the Law speaks nothing of you▪ nor for a Councel of State, till I see, and read, or hear your Com∣mission, which I desire (if you please) to be acquainted with.
But Sir, give me leave further to aver unto you, and upon this Principle or Averment I will venture my life and being, and all I have in the world; That if the House had by a Proclaimed and declared Law, Vote, or Order, made this Councel (as you call your selves) a Court of Justice, yet that proclaimed or declared Law, Vote, or Order, had been unjust and null, and void in itself; And my reason is, because the House it self was never (neither now, nor in any age before) betrusted with a Law-executing power, but only with a Law making power.
And truly, Sir, I should have look'd upon the people of this Nation as very fools, if e∣ver they had betrusted the Parliament with a Law-executing power, and my reason is, be∣cause, if they had so done, they had then chosen and impowred a Parliament to have de∣stroyed them, but not to have preserved them (which is against the very nature and end of the very being of Parliaments, they being by your own declared doctrine, chosen to provide for the peoples weale, but not for their wo, First part Declarat. pag. 150, 266, 267, 269, 276, 279, 280, 304, 361, 382, 494, 696, 700, 716, 726.) And Sir, the reason of that reason is, because its possible, if a Parliament should execute the Law, they might do palpable inju∣stice and m••••e administer it, and so the people would be robbed of their intended extraor∣dinary benefit of Appeals; for in such cases, they must appeal to the Parliament either a∣gainst it self, or part of it self; and can it ever be imagined they will ever condemn them∣selves, or punish themselves? nay, will they not rather judge themselves bound in honour and safety to themselves, to vote that man a Traytot, and destroy him, that shall so much as question their actions, although formerly they have dealt never so unjustly with them? For this Sir, I am sure, is very commonly practised now a dayes; and therefore the honesty of former Parlia∣ments in the discharge of their trust and duty in this particular, was such, that they have declared, the power is not in them to judge or punish me, o•• the meanest free man in England, beeng no Member of their House, although I should beat or wound one of their Members nigh unto their door, going to the House to discharge his duty; but I am to be sent in all such cases to the Judge of the upper. Bench, unto whom by Law they have given declared rules and direction in that particular how to behave himself, which be as evident for me to know as himself. Now ••i••, if reason and justice do not judg it convenient that the Parlia∣ment shall not be Judges in such particular cases, that are of so neer concernment to themselves, but yet hath others that are not of their House, that are as well concerned as themselves; much lesse will reason or justice admit them to be judges in particular cases that are farther remote stom their particular selves, and do meerly concern the Common-wealth; and sure I am, Sir, this is the declared Statute Law of England and doth stand in full force at this hour, there being, I am sure of it, no Law to repeal it, no not since the House of Com∣mons set up their new Common-wealth. Now, Sir, from all this I argue thus, that which is not inherent in the whole, cannot by the whole be derived or assigned to a part.
But it is not inherent, neither in the power nor authority of the whole House of Commons, pri∣marily and originally to ••••ecute the Law, and therefore they cannot derive it to a part of them∣selves.
But yet Sir, with your favour, for all this, I would not be mistaken, as though I maintai∣ned