac Judices ecclesiastici digitum (ut aiunt) latum praescriptos à se jurisdicti∣onis fines transilirent, multis minis vibrabant. Ea Poena Praelatis valdè terribilis fuit. Nam si à laicis Judicibus rei pronuntiarentur, & bonis omnibus mulctandi & aeternis carcerum tenebris involvendi erant. Hu∣jus Poenae atrocitate Episcopi & Praelati jurisdictione praediti ita perplexi & perturbati sunt; ut quia Leguleiorum minantia Tela vix vitare pote∣rant, * 16.845 consilium sine Morâ ineundem putarunt, & Londini in Synodo convenerunt. In eâ supplicationem totius Anglicani Cleri Nomine con∣ceptam Regi tradiderunt; in qua de laicis judicibus oppidò semperquè cle∣ricis infestis graviter conquesti sunt. Nullam esse Causam dixerunt, cur pro Regis Regni{que} incolumitate ac Salute major Fides consuetudinum quàm Legum peritis sibi{que} Ecclesiasticae Jurisdictionis Praelatis haberetur. Se enim jure certo haerere ac insistere; illos arbitrio vagari, ac jura pro causis quotidianis quotidiana suo aeri insculpere, eadem{que} in causis eisdem figere, tollere ac refigere. Tum quod in aliis Statutis Parliamenti Authoritate edantur (quo quidem jure nescitur) interpretationem sibi peculiariter arro∣gare & leges condentium intentiones at{que} mentes (quae sola lex omnibus hu∣manis legibus imperitat) incertis motivis & decretis impudenter & impe∣ritè, quocun{que} vellent, deducere. Non esse autem aliam Regi causam, cur Praelatorum fides sibi in dubium veniret, quàm quod prioribus seculis Clerus à Rege defecit, & Romano Pontifici adhaesit. Nunc autem eadem ista lata jura, quae Praelatis ipsis in Parliamento contra Romanum Pon∣tificem deprecantibus pro jure Regio sancita sunt, in Praelatos Regni in∣iquâ Juridicorum & Leguleiorum calumniâ censurâ{que} torqueri. Id quod ex uno inani verbo, ab aliquo litigioso calumniatore perperam interpreta∣to, perspici facilè possit. Nam Lex his disertis verbis sancita est. That * 16.846 if any purchase or pursue, or do to be purchased or pursued, in the Court of Rome, or elsewhere; any such Translations, Processes, and Sentences of Excommunications, Bulls, Instruments, or any

other things, which touch the King, against him, his Regality, or his Realm, &c. Si quis impetret aut persequatur, seu impetrari vel per∣sequi procuret, in Curiâ Romanâ, seu alibi, aliquas ejusmodi Translationes, Processus & Sententias excommunicationum, Bullas, Instrumenta, vel ali∣am rem quamcunque, quae Regem tangat, contra eum, ejus regalem digni∣tatem vel regnum. Ex his verbis Causidici, qui Praelatos Sanctionum pe∣riculis involvere vellent, cavillantur hac tam gravi poenâ ecclesiasticos Ju∣dices teneri, si quantulumcunquè in jurisdictionem 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, aut quovismodo titubaverint. Quo terrore proposito, perdifficilis & periculosa erit ecclesiasticae jurisdictionis tam arctis coercitae sinibus tracta∣tio. Quod eo est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, quia Statutum illud in Praelatorum gratiam latum est. Cum enim indignissimi antea quique ad Papam promiscuè con∣fugissent, ab eo{que} nummis intervenientibus opulentissima beneficia & maximas dignitates Ecclesiasticas impetrâssent; nec Praelati ea ambitione & cupidi∣tate Romanâ impediti Ecclesias, quarum essent Patron, liberè conferre poterant, proscriptione sancitum est: Ne Regis deinceps subditi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 provisiones à Papâ peterent; aut citationes, processus, excommunicationes, vel ecclesiasticas censuras à Papâ Romae, seu alibi, ratione hujusmodi Provisionum decretas, interpositas, aut fulminatas, in Angliâ vel alibi, contra Regem aut Regis subditos exequeretur, denunciaret, aut promulgaret. Quod verbum alibi calumniosi Legulei malitiosâ interpretatione convertunt in Praelatos; ejus∣que sensum esse call dè fingunt, si de causa civili non modo Romae, sed in ecclesiasticis foris & consisto ijs, quae Curias Christianitatis appellant, eti∣am in regno, lis fortè interveniat. At longè alium fuisse illorum sen∣sum, quorum consensu conditum tum Statutum fuit, certum est, qui illud verbum in curiâ Romanâ vel alibi, interposuerunt. Quia Papa ipse saepe ab urbe Romanâ Lugduni, Pisis, Avinione, aliis{que} locis, Româ longè la∣teque disjunctis, abfuit, in quibus illa 〈◊〉〈◊〉 jura non minus quam Romae usurpavit. Tum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Papae eadem ipso Papae Nomine frequenter facere; quibus perinde illâ saluberrimâ sanctione occurrendum fuit, quam his quae Romae siunt. Itaquè contra omnem juris & aequitatis rationem esse; ut quae salubriter in Praelatorum utilitatem constituta sunt, iniquis∣simis interpretantium cavillis in eorum perniciem torqueantur. Praeterea quis existimare queat, tam insanos tum fuisse Episcopos; ut tam duris & saevis, si modò ita accipiantur, in se Legibus vellent consentire? Nam si causas forte civiles in suis foris tractent, pedem{que} in Regis jurisdictionem intulerint; an eâdem poenâ afficiendi censerentur, quâ Papae provisores? Etenim omni aequo & rationabili jure 〈◊〉〈◊〉 convenit esse delicto parem. Itaquè si jurisdictionis sibi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sines exeant; non ipso jure tam graves poenas incurrant; sed Prohibitionibus coerceantur, quas si contemp∣serint, vindicentur de contemptu. Legum enim poenas verborum am∣biguitate ad casus non expressos nullo jure referendas; sed si verbum ul∣lum in condendâ lege ambiguum interveniat, etiam si de condentium mente non appareat, tamen id in benigniorem significationem interpretatione de∣ducendum. Ad extremum addiderunt, iniquè secum agi, quòd laicorum Judicum, qui ut ecclesiastica jurisd ctio pen tus 〈◊〉〈◊〉, & contemptui vulgo siat, quidlibet statuere vellent, tanquam inimicorum censuras & judicia patiantur. Summa petitionis hujus fuit; ut Parliamenti in∣terpretatione illa vox alibi, quae tam perplexam difficultatem induxit, de∣claretur; tum ut Ecclesiastici Judices, nisi Prohibitiones regias spreverint 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tam atroci contra Provisores poena non teneantur: Postremò, ut hi,

qui de jurisdictionis finibus totis viribus contra Praelatos tam hostiliter semper dimicare solent, à concedendis Prohibitionibus, & cognoscendis hujusmodi causis exercendis{que} in Ecclesiasticos Judices judiciis supersedeant: Alijque statuantur, qui cum de jurisdictionis utriusque finibus agatur, aut illae cau∣sae in controversiam venirent, sine omni suspicione & interpretari contro∣versa jura aequius, & sine invidiâ judicare, rectius velint. In hac au∣tem re Polidorus Virgilius falsus est. Quod Martinum Papam, qui diu * 16.847 antè obijt, cum Henrico Sexto Rege de rescindendis illis juribus & actio∣nibus egisse, & illa statuta, quae contrà Papae Provisiones lata sunt, à poenis provisis & praemonitis nuncupata esse scribat. Sed ut omisso 〈◊〉〈◊〉 peregrino & à nostrae historiae sensu veritate{que} aliena, ad hanc Praesulum atque Praelatorum supplicationem revertamur: Si tum, cum Papa autho∣ritatem regiam in omni jurisdictione exerceret, cumquè vis ejus etiam Re∣gibus esset formidabilis, tamen contra tam immanem & violentam juris regni peritorum interpretationem deprecari Praelati coacti sunt; quid nunc facient, cum Ecclesiasticae jurisdictionis gubernaculis Principi delatis, & Papali usurpatione exclusâ, nec illa Causidicorum turba neque quisquam 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hominum ordo majore fide, religione, doctrinâ, prudentiâ & fa∣cundiâ Papalem oppugnent, & Principis jurisdictionem tueantur, quàm Praelati: Vt graviori supplicio digni sint hi, qui Ecclesiastica judicia jam contrà Papam, eaquè Principis nomine exercitata, obsoletis illorum Statu∣orum calumnijs nunc impediant, & Praelatos à munere suo piè recte{que} ge∣rendo deterreant; quàm qui priscis illis temporibus Papales Provisiones Romae vel alibi impetrarent. Quod si tam iniqui calumniatores duriores esse volunt, & vetera ob alias causas lata jura non ad Principis aut Rei∣publicae; sed ad suam utilitatem atque quaestum, & ad integerrimi reli∣giosissimi{que} Praelatorum ordinis perniciem refricare volunt; saltem ipsi simili Lege latâ patiantur legem talionis: eadem{que} poena plectantur; si in Ecclesiasticae jurisdictionis limites incurrant, quâ Praelatos, si suas causas vel minimo digito attigerint, affici volunt.

XIV.

A Passage out of Arch-Bishop Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae, con∣cerning Ceremonies used in Consecration of Churches, referred to in the Preceding History.

Pag. 85.

Etsi enim assentior rectè ac secundum Deum egisse Pontifices [Romanos] quòd hujusmodi nugis ac praestigijs, quae multis ante eos saeculis in summo usu & existimatione à veteribus culta & observata fuerunt, fidem omnem ac authoritatem detraxerint; in hoc tamen desidero illorum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Pietatem, sive Prudentiam, quod quae in eo genere corrigere volebant, in alio deteri∣ora effecerunt; ut immutata magis & ad novas superstitiones traducta, quàm penitus deleta & extincta cernantur. Legat enim qui volet recen∣tiores, & nostro praesertim aevo editos, Pontificales ac Missales Libros; reperiet eos & Ceremoniarum multitudine & peragendi difficultate atque taedio, & exorcisationis amentiâ, priores illos longè superare. Quibus enim, non dicam verbis, sed portentes, haec & hujusmodi à Pontificijs adhuc ad∣jurantur? Primarius Lapis, & Caementum pro Ecclesiâ aedificandâ, Sal & Aqua, Panis Benedictus, Dedicatio recentis Ecclesiae, Altaria, Vasa, Indumenta, Linteamina, & Ornamenta Ecclesiastica, Altare Portatile,

Calix cum Patenâ, Crux Nova, Sanctorum Imagines, Campane atque Signa, Cineres, Incensus, tum in Militum (ut vocant) Règularium erectione, Arma, Enses & Vexilla Beilica. Haec omnia, quàm solenni ritu, Sanctarum Scripturarum Sententijs ad suas Decantationes perperam adhibitis, Pontificij peragunt, paucis videamus, &c.—Sed quid hujus generis infinita exempla persequar? Cui enim dubium est, hujus∣modi Exorcismis Papales Ritus & Ceremonias abundare; qui ab his, quos in ordinatione Ordalii vulgaris{que} purgationis antiquitus secuta est, quam serò damnabant, aut nihil differunt, aut pluribus magis{que} stupendis prae∣stigijs referti sunt. At Sanctus Augustinus, qui suo tempore de Caere∣moniarum multitudine quaestus est, si jam viveret, quid de hoc immenso numero, & prolixo earum celebrandarum modo, existimare poterat?

XV.

A Passage out of a Pamphlet, entituled Antidotum Culmerianum. Print∣ed at Oxford, 1644. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. referred to in the preceding History.

Pag. 11.

Who but he (Richard Culmer, then demolishing the painted Glass and other Ornaments of the Cathedral Church of Canterbury) made the place his Refectory, his Dining Room, the place of his Repast at that time? Being so sedulous, hot and intent upon the Work, that to lose no time in following it, he took his Bottle and Bag with him to victual himself upon the place. If all this amount not to Impudence, as perhaps with too many Judges in these Days it will not; I shall tell you now of Impudence with a Witness: And I term it so, be∣cause I have it from an Eye-Witness of good Credit, that, not with∣out just Scandal, saw the deed done, and will be ready, if lawfully required, to attest and justifie the Report with his Corporal Oath. What do you think then of Pissing in the open Church, and at Noon-Day, in Publick view?—This is he that did the deed in the Body of that Cathedral, &c.

XVI.

A Passage out of the same Pamphlet, referred to in the preceding History, being part of Richard Culmer's Information against Mr. E. B. a Gen∣tleman of Quality of Goodneston in Kent, his Parishioner, Exhibited at the Council-Table.

Pag. 35.

And I heard the said Mr. B. say, having read over the Book of Sabbath-Recreations, and delivering it to me before Evensong in the Church, I asked him, if he had read it; he replyed, yes; it will make a good Privy Seal. And my Wife and I heard him in our own House say of the said Book, that it was, as if a School-Ma∣ster should say; it is a good Boy, ply thy Book, and thou shalt go to play in the Afternoon. And I and my Servant heard him say, that it was unfit such Books should be sent for Ministers to read in the Church. Yet, after he had a Project to get my Benefice,

he to collogue for it, said in my Hearing that it was a good Book; and if it were read, the Sabbath would be better kept than ever it was. Dated July 31. 1635.

