If in time, as in place there were Degrees of high and low; I verily believe that the high­est of time, whould be that which passeth betwixt, 1640, and 1660. For he that thence as from the Divils Mountain, should have looked upon the World, and observed the Actions of Men, especially in England, might have had a Prospect of all kinds of Injustice, and of all kinds of Folly that the world could afford; and how they were produced by then Hypocrisy and self-conceit, whereof the one is double Iniquity, and the other double Folly.

I should be glad to behold the Prospect. you [Page 2] that have lived in that time and in that part of your Age; wherein Men used to see best into good and evil; I pray you set me (that could not see so well) upon the same Mountain, by the re­lation of the actions you then saw, & of their Causes, Pretentions, Justice, Order, Artifice and Events.

In the year, 1640. The Government of Eng­land was Monarchical, and the King that reigned, Charles the I. of that Name, holding the Soveraignty by Right of a Discent continued above 600 years; and from a much longer Discent King of Scotland; and from the Time of his Ancestors Henry the 2. King of Ireland, a Man that wanted no Vertue, either of Body or Mind, nor endeavour'd any thing more, than to discharge his Duty towards his God, in the well-governing of his Subjects.

How could he than miscarry, having in every County so many Train'd-bands, as would (put to­gether) have made an Army of 60000 Men, and di­vers Magazenes of Ammunition, in Places fortified.

If those Souldiers had been (as they and all o­thers of his Subjects ought to have been) at his Ma­jesties Command: the Peace and Hapiness of the Three Kingdoms, had continued, as it was left by K. James; but the People were corrupted generally, and Disobedient Persons esteemed the best Patriots

But sure, there were Men enough, besides those that were ill-affected, to have made an Army sufficient for to have kept the People from uniting into a Body able to oppose him.

Truely, if the King had had Money, I think he might have had Souldiers enough in England; [Page 3] for there were very few of the common People that cared much for either of the Causes, but would have taken any side for pay and plunder: But the Kings treasure was very low, and his Enemies that pretended the Peoples ease from Taxes, and other specious things, had the Command of the Purses of the City of London, and of most Cities and Corporate Towns in England, and of many parti­cular Persons besides.

But how comes the People to be so corrupted, and what kind of People were they that did so se­duce them?

The Seducers were of divers sorts. One sort were Ministers; Ministers (as they called themselves) of Christ; and sometimes in their Sermons to the People, Gods Embassadors, pretending to have a Right from God to govern every one his Parish, and their Assembly, the whole Nation.

Secondly, There were a very great number, though not comparable to the other, which notwithstanding that the Popes Power in England, both Temporal and Ecclesiastical had been by Act of Parliament a­bolished, did still retain a belief, that we ought to be governed by the Pope, whom they pretend­ed to be the Vicar of Christ, and in the Right of Christ to be the Governour of all Christian People, and these were known by the Name of PAPISTS, as the Ministers I mentioned before, were common­ly called PRESBYTERIANS.

Thirdly, There were not a few, who in the be­ginning of the Troubles were not discovered, but shortly after declared themselves for a Liberty in [Page 4] Religion, and those of different opinions one from another: Some of them (because they would have all Congregations free and independant upon one a­nother) were called INDEPENDANTS; others that held Baptism to Infants, and such as under­stood not into what they are Baptized to be ineffe­ctual, were called therefore ANABAPTISTS: Others that held, that Christs Kingdom was at this time to begin upon the Earth, were called FIFTH-MOMARCHY-MEN; besides divers other Sects as QUAKERS, ADAMITES, &c. whose names and peculiar Doctrines I do not very well remem­ber, and these were the Enemies, which arose a­gainst his Majesty from the private Interpretation of the Scripture exposed to every Mans scanning in his Mother Tongue.

Fourthly, There were an exceeding great number of Men of the better sort, that had been so edu­cated, as that in their youth having read the Books written by famous men of the Antient Grecian and Roman Commonwealths, concerning their Policy and great Actions, in which Book the Popular Go­vernment was extold by that glorious Name of Li­berty, and Monarchy disgraced by the Name of Ty­ranny: they became thereby in love with their form of Government: And out of these men were cho­sen the greatest part of the HOUSE OF COM­MONS: or if they were not the greatest part, yet by advantage of their Eloquence were always able to sway the rest.

Fifthly, The City of London, and other great Towns of Trade, having in admiration the prospe­rity [Page 5] of the low Countries, after they had revolted from their Monarch, the King of Spain, were in­clined to think, that the like change of Govern­ment here would to them produce the like prospe­rity.

Sixthly, There were a very great Number, that had either wasted their fortunes, or thought them too mean for the good part? they thought were i [...] themselves: and more there were that had able bo­dies, and saw no means how honestly to get their Bread: These longed for a War, and hoped to maintain themselves hereafter by the lucky chusing of a Party to side with, and consequently did for the most part serve under them, that had greatest plenty of Money.

Lastly, The People in general were so ignorant of their Duties, as that not one perhaps of 1000 knew what Right any man had to command him, or what necessity there was of King or Common­wealth, for which he was to part with his money against his will, but thought himself to be so much Master of whatsoever he possest, that it could not be taken from him upon any pretence of Common Safety without his own consent. King, they thought was but a Title of the highest honour, which Gen­tlemen, Knight, Baron, Earl, Luke were but steps to ascend to with the help of Riches, and had no Rule of Equity, but Precedents and Custom, and he was thought wisest and fittest to be chosen for a Parliament, who was most averse to the granting of Subsidies, or other publick Payments.

In such a Constitution of People, methinks the [Page 6] King is already outed of his Government: so as they need not have taken Arms for it: For I cannot imagine, how the King should come by any means to resist them.

There was indeed very great difficulty in the business, but of that point you will be better infor­med in the pursuit of this Narration.

But I desire to know first the several grounds of the Pretences, both of the Pope and of the Pres­byterians, by which they claim a Right to govern us, as they do in chief, and after that, from whence, and when crept in the Pretences of that Long Par­liament for a Democrasie.

As for the Papists, they challenge this Right from a Text in Deut. 17. and other like Texts, ac­cording to the Old Latin Translation in these words, And he that out of Pride shall refuse to obey the Com­mandment of that Priest, which shall at that time Mi­nister before the Lord thy God, that man shall, by the Sentence of the Judge, be put to Death: and be­cause the Jews were the People of God then, so is all Christendom the People of God now, they in­fer from thence, that the Pope, whom they pretend to be High Priest of all Christian People, ought al­so to be obeyed in all his Decrees by all Christians upon pain of Death: Again, whereas in the New Testament: Christ saith, all Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth, go therefore and teach all Nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and teach them to observe all those things, that I have comman­ded you, from thence they in [...]er, that the Command [Page 7] of the Apostles was to be obeyed, & by consequence the Nations were bound to be governed by them, and especially by the Prince of the Apostles, St. Pe­ter, and by his Successors the Popes of Rome.