Per me Rich. Culmer.

XVII.

A third Passage out of the same Pamphlet, referred to in the preceding History, being the Order of Council-Table, made against Richard Cul∣mer, after he had Exhibited the said Information.

Pag. 19.

At White-Hall, Octob. 9. 1635.

Present.

Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury his Grace.

Lord Keeper

Lord Privy-Seal

Earl Marshal.

Lord Cottington.

Mr. Secretary Windebank.

Whereas upon an Information given by R. C. Clerk, against E. B. of B. in the County of Kent, Gent. the said E. B. was sent for by Warrant, and bound to Appear and Answer the same before their Lordships, Friday the 9th of this present; this day, both the said Parties having been called and heard before the Board: Their Lordships finding the said Information and Complaint against Mr. B. to have been Causeless and Unjust, did think fit and order, that he should be forthwith discharged from any further Attendance concern∣ing the same, and that the Bonds by him entred into for his Appear∣ance, should be delivered up unto him. Lastly, that the said R. C. should, for such his Mis-information and Abuse, stand committed Prisoner to the Fleet.

XVIII.

A Passage out of a Sermon, Preached by Dr. Heylin at Oxford, 1630. against the Feoffment for buying in Impropriations, referred to in the preceding History.

Life of Arch-Bishop Laud, pag. 199.

Planting also many Pensionary Lecturers in so many places where it need not; and upon days of common Labour, will at the best bringing forth of Fruit, appear to be a Tare indeed, though now no Wheat be counted Tares, &c. We proceed a little on further in the proposal of some things to be considered. The Corporation of Feoffees for buying in of Impropriations to the Church; doth it not seem in the appearance to be an excellent piece of Wheat? A Noble and Gracious point of Piety? Is not this Templum Domini, Templum Domini? But, blessed God, that Men should thus draw near unto thee with their Mouths, and yet be far from thee in their Hearts! For what are those intrusted in the managing of this great Business?

Are they not the most of them the most Active, and the best Affected Men in the whole Cause, and Magna Partium Momenta, chief Pa∣trons of the Faction? And what are those whom they prefer? Are they not most of them such as must be serviceable to their dangerous Innovations? And will they not in time have more Preferments to bestow, and therefore more Dependencies, than all the Prelates in the Kingdom, &c. yet all this while we sleep and slumber, and fold our Hands in Sloth; and see perhaps, but dare not note it.

XIX.

A Passage out of the Statute of the 27th of Elizabeth, against Jesuits and Seminary Priests, referred to in the preceding History.

27 Eliz. cap. 2. sect. 3.

And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid; that it shall not be Lawful to or for any Jesuit, Seminary Priest, or other such Priest, Deacon, or Religious Ecclesiastical Person whatsoever, being born within this Realm, or any other Her Highness Dominions, and heretofore since the said Feast of the Nativity of St. John Baptist, in the First Year of Her Majesty's Reign, made, ordained, or pro∣fessed, or hereafter to be made, ordained, or professed, by any Au∣thority or Jurisdiction, derived, challenged, or pretended from the See of Rome, by or of what Name, Title, or Degree so-ever, the same shall be called or known, to come into, be, or remain in any part of this Realm, or any other Her Highness Dominions, after the end of the same forty days, other than in such special Cases, and upon such special Occasions only, and for such time only, as is expressed in this Act; and if he do, then every such Offence shall be taken and adjudged to be High Treason; and every Person so offending, shall for his Of∣fence be adjudged a Traytor, and shall suffer, lose and forfeit, as in Case of High Treason. And every Person, which after the end of the same forty days, and after such time of departure, as is before limited and appointed, shall wittingly, and willingly receive, relieve, comfort, aid, or maintain, any such Jesuit, Seminary Priest, or other Priest, Deacon, or Religious or Ecclesiastical Person, as is aforesaid, being at Liberty, or out of hold, knowing him to be a Jesuit, Se∣minary Priest, or other such Priest, Deacon, or Religious or Ecclesi∣astical Person, as is aforesaid, shall also for such Offence be adjudged a Felon, without Benefit of Clergy, and suffer Death, lose and for∣feit, as in Case of one Attainted of Felony.

XX.

A Passage out of Sir Edward Coke's Institutes, being his Judgment upon the said Statute, referred to in the preceding History.

Lib. 3. cap. 37.

The Cause of making this Statute of 27 Eliz. against Jesuits and Seminary Priests and their Receivers, you may read at large lib. 5. fol. 38, 39. in the Case De Jure Regis Ecclesiastico. [Sir Edward Coke's Words in the place referred to by himself, are here subjoined.]

And albeit many of Her Subjects, after the said Bull of Pius Quintus, adhering to the Pope, did renounce their former Obedi∣ence to the Queen, in respect of that Bull; yet all this time no Law was either made or attempted against them for their Recusancy, &c.—Then Jesuits and Romish Priests were sent over; who in secret Corners whispered and infused into the Hearts of many of the Un∣learned Subjects of this Realm, that the Pope had Power to Excom∣municate and Depose Kings and Princes; that he had Excommuni∣cated the late Queen, Deprived Her of Her Kingdom, and discharged all Her Subjects of their Oaths, Duties, and Allegiance to Her—And thereupon Campian, Sherwin, and many other Romish Priests were Apprehended, &c.—But all this time there was no Act of Parliament made, either against Recusants, or Jesuits, or Priests, &c.—But after these Jesuits and Romish Priests coming daily into, and swarming within this Realm, instilling still this Poison into the Subjects Hearts, that by Reason of the said Bull of Pius Quintus, Her Majesty was Excommunicated, Deprived of Her Kingdom, &c. In the 27th Year of her Reign, by Authority of Parliament, Her * 16.848 Majesty made it Treason, for any Jesuit or Romish Priest, being Her Natural Born Subject, and made a Romish Priest or Jesuit since the beginning of Her Reign, to come into any of her Dominions: Intend∣ing thereby to keep them out of the same, to the end, that they should not infect any other Subjects, with such Treasonable and Damnable Persuasions and Practices, as are aforesaid: Which with∣out Controversie were High Treason, by the Ancient and Common Laws of England. Neither would ever Magnanimous King of Eng∣land, sithence the first Establishment of this Monarchy, have suffered any (especially being his own Natural Born Subjects) to live, that persuaded his Subjects, that he was no Lawful King, and practised with them to withdraw them from their Allegiance, &c.

XXI.

A Passage out of Bishop Montague's Origines 〈◊〉〈◊〉, referred to in the preceding History.

Tom. 1. par. 2. pag. 464.

Sanctè credimus, accuratè tuemur & defendimus, hoc ipsum Officium & munus in Ecclesiâ, sive Apostolicum, seu 〈◊〉〈◊〉, adeò esse de necessitate salutis ordinariâ; ut sine altero alterum esse nequeat. Non est Sacerdoti∣um, nisi in Ecclesiâ; non est Ecclesia sine Sacerdotio. Illud autem intelligo, per 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Episcopalem Ordinariam. Neque enim admittendam cense∣mus extraordinariam aliquam seu Vocationem seu 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nisi miraculo∣sam. Oportet omnino miraculis agant, & suam confirment functionem signo aliquo; qui non ab Episcopis, derivata ab Apostolis per Successionem Insti∣tutione, in Ecclesiam inducuntur; sed vel orti à sese, vel nescio unde intrusi, sese ingerunt. Nam quod praetendunt, ordinariam Vocationem retinendam, adhibendam, eique adhaerescendum, nisi in casu 〈◊〉〈◊〉, absurdum est; & suppositioni innititur impossibilitatis. Neque enim talis casus aut extit it aliquando, aut contingere potest; nisi fallat nos Dominus, qui promisit: Portae Inferorum non praevalebunt, &c.

Notes

• * 1.1

  See Rush∣worth's Colle∣ctions, par: 3. vol: 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 123. Prynne's Compt. Hist: p: 19. &c.
• * 1.2

  viz. should charge me.
• * 1.3

  See the Order of the Lords for his Commitment apud Prynne p. 22.
• * 1.4

  Psal: 93. & 94. In vulgara Editione, Ps. 92, & 93.
• * 1.5

  See this Con∣firmed by the King's own Te∣stimony, in his large Declara∣tion, p: 420. W: S: A: C:
• † 2.1

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 twenty four hours.
• * 2.2

  al. shall.
• * 2.3

  The Arti∣cles of Pacifi∣cation were concluded 1639. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 17: Sign∣ed by the King, June: 18:
• * 3.1

  al. by the Ge∣neral Assembly, and Our Com∣missioner for the time being.
• * 3.2

  Articulo 7:
• * 3.3

  lege Question was made.
• * 4.1

  Quaere, who were these Ca∣nonists, and how had they Votes in Convocation? Have we any such; properly so called? W: S: A: C:
• * 4.2

  I suppose to be here meant some Civilians, Graduates Legum five utriusque Juris, viz: of the Canon and Civil (or Imperial) Laws, or others perhaps interessed in the Spiritual Courts, being in Holy Orders, and sitting in that Convocation, either in their own Right, as Deans or Arch-Deacons, or by Delegation from the Clergy of some Diocess; or perhaps, Proxies for some absent Members of the Convxation. H: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• † 4.3

  Concil Ephes: Par: 1: & 2:
• * 4.4

  Concil Ephes: Par: 3:
• * 4.5

  Concil. Tol: 4: cap: 3: Bin: To: 2. par: 2: p: 346. Concilium quoque 〈◊〉〈◊〉 solvere audeat, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 fuerint 〈◊〉〈◊〉 determinata; 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 deliberatione commu∣ni 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Episcoporum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 manibus 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 4.6

  Concil: Are∣lat: 2: 〈◊〉〈◊〉: 9: Bin: To: 1: par: 1: p: 589.
• † 4.7

  Concil: Aure∣lianense, 5: 〈◊〉〈◊〉. To: 2: par: 2: p: 39.
• * 4.8

  Concil: His∣palense: Ibid: p: 295.
• * 4.9

  I have seen the Records of some Proceedings against this Bi∣shop Cheyney; from which it appears, that he was suspected of being a secret Papist, as was after∣wards his Successor Bishop Good∣man. H: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 4.10

  Quatnordecim affirmâsse, sep∣tem negâsse, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dubitâsse, Acta Synod: Lond: A: 1533. M: S:
• † 4.11

  Acta Synod: Lond: An: 1532. M: S:
• † 4.12

  Aug. 17:
• † 4.13

  Nov. 11. Rushw.
• * 4.14

  The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Diary saith Nov 22. W: 〈◊〉〈◊〉. A: C.
• * 4.15

  The Bishops were before this inveighed a∣gainst in several Speeches Nov. 7 9. 21. 25. &c. Rushw.
• * 4.16

  Vide Rushw. par. 3. vol. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pag. 99.—112.
• * 4.17

  The Order for erecting this Committee may be found in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Compl. Hist. p. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 4.18

  See the Petiti∣on of the Lon∣doners against the Bishops, pre∣sented Dec. 11. 1640. apud Rushw. p. 93.
• * 4.19

  Decemb. 16. 1640.
• * 4.20

  They are Printed intire in Rushw. pag. 113. Pryn p. 31. &c. Abbre∣viated in Heylin's Life of Laud. p. 466. Published by the Scots them∣selves London 1641. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. and soon after by Pryn in his Antipathy of the English Prelacy. par. 1. p. 334.
• * 4.21

  Book, Rushw.
• | 4.22

  Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 4.23

  Which, Rushw, & Pryn.
• * 4.24

  To be, Rushw.
• a 4.25

  Process a∣gainst the Ld. Balmerino: A Copy whereof I had by me when I writ this. W. C.
• * 4.26

  See, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 CH. large Declara∣tion, p. 13, &c.
• * 5.1

  Changes, Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 5.2

  Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 5.3

  Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 5.4

  When St. Cyprian was brought to the place of his Execution, ex∣uit se lacernum birrum, quem indutus erat, &c. dehinc tunicam tulit, & Diaconibus tradidit; & stans in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 expectabat Spi∣culatorem. Now if you ask, what that linea was, sure it could not be his Shirt. For that could not stand with his Episcopal Gravity; nor was it necessary for him, in regard of his kind of Death, which was Beheading. But Baronius tells us, Annal. Eccles. An. 261. n. 40. that it was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 illud Vestimentum, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 omnibus Commune, Italicè Rocheto di∣cunt. And by this passage con∣cerning S. Cyprian, it is evident; that this Habit there mentioned was the usual and known Habit of a Bishop in those times.
• † 5.5

  Mercy, 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• a 5.6

  Christus Crucisixus est propter 〈◊〉〈◊〉 humanum. Just. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 246. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Athan. de Incarn. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Euseb. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Orbe universo. Greg. Naz. Orat. 42. Aug. in Ps. 95. Pro Proditore 〈◊〉〈◊〉. S. Ambros. L. de Para∣diso, c. 8 Pro 〈◊〉〈◊〉 qui curari 〈◊〉〈◊〉. S. Amb. Lib. 2. de Cain & Abel. c. 3. Pro Gentibus, sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 non voluerunt. S. Chrysost. Hom. 7. in 1 Tim. 2. Pro 〈◊〉〈◊〉, si omnes redimi vellent. S. Hieron in 1 Tim. 2. 1. Primasius, Ibid. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ratio dubitandi est, Prosper. L. 2. de Vocat. Gent. c. 16. Non pro sidelibus 〈◊〉〈◊〉, sed pro, &c. Theoph. in Heb. 11. 9. Oecumenius, Ibid.
• b 5.7

  S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3. 17. 2 Cor. 5. 15. Heb. 2. 9. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Tim. 2. 6. 1 Tim. 4. 10. 1 S. Jo. 2. 1, 2.
• c 5.8

  Nemo mortalium est, qui non 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 & seriò per ministros Evangelij vocari ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉 remissionis Peccatorum & 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 per mortem Christi: Act. 13. 38. & S. Jo. 3. 17, 18. Evangelio autem nibil falsum aut simulatum subest; sed quicquid in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 per 〈◊〉〈◊〉 effertur, aut 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hominibus, id 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 ab Authore 〈◊〉〈◊〉 offertur & 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. Sic 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 pro omnibus mortuus est, ut omnes & singuli, mediante, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 possint vir∣tute 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hujus 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 & vitam 〈◊〉〈◊〉 consequi. &c. Sententia Theologorum Magn. Britan. apud Acta Synod. Dord. Artic. 2. Thes. 3.
• * 5.9

  Dr. Lind∣say, Proceedings in the Assembly at Perth. An. 1618. Par. 2. p. 26.
• * 5.10

  See the Ar∣ticles of Perth in Heylin's Life of Laud. p. 78. and in Spots∣wood's Hist. of the Church of Scotland, p. 538.
• † 5.11

  Were 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. Rushw. & Pryn.
• a 5.12

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Can. Apost. 65.
• b 5.13

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. St. Igna. Epist 8.
• c 5.14

  Die 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 nefas esse ducimus. Tert. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. militis c. 3.
• d 5.15

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Si quis tanquam hoc 〈◊〉〈◊〉 convenire judicans, Die Domini∣co Jejunaverit, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in ejusdem diei contemptum, Anathema sit. Con. Gangren. Can. 18.
• e 5.16

  Constitutum est, ne diebus de∣minicis jejunaretur. S. Hil. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. in Psal.
• f 5.17

  Qui Die Dominico fludiose jeju∣nat, non credatur Catholicus. Con∣cil. Carthag. 4. Can. 64. Anno 398.
• g 5.18

  Quadragesima totis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sab∣batum, & Dominicum Jejunatur di∣ebus. Ambros. de Elia & Josu. c. 10.
• h 5.19

  Hoc est in Resurrectione Chri∣sti non credere, si Legem quis Je∣junij Die Resurrectionis indicat. S. Ambros. Epist. 83.
• k 5.20

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 hunc Diem Jejunio decernendum putaverit, non parvo Scandalo erit. S. Aug. Epist. 86. Christus enim gaudium manducanti∣bus, Luctum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 deputa∣vit. S. Mat. 9. 15. Ibid.
• l 5.21

  1. Cor. 15. 14.
• m 5.22

  Quis non Deum offendet, si ve∣lit cum scandalo totius, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ubique di∣latata est, Ecclesiae Die Dominico Je∣junare? Ibid. Versùs Med.
• n 5.23

  Illum ut legitimum diem suis Auditoribus ad Jejunandum consti∣tuerunt. S. Aug. Epist. 86.
• o 5.24

  S. Ambrose Epist. 83. Mani∣chaeos ob istius diei Jejunia jure damnamus.
• p 5.25

  Epiphan. Haeres. 85. n. 3.
• q 5.26

  Manichaeorum simillimos. S. Aug. Epist. 86.
• r 5.27

  S. Leo. Epist. 93. c. 4.
• s 5.28

  Conc. Caesar. August. can. 2. apud Bin. To. I. par. 1. p. 553.
• t 5.29

  Conc. Gangrens. c. 18. & Baron. Annal. An. 361. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 53.
• * 5.30

  The Word co∣ming is added from Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 5.31

  To be deliver'd.
• * 5.32

  Be charged.
• * 5.33

  Ad Anglicani Tribunalis Ex∣emplar 〈◊〉〈◊〉 est. An. 1610. Aliud in Scotiâ, cujus Authoritate, & Potestate 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 efformandum erat. Qui∣dam Ministri Episcopalem Jurisdicti∣onem & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in Ecclesia affect∣antes, armati sunt Potestate utri∣usq, gladii, quo facilius Episcopalem Dominationem invaderent; id{que} sub diplomate Regio, abs{que} 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Statu∣to vel Specie minimi consensus Pro∣cerum & Ordinum Regni, ut in Anglia. Delegata Commissariorum Jurisdictione freti, Ecclesiam 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in hunc usque Diem vi sub∣igunt, & miserum in modum op∣primunt. Spottiswodius Andr politanus; Lawes Glascuensis, &c. Altare Damascenum p. 28. Typis excusus est hic Liber An. 1623
• * 5.34

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Grant a Request, or 〈◊〉〈◊〉 desired.
• * 6.1

  Proceed∣ings at Perth. p. 50.
• * 6.2

  Proceedings of Perth. p. 40.
• † 6.3

  Some other, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 6.4

  of Rushw, & Pryn.
• * 6.5

  The Copies, Rushw. the Co∣py, Pryn.
• * 6.6

  Absolute Ne∣cessity, Pryn. & Rushw.
• † 6.7

  It Rushw, & Pryn.
• * 6.8

  Can. 69.
• * 6.9

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 69.
• † 6.10

  Sermon. Rushw. & Pryn.
• a 6.11

  Deut. 10. 12
• b 6.12

  Mat. 7. 19. & 22. 37. & 6. 16.
• c 6.13

  Esai. 1. 19, 20.
• d 6.14

  Ephes. 2. 10. & 1 Tim. 6. 18. & Titus 2. 7. 14. & 3. 1, 8, 14. S. James 2. 17. & 1 S. Pet. 2. 12. S. Je. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & 21. 27. & 22. 12.
• * 6.15

  In the Ser∣vice-Book both of England, and Scotland.
• * 6.16

  Can. 113.
• * 6.17

  B. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Argumen∣to in Lib. Ter∣tul. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 471.
• † 6.18

  The like, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 6.19

  What Seeds of Popery he did sow in our Kirk; Pryn, & Rush.
• a 6.20

  Pauco tempore 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ut 〈◊〉〈◊〉 esse videatur, Conc. Elib. Can. 21.
• b 6.21

  In quantum Ratio 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Conc. Valentin. Can. 2.
• c 6.22

  Ut 〈◊〉〈◊〉 secundum pec∣catorum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Episcopi 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Tempora 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Conc. Carthag. 3. Can 3.
• d 6.23

  Author of the Observations 〈◊〉〈◊〉 some of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Majesty's late Answers, p. 34.
• e 6.24

  Conc. Ancyran. Can. 1. & 2.
• † 7.1

  Worship, Rushw. Service, Pryn.
• * 7.2

  How far this was my Work, you may see afterwards.
• † 7.3

  Memoirs. Rushw. Memo∣ries, Pryn.
• * 7.4

  Had. Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.5

  In, Rushw & Pryn.
• † 7.6

  In, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.7

  [To Ross] are added from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 7.8

  Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.9

  Here Rushworth's Copy addeth,
• * 7.10

  To express and discover all, would require a whole Book. We shall only touch some few in the matter of the Communi∣on. So also Pryn.
• † 7.11

  Praise, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.12

  S. Lu. 22. 19.
• * 7.13

  Must, Rushw.
• † 7.14

  Forth, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.15

  Viz. Their Argument Ta∣ken from the Reason of the Posture of the Priest, given in the Rubrick, H. W.
• † 7.16

  Above Rushw. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 7.17

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Can. 18.
• * 7.18

  An. 1549. Citantur 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bu∣cero in Script. Anglican. p. 455.
• a 7.19

  Memor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 quid 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Anglicanis cum primis debeam, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 datum est mibi bac in re 〈◊〉〈◊〉, id 〈◊〉〈◊〉 subscribere; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Paternitas 〈◊〉〈◊〉, aliique 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de his Judicabunt. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Epist. ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉. quae extat 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Opera ejus Angl. p. 456.
• * 7.20

  In 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 465.
• * 7.21

  In 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 de 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Viri. p. 867.
• * 7.22

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 7.23

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• † 7.24

  Corporeal 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• | 7.25

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 7.26

  In the Prayer of Consecration in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for Scotland.
• * 7.27

  The words in the Canon of the Mass are. Ut nobis Corpus & Singuis fiant dilectissimi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi.
• * 7.28

  In the Collect of Thanksgiving after the Re∣ceiving.
• † 7.29

  In the Prayer of Consecration.
• * 7.30

  a Cor. 11. 24. 1 Cor. 10. 16.
• * 7.31

  Secretaries, 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 7.32

  Conference with Fisher, §. 34. puncto 4. p. 292. &c.
• * 7.33

  any, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & Pryn.
• | 7.34

  well, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & Pryn.
• * 7.35

  Respons. ad Harding, Art. 17. divis. 14.
• † 7.36

  Differentia 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in modo; illic enim Christus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 occisus est: Hic 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sit 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Hugo Grot. in Consult. Cas∣sandri. ad Art. 10. p. 25.
• * 7.37

  In the Pray∣er of Consecra∣tion in the Li∣turgy for Scot∣land.
• † 7.38

  when, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & Pryn;
• * 7.39

  terrible Rush. & Pryn.
• * 7.40

  kindled, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.41

  Rushw.
• * 7.42

  What is meant by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the King into the Covenant, and his Commissioner Subscribing it, see the King's Large Decla∣ration. p. 134. &c. W. S. A C.
• * 7.43

  2 Cor 12. 11.
• * 7.44

  could, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & Pryn.
• † 7.45

  in their 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• † 7.46

  p. 40.
• * 7.47

  The place is corrected from Pryn. & Rush.
• * 7.48

  and Proceed∣ing.
• a 7.49

  Can. 1. sub Carolo.
• b 7.50

  Plures nimirum, &c. vestra omnia 〈◊〉〈◊〉, urbes, insulas, castella, &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bello non idonei, &c. qui 〈◊〉〈◊〉 libenter 〈◊〉〈◊〉, si non apud istam disciplinam occidi magis liceret, quam 〈◊〉〈◊〉? Tert. Apologet. c. 37. And in another place, speaking of the Rebellions raised by Cassius, Niger, and Albinus, he Notes, that none of their 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were Christians. Nunquam Albiniani, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, vel Cassiani, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Chri∣stiani: And then adds; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nullius est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nedum Imperatoris, &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ad Sca∣pulam, c 2 § 2. Constantius the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Emperor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 heavy upon the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christians: And when it was suggested unto him, that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and other 〈◊〉〈◊〉, had secretly stirred up 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to invade the Empire; the Holy Father having fully confuted the Calumny, concludes thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. S. Athanas. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ad Constantium. Edit. Gr. Lat. p 681. The like faithful Subjects the Christians shewed themselves to Julian the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, when he used them very sowrly. And though they would not obey him, when he commanded them to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Idols; yet in other things they did, and Rebelled not, S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. in Psal. 124. Nor did they forbear, either for want of strength or opportunity: For when Julian dyed, the whole Army cryed our, We are all Christians. Soc. Lib. 3. Hist. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 22. And so St. Amb. to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Younger: Against your Forces, my Weapons are Prayers and Tears; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nec debeo nec possum resistere, &c. Non ego me vallabo circum∣fusione Populorum, &c. (which as the case stood then with him, he was able to do;) 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Auguste, non pugnamus. S. Amb. in Orat. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. inter Epistolas 32, & 33. The like for Defensive Arms: Inde est enim, quod nemo nostrum, quando apprehenditur, reluctatur, nec adversus injustam violentiam vestram, quam∣vis nimius & copiosus noster sit Populus, ulciseitur. Cyprian. Epistola ad Demetrianum. Quum tam 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, ne verbe quidem reluctamur; sed Deo 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ultionem. Lactant. L. 5. Divin. Instit. c. 22. Neque tunc Civitas Christi quanquam haberet, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 magnorum agmina Populorum, adversùs im∣pios persecutores pro temporali salute pugnavit. Sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ut obtineret 〈◊〉〈◊〉, non repugnavit. S. Aug. Lib. 22. de Civitat. Dei. c. 6.
• a 7.51

  Nec singulis civibus, nec universis fas est summi, Principls vitam, famam aut fortunas in discrimen 〈◊〉〈◊〉, & si omnium scelerum, &c. Poenis acerbissimis statuendum est in eos, qui 〈◊〉〈◊〉 scriptis subditos in Principes armare consueverunt. Bodin. L. 2. de Repub. c. 5. p. 210, & 212.
• b 7.52