For the Text in the Old Testament, I do not see how the Commandment of God to the Jews to obey their Priests can be interpreted to have the like force in the Case of other Nations Christian, more then upon Nations Unchristian: For all the world are Gods People, unless we also grant, that a King cannot of an Infidel be made Christian without ma­king himself subject to the Laws of that Apostle or Priest, or Minister, that shall convert him. The Jews were a peculiar People of God, a Sacerdo­tal Kingdom, and bound to no other Law, but what first Moses, and afterwards every High Priest did go and receive immediately from the Mouth of God in Mount Sinai in the Tabernacle of the Ark, and in the Sanctum Sanctorum of the Temple. And for the Text in St. Mathew: I know the words in the Gos­pel are not, Go teach, but Go and make Disciples; and that there is a great difference between a Sub­ject and a Disciple, and between teaching and com­manding; and if such Texts as these must be so in­terpreted, why do not Christian Kings lay down their Titles of Majesty and Soveraignty, and call themselves the Popes Lieutenants? But the Doctors of the Romish Church seem to decline that Title of Absolute Power, in their distinction of Power Spiritu­al and Temporal, but this Distinction I do not very well understand.

By Spiritual Power they mean the Power to [Page 8] determine Points of Faith, and to be Judges in the Inner Court of Conscience of Moral Duties, and of a Power to punish those men that obey not their Precepts by Ecclesiastical Censure, that is by Ex­communication; and this Power they say the Pope hath immediately from Christ without dependance upon any King or Soveraign Assembly whose Sub­jects they [...] that stand Excommunicate: But for the Power Temporal, which consists in judging and punishing those Actions, that are done against the Civil Law, they say they do not pretend to it direct­ly, but only indirectly▪ That is to say so far forth as such Actions tend to the hinderance or advance­ment of Religion in ordine ad Spiritualia.

What Power then is le [...]t to Kings and other Civil Soveraign [...] which the Pope may not pretend to be in ordine ad Spiritualia?

None, or very little; and this Power the Pope not only pretends to in all Christendom, but some of his Bishops also in their several Di [...]cesses, jure Divino [...] that is immediately from Christ, with­out deriving it from the Pope.

But what if a man refuse Obedience to this pretended Power of the Pope and his Bishops, what harm can Excommunication do him, especially if he be a Subject of an other Soveraign?

Very great harm: for by the Popes or Bishops Signification of it to the Civil Power, he shall be pu­nished sufficiently.

He were in an ill Case then that adventured to write, or speak in defence of the Civil Power, that must be punished by him, whose Rights he des [...]nded [Page 9] [...]ike Uzza, that was slain, because he would needs unbidden, put forth his hand to keep the Ark from falling. But, what if a whole Nation should revolt from the Pope at once? What effect could Excom­munication have upon the Nation?

Why they should have no more Mass said at least by any of the Popes Priests. Besides the Pope would have no more to do with them, but cast them off, and so they would be in the same Case as if a Nation should be cast off by their King, and left to be Governed by themselves, or whom they would.

This would not be taken so much for a Pu­nishment to the People as to the King, and there­fore when a Pope Excommunicates a whole Nation, methinks he rather Excommunicates himself, than them. But I pray you tell me what were the Rights the Pope pretended to in the Kingdoms of other Princes.

First an Exemption of all Priests, Fri [...]rs, and Monks in Criminal Causes, from the Cognizance of Civil Judges. Secondly, Collation of Benefi­ces on whom he pleased, Native or Stranger; and Exaction of Tenths, Fruits, and other payments. Thirdly▪ Appeals to R [...]me, in all Causes where the Church could pretend to be concern'd. Fourth­ly, To be the [...]upreme Judge concerning the Law­fullness of Marriage, (i. e. concerning the Here­ditar [...] Succession of Kings) and to have the Cog­nizance of all Causes concerning Adultery and For­nication.

Good! A Monopoly of Women.

Fifthly, A power of absolving Subjects of [Page 10] their Duties, and of their Oathes of Fidelity to their Lawful Soveraigns, when the Pope should think fit, for the Extirpation of Heresie.

This power of Absolving Subjects of their Obedience; as also that other of being Judges of Manners and Doctrine, is as absolute a Soveraign­ty as is possible to be: and consequently there must be two Kingdoms in one and the same Nation, and so no man be able to know which of his Masters he must obey.

For my part I should rather obey that Ma­ster that had the Right of Making Laws, and of inflicting Punishments, then him that pretendeth only to a Right of making Canons, that is to say, Rules; and no Right of Coaction, or otherwise Punishing, but by Excommunication.

But the Pope pretends also, that his Canons are Laws; and for Punishing, can there be a grea­ter then Excommunication supposing it true (as the Pope saith it is) that he that dies Excommuni­cate is damn'd: which supposition, it seems, you believe not, else you would rather have chosen to obey the Pope, that could cast your Body and Soul into Hell, then the King that can only kill the Body.

You say true; for it were very Uncharitable in me to believe, that all English men (except a few Papists) that have been born and called Hereticks, ever since the Reformation of Religion in England, should be damn'd.

But for those that dye Excommunicate in the Church of England at this day, Do you not [Page 11] think them also Damn'd, and he that is Excommu­nicate for Disobedience to the Kings Law, either, Spiritual or Temporal, is Excommunicate for Sin, and therefore if he Dye Excommunicate and with­out desire of Reconciliation; he Dies Impenitent. you see, what follows. But to Dye in Disobedience to the Precepts and Doctrine of those men that have no Authority or Jurisdiction over us, is quite an other Case, and bringeth no such danger with it.

But what is this Heresie which the Church of Rome so cruelly persecutes, as to Depose Kings that do not, when they are bidden turn all Here­ticks out of there Dominions?

Heresie is a word, which when it is used without Passion, signifies a private Opinion: so the different Sect of the Old Philosophers, Academians, Peripateticks, Epicureans, Sto [...]ks, &c. were called Heresie: But in the Christian Church, there was in the signification of that word, comprehended a sinful opposition to him that was chief Judge of Doctrines in order to the Salvation of mens Souls; and consequently Heresie may be said to bear the same Relation to the power Spiritual, that Rebelli­on doth to the power Temporal, and is sutably to be persecuted by him that will preserve a power Spiritual, and Dominion over mens Consciences.

It would be very well (because we are all of us permitted to read the Holy Scriptures, and bound to make them the Rule of our Actions both publick and private) that Heresie were by some Law defined, and the particular Opinions set forth, [Page 12] for which a man were to be condemned and punish­ed as Hereticks; for else, not only men of mean capacity, but even the wisest and devoutest Chri­stian may fall into Heresie, without any will to op­pose the Church; for the Scriptures are hard, and the interpretations different of different men.