  Temporibus & Locis nimium servientes, &c. Nec hoc locum habet in privatis tantum, sed nec Magistratibus inferioribus hoc licet, &c. Grotius. L. 1. de Jure belli & pacis, c. 4. n. 6.
• c 7.53

  Ibid. n. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.
• d 7.54

  Rebellem propriè & strictè dici, qui con∣tra Imperatorem, vel ejus officiales resistit, in pertinentibus ad statum Imperij. Asserit Lance∣lot Conradus. L. 1. de praestantia & potestate, Imperat. n. 12.
• * 7.55

  Greg. Turonens. L. 5. Hist. n. 18.
• e 7.56

  Aristoteles citat. apud Grotium. L. 1. de Jure 〈◊〉〈◊〉, c. 4. n. 2.
• f 7.57

  Seneca. Epist. 73.
• g 7.58

  Tacitus. L. 4. Histor.
• h 7.59

  Nec 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nec licitum Regis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 manus 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Plutarch. In vit. Agidis & Cleomen.
• * 7.60

  Boni expetendi, qualescunque to∣lerandi.
• k 7.61

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. L. 1. Epist Fam. Epist. 9. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, nec patriae vim offerri oportere.
• * 7.62

  Jerem. 38. 5.
• * 7.63

  Procured, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.64

  p. 9.
• † 7.65

  Worse, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.66

  Conjunction.
• † 7.67

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 7.68

  By 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 7.69

  It, 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 7.70

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 7.71

  Superstitions 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 8.1

  Desunt 〈◊〉〈◊〉, in Rushw.
• † 8.2

  put to, Rush, & Pryn.
• * 8.3

  Who was Register, or Secretary, to the Scotch Commis∣sioners.
• * 8.4

  Decemb. 14. 1640.
• * 8.5

  Decemb. 18. 1640.
• * 8.6

  Ecclus. 51. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• † 8.7

  Conjunction.
• * 8.8

  Psal: 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉
• * 8.9

  Decemb 15. 1640.
• * 8.10

  Profess, Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 8.11

  The Scottish 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The Survey of the Discipline.
• * 8.12

  Thereafter, Pryn & Rushw.
• † 8.13

  Skill.
• † 8.14

  Ceased. Rush.
• * 8.15

  Brought. Rushw.
• * 8.16

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, in Platinae Hygi∣num. Vide autem 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. Dissert 1. 4. 2. W S. A. C. Rom. 1. 8.
• a 8.17

  Jewell's Reply to Dr. Harding.
• * 8.18

  United. Rushw & Pryn.
• † 8.19

  The same is added from Pryn and Rush.
• * 8.20

  Jan. 22. 1641.
• * 8.21

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 habens Lutherus rem sine Ec∣clesiae pernicie abrogari non posse, quod unum po∣tuit nomen sustulit, 〈◊〉〈◊〉; puriore vocabulo Graeco parum Latinum supposuit; pro Episco∣pis Superintendentes, pro Archiepiscopis Gene∣rales Superintendentes appellans. Tilenus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ad Scotos, c. 6. And he well knew the state of his Neighbour Churches. Saravia similiter, Praefat. L. de diversis Mi∣nistrorum Evangelii gradibus. Zanchius de Relig. Observat. c. 25. n. 10, 11. Jacob. Haerbrand Lutheranus. In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Commun. p. 699. Saving that he dislikes not the Alte∣ration of the Name.
• a 8.22

  S. Aug. L. 19. de Civ. Des, c. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Latinè su∣perintendere possumus dicere, quod ille, qui 〈◊〉〈◊〉, eis, quibus 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 sc. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 9.1

  Recombu∣stion after this, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 9.2

  See Rushw. par. 3. vol. 2. pag. 135. 152, 153, 154. 174. 183, 184, 187. 193, 194, &c. 207. 235. &c. 282, &c.
• * 9.3

  See the Pe∣titions of these three Men pre∣sented to the House of Com∣mons against the Arch-Bishop, apud Rush∣worth. par. 3. vol. 1. p. 74, &c.
• * 9.4

  It was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Li∣bel indeed in strictness of Law, having the Author's Name set to it; but it is called a Libel for the scurrilous and soul Language of it. H. W.
• † 9.5

  Jan. 26. 1641.
• * 9.6

  Dec. 21. 1640.
• * 9.7

  There were present, and concurring in the Sentence, Sir The. Coventry, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Manchester, Lord President of the Council, W. Earl of Pembroke, Lord Steward, Philip 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Lord Chamberlain, Edw. Earl of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Oliver Lord Viscount Gran∣dison, George Lord Bishop of London, Rich. Lord Bishop of Duresme, Sam. Lord Bishop of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Lord Bishop of Rochester, William Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells, Sir 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Coke Secretary, Sir Hen. Martin, Jo. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Dean of St. Pauls, Walt. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Dean of Rochester, Tho. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Doctor of Divinity, Edm. Pope, and Hugh Barker, Doctors of Law, and Sir Charles 〈◊〉〈◊〉, who only desired to be spared, and so gave no Sentence.
• * 9.8

  Close Prisoner from the High-Commission-Court was not to shut him up in his Chamber, but only not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 suffer him to go out of the Pri∣son. W. C.
• † 9.9

  Jan. 28. 1641.
• † 9.10

  Jan. 21. 1640.
• * 9.11

  Feb. 26. 1640.
• * 9.12

  Rushworth saith, they were carried up by Mr. Pym, Mr. Hampden, and Mr. May∣nard, and inserteth Pym's Speech, made at the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of them to the Lords, Par. 3. Vol. p. 195. 199. &c. So also Pryn, pag. 24, 25, 28. who also Exhibits, p. 23, 24. the Preliminary Votes and Orders of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, made Febr. 22, 23, 24, 26. for the framing and carrying up the Articles to the Lords. H. W.
• * 9.13

  'Tis Article 10.
• * 10.1

  There are Printed also in Rushworth, par. 3 vol 1. p. 196. &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Compl. Hist. p. 25, &c.
• † 10.2

  Rushw.
• * 10.3

  This King∣dom of Eng∣land. Rush. & Pryn.
• * 10.4

  Ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 10.5

  Arist. L 3. Polit. c. 11.
• * 10.6

  Ad Secundum.
• † 10.7

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. King.
• * 10.8

  Ad Tertium.
• * 10.9

  Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 10.10

  Desunt in Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 10.11

  Ad Quartum.
• * 10.12

  All this about Stone, is afterward more per∣fectly related, and so this to be omitted here, according to the Arch-Bishop's Direction, p. 159. Only compare them first together. W. S. A. C. The Account being short, I thought it better to let it stand here, than 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the History, for the sake of one single Repetition. H. W.
• * 10.13

  Desunt in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & Pryu.
• * 10.14

  Ad Quintum.
• * 10.15

  Rush. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 10.16

  Ad Sextum.
• * 10.17

  Rushw. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 10.18

  Ad Septim.
• * 10.19

  Other, Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 10.20

  Commenda∣tion, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 10.21

  Ad Octavum.
• * 10.22

  Pryn, & Rushworth.
• * 10.23

  Ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 10.24

  Ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• † 10.25

  Arift. l 2. Rhetor. c. 5. Arift. Rhet. l. 2. c. 7. §. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• | 10.26

  Non omnis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 perficit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 boni, sed solùm illa, à quâ dependet esse perfectum 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Tho. 1. 2. q. 36. Art. 3. ad quint:
• * 10.27

  I would not adventure to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and disjoint the History; The Reader (if he so pleaseth) may 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by such Repetitions. H. W.
• * 10.28

  I find that some things in my general Answer to the Arti∣cles are repeated again in the beginning of my particular An∣swers, when my Tryal came on. I desire (for I had no time to do it my self) that, to avoid tedi∣ousness, all those may be left out of the first Answer, that are per∣fected in the 2d. W. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 10.29

  2.
• * 10.30

  3.
• * 10.31

  4.
• * 10.32

  2 Cor. 13. 8.
• * 10.33

  5.
• * 10.34

  6.
• * 10.35

  7.
• * 10.36

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 10.37

  In a Book 〈◊〉〈◊〉, The Re∣monstrance of the Nobility, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Mini∣sters and Com∣mons, within the Kingdom of Scotland. Feb. 27. 1639. p. 12. Edin∣burgh.
• * 10.38

  9.
• * 10.39

  These Papers were taken 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Arch-Bishop by Pryn, 1643. May. 31. and shortly af∣ter Published 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a Pamphlet En∣tituled Rome's Master-piece. H. W. Ps. 31. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 16.
• * 10.40

  Remonst. die Mercurij. 15. Decemb. 1641. p. 20.
• * 10.41

  Ministers, Rushw. & 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• † 10.42

  Design, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 10.43

  〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 10.44

  Remonstr. Die Mercurij 15. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 1641. p. 14.
• † 10.45

  Distinction, Rushw. Disu∣nion, Pryn.
• * 10.46

  Ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 10.47

  Exod. 12. 49.
• * 10.48

  Which.
• † 10.49

  Remonst. Die Mercurii, 15. Decemb. 1641. p. 20.
• * 10.50

  26. Septemb. 1635.
• † 10.51

  11. Octob. 1635.
• * 10.52

  Dat. Sept. 14. 1635.
• * 11.1

  These Words are added from Pryn, & Rushw.
• * 11.2

  Ad 13.
• * 11.3

  Maule.
• † 11.4

  Feb. 8. 1641.
• * 11.5

  Proceedings of the Assembly at Perth. p. 40. & 68.
• † 11.6

  P. 41.
• † 11.7

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 11.8

  Assured.
• * 11.9

  Ad 14.
• * 11.10

  A forementi∣oned Crimes, Rushworth. Crimes afore∣mentioned were done and committed, Pryn.
• † 11.11

  One of, Rush. & Pryn.
• | 11.12

  These words are added from Pryn & Rushworth.
• * 11.13

  Feb. 10. 1641.
• * 11.14

  Feb. 26. 1640.
• * 11.15

  Vide 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 202.
• * 11.16

  Mar. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1640.
• † 11.17

  And more.
• * 11.18

  Mar. 1. 1640.
• * 12.1

  Mar. 12. 1640.
• * 12.2

  Mar. 13. 1640.
• * 12.3

  Mar. 22. 1641.
• * 12.4

  Maij 1. 1641.
• * 12.5

  See the King's Speech apud Rush. p. 239.
• * 12.6

  Maij 9. 1641.
• * 12.7

  Maij 12. 1641.
• * 12.8

  It is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a∣pud Rushw. p. 267.
• * 12.9

  Maij 1. 1641;
• * 12.10

  Psal. 69. 12.
• * 12.11

  Junij 23. 1641.
• * 12.12

  f. Hatred.
• * 12.13

  Junij 25. 1641.
• * 12.14

  Julij 1. 1641.
• * 12.15

  Aug. 10. 1641.
• † 12.16

  From 〈◊〉〈◊〉 9: till Octob: 20: So Rushworth p: 387, 388.
• * 13.1

  Octob. 23. 1641
• * 13.2

  Objected.
• * 13.3

  Nov. 1. 1641.
• * 13.4

  Nov 25. 1641. Vide Rushw. p. 429. &c.
• * 13.5

  Dec 30. 1641.
• * 13.6

  See Rushw. p. 468.
• * 13.7

  The Address of the 12 Bishops here subjoyned, is not right. It should be to the King. Quaere. W. S. A. C It was directed, To the King's most Ex∣cellent Majesty, and the Lords and Peers Assembled in Parliament: And was intended to have been presented in the House of Lords, the King being present, although it was presented in the absence of the King. See Life of Arch-Bishop Williams, par. 2. pag. 178. H W. It is also extant in Rushworth, p. 466. In Heylin's Life of Laud, p. 490. In Hacket's 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Williams, p. 178.
• * 14.1

  up, Rushw.
• † 14.2

  debatable, Rushw.
• | 14.3

  Rushw.
• * 14.4

  Lords and Peers, Rushw.
• † 14.5

  their duties, Rushw.
• * 14.6

  and the maintenance thereof, Rush.
• † 14.7

  move them to adhere. Rushw.
• * 14.8

  can find, Rushw.
• † 14.9

  these parti∣culars, Rushw.
• * 14.10

  humbly, Rushw.
• † 14.11

  that, Rushw.
• * 14.12

  or, Rushw.
• † 14.13

  until, Rushw.
• * 14.14

  good, Rushw.
• † 14.15

  that, Rushw.
• * 14.16

  Laws, Or∣ders, Votes, Rushw.
• * 14.17

  Rushw.
• * 14.18

  House, Rush.
• † 14.19

  the, Rushw.
• * 14.20

  this their, Rushw.
• † 14.21

  violent, Rushw.
• * 14.22

  Honourable, Rushw.
• † 14.23

  or this their, Rushw.
• † 14.24

  Amongst his, Rushw.
• * 14.25

  Jan. 4. 1641.
• * 14.26

  Jan. 20. 1641.
• * 15.1

  Feb. 6. 1641. Vide Rushw. par. 3. vol. 1. p. 276. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 280, 281, 282. 396, 397. 553. He saith it was Passed by the King 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Mun∣day Febr. 14.
• * 15.2

  Feb. 10. 1641. Feb. 11. 1641.
• * 15.3

  Feb. 14. 1641.
• * 15.4

  It may be found intire in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 554.
• * 15.5

  Feb. 16. 1641.
• * 15.6

  See 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. p. 555.
• * 15.7

  Febr. 17.
• * 15.8

  Febr. 19.
• * 15.9

  Feb. 19. 1641.
• * 15.10

  Feb. 20. 1641.
• * 15.11

  Mar. 4. 1641.
• * 15.12

  Mar. 6. 1641.
• * 15.13

  Feb. 5. 1627.
• * 15.14

  Mar. 3. 1641.
• * 15.15

  Prudence.
• * 16.1

  Mar. 19. 1641.
• * 16.2

  Mar. 21. 1641.
• * 16.3

  Mar. 23. 1641.
• * 16.4

  Mar. 24. 1641.
• * 16.5

  Mar. 31. 1642.
• * 16.6

  April 1. 1642.
• * 16.7

  Apr. 13. 1642.
• * 16.8

  Apr. 20. 1642.
• * 16.9

  Apr. 25. 1642.
• * 16.10

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 3. 1642.
• * 16.11

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 16. 1642.
• * 16.12

  Maij 15. 1642.
• * 16.13

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.14

  Aug. 19. 1642.
• * 16.15

  Sept. 1. 1642.
• * 16.16

  Sept. 9. 1642.
• * 16.17

  Sept. 10. 1642.
• * 16.18

  Octob. 15.
• * 16.19

  It was so then, though now 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.20

  Octob. 24.
• * 16.21

  Octob. 27.
• † 16.22

  f. Person.
• * 16.23

  Octob. 28.
• * 16.24

  Novemb. 2.
• * 16.25

  Novemb. 9.
• * 16.26

  Novemb. 16.
• * 16.27

  Novemb. 22.
• * 16.28

  Novemb. 24.
• * 16.29

  Decem. 7. 1642.
• * 16.30

  Decemb. 8.
• * 16.31

  Decemb. 19.
• * 16.32

  Decemb. 23.
• * 16.33

  Jan. 5. 1642.
• * 16.34

  Jan. 26.
• * 16.35

  Feb. 3. 1642.
• * 16.36

  Feb. 14.
• * 16.37

  Mar. 2. 1642.
• * 16.38

  Mar. 24. 1642.
• * 16.39

  for Culmer.
• * 16.40

  Mar. 28. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.41

  April 11.
• * 16.42

  April 13.
• * 16.43

  April 14.
• * 16.44

  April 21.
• * 16.45

  April 24.
• * 16.46

  May 1.
• * 16.47

  May 2.
• * 16.48

  May 9. 1643.
• * 16.49

  May 16. May 17. The Ordi∣nance may be found at large in Rushw. par. 3. vol. 2. p. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.50

  May 20.
• * 16.51

  May 26.
• * 16.52

  May 23.
• * 16.53

  May 31.
• * 16.54

  The Warrant may be found in Pryn's Bre∣viat of the Life of the Arch-Bi∣shop. p. 28.
• * 16.55

  Junij 10. 1643.
• * 16.56

  It may be found also in Rushw. par. 3. vol. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 330.
• * 16.57

  of Canterbu∣ry, Rushw.
• † 16.58

  be Susp. Rush.
• * 16.59

  his Rushw.
• † 16.60

  his Rushw.
• * 16.61

  Et Seques∣trationis, Rush.
• * 16.62

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 11. 1643.
• * 16.63

  Junij 12.
• * 16.64

  Julij 1.
• * 16.65

  Cicero. L. 1. Tuscul. Qu.
• * 16.66

  Julij 12.
• * 16.67

  Aug. 3.
• * 16.68

  Aug. 5. 1643. Aug. 6.
• * 16.69

  Aug. 7.
• * 16.70

  Aug. 8.
• * 16.71

  Aug. 9.
• * 16.72

  Aug. 10.
• * 16.73

  Aug. 11. Aug. 15.
• * 16.74

  Aug. 19.
• * 16.75

  Aug. 20.
• * 16.76

  Low-Laigh∣ton.
• * 16.77

  Aug. 27.
• * 16.78

  September 11.
• * 16.79

  September 25.
• * 16.80

  Octob. 3.
• * 16.81

  Octob. 24. See the Arti∣cles and Order of the Lords made there∣upon, apud Rushworth, par. 3. vol. 2. p. 817, 820. apud Pr. p. 38,— 41. The A. B's 〈◊〉〈◊〉 may be found in Rush∣pag. 820. Pryn p. 41.
• * 16.82

  Hern and Chute were assigned by Order of the Lords, Octob. 24. Hales added by their Order, Octob. 28. See both Orders apud Rush∣worth, p. 821. Pryn, p. 41, 42. Gerrard add∣ed by their Order, Jan. 16. See this Order also ibid. p. 825, & 46. The first Order apud Hey∣lin's Life of Laud, p. 513.
• * 16.83

  Octob. 27.
• * 16.84

  Octob, 28. 1643.
• * 16.85

  See the Order of the Lords, apud Rushw. p. 821. Pryn, p. 42.
• * 16.86

  Octob, 31. The Petition may be found, apud Rushw. p. 821. Pryn, p. 42.
• * 16.87

  See the Order of the Lords, Ibid. p. 822. 42.
• * 16.88

  Novemb. 6. Novemb. 7.
• * 16.89

  Novemb. 8.
• * 16.90

  Novemb. 13. See the Order apud Rushw. p. 822.
• * 16.91

  Vide Rushworth, p. 822: Pryn, p. 43. This Answer is otherwise worded in Pryn's Compl. Hist. p. 43. who took it (I suppose) from the Parliament Records, W. S. A. C. It is thus worded, All advantages of Exception to the said Articles of Impeachment to this Defen∣dant saved and reserved, this Defendant hum∣bly saith, that he is Not Guilty of all or any the Matters by the said Impeachment Charged, in such manner and form 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the same are by the said Articles of Impeachment Charged.
• * 16.92

  See the Order 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Rushw. p. 822. Pryn, p. 43.
• * 16.93

  were.
• * 16.94

  Dec. 8. 1643.
• * 16.95

  Decemb. 13. Decemb. 18.
• * 16.96

  Decemb. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.97

  Jan. 3. 1643. See the Order apud Rushw. p. 823. Pryn, p. 43.
• * 16.98

  Januar. 6. The Petition may be found apud Rushw. p. 823. And the Order of the Lords, p. 824. Both apud Pryn, p. 44. Januar. 7.
• * 16.99

  For so those Puritans stiled and accounted the Sunday, H. W.
• * 16.100

  Januar. 8.
• * 16.101

  Januar. 16. Vide the Order apud Rushw. p. 824. Pryn, p. 45. Mr. Maynard was then chief Manager for the Commons. See his Speech made then to the Lords, apud Rushw. p 824 & Pryn, p. 45. See the Order apud Rushw. p. 825. Pryn, p. 46, 47. Jan. 22. 1643 See the Arch-Bishop's Petiti∣on made here∣in, Jan. 19. apud Rushw. p. 825. Pryn. p. 46.
• * 16.102

  This Answer was put in Jan. 22. being short, and in general Pleading Not Guilty, and making only a short particular Plea to the 13^th Article. The said Answer may be found in Rush. p. 826. & Pryn, p. 47. I have Transcribed it from Pryn, and caused it to be here inserted. H. W.
• * 16.103

  Jan. 29.
• * 16.104

  Mar. 4. See the Order 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Rushw. p. 827. Pryn, p. 48. Mar. 9.
• * 16.105

  Scilicet (plus quam) 〈◊〉〈◊〉 triennio 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tempus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 judicium 〈◊〉〈◊〉 seni. Tacit. L. 6. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.106

  have 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.107

  Tacit. L. 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.108

  Note, that where entire set Speeches were made by the Arch-Bishop, although spoken by him at the Bar, the same marks are put to it. But wheresoever those marks are found in the History, from the second to the last day of the Trial inclusive, the words to which they are affixed were not spoken at the Bar at that time, but either added afterwards by the Arch-Bishop at the Recapitulation of his Answer, or inserted in writing the History. H. W.
• * 16.109

  Die Primo.
• * 16.110

  Mar. 12. 1643.
• * 16.111

  See a Relation of what then passed, before Wild began his Speech, apud Rushw. p. 827. and Wild's Speech entire, Ibid. p. 828, &c. and in Pryn's Compl. Hist. p. 51, &c.
• * 16.112

  The Death and dispersion of our Witnesses, the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of some of our Members, who have been employed and taken pains in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 business. So Wild's Speech apud Pryn, p. 51.
• * 16.113

  The multitude of diversions, which we have had and have daily. So Wild's Speech, Ibid.
• * 16.114

  Treason in the highest pitch and altitude. So Wild's Speech, p. 52.
• * 16.115

  Transubstan∣tiation is not mentioned in Wild's Speech apud Pryn, p. 52.
• † 16.116

  The particu∣lar Ceremonies, charged with Popery and Su∣perstition, are not named in Wild's Speech, Ibid.
• * 16.117

  None of the Particulars, which follow to the end (save the conclusive Sentence) are to be found in Wild's Speech apud Pryn; but only some General 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and Ac∣cusations to this purpose. H. W.
• * 16.118

  Optat. L. 6. Cont. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.119

  This Speech is extant also in Rushw. p. 830, &c. Heylin, p. 516, &c. Pryn, p. 53, &c.
• * 16.120

  Capitally or Criminally, Rushworth & Pryn.
• * 16.121

  Sen L. 6. de Benef. c. 28.
• † 16.122

  Much more, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 16.123

  Act. 25. 11.
• * 16.124

  Job 27. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.125

  An 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to subvert, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.126

  Testimony, Rush. & Pryn.
• | 16.127

  here 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Heylin, & Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.128

  Arist. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, c. 7, 8.
• * 16.129

  Tho. 2. 2a. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 60. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 5.
• * 16.130

  Confer with Fi∣sher, §. 26. Num. 14 p. 211.
• * 16.131

  now, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.132

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉〈◊〉. &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dan∣gerous, Rushw.
• | 16.133

  so Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.134

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 you with, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.135

  my Place hath or ever had since the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Rush. & Pryn.
• | 16.136

  since which, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.137

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.138

  Libelling, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.139

  served, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.140

  more, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.141

  more, Rush. & Pryn.
• | 16.142

  Men of great abilities, and some, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.143

  promised Rush. & Pryn. W. Pryn in his Popish Royal Favour. p. 71. Pryn in Print∣ing the Arch-Bishop's Speech, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this whole Passage concerning him∣self. H. W.
• * 16.144

  See Rushworth, p. 832. who relateth, that when some of the Lords, hearing the Name of Birkenhead, and imagining him to be the Author of the Oxford Aulicus, smiled at it; the Arch-Bishop taking notice of it, stopped and assured the Lords, that he meant not him, but another Person of like Name. Yet after all, Pryn in publishing this Speech, hath the Impudence to affirm in the Margin of his Book, that this Convert of the Arch-〈◊〉〈◊〉, was the Author of all the Li∣bellous Popish Oxford Aulicus's, although he knew full well, that his Name was John Birkenhead; and adds, that at the naming of this 〈◊〉〈◊〉, most of the Lords and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 smil'd; but saith not one word of the Arch-Bishop's correction of their mistake. H. W.
• † 16.145

  in St. Johns, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.146

  9.
• | 16.147

  Chesford, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.148

  and Sister, Rush. & Pryn.
• † 16.149

  Right Honou∣rable the Coun∣tess of Buck∣ingham, Rush. & Pryn.
• * 16.150

  13.
• * 16.151

  A desperate Apostate-Papist, Mr. Cheynes's Sermon at his Funeral, informs us how good a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be Lived and Died. Thus Godly Will. Pryn in his Marginal Note on this place, p. 56.
• † 16.152

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Gentleman, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 16.153

  20.
• | 16.154

  Winchcomb, Rushw. & Pryn.
• * 16.155

  21.
• * 16.156

  Wollescot, Rushw. & Pryn.
• † 16.157

  It being only in God's Power, not mine, to preserve them from relapse. Rushw. & Pryn. Note, that the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Copies of this Speech, Printed in Rush. &c. are very different from this, being taken from the Arch-Bishop's Mouth as he spoke; this from the Origi∣nal, as be wrote it. H. W.
• * 16.158

  Hundreds of real Converts to Christ, for every one of his pre∣tended ones, and that himself had Converted a∣bove 120 Pa∣pists, Pryn, p. 56.
• * 16.159

  Die Secundo.
• * 16.160

  Mar. 13. 1643.
• * 16.161

  I.
• * 16.162

  Sir Ed. Cook Inst. p. 3. c. 1.
• * 16.163

  Speed in Hen. 4. §. 42.
• * 16.164

  Ibid.
• * 16.165

  II.
• * 16.166

  1 Eliz. c. 6. §. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.167

  Part. 4. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 74.
• * 16.168

  1 Eliz. c. 1. & 1 Ed. 6. c, 12.
• * 16.169

  1 Ed. 6. c. 12. §. ult. & 1 E∣liz. c. 6. §. ult.
• * 16.170

  The dreadful Licence of Infe∣rences among our English Pleaders in Ca∣ses of Death. Speed. in H. 7. S. 61.
• * 16.171

  Aug. l. 7. de Civ. Dei. c. 3.
• * 16.172

  III.
• * 16.173

  IV.
• * 16.174

  V.
• * 16.175

  VI,
• * 16.176

  VII.
• * 16.177

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Mat. 21. 44.
• * 16.178

  two of the.
• * 16.179

  Prov. 16. 14.
• * 16.180

  VIII.
• * 16.181

  IX.
• * 16.182

  No such word there sure, it should be Pre∣rogative Regis. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.183

  X.
• * 16.184

  Can. 77.
• * 16.185

  Can. 79.
• * 16.186

  XI.
• * 16.187

  f. Walker.
• * 16.188

  XII.
• * 16.189

  25 Hen. 8. c. 20. §. ult.
• * 16.190

  XIII.
• * 16.191

  Heylin Cont. Burton, p. 40;
• * 16.192

  Aug. 2. Retract. c. 21.
• * 16.193

  XIV.
• * 16.194

  XV.
• * 16.195

  My Sermon in Psal. 75. 2, 3, p. 14.
• * 16.196

  Die Tertio.
• * 16.197

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, Rushw.
• * 16.198

  Saturday, Mar. 16. 1643.
• * 16.199

  Here the Relation is im∣perfect. It seems he mov'd, that his Solicitor might come to him, and in the mean time the Hearing put off.
• * 16.200

  W. S. A. C.
• * 16.201

  Die Quarto.
• * 16.202

  I.
• * 16.203

  Sixteen. vide.
• * 16.204

  See this Record twice referred to after∣wards. In the latter Place the useful Words of it are recited. So that, perhaps, it will not be necessary to print the whole Patent; but if it be, I have a Copy of it. W. S. A. C. This came not to my Hands. H. W.
• * 16.205

  II.
• * 16.206

  III.
• * 16.207

  IV.
• * 16.208

  V.
• * 16.209

  VI.
• * 16.210

  Tacit. L. 3. Annal.
• * 16.211

  VII.
• * 16.212

  did.
• * 16.213

  VIII.
• * 16.214

  IX.
• * 16.215

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 5. 7.
• * 16.216

  X.
• * 16.217

  W. Pryn's Bre∣viate of the Arch-Bishop's Life. p. 19.
• * 16.218

  Paulò post medi∣um.
• * 16.219

  Si 〈◊〉〈◊〉 erant, quare 〈◊〉〈◊〉 damnati 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 si scelerati, qua∣re sic 〈◊〉〈◊〉? Aug. Epist. 172.
• * 16.220

  XI.
• * 16.221

  XII.
• * 16.222

  I.
• * 16.223

  Mar. 22. 1643. Friday.
• * 16.224

  Die Quinto.
• * 16.225

  Frigidius di∣ctum. W: S: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 C.
• * 16.226

  from.
• * 16.227

  II.
• * 16.228

  Injunct. of Q. Eliz. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.229

  III.
• * 16.230

  IV.
• * 16.231

  Cyril Hierosol. Cateche. 15.
• * 16.232

  1 Eliz. c. 2.
• * 16.233

  V.
• * 16.234

  VI.
• * 16.235

  by.
• * 16.236

  St: Mat: 21. 13.
• * 16.237

  1 Reg. 12. 16.
• * 16.238

  In the second 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.239

  VII.
• * 16.240

  VIII.
• * 16.241

  XI.
• * 16.242

  I.
• * 16.243

  Thursday, Mar. 28. 1644.
• * 16.244

  Die Sexto.
• * 16.245

  Exclude from the Bene∣fit.
• * 16.246

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 21.
• * 16.247

  II.
• * 16.248

  2.
• * 16.249

  f. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.250

  4.
• * 16.251

  5.
• * 16.252

  6.
• * 16.253

  8.
• * 16.254

  1.
• * 16.255

  2.
• * 16.256

  Sir Timothy Baldwin hath these Papers. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.257

  3.
• * 16.258

  Ma. Parkeri Antiqu. Britan. in vita Joh. Stafford. p. 326, 327.
• * 16.259

  III.
• * 16.260

  Job 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 34.
• * 16.261

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Chro. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 251.
• * 16.262

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 101.
• * 16.263

  Can. 62. Ec. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.264

  Die Septimo.
• * 16.265

  April. 4. 1644.
• * 16.266

  1640. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.267

  April. 4. 1644.
• * 16.268

  April 8.
• * 16.269

  April 11.
• * 16.270

  April 16.
• * 16.271

  Die Septimo.
• * 16.272

  I.
• * 16.273

  l. for the making of which he said it was against Law for the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.274

  Vide supra, post 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.275

  Art. 21.
• * 16.276

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3.
• a 16.277

  Can. 40.
• b 16.278

  Can. 118.
• c 16.279

  Can. 103.
• d 16.280

  Can. 127.
• * 16.281

  Made De∣cember 14. 1640. and ex∣tant in Rush∣worth, par. 3. vol. 1. p. 105.
• * 16.282

  Et Art. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• † 16.283

  Apud Aug: Epist. 88. 98.
• b 16.284

  Aug. Ep. 102.
• c 16.285

  Aug. Ep. 103.
• d 16.286

  Greg. Eulo∣gio Episcopo A∣lexandrino. A∣pud H. Spel∣man. in Concil. p. 80. Et E∣pisc. Arelatensi. Ibid. p. 95.
• * 16.287

  The Managers against the Arch-Bishop in another place pretend, that this Title was ne∣ver given to any English Bishop at least. But herein they are much mistaken. For 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was of∣ten given to them. To produce but one In∣stance: Pope Leo III. gave this Title to Ethe∣lard Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and that in a Letter wrote to Kenulphus King of Mercia. Angl. Sacr. par. 1. pag. 460. H. W.
• * 16.288

  1 Tim. 6. 16.
• * 16.289

  S. Aug. 16. Civ. Dei, c. 21.
• * 16.290

  Cont. Fisher. §. 25. p. 171.
• * 16.291

  S. Hieron. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Aug. Epist. 11. 13. 14. 17. 18. &c.
• * 16.292

  These six Lines are inserted out of place, and belong clearly to his Defence of making new 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for the Vniversity, which follow∣eth afterwards. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.293

  II.
• * 16.294

  III.
• * 16.295

  IV.
• * 16.296

  V.
• * 16.297

  VI.
• * 16.298

  VII.
• * 16.299

  VIII.
• * 16.300

  IX.
• * 16.301

  April 22.
• * 16.302

  April 25.
• * 16.303

  April 30.
• * 16.304

  Maij 4. 1644. Saturday.
• * 16.305

  Die Octavo.
• * 16.306

  Paterc. L. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.307

  I.
• * 16.308

  II.
• * 16.309

  Can. 88. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Aug.
• * 16.310

  25 Hen. 8. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 19. §. ult.
• * 16.311

  III.
• * 16.312

  IV.
• * 16.313

  V.
• * 16.314

  VI.
• * 16.315

  VII.
• * 16.316

  1.
• * 16.317

  Diary, in fine. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 21.
• * 16.318

  VIII.
• * 16.319

  Diary, fine. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 8.
• * 16.320

  IX.
• * 16.321

  25 Hen. 8. cap. 19. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ult.
• * 16.322

  X.
• * 16.323

  1 Eliz. c. 2.
• * 16.324

  1 Eliz. c. 1: §. 8.
• * 16.325

  The Words of the Statute are By Vertue of this Act.
• * 16.326

  XI.
• * 16.327

  Maii 6.
• * 16.328

  Maii 9. Maii 13.
• * 16.329

  Maii 16. 1644.
• * 16.330

  Die Nono.
• * 16.331

  I.
• * 16.332

  II.
• * 16.333

  III.
• * 16.334

  IV.
• * 16.335

  V.
• * 16.336

  1 Eliz, c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.337

  13 Ed. 1.
• * 16.338

  1 Eliz. c. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 8.
• * 16.339

  1 Eliz. c. 2.
• * 16.340

  VI.
• * 16.341

  〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉 Perjuri 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 69.
• * 16.342

  1.
• * 16.343

  〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.344

  3.
• * 16.345

  4.
• * 16.346

  5.
• * 16.347

  6.
• * 16.348

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 15. §. 12.
• * 16.349

  7.
• * 16.350

  8.
• * 16.351

  9.
• * 16.352

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 9. §. 2.
• * 16.353

  VII.
• * 16.354

  1.
• * 16.355

  13 Eliz. c. 10. §. Penult.
• * 16.356

  VIII.
• * 16.357

  IX.
• * 16.358

  1.
• * 16.359

  2.
• * 16.360

  3.
• * 16.361

  4.
• * 16.362

  5.
• * 16.363

  The Arch-Bishop had collected many Papers, Decrees, and Precedents, to assert his Privi∣ledge of Visiting the Vniversities, in Right of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 See, about the Year 1635. Which being 〈◊〉〈◊〉 on by Pryn, among his other Papers at Lambeth, were by him, after the Arch-Bishop's Death, published in his own Name, with this title, The Plea of the University of Oxford 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. London 1647. eight sheets in 410. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. W.
• * 16.364

  X.
• * 16.365

  1.
• * 16.366

  2.
• * 16.367

  3.
• * 16.368

  4.
• * 16.369

  XI.
• * 16.370

  1.
• * 16.371

  2.
• * 16.372

  3.
• * 16.373

  Psal. 45. 17.
• * 16.374

  4.
• * 16.375

  Conf. at Hamps. Court. p. 84.
• * 16.376

  5.
• * 16.377

  6.
• * 16.378

  37 H. 8. c. 17.
• * 16.379

  Can. 1.
• * 16.380

  Maij 16.
• * 16.381

  Maij 17.
• * 16.382

  Maij 20. 1644. Munday.
• * 16.383

  Die Decimo.
• * 16.384

  I.
• * 16.385

  Injunct. of Q. Eliz. fine.
• * 16.386

  In his reply.
• * 16.387

  Calv. 1. Inflit. c. 11. §. 12.
• * 16.388

  Hom. of Idol. par. 2. To. 2. p. 27. Fine.
• † 16.389

  3 & 4 Ed. 6. c. 10.
• * 16.390

  l. was Com∣mended, or Commanded.
• * 16.391

  Art. 35.
• * 16.392

  1 〈◊〉〈◊〉 3. 1, 2.
• * 16.393

  2 Chron. 29. 28
• * 16.394

  B. Rhenani 〈◊〉〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. de Coron. Mil. p. 40. Bp. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de Missa. L. 6. c. 5.
• * 16.395

  Can. Eccles. Aug. 24.
• * 16.396

  Tho. p. 3. 9. 63. A. 6. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.397

  1 Cor. 9. 13. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Mat. 23. 19.
• * 16.398

  Injunct. of Q. Eliz. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.399

  Rom. 2. 22.
• * 16.400

  II.
• * 16.401

  1.
• * 16.402

  2.
• * 16.403

  3.
• * 16.404

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.405

  Psal. 119.
• * 16.406

  2.
• * 16.407

  3.
• * 16.408

  III.
• * 16.409

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.410

  2.
• * 16.411

  Cont. Fisher. §. 33. p. 279.
• * 16.412

  L. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 11. §. 12.
• * 16.413

  S. Job. 1. 32, 33.
• * 16.414

  S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 19. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.415

  3.
• * 16.416

  S. Joh. 10. 1, 2.
• * 16.417

  All these Pictures were placed in the Gallery by Cardinal Pole, when he built it, and con∣tinue there still, having not been defaced by the Godly Party in the time of the Rebellion, at were the Windows of the Chappel, and the Chappel it self converted to a Dancing-Room by them, having first beat down Arch-Bishop Parker's Tomb in the middle of it, and cast his Bones upon the Dunghil. H. W.
• * 16.418

  IV.
• * 16.419

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.420

  S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Ad∣versus Vigilan∣tium.
• * 16.421

  Tom. 2. Hom. 1. Princip.
• * 16.422

  2
• * 16.423

  In 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. p. 65. 'Tis com∣monly called the Black Book.
• * 16.424

  3.
• * 16.425

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 observa∣batur ab 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Vedelius. (and he no way Superstitious) in Igna. Epistola ad Philip. Ex∣ercit. 16. c. 3.
• * 16.426