The meaning of the word Heresy is by Law declared in an Act of Parliament, in the First Year of Queen Elizabeth; wherein it is ordained, that the Persons who had by the Queens Letters Pa­tents, the Authority Spiritual (meaning the High Commission) shall not have Authority to Adjudge a­ny Matter or Cause to be Heresy, but only such as heretofore have been Adjudged to be Heresy, by the Authority of the Canonical Scriptures, or by the First 4. General Counsels, or by any other General Council, where the same was declared Heresy by the express and plain words of the said Canonical Scripures or such as hereafter shall be adjudged Heresy, by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm; with the assent of the Clergy in their Con­vocation.

It seems therefore, if there arise any new Er­ror that hath not been yet declared Heresy, (& many such may arise) it cannot be Judged Heresy without a Parliament; for how foul soever the error be, it cannot have been declared Heresy, neither in the Scriptures nor in the Councils, because it was never before heard of; and consequently, there can be no Error unless it fall within the compass of Blasphemy against God, or Treason against the King) for which a Man can in Equity be punished: Besides [Page 13] who can tell what is declared by the Scripture, which every man is allowed to read and interpret to himself? nay more what Protestant, either of the Laity or Clergy (if every General Councel can be a competent Judge of Heresie) is not already con­demned) for divers Councels have declar'd a great many of our Doctrines to be Heresie (as they pre­tend) upon the Authority of the Scriptures.

What are those points, that the first four Ge­neral Counsels have declared Heresie?

The first General Councel held at Nicaea decla­red all to be Heresie, which was contrary to the Ni­cene Creed. Upon occasion of the Heresie of Ar­rius, which was the denying the Divinity of Christ, the Second General Counsel held at Constantinople de­clar'd Heresie the Doctrine of M [...]cedonius, which was that the Holy Ghost was created. The Third Counsel assembled at Ephesus condemned the Do­ctrine of Nestorius, that there were two persons in Christ. The Fourth held at Calcodon condemned the Error of Emtyches, that there was but one na­ture in Christ. I know of no other Points condem­ned in these 4 Counsels, but such as concern Church-Government, or the same Doctrines taught by o­ther Men in other words: And these Counsels were all called by the Emperors, and by them their De­crees confirmed, at the Petition of the Counsels themselves.

I see by this, that both the Calling of the Counsel and the confirmation of their Doctrine and Church Government had no obligatory force, but from the Authority of the Emperor; how comes [Page 14] it then to pass, that they take upon them now a Legislative Power, and say their Canons are Laws? That Text, all Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth, had the same force then as it hath now, & con­ferred a Legislative Power on the Counsels not only over Christian men, but over all Nations in the world.

They say no; for the Power they pretend to is derived from this, that when a King was conver­ted from Gentilism to Christianity, he did by that very Submission to the Bishop that converted him, submit to the Bishops Government, and became one of his sheep, which Right therefore he could not have over any Nation, that was not Christian.

Did Silvester (which was Pope of Rome in the time of Constantine the Great converted by him) tell the Emperor his New Disciple before hand, that if he became a Christian he must be the Popes Subject.

I believe not, for it is likely enough, if he had told him so plainly, or but made him suspect it, he would either have been not Christian at all, or but a Counterfeit one.

But if he did not tell him so, and that plainly, it was foul play, not only in a Priest, but in any Christi­an. And for this Derivation of their Right from the Emperors consent, it proceeds only from this, that they dare not challenge a Legislative power, nor call their Canons, Laws in any Kingdom in Christen­dom, farther than the Kings make them so▪ But in Peru, when Atabalipa was King, the Fry [...]r told him, that Christ being King of all the World had given the disposing of all the Kingdoms therein to the Pope: And that the Pope had given Peru to the Roman Emperor Charles the 5. and required Ataba­lipa [Page 15] to resign it, and for refusing it, seised upon his Person by the Spanish Army there present, and mur­dered him: You see by this how much they claim, when they have Power to make it good.

When began the Popes to take this Authority upon them first?

After the Inundation of Northern People had overflowed the Western Parts of the Empire, and possessed themselves of Italy, the People of the Ci­ty of Rome submitted themselves, as well in Tempo­rals as Spirituals to their Bishop; and then first was the Pope a Temporal Prince, and stood no more in so great fear of the Emperors, which lived far off at Constantinople: In this time it was that the Pope began by pretence of his Power Spiritual, to en­croach upon the Temporal Rights of all other Princes of the West, and so continued gaining upon them, till his Power was at the highest, in that 300 years or thereabout, which passed between the time of Pope Leo the 3. and Pope Innocent the 3. For in this time Pope Zachary 1. deposed Chilperick, then King of France, and gave the Kingdom to one of his Subjects Pepin: And Pepin took from the Lombards a great part of their Territory, and gave it to the Church: shortly after the Lombards having reco­vered their Estate, Charles the Great retook it, and gave it to the Church again, and Pope Leo the 3. made Charles Emperor.

But what Right did the Pope there pretend for the creating of an Emperor?

He pretended the Right of being Christs Vi­car, and what Christ could give, his Vicar, might [Page 16] give, and you know that Christ was King of all the World.

Yes, as God, and so he gives all the Kingdoms of the World, which nevertheless, proceed from the consent of People either for fear, or hope.

But this Gift of the Empire was in a more spe­cial Manner, in such a Manner, as Moses had the Go­vernment of Israel given him, or rather as Joshua had it given him, to go in and out before the Peo­ple, as the High Priest should direct him, and so the Empire was understood to be given him on con­dition to be directed by the Pope: for when the Pope inuested him with the Regal Ornaments, the People all cryed out Deus dat, that is to say, 'tis God that gives it: and from that time all, or most of the Chri­stian Kings do put into their Titles the words Dei gratia, that is by the gift of God: and their Suc­cessors use still to receive the Crown and Scepter [...]rom a Bishop.

'Tis certainly a very good Custom for Kings to be put in mind by whose gift they reign, but it can­not from that Custom be infer'd, that they receive the Kingdom, by mediation from the Pope, or by a­ny other Clergy: for the Popes themselves received the Papacy from the Emperor, the first that ever was elected Bishop of Rome, after Emperors were Christians, and without the Emperors consent excu­sed himself by Letter to the Emperor; with this, that the People and Clergy of Rome forced him to take it upon him, and prayed the Emperor to confirm it, which the Emperour did but with Reprehension of their Proceedings and prohibition of the like for the [Page 17] time to come the Emperour was Lotharius, and the Pope Calixtus the first.

You see by this the Emperour never ac­knowledged this gift of God was the gift of the Pope, but maintained the Popedom was the gift of the Emperour; but in process of time by the neg­ligence of the Emperour (for the greatness of Kings makes them that they cannot easily descend into the obscure and narrow Mines of an ambitious Clergy,) they found means to make the people believe, there was a Power in the Pope and Clergy: which they ought to submit unto, rather than un­to the Commands of their own King whensoever it should come into Controversy, and to that end devised and decreed many new Articles of Faith, to the diminution of the Authority of Kings, and to the disjunction of them and their Subjects, and to a closer adherence of their Subjects to the Church of Rome's Articles, either not at all found in, or not well founded upon the Scripture, as first▪ That it should not be lawful for a Priest to Marry. What influence could that have upon the Power of Kings? do you not see that by this, the King must of necessity either want the Priesthood, and therewith a great part of the Reverence due to him from the most Religious part of his Sub­jects, or else want lawful Heirs to succeed in? by which means being not taken for the Head of the Church, he was sure in any Controversy between Him and the Pope, that his Subjects would be against him.