  1.
• * 16.427

  2.
• * 16.428

  3.
• * 16.429

  4.
• * 16.430

  Maij 22.
• * 16.431

  Maij 27.
• * 16.432

  Maij 25.
• * 16.433

  I.
• * 16.434

  Maij 27. 1644. Munday.
• * 16.435

  Die Undecimo.
• * 16.436

  1.
• * 16.437

  2.
• * 16.438

  3.
• * 16.439

  II.
• * 16.440

  1.
• * 16.441

  Can. Eccles. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 24.
• * 16.442

  III.
• * 16.443

  1.
• * 16.444

  2.
• * 16.445

  3.
• * 16.446

  Heylin affirm∣eth, that the old Crucifix, being found a∣mong the Rega∣lia, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 then placed upon the Altar. Life of Laud, p. 144.
• * 16.447

  4.
• * 16.448

  5.
• * 16.449

  p. 706.
• * 16.450

  p. 706.
• * 16.451

  p. 706.
• * 16.452

  p. 706.
• * 16.453

  IV.
• * 16.454

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 11.
• † 16.455

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Cheynell.
• * 16.456

  And the third Witness agrees in this.
• * 16.457

  Can. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.458

  V.
• * 16.459

  VI.
• * 16.460

  Can. 24.
• * 16.461

  VII.
• * 16.462

  Q. Eliz. Injunct. Fine.
• * 16.463

  VIII.
• * 16.464

  Junii 1.
• * 16.465

  Junii 6.
• * 16.466

  Thursday, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 6. 1644.
• * 16.467

  Die Duode∣cimo.
• * 16.468

  I.
• * 16.469

  II.
• * 16.470

  III.
• * 16.471

  IV.
• * 16.472

  1.
• * 16.473

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. against the Peril of Idola. p. 3. p. 92.
• * 16.474

  V.
• * 16.475

  1.
• * 16.476

  Calv. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 11. §. 12.
• * 16.477

  Deut. 4. 15, 16.
• * 16.478

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 20. 21.
• * 16.479

  St. Aug.
• * 16.480

  Deut. 7. 5. & 12. 2.
• * 16.481

  Euseb. 3. de vita Constan. c. 54.
• * 16.482

  VP.
• * 16.483

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1. p. 11.
• * 16.484

  VII.
• * 16.485

  Dr. Featly's Sermons.
• * 16.486

  p. 477.
• † 16.487

  p. 791.
• | 16.488

  p. 808.
• * 16.489

  p. 810.
• * 16.490

  This was done long before the Reformation; when the Pa∣tents of Chan∣cellors and Com∣missaries were revocable at the pleasure of the Bishop. H. W.
• * 16.491

  I.
• * 16.492

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 11. 1644. Whitson-Tues∣day.
• * 16.493

  Die Decimo∣tertio.
• * 16.494

  The Arch-Bishop calls the English Papists Roman-Catholicks; not as allowing them to be such; but referring to that Name, which some of them were before said to have affixed to him. H: W:
• * 16.495

  II.
• * 16.496

  Psal. 24. 7.
• * 16.497

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Jo. Prideaux. Con∣cie, in S. Luc. 19. 46 1 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 9. 13.
• * 16.498

  Psal. 95. 6.
• * 16.499

  S. Lue. 22. 31. In Antiq. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, p. 85.
• * 16.500

  III.
• * 16.501

  Here in England, both before and since the Reformation, Chappels 〈◊〉〈◊〉 erected, were al∣ways solemnly Consecrated, as well as Churches. I could produce 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 of the Time preceding, many of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 succeeding the 〈◊〉〈◊〉. H. W.
• * 16.502

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 L. 10. Hist. c. 3.
• * 16.503

  2.
• * 16.504

  3.
• * 16.505

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.506

  The. 2. 2ae. q. 85. A. 2. ad 3.
• * 16.507

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.508

  3.
• * 16.509

  IV.
• * 16.510

  Tertio Servis, & ijs qui sub aliorum degerent Imperio, quietis Diem indulgendum censuit, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aliquam haberent à labore remissionem. Gal. L. 2. Inst. c. 8. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 28.
• * 16.511

  S. John 10. 22.
• * 16.512

  V.
• * 16.513

  This Mr: Culmer not only Pissed in the Church of Canterbury, but also demolished the Noble Glass-Windows of it with his own Hands. The like he did in the Parish-Church of Minster in Thanet; which Benefice he usurped during the Rebellion. I have had more particular Oppor∣tunities to be informed concerning him from many yet alive, who knew him well; and upon the whole, think him to have been one of the greatest Villains in the Three Kingdoms. H:
• * 16.514

  Antidatum 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 11.
• * 16.515

  Ibid: p: 35.
• * 16.516

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 que Sabbatismi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ter 〈◊〉〈◊〉 supe∣rant. Cal. 2. Inst. c. 8. 〈◊〉〈◊〉: 34.
• * 16.517

  VI.
• * 16.518

  VII.
• * 16.519

  VIII.
• * 16.520

  My Speech in the Star-Chamber, Praefat. versus 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.521

  Divine and Po∣litick Observa∣tions upon my Speech, p. 78.
• * 16.522

  Speed in Hen. 7. 5. 16.
• * 16.523

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 14. 1644.
• * 16.524

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 17. 1644. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.525

  I.
• * 16.526

  Die 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.527

  II.
• * 16.528

  III.
• * 16.529

  Confer. at Ham. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, p. 47.
• * 16.530

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 dictum. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.531

  His Name was Gelli∣brand. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.532

  I believe 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Name here 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is Mr. Fox the 〈◊〉〈◊〉. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.533

  1.
• * 16.534

  2.
• * 16.535

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. at Ham. Court. p. 29, 30.
• * 16.536

  1.
• * 16.537

  2.
• * 16.538

  3.
• * 16.539

  〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.540

  5.
• * 16.541

  6.
• * 16.542

  7.
• * 16.543

  8.
• * 16.544

  9.
• * 16.545

  Junij 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1644. Thursday.
• * 16.546

  Die 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.547

  I.
• * 16.548

  II.
• * 16.549

  III.
• * 16.550

  IV.
• * 16.551

  V.
• * 16.552

  I suppose these Considerations are those Pub∣lished in Pryn's Compl. Hist. p. 287. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.553

  VI.
• * 16.554

  1 Sam. 8. 12.
• * 16.555

  Perkins Opera, fol. p. 34.
• * 16.556

  VII.
• * 16.557

  VIII.
• * 16.558

  p. 32.
• † 16.559

  p. 36.
• * 16.560

  IX.
• * 16.561

  X.
• * 16.562

  1.
• * 16.563

  2.
• * 16.564

  3.
• * 16.565

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 27. 1644. Thursday.
• * 16.566

  I.
• * 16.567

  Die Decimo∣sexto.
• * 16.568

  II.
• * 16.569

  III.
• * 16.570

  p. 47.
• * 16.571

  Contr. Fisher. p. 292.
• * 16.572

  Perkin's Opera in fol. p. 590.
• * 16.573

  1 Cor. 11. 92.
• * 16.574

  Thorndike of Assemblies. c. 8. p. 260.
• * 16.575

  St. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 26. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Idem est ef∣fectus Passionis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Thorn. p. 3. q. 79. A. 1. c.
• * 16.576

  p. 49.
• * 16.577

  In bono opere 〈◊〉〈◊〉 acceptabili, Fides & Cha∣ritas 〈◊〉〈◊〉, non separantur. Qui loqui∣tur, simul facit vocem & verbum. St. Aug. L. 1. de Gen. ad Lit. c. 15.
• * 16.578

  IV.
• * 16.579

  Julij 4.
• * 16.580

  Julij 5. 1644. Friday.
• * 16.581

  I.
• * 16.582

  Die Diceimo∣septimo.
• * 16.583

  Sir Leolin Jenkins hath a Copy of it out of the Records of the Exchequer. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.584

  Julij 15.
• * 16.585

  Junij 17.1644. Wednesday.
• * 16.586

  Die Decimo∣octavo.
• * 16.587

  I.
• * 16.588

  Cont. Fisher. §. 25. p. 176.
• * 16.589

  Mounta. Origi. Eccles. p. 464.
• * 16.590

  II.
• * 16.591

  Tam certo scio Papam esse magnum illum Antichristum, quam Deum ip∣sum esse in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Creatorem, & 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 verum Messiam. Gab. Pow. de Antichristo. E. pist. ad Lecto∣rem. Dr. Featly's Sermon. p. 808.
• * 16.592

  p. 810.
• * 16.593

  III.
• * 16.594

  Bishop Bilson's Perpetual Go∣vernment.
• * 16.595

  Book of Ordina∣tion, Preface.
• * 16.596

  8 Eliz. c. 1.
• * 16.597

  S. John 20. 21. Calvin Ibid.
• * 16.598

  Ephes. 4. 11.
• * 16.599

  IV.
• * 16.600

  V.
• * 16.601

  See the Letter above, in the Answer to the Scotch Arti∣cles.
• * 16.602

  I.
• * 16.603

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 1. L. 8. c. 27.
• * 16.604

  〈◊〉〈◊〉, King, Montague, Neale.
• * 16.605

  II.
• * 16.606

  III.
• * 16.607

  IV.
• * 16.608

  V.
• * 16.609

  VI.
• * 16.610

  VII.
• * 16.611

  VIII.
• * 16.612

  IX.
• * 16.613

  X.
• * 16.614

  S. Aug. Epist. 167.
• * 16.615

  This Book was Published by Pryn in the Year 1643. in 5. Sheets in Quarto. A Copy whereof being by his Endeavours conveyed to the Arch-Bishop, then a Prisoner in the Tower, the Arch-Bishop wrote Notes in the Margin of it, so far, and so much, as to vindicate himself from the Aspersions laid upon him therein. This Copy with the said Notes is now in the Hands of that knowing and learned Antiquary Mr. Antho∣ny Wood; which having been by him Com∣municated to me, I have, with his Leave, Transcribed the Arch-Bishops Notes, and caused them to be adjoined to these Papers concerning the Plot discovered by Andrew ab Habernfeld, reprinted in the following Collection. H:
• * 16.616

  XI.
• * 16.617

  1.
• * 16.618

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 7th Addi∣tional.
• * 16.619

  The Archbishop related this Case more at large, and therewith defended himself in a writ∣ten Paper; which being seized by Pryn in the Tower, was now produced and read before the Lords. It may be found in Pryn's Compl. Hist. p. 428. H. W.
• * 16.620

  Confer. at Hamp. Court. p. 51.
• * 16.621

  27 Eliz. c. 2. §. 3.
• * 16.622

  Art. 7. Addit,
• * 16.623

  L. 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 37.
• * 16.624

  After all, Pryn would insinuate, that 〈◊〉〈◊〉: Giles 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the same Man with Sancta Clara, and wrote the Book Entituled, Deus, Naturs, & Gratia, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be fully knew the contra∣ry, Compl: Hist: p: 427. 429. Nay he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Considence at last (p: 430.) to add, that it is most apparent. H.
• * 16.625

  XII.
• * 16.626

  Sir Ed. Coke. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3. Instit. c. 3.
• * 16.627

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 24. 1644. Munday.
• * 16.628

  I.
• * 16.629

  Die Decimo∣nono:
• * 16.630

  II.
• * 16.631

  Heylin 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Burton p. 229.
• * 16.632

  Art. 35. Eccl. Ang.
• * 16.633

  Cap. 11. 7.
• ‖ 16.634

  Annot. in A∣poc. 17. 8.
• * 16.635

  2 Thess. 2.
• * 16.636

  III.
• * 16.637

  My Book cont. Fisher, p. 376.
• * 16.638

  Pag. 36.
• * 16.639

  IV.
• * 16.640

  Quemadmodum sape 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aedificia, ut fundamenta & ruinae maneant; ita non passus est Ecclesiam suam ab Antichristo vel à funda∣mento subverti, vel solo aequari, &c. sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 quaque vastatione semirutum adificium superesse voluit. Cal. L. 4. Inst. c. 2. § 11.
• * 16.641

  Cont. Fisher, § 3. p. 11.
• † 16.642

  Cont. Fisher, p. 377.
• ‖ 16.643

  Cont. Fisher, § 37. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 6. p. 320.
• * 16.644

  1 S. Joh. 4. 3.
• * 16.645

  2 Tim. 2. 18.
• * 16.646

  Aliqua Circum∣stantia dat spe∣ciem Actui mo∣rali. Tho. 1. secundae, q. 73. A. 7. ad primum
• * 16.647

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 20. p. 128.
• * 16.648

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Par. 2. p. 213.
• * 16.649

  V.
• * 16.650

  Petro successit Linus, Lino 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. Et sic usque ad Anastasium, qui 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sedet. Et in hoc ordine successionis 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Donatista Episcopus invenitur. S. Aug. Epist. 165.
• * 16.651

  VI.
• * 16.652

  VII.
• * 16.653

  Qui se 〈◊〉〈◊〉, cum 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.654

  VIII.
• * 16.655

  The Pop. Roy. Favourit. p. 31.
• * 16.656

  assured.
• * 16.657

  Frigidc dictum. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.658

  1 Tim. 5: 19:
• * 16.659

  IX.
• * 16.660

  X.
• * 16.661

  XI.
• a 16.662

  Non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 docemus, nec Adversarios 〈◊〉〈◊〉 incessimus, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 plerique faciunt, &c. Greg. Naz. Orat. 32.
• b 16.663

  Abstineamus nos à conviciis, ne tempus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 impendamus, &c. Aug. Epist. 177.
• * 16.664

  In the Anti∣quaeries to Mr. Pryn. p. 12.
• † 16.665

  Sid. Simp∣son's Anato∣mist, p. 2. & 6.
• * 16.666

  XII.
• * 16.667

  Julii 29. 1644. Munday.
• * 16.668

  Die Vicesimo.
• * 16.669

  I.
• * 16.670

  See Heylin's Life of Arch-Bishop Laud, p. 152.
• * 16.671

  1 Eliz. c. 1:
• * 16.672

  Id possumus quod Jure possu∣mus.
• * 16.673

  By the Advice of her Honoura∣ble Council. Pre∣fat. to the In∣junctions.
• * 16.674

  Discourse, Sect. 1. c 9. p. 51.
• † 16.675

  Religionis Ju∣dices Pontifices sunt Legis Se∣natut. Cic. L. 4. Epist. ad Att. Ep. 2.
• * 16.676

  II.
• * 16.677

  See the Diary, at March 26, 29. May 11. Anno 1626. H. W.
• * 16.678

  III.
• * 16.679

  Artic. 1. Addi∣tional.
• * 16.680

  1 Maria, c 1. § 3.
• * 16.681

  IV.
• * 16.682

  V.
• * 16.683

  VI.
• * 16.684

  VII.
• * 16.685

  VIII.
• * 16.686

  IX.
• * 16.687

  X.
• * 16.688

  1:
• * 16.689

  2.
• * 16.690

  3.
• * 16.691

  4:
• * 16.692

  1.
• * 16.693

  2.
• * 16.694

  3.
• * 16.695

  XI.
• * 16.696

  XII.
• * 16.697

  XIII.
• * 16.698

  It was view∣ed.
• * 16.699

  Potentia sequi debet Justitiam, non praeire, Aug. L. 13. de Trin, c. 13.
• * 16.700

  XIV.
• * 16.701

  Here is a void space left in the Margin, with design (I suppose) to insert therein some Passages out of Law-Books concerning the ob∣scure Birth of Margna Charta: Which space was not filled up. H:
• * 16.702

  XV.
• * 16.703

  Num. 11.
• * 16.704

  St. John 16.33.
• * 16.705

  St. Luke 23. 34. 1 Cor. 4. 3.
• * 16.706

  Aug. 23.1644.
• * 16.707

  Aug. 24.
• * 16.708

  September 2. 1644.
• * 16.709

  1 Pars Pat. de An 45. Ed. 3. m. 34.
• † 16.710

  Cod. L. 1. Tit. 5. L. 12, & 21. Conser. at Hamp. Court, p. 26.
• * 16.711

  Judices 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. ne 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 ad vexandos Homires superflua multitudo 〈◊〉〈◊〉 protrabatur. H. L. 21. Tit. 5. Adde & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 rationem, quod qui praedicta li∣centia abutuntur, veniunt in suspitionem, quod non 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉. Gloss. Ibid.
• * 16.712

  Pryn in his Independency Examined p 4.
• † 16.713

  1 Chron. 13. 4, 5 Acts. 15. 22.
• * 16.714

  Sir Wal. Raw∣ley Hist. of the World. L: 2: c: 5: 〈◊〉〈◊〉: 〈◊〉〈◊〉:
• * 16.715

  Numb. 3, & 4.
• * 16.716

  Quid Molesliae & Tristitiae 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 Fratribus, temerarii Assertores 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dici non potest. Aug. 1. de Gen. ad Lit. C. 19.
• * 16.717

  Cont. Fish. p. 376.
• * 16.718

  Non 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doctrine 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Greg. Naz. Orat. 32.
• * 16.719

  Mr. Pryn's Rome's Ma∣ster-piece.
• * 16.720

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1. 2〈◊〉〈◊〉. q. 50. A. 5.
• * 16.721

  S. Aug. l. 1. Cont. Academ. c. 1.
• * 16.722

  S. Mat. 10 29. Rom. 8. 28.
• * 16.723

  Septemb 3. 1644.
• * 16.724

  Septemb. 4.
• * 16.725

  Septemb. 6.
• * 16.726

  Septemb. 11.
• * 16.727

  Septemb. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.728

  I.
• * 16.729

  II.
• * 16.730

  Septemb. 27.
• * 16.731

  Octob. 4.
• * 16.732

  Octob. 11.
• * 16.733

  The Lord Chancellor Finch told me, that this Argument was not Mr. Herns, (though he pro∣nounced it) for he could not Argue; but it was Mr. Hales, afterward Lord Chief Justice. And he said farther, that being then a Young Law∣yer, he stood behind Mr. Hern, when he spoke at the Bar of the Lords House, and took Notes of it; and that it will be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 among his Reports. W. S. A. C.
• * 16.734

  A short Intro∣duction.
• * 16.735

  The Charge, upon what it consists.
• * 16.736

  The Titles of the several par∣cels of the Ar∣ticles upon which the Charge against the Arch-Bishop was made up.
• * 16.737

  The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon his Councel, by Reason of the mixt Charge, without distin∣guishing what was intended to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a Treason, what a 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.738

  The two Points presented by Councel in wri∣ting, to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon for his Defence in point of Law.
• * 16.739

  The first only admitted.
• * 16.740

  The Method proposed.
• * 16.741

  The three Gene∣ral Charges.
• * 16.742

  Two General Questions to be insisted upon.
• * 16.743

  In maintenance of our first 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon the first Question.
• * 16.744

  The uncertainty of what was, or was not Treason, produced the Law of 25 Ed. 3.
• * 16.745

  The Parliament of 25 Ed. 3. by Reason of that Law called Parliamentum Benedictum, and that no Law had deservedly more Honour than Magna Charta.
• * 16.746

  The Act of 25 Ed. 3. the Rule in Parlia∣ment to judge Treasons by.
• * 16.747

  Parliament Roll 1 H. 4. num. 144. the Prayer of the Commons.
• * 16.748

  Parliament Roll, 5 H. 4. num. 12. Case Earl of Northumberland.
• * 16.749

  ☜
• * 16.750

  Treasons parti∣cularly Enacted after 25 Ed. 3. still reduced to that Law. Treasons made in the divided time of R. 2. re∣duced per Stat. 1 H. 4 cap. 10. Made in the time of H. 8. reduced 1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. Made in the time of Ed. 6. reduced by the Act of 1 Ma∣riae, cap. 10.
• * 16.751

  ☜
• * 16.752

  From 1 H. 4. to this day, no Judgment in Parliament given of any Treason not contained in that Law.
• * 16.753

  This Law in all times the Stand∣ard to Judge Treasons by.
• * 16.754

  Treasons decla∣red per Stat. 25 Ed. 3. cap. 2.
• * 16.755

  ☞
• * 16.756

  Stat. 25 Ed. 3. may admit no construction by Equity or Infe∣rence to make other Treason than thereby declared.
• * 16.757

  Reasons why not.
• * 16.758

  Viz.
• * 16.759

  Instances where it would not.
• * 16.760

  Stat. 3 H. 5. cap. 6.
• * 16.761

  1 M cap. 6. Cok. Collections 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.762

  ☜
• * 16.763

  2. Question.
• * 16.764

  Mildmay's case 6. Report Coke fol. 42.
• * 16.765

  ☜
• * 16.766

  Objection. Answer.
• * 16.767

  ☞
• * 16.768

  Parliament Roll, 28 H. 6. num. 28. to 47. In the Case of the Duke of Suf∣folk.
• * 16.769

  Articles Cardi∣nal Woolsey in Parliament, 21 H. 8. Indictment K. Bench Ligham, 23 H. 8.
• * 16.770

  Empson, 1 H. 8.
• * 16.771

  ☞
• * 16.772

  Answer to the second General Charge, of en∣deavouring to subvert Reli∣gion.
• * 16.773

  Stat. 5. R. 2. C. 5. 2 H. 5. C. 7.
• * 16.774

  ☜
• * 16.775

  Stat. 1 Ed. 6. C. 12. 1 Mar. C. 12. Answer to the third general Charge, la∣bouring to sub∣vert and incense the King a∣gainst Parlia∣ments. Articles against the Duke of Ireland, and others, 11 R. 2.
• * 16.776

  ☜
• * 16.777

  14 Article.
• * 16.778

  Answer to the particular Ar∣ticles insisted upon 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Charge.
• * 16.779

  The first Par∣ticular.
• * 16.780

  Differences be∣tween the Mat∣ters charged, & the Fact made Treason by the Statute 3 Jac. C. 4.
• * 16.781

  The second Par∣ticular.
• * 16.782

  Number of Crimes below Treason or Fe∣lony, cannot make a Trea∣son.
• * 16.783

  Power 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de∣clare 〈◊〉〈◊〉, per Stat. 25. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 3. c. 2. Wherein we conceive there is no power to de∣clare an Offence below a Felony to be a Trea∣son.
• * 16.784

  ☜
• * 16.785

  ☜
• * 16.786

  Earl Strafford.
• * 16.787

  ☜
• * 16.788

  Whatsoever hath been hitherto placed in the Margin of this Argument, was transcribed from Mr. Hern's own Copy: But this which followeth, I transcribed from a loose Note, wrote by an un∣known hand, and affixed to this place. H. W.
• * 16.789

  Concerning the Proviso in 25 Ed. 3. (last mentioned) it is observable, That Mr. Lane, in the Lord Strafford's Tryal, saith, That that Clause of Provision 25 Ed. 3. is quite taken away by 6 Hen. 8. Cap. 4. & 20. So that no Treason is now to be reckoned, but what is lite∣rally contained in 25 Ed. 3. See for this, Whitlock's Memoirs, pag. 43. See also Bur∣net's Hist. Reform. Part II. pag. 253. about the Repeal of Treasons.
• * 16.790

  Octob. 22. 1644.
• * 16.791

  Octob. 28.
• * 16.792

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1.
• * 16.793

  Novemb. 2.
• * 16.794

  Novemb. 6.
• * 16.795

  Novemb. 11.
• * 16.796

  My Defence in the House of Commons.
• * 16.797

  1.
• * 16.798

  2.
• * 16.799

  3.
• * 16.800

  4.
• * 16.801

  Quomodo potest malus litigator landare 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Aug. Epist. 166.
• * 16.802

  I.
• * 16.803

  II.
• * 16.804

  Cont. Fisher, p. 211.
• * 16.805

  An. 45. Ed. 3.
• * 16.806

  Tacit. L. 6. Annal.
• * 16.807

  Annum jam a∣gens septuagesi∣mum secundum.
• * 16.808

  Novemb. 13. 1644.
• * 16.809

  Novemb. 16.
• * 16.810

  Novemb. 22.
• * 16.811

  Novemb. 23: Novemb. 29. Novemb. 28.
• * 16.812

  Decemb. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.813

  Decemb. 16. 1644.
• * 16.814

  Decemb. 17.
• * 16.815

  Decemb. 24.
• * 16.816

  Decemb. 25.
• * 16.817

  Jan. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 16.818

  Jan: 3.
• * 16.819

  1 Pet. 2. 23.
• * 16.820

  Judg. 16. 30.
• * 16.821

  Exod. 12. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 16.822

  John 19. 11.
• * 16.823

  Dan. 3.
• * 16.824

  This Sea, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Copy.
• * 16.825

  Luk. 6. 39.
• † 16.826

  In this way, Hind's Copy.
• * 16.827

  Job. 11. 48.
• * 16.828

  Act. 6. 12.
• * 16.829

  Act. 12. 3.
• * 16.830

  Esa. 1. 15.
• * 16.831

  Psal. 9. 12.
• * 16.832

  Heb. 10. 31.
• * 16.833

  Sir John Clot∣worthy.
• * 16.834

  So Lord, Hind's Copy.
• * 16.835

  hath.
• * 16.836

  The shorter Lines both here and afterwards, are Abbreviations of so many several parts of the Will, made by W. S. A. C.
• * 16.837

  f. each.
• * 16.838

  f Rich. Cobb.
• * 16.839

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 cunctis liberalium Artium Disciplinis eruditum pro Magistro teneamus, & quasi Com∣parem, velut alterius Orbis Apostolicum & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Capgr. in vit. S. Anselmi, & Gu. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de Gestis Pontific. Anglor. p. 223. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 prima Sedes Archiepiscopi habetur, qui est totius Angliae Primas & 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Id. Ibid. p. 195.
• * 16.840

  Hieron. La∣mas, in Summa, p. 3. c. 3.
• * 16.841

  in 1 Cor. 10. 3. & in 1 Cor. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 24.
• * 16.842

  Integritatis Cu∣stodes, & Recta sectantes. De vera Relig. c. 5.
• * 16.843

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2. 12.
• * 16.844

  Anno 1445.
• * 16.845

  Anno. 1446.
• * 16.846

  Anno, 16. Rich. 2. cap. 5.
• * 16.847

  Lib. XIX. An. 1374.
• * 16.848

  Statutum de An. 27 Eliz.