Is not a Christian King as much a Bishop now, [Page 18] as the Heathen Kings were of old? for amongst them Episcopus was a name common to all Kings; Is not he a Bishop now, to whom God hath com­mitted the charge of all the Souls of his Subjects, both of the Laity and of the Clergy? And though he be in relation to our Saviour who is the chief Pasture of Sheep, yet compared to his own Subjects, they are all Sheep, both Laick and Clergy and he only Shepheard, and seeing a Christian Bishop is but a Christian indued with power to govern the Clergy, it follows that every Christian King is not only a Bishop but an Archbishop, and his whole Kingdom his Diocess; and though it were granted that Imposition of Hands were necessary for a Priest, yet seeing Kings have the power of Go­vernment of the Clergy that are the Subjects, even before Baptism, the Baptism it self wherein he is received as a Christian is a sufficient Imposition of Hands, so that whereas before, he was a Bi­shop, now he is a Christian Bishop.

For my part I agree with you, this Prohi­bition of Marriage to Priests came in about the time of Pope Gregory the Seventh, and William the First King of England, by which means the Pope had in England, what with Secular, and what with Regular Priests, a great many lusty Batchelers at his Service. Secondly, That Auricular Confession to a Priest was necessary to Salvation. 'Tis true, that before that time, Confession to a Priest was usual, and performed for the most part (by him that Confessed) in writing, but that use was taken away about the time of King Edward the Third, [Page 19] and Priests commanded to take Confessions from the Mouth of the Confitent; and men did generally believe, that without Confession and Absolution be­fore their departure out of the World they could not be saved, and having Absolution from a Priest they could not be damned. You understand by this how much every man would stand in awe of the Pope and Clergy, more than they would of the King, and what inconveniency it is for a State to have their Subjects confess their secret thoughts to Spies.

Yes, as much as Eternal Torture is more terrible than Death, so much they would fear the Clergy more than the King.

And though perhaps the Roman Clergy will not maintain that a Priest hath power to remit Sins absolutely, but only with a condition of Re­pentance, yet the people were never so instructed by them, but were left to believe that whensoever they had Absolution their precedent Sins were all discharged, when their Penance, which they took for Repentance, was performed; in the same time began the Article of Transubstantiation, for it had been disputed a long time before, in what manner a man did eat the Body of our Saviour Jesus Christ, as being a point very difficult for a man to con­ceive and imagine clearly, but now it was made very clear that the Bread was Transubstantiated into Christs Body, and so was become no more Bread, but Flesh.

It seems then that Christ had many Bodies, and was in as many places at once as there were [Page 20] Communicants, I think the Priests then were so wanton as to insist upon the dulness, not only of common people, but also of Kings and their Coun­celors.

I am now in a Narration, not in a Dis­putation, and therefore, I would have you at this time to consider nothing else but what effect this Doctrine would work upon Kings and their Sub­jects in relation to the Clergy, who only were able of a piece of Bread to make our Saviours Body, and thereby at the hour of death to save their Souls.

For my part it would have an effect on me to make me think them Gods, and to stand in awe of them as of God himself, if he were visibly present.

Besides these and other Articles tending to the upholding of the Pope's Authority, they had many fine points in their Ecclesiastical Policy con­ducing to the same end: of which I will mention only such as were established within the same time; for then it was the Order came up of Preaching-Friars, that wandred up and down with power to Preach in what Congregation they plea­sed, and were sure enough to instil into the people nothing that might lessen their obedience to the Church of Rome, but on the contrary, whatsoever might give advantage to it against the Civil Power, besides they privately insinuated themselves with Women and Men of weak judgments; con­firming their adherence to the Pope, and urging them in the time of their sickness to be beneficial to it by contribution of Money, or building Re­ligious [Page 21] Houses, or works of Piety, and necessary for the remission of their Sins.

I do not remember that I read of any Kingdom or State in the World, where liberty was given to any private man to call the people together and make Orations frequently to them, or at all, without first making the State acquainted, except only in Christendom: I believe the Heathen K. foresaw that a few such Orators would be able to make a great Sedition, Moses did indeed command to read the Scriptures, and expound them in the Synagogues every Sabbath day, but the Scriptures then were nothing else, but the Laws of the Na­tion delivered unto them by Moses himself, I be­lieve it would do no hurt if the Laws of England also were often read and expounded in the several Congregations of English-men at times appointed, that they may know what to do; for they know already what to believe.

I think that neither the Preaching of Friers, nor Monks, nor of Parochial Priests, tended to teach men what, but whom, to believe; for the Power of the Mighty hath no foundation, but in the opinion and belief of the people, and the end which the Pope had in multiplying Sermons was no other, but to prop and enlarge his own Authority over all Christian Kings and States.

Within the same time, that is, between the time of the Emperour Charles the Great and of King Edward the Third of England, began their second Policy, which was to bring Religion into an Art, and thereby to maintain all their Degrees [Page 22] of the Roman Church by Disputation, not only from the Scriptures, but also from the Phylosophy of Aristotle, both Moral and Natural, and to that end the Pope exhorted the said Emperour by Let­ter to erect Schools of all kinds of Literature, and from thence, began the Institution of Universities, for not long after the Universities began in Paris, and in Oxford: It is true that there were Schools in England before that time, in several places, for the instruction of Children in the Latine Tongue; that is to say, in the Tongue of the Church, but for an University of Learning there was none e­rected till that time, though it be not unlikely there might be then some that taught Philosophy, Logick, and other Arts, in divers Monastries, the Monks having little else to do but to study. After some Colledges were built to that purpose, it was not long before many more were added to them by the Devotion of Princes and Bishops, and other wealthy men and the Dicipline therein was con­firmed by the Popes that then were, and abun­dance of Scholars sent thither by their friends to study, as to a place from whence the way was open and easy to preferment both in Church and Com­monwealth. The profit the Church of Rome ex­pected from them, and in effect received, was the Maintenance of the Pope's Doctrine, and of his Authority over Kings and their Subjects, by School Divines, who striving to make good many points of Faith incomprehensible, and calling in the Phylosophy of Aristotle to their assistance, wrote great Books of School Divinity, which no [Page 23] man else, nor they themselves were able to under­stand, as any man may conceive that shall consider the writing of Peter Lombard, or Scotus, or of him that wrote Commentaries upon him, or of Suarez, or of any other School Divines of later times, which kind of Learning nevertheless hath been much admired by two sorts of men, other­wise prudent enough; The one of which sorts were those that were already Devoted, and really affectionate to the Roman Church, for they believed the Doctrine before, but admired the Arguments, because they understood them not, and yet found the Conclusions to their mind; The other sort were negligent men, that had rather admire with others, than take the pains to exa­mine, so that all sorts of people were fully re­solved that both the Doctrine was true, and the Pope's Authority no more then what was due to him. I see that a Christian King, or State, how well soever provided he be, of Money and Arms, (where the Church of Rome hath such authority) will have but a hard match of it, for want of men; for their Subjects will hardly be drawn into the Field, and fight with courage against their Con­sciences.

It is true that great rebellions have been raised by Church-men in the Pope's quarrel against Kings, as in England against King John, and in France against King Henry the Fourth, wherein the Kings had a more considerable part on their sides, than the Pope had on his, and shall always have so, if they have money; for there are but few, [Page 24] whose Consciences are so tender as to refuse money when they want it, but the great mischief done to Kings upon pretence of Religion, is when the Pope gives power to one King to Invade another.

I wonder how King Henry the Eighth so utterly extinguished the Authority of the Pope in England, and that without any Rebellion at home, or any Invasion from abroad?

First, The Priests, Monks, and Friars, be­ing in the heighth of their Power, were now, for the most part grown insolent and licentious, and thereby the force of their Arguments was now taken away by the scandal of their lives, which the Gentry, and men of good education, easily perceived, and the Parliament consisting of such persons, were therefore willing to take away their Power, and generally the Common people which for a long time had been in love with Parliaments were not displeased therewith. Se­condly, The Doctrine of Luther beginning a little before, was now by a great many men of the greatest Judgments so well received, as that there was no hope to restore the Pope to his Power by Rebel­lion. Thirdly, The Revenue of the Abbies and all other Religious Houses, falling hereby into the Kings hands, and by him being disposed of to the most eminent Gentlemen in every County, could not but make them do their best to confirm them­selves in the possession of them. Fourthly, King Henry was of a nature quick, and severe in the Pu­nishing of such as should be the first to oppose his designs. Lastly, As to Invasion from abroad, if [Page 25] the Pope had given the Kingdom to another Prince, it had been in vain, for England is another manner of Kingdom than Navarre, besides the French and Spanish Forces were imployed at that time one against another, and though they had been at lea­sure, they would have found perhaps no better success than the Spaniard found afterwards in 1588. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the Insolence, Ava­rice, and Hypocrisy of the then Clergy, and not­withstanding the Doctrine of Luther, if the Pope had not provoked the King by endeavouring to cross his Marriage with his second Wife, his Au­thority might have remained in England till there had risen some other quarrel.

Did not the Bishops that then were, and had taken an Oath, wherein was among other things that they should defend and maintain the Regal Rights of St. Peter, the words are Regalia Sancti Petri, which nevertheless some have said are Re­gulas Sancti Petri, (that is to say) St. Peter's Rules or Doctrine, and that the Clergy afterwards did read it, (being perhaps written in Shorthand) by a mistake to the Pope's advantage Regalia. Did not (I say) the Bishops oppose that Act of Par­liament against the Pope's, and against the taking of the Oath of Supremacy?

No, I do not find the Bishops did many of them oppose the King; for having no power with­out him it had been great imprudence to pro­voke his Anger; there was besides a Controversy in those times between the Pope and the Bishops, most of which did maintain, that they exercised [Page 26] their Jurisdiction Episcopal in the Right of God, as immediately as the Pope himself did exercise the same over the whole Church; and because they saw that by this Act of the King in Par­liament they were to hold their Power no more of the Pope, and never thought of holding it of the King, they were perhaps better content, to let the Act of Parliament pass in the reign of King Edward the Sixth, the Doctrine of Luther had taken such great root in England that they threw out a great many of the Pope's new Articles of Faith, which Queen Mary succeeding him restored again, together with all that had been abolished by King Henry the Eighth▪ saving (that which could not be restored) the Religious Houses, and the Bishops, and Clergy of King Edward were partly burnt for Hereticks, partly fled, and partly recanted; and they that fled betook themselves to those places beyond Sea, where the Reformed Re­ligion was either protected, or not persecuted, who after the decease of Queen Mary returned a­gain to favour and preferment under Queen Eli­zabeth, that restored the Religion of her Brother King Edward, and so it had continued to this day excepting the interruption made in this late Re­bellion of the Presbyterians and other Democra­ [...]ical men: But thus the Romish Religion were now cast out by the Law, yet there were abundance of people, and many of them of the Nobility that still retained the Religion of their Ancestors, who as they were not much molested in points of Con­science, so they were not by their own Incli­nation [Page 27] very troublesom to the Civil Government, but by the secret practice of the Jesuites and o­ther Emissaries of the Roman Church, they were made less quiet than they ought to have been; and some of them to venture upon the most horrid Act that ever had been heard of before, I mean upon the Gunpowder Treason, and upon that ac­count the Papists in England have been looked upon as men that would not be sorry for any disorders here that might possibly make way to the restoring of the Pope's Authority: and there­fore I named them for one of the distempers of the State of England in the time of our late King Charles.

I see that Monsieur du Plesis and Dr. Mor­ton Bishop of Durham writing of the progress of the Pope's Power and intituling their Books, one of them, The Mystery of Iniquity, the other The Grand Imposture, were both in the right, for I believe there was never such another cheat in the world: And I wonder that the Kings and States of Christendom never perceived it.

It is manifest they did perceive it. How else durst they make War against the Pope, and some of them take him out of Rome it self, and car­ry him away Prisoner? but if they would have freed themselves from his Tyranny, they should have agreed together and made themselves every one (as Henry the Eighth did) Head of the Church within their own respective dominions, but not agreeing they let his Power continue, every one hopeing to make use of it (when there should be cause against his neighbour.

Now, as to the other Distemper by Presby­terians. How came their Power to be so great being of themselves for the most part but so many poor Scholars?

This Controversie between the Papist and Reformed Churches could not chuse but make eve­ry man, to the best of his Power, examine by the Scriptures which of them was in the right, and to that end they were translated into Vulgar Tongues: whereas be [...] the Translation of them was not allowed, nor any man to read them, but such as had express Licence so to do, for the Pope did concerning the Scriptures the same, that Mo­ses did concerning Mount Sinai, Moses suffered no man to go up to it, to hear God speak or gaze upon him, but such as he himself took with him, and the Pope suffered none to speak with God in the Scriptures that had not some part of the Pope's Spirit in him, for which he might be trusted.

Certainly Moses did therein very wisely, and according to God's own Commandment.

No doubt of it, and the event it self hath made it since appear so; for after the Bible was Translated into English, every Man, nay every Boy and Wench that could read English, thought they spoke with God Almighty, and understood what he said, when by a certain Number of Chapters a Day they had read the Scriptures once or twice o­ver, the Reverence and Obedience due to the Re­formed Church here, and to the Bishops and Pastors therein, was cast off, and every man became a Judge of Religion and an Interpreter of the Scriptures to himself.

Did not the Church of England intend it should be so: what other end could they have in recommending the Bible to me, if they did not mean I should make it the Rule of my Actions, else they might have kept it, though open to them­selves, to me Sealed up in Hebrew, Greek and La­tine, and fed me out of it, in such measure as had been requisite for the salvation of my Soul, and the Churches peace.

I confess this Licence of Interpreting the Scripture was the cause of so many several Sects, as have lain hid till the beginning of the late King's Reign, and did then appear to the Disturbance of the Commonwealth, but to return to the Story, Those persons that fled for Religion in the time of Queen Mary, resided, for the most part, in places where the Reformed Religion was professed and Governed by an Assembly of Ministers, who also were not a little made use of (for want of better Statesmen) in points of Civil Government, which pleased so much the English and Scotch Protestants that lived amongst them, that at their return they wished there were the same Honour and Reve­rence given to the Ministry in their own Countries, and in Scotland (King James being then young) soon (with the help of some of the powerful No­bility) they brought it to pass; also they that re­turned into England in the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, endeavoured the same here, but could never effect it till this last Rebellion, nor without the help of the Scots, and it was no sooner effected but it was defeated again by the other [Page 30] Sects, which by the preaching of the Presbyterians and private Interpretation of Scripture, were grown numerous.

I know indeed, that in the beginning of the late War, the Power of the Presbyterians was so very great, that not onely the Citizens of London were, almost all of them, at their Devotion; but also the greatest part of all other Cities and Mar­ket Towns of England: But you have not yet told me by what Art and what Degrees they became so strong.

It was not their own Art alone that did it, but they had the Concurrence of a great many Gentle­men that did no less desire a Popular Government in the Civil State than these Ministers did in the Church; and as these did in the Pulpit draw the People to their Opinions and to a dislike of the Church Government, Canons, and Common Prayer Book, so did the other make them in love with Democracie by their Harangues in the Parliament, and by their Discourse and Communication with people in the Country, continnually extolling of Liberty, and inveighing against Tyrany, leaving the people to collect of themselves, that this Tyrany was the present Government of the State: and as the Presbyterians brought with them into their Churches their Divinity from the Universities, so did many of the Gentlemen bring their Politicks from thence into the Parliament, but neither of them did this very boldly in the time of Q. Eliz. and though it be not likely that all of them did it out of malice, but many of them out of error, yet certainly the Chief [Page 31] leaders were ambitious Ministers and ambitious Gentlemen, the Ministers envying the Authority of Bishops, whom they thought less Learned. And the Gentlemen envying the Privy Council whom they thought less wise than themselves; for 'tis a hard matter for men who do all think highly of their own Wits (when they have also acquired the Learning of the University) to be perswaded that they want any Ability requisite for the Govern­ment of a Commonwealth, especially having read the Glorious Histories, and the Sententious Poli­tick of the Ancient Popular Government of the Greeks and Romans amongst whom Kings were hated and branded with the name of Tyrants; and Popular Government (though no Tyrant was ever so cruel as a Popular Assembly) passed by the name of Li­berty. The Presbyterian Ministers in the beginning of the Reign of Q. Eliz. did not (because they durst not) Publickly Preach against the Discipline of the Church, but not long after (by the favour perhaps of some great Courtier) they went abroad Prea­ching in most of the Market Towns of England (as the Preaching Fryers had formerly done) upon working days in the morning; in which these and others of the same Tenets; that had charge of Souls both by the Manner and Matter of their Preach­ing; applied themselves wholly to the winning of the People, to a likeing of their Doctrines, and good Opinion of their Persons.

And first for the manner of their Preaching, They so framed their Countenance and Gesture at the entrance into the Pulpit, and their Pronunciation, [Page 32] both in their Prayer and Sermon; and used the Scripture phrase, whether understood by the Peo­ple or not, as that no Tragedian in the World could have Acted▪ the part of a right godly man bet­ter then these did, insomuch that a man unacquain­ted with such Art could never suspect any Ambi­tious Plot in them, to raise Sedition against the State, as they then had designed, or doubt that the Vehemence of their Voice (for the same words with the usual Pronunciation had been of little force) and forcedness of their Gesture and Looks could arise from any thing else but zeal to the ser­vice of God. And by this Art they came into such credit, that numbers of men used to go forth of their own Parishes and Towns on working days, leaving their Calling; and on Sunday leaving their own Churches to hear them Preach in other places, and to Despise their own and all other Preachers that acted not as well as they. And as for those Ministers that did not usually Preach, but instead of Sermons did read to the People such Homilies as the Church had appointed; they esteemed and called them Dumb Dogs.

Secondly, For the matter of their Sermons, be­cause the Anger of the People in the late Roman Usurpation was then fresh; they saw there could be nothing more gracious with them then to Preach against such other Points of the Romish Religion as the Bishops had not yet condemned, that so receding farther from Popery then they did, they might with Glory to themselves leave a Suspition on the Bi­shops as men not yet well purged from Idolatry.

[Page 33] Thirdly, before their Sermons their Prayer was▪ or seemed to be ex tempore, which they pretended to be dictated by the Spirit of God within them, and many of the People believed or seemed to be­lieve it, or any man might see that they did not take care before hand, what they should say in their Prayers: And from hence came a dislike of the Com­mon Prayer-Book, which is a set form praemedita­ted: that men might see to what they were to say, Amen.

Fourthly, They did never in their Sermons, or but lightly inveigh against the Lucrative vices of Men of Trade or Handicraft, such as are faining, lying, couzening, Hypocrisie, and other uncharita­bleness (except want of Charity to their Pastor, and to the faithful, which was a great ease to the gene­rality of Citizens, and the Inhabitants of Market Towns, and no little profit to themselves.

Fifthly, by preaching up an opinion, that men were to be assured of their Salvation, by the Te­stimony of their own private Spirit, meaning the Holy Ghost; dwelling within them: And from this opinion, the People, that [...]ound in themselves a suf­ficient hatred towards the Papists, and an ability to repeat the Sermons of these men at their coming home made no doubt, but that they had all that was necessary, how fraudulently and spitefully soever they behaved themselves to their Neighbours, that were not reckoned amongst the Saints, and some­times to those also.

Sixthly, They did indeed with great earnestness, and severity inveigh often against two Sins, Carnal [Page 34] Lust, and vain Swearing, which without question was very well done, but the Common People were there­by inclined to believe, that nothing else was Sin, but that which was forbidden in the 3d. and 7th. Commandment: for few men do understand by the Name of Lust any other Concupiscence than that which is forbidden in the 7 Commandment: for men are not ordinarily said to lust after another Mans Catle, or other goods or possessions, and therefore ne­ver made much Scruple of the Acts of Fraud & Ma­lice, but endeavoured to keep themselves from Un­cleaness only, or at least from the Scandal of it; and whereas they did both in their Sermons and writings maintain and inculcate, that the very first motions of the Mind, that is to say the delight Men and Women took in the sight of one anothers Form, though they checked the proceeding therof, so that it never grew up to be a Design, was nevertheless a Sin; they brought Young Men into Desperation and to think themselves damn'd because they could not (which no man can, and is contrary to the Constitution of Na­ture) behold a delightful Object without Delight; and by this means they became Confessors to such as were thus troubled in Conscience, and were obey­ed by them, as these Spiritual Doctors in all Cases of Conscience.

Yes, divers of them did preach frequently a­gainst Oppression.

Tis true, I had forgot that, but it was before such as were free enough from it, (I mean) the Com­mon People, who would easily believe themselves oppressed, but never Oppressors: And therefore [Page 35] you may reckon this amongst their Artificers, to make their People beleive they were oppressed by the King, or perhaps by the Bishops or both, and inclined the meaner sort to their Party afterward when there should be occasion; but this was but spa­ringly done in the time of Q. Eliz. whose fear and Jealousie they were afraid of: nor had they as yet any great Power in the Parliament House, where­by to call in question her Prerogative by Petitions of Right, and other Devices as they did afterwards when Democratical Gentlemen had received them into their Council, for the design of changing the Monarchical Government into Popular, which they called Liberty.

Who could think that such Horrible Designs as these could so easily and so long remain, covered with the Cloak of Godliness; for that they were most Impious Hypocrites is manifest enough, by the War these preceedings ended in, and by the Impious Act in the War committed? But when began first to appear in Parliament the attempt of Popular Government and by whom?

As to the time of attempting the change of Government from Monarchical to Democratical, we must distinguish: They did not challenge the Soveraignty in plain terms, and by that name, till they had slain the King; nor the Rights thereof, altogether, by particular Heads, till the King was driven from London by Tumults raised in the City against him, and retired for the security of his Person to York, where he had not been many days when they sent unto him Nineteen Propositions, [Page 36] whereof above a Dozen were Demands of several Powers, Essential parts of the Power Soveraign, but before that time they had demanded some of them (in a Petition which they called a Petition of Right) which nevertheless the King had granted them in a former Parliament: though he deprived himself thereby, not only of the Power to Levy Mony without their consent, but also of his ordi­nary Revenue by Custome of Tonnage and Poun­dage, and of the Liberty to put into Custody such men as he thought likely to disturb the Peace and [...]ise Sedition in the Kingdom: As for the men that did this, 'tis enough to say, they were the Members of the last Parliament, and of some other Parliaments in the beginning of the Reign of King Charles, and the end of the Reign of King James: To name them all is not necessary, farther then the Story shall require; most of them were Members of the House of Commons, some few also of the Lords: But all such as had a great Opi­nion of their sufficiency in Politicks which they thought was not sufficiently taken notice of by the King.

How could the Parliament, when the King had a great Navy, and a great number of Train'd Souldiers, and all the Magazines of Ammunition in his power, be able to begin the War.

The King had these things in his Right, but that signifies little, when they had the Custody of the Navy and Magazines, and with them all the Trained Souldiers, and in a manner all the Subjects were by the Preaching of Presbyterian [Page 37] Ministers and the seditious whispering of false and ignorant Polititians made his Enemies, and when the King could have no Money but what the Parliament should give him, which you may be sure should not be enough to maintain his Le­gal Power, which they intended to take from him. And yet I think they would never have ad­ventured into the Field but for that unlucky busi­ness of imposing upon the Sc [...]ts (who were all Presbyterians) our Book of Common Prayer, for I believe the English would never have taken well that the Parliament should make War upon the King upon any provocation, unless it were in their own defence, in case the King should first make War upon them, and therefore it behoved them to provoke the King that he might do something that might look like Hostility: It hapned in the year 1637. that the King by the advice (as it is thought) of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, sent down a Book of Common Prayer into Scotland, not differing in substance from ours, nor much in words, besides the putting of the word Presbyter for that of Minister, commanding it to be used (for Confor­mity to this Kingdom) by the ministers there, for an ordinary form of Divine Service; this being read out the Church at Edinburgh, caused such a Tumult there, that he that read it had much adoe to escape with his life, and gave occasion to the greatest part of the Nobility, and others, to enter (by their own Authority) into a Covenant amongst themselves to put down Episcopacy without con­sulting the King, which they presently did, anima­ted [Page 38] thereto by their own Confidence, or by assu­rance from some of the Democratical English men, that in former Parliaments had been the greatest opposers of the King's interest, that the King would not be able to raise an Army to chastise them without calling a Parliament, which would be sure to favour them, for the thing which those Demo­craticals chiefly then aimed at, was to force the King to call a Parliament, which he had not done of ten years before, as having found no help, but hinderance, to his designs in the Parliaments he had formerly called. Howsoever contrary to their expectation by the help of his better affected Subjects of the Nobility and Gentry, he made a shift to raise a sufficient Army to have reduced the Scots to their former obedience, if it had pro­ceeded to Battle: And with this Army he marched himself into Scotland, where the Scotch Army was also brought into the Field against him, as if they meant to fight; but then the Scotch sent to the King for leave to treat by Commissioners on both sides, and the King willing to avoid the destruction of his own Subjects condescended to it, the issue was Peace, and the King thereupon went to Edin­burgh and passed an Act of Parliament there to their Satisfaction.

Did he not then confirm Episcopacy?

No, but yielded to the abolishing of it, but by the means the English were crossed in their hope of a Parliament, but the Democraticals, for­merly opposers of the King's Interest, ceased not to endeavour still to put the two Nations into a [Page 39] War, to the end the King might buy the Parlia­ment's help at no less a price than Soveraignty it self.

But what was the Cause that the Gentry and Nobility of Scotland were so averse from E­piscopacy? For I can hardly believe that their Consciences were extraordinarily tender, nor that they were so very great Divines as to know what was the true Church Discipline established by our Saviour and his Apostles, nor yet so much in love with their Ministers as to be over-ruled by them in the Government either Ecclesiastical or Civil, for in their lives they were just as other men are, Pursuers of their own Interests and Prefer­ments, wherein they were not more opposed by the Bishops than by their Presbyterian Mini­sters.

Truly I do not know, I cannot enter into o­ther mens thoughts farther than I am lead by the consideration of Human Nature in general: But upon this consideration I see. First, That men of antient Wealth and Nobility are not apt to brook, that poor Schollars should (as they must when they are made Bishops) be their Fellows. Se­condly, That from the emulation of Glory between the Nations, they be willing to see their Nation af­flicted with Civil War, and might hope by aiding the Rebels here to acquire some Power over the Eng­lish; at least so far as to establish here the Presbyteri­an Discipline, which was also one of the points they afterwards openly demanded. Lastly, They might hope for in the War some great sum of money as a [Page 40] reward of their assistance, besides great Booty which they afterwards obtained, but whatsoever was the cause of their hatred to Bishops, the pulling of them down was not all they aimed at; if it had (now that Episcopacy was abolished by Act of Parlia­ment) they would have rested satisfied, which they did not; for after the King was returned to Lon­don the English Presbyterians and Democraticals, by whose favour they had put down Bishops in Scot­land, thought it reason to have the assistance of the Scotch for the pulling down of Bishops in Eng­land▪ and in order thereunto, they might perhaps deal with the Scots secretly to rest unsatisfied with that pacification which they were before contented with, howsoever it was, not long after the King was returned to London they sent up to some of their friends at Court a certain Paper containing (as they pretended) the Articles of the said Paci­fication: a false and Scandalous Paper, which was by the King's Command burnt (as I have heard) publickly, and so both parts returned to the same Condition as they were in when the King went down with his Army.

And so there was a great deal of Money cast away to no purpose; but you have not told me who was General of that Army.

I told you the King was there in Person, he that commanded under him was the Earl of A­rundel; a man that wanted not either Valour o [...] Judgement: but to proceed to Battle, or to Trea­ty, was not in his Power but in the King's.

He was a man of a most Noble and Loyal Family, and whose Ancestors had formerly given a great overthrow to the Scots in their own Coun­trey, and in all likelihood he might have given them the like now, if they had Fought.

He might indeed, but it had been but a kind of Superstition to have made him General u­pon that account, though many Generals hereto­fore have been chosen for the good luck of their Ancestors in the like occasions. In the long War between Athens and Sparta a General of the A­thenians by Sea, won many Victories against the Spartans, for which cause after his death they chose his Son for General with ill success: The Romans that Conquered Carthage by the Valor and Conduct of Scipio, when they were to make War again in Africk against Caesar, chose another Scipio, a man Valiant and Wise enough, but he perished in the imployment. And to come home to our own Nation, the Earl of Essex made a fortunate Expedition to Cadiz, but his Son sent afterwards to the same place could do nothing. 'Tis but a foolish Superstition to hope that God has entailed success in War, upon a Name or Family.

After the Pacification broken what succeeded next?

The King sent Duke Hamilton with Com­mission and Instructions into Scotland to call a Par­liament there, (but all was to no purpose) and to use all the means he could otherwise, but the Scots were resolved to raise an Army, and to enter into England, to deliver (as they pretended) their [Page 42] grievances to his Majesty in a Petition because the King (they said) being in the hands of evil Coun­cellors, they could not otherwise obtain their right; but the truth is, they were otherwise animated to it by the Democratical, and Presbyterian Eng­lish, with a promise of Reward, and hope of Plun­der: some have said that Duke Hamilton also did rather encourage them to, than deterr them from the Expedition; as hoping by h [...] disorder of the two Kingdoms to bring to pass that which he had formerly been accused to endeavour to make him­self King of Scotland; but I take this to have been a very uncharitable Censure upon so little ground to judge so hardly of a man, that afterwards lost his life in seeking to procure the liberty of the King his Master. This resolution of the Scots to enter into England being known: the King wanting Money to raise an Army against them, was now, as his Enemies here wished, constrained to call a Parli­ament to meet at Westminster the 13 of April 1640.

Methinks a Parliament o [...] England, if upon any occasion should furnish the King with Money now in a War against the Scots out of an invete­terate Disaffection to that Nation that had always taken part with their Enemies the French, and which alwayes esteemed the Glory of England for an abatement of their own.

'Tis indeed commonly seen that Neighbour Nations envy one anothers Honour, and that the less potent bears the greater malice; but that hinders them not from agreeing in those things which their common ambition leads them to: And [Page 43] therefore the King found for the War, but the less help, from this Parliament, and most of the Members thereof in their ordinary discourses seemed to wonder, why the King should make a War upon Scotland, and in that Parliament some­time called them their Brethren the Scots, but in­stead of taking the King's business, which was the raising of Money, into their consideration, they fell upon the redressing of grievances, and especially such way of levying money as in the last inter­mission of Parliament the King had been forced to use, such as were Ship money, for Knighthood, and such other Vails (as one may call them) of the Regal Office which Lawyers had found justi­fiable by the antient Records of the Kingdom; be­sides they fell upon the Actions of divers Mini­sters of State, though done by the Kings own Com­mand and Warrant, insomuch that before they were called the Money which was necessary for this War (if they had given Money as they ne­ver meant to do) had come too late; it is true there was mention of a sum of Money to be given the King by way of Bargain, for relinquishing his Right to Ship-money, and some other of his Prero­gatives; but so seldom, and without determining any Sum, that it was in vain for the King to hope for any success; and therefore on the Fifth of May following he disolved them.

Where then had the King Money to raise and pay his Army?

He was forced the second time to make use of the Nobility and Gentry, who contributed some [Page 44] more, some less, according to the greatness of their Estates, but amongst them all they made up a very sufficient Army.

It seems then that the same Men that crossed his business in the Parliament, now out of Parlia­ment advanced it all they could, what was the rea­son of that?

The greatest part of the Lords in Parliament and the Gentry throughout England were more affected to Monarchy than to a Popular Government, but so as not to endure to hear of the King's absolute Power, which made them in time of Parliament easily to condescend to abridge it, and bring the Govern­ment to a mixt Monarchy, as they called it, where­in the absolute Sovereignty should be divided be­tween the King, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons.

But how if they cannot agree?

I think they never thought of that, but I am sure they never meant the Soveraignty should be wholly either in one or both Houses; besides they were loath to desert the King when he was Inva­ded by Forreiners; for the Scots were esteemed by them as a Forrein Nation.

It is strange to me that England and Scotland being but one Island, and their Language almost the same, & being Governed by one King, should be thought Forreiners to one another, the Romans were Masters of many Nations, and to oblige them the more to obey the Edicts of the Law sent unto them by the City of Rome, they thought fit to make them all Romans; and out of divers Nati­ons [Page 45] as Spain, Germany, Italy, and France, to ad­vance some, that they thought worthy, even to be Senators of Rome, and to give every one of the Common People the Priviledge of the City of Rome, by which they were protected from the Contumelies of other Nations where they resided, why were not the Scotch and English in like man­ner united unto one People?

King James at his first coming to the Crown of England did endeavour it, but could not pre­vail, but for all that I believe the Scotch have now as many priviledges in England as any Nation had in Rome of those which were so (as you say) made Romans; for they are all Naturaliz'd, and have right to buy Land in England to them and their Heirs.

'Tis true of them that were born in Scotland after the time that King James was in possession of the Kingdom of England.

There be very few now that were born be­fore. But why have they a better right that were born after than they that were born before?

Because they were born Subjects to the King of England and the rest not.

Were not the rest born Subjects to King James? And was not he King of England?

Yes, but not then.

I understand not the subtilty of the Distin­ction, but upon what Law is that distinction groun­ded? Is there any Statute to that purpose?

I cannot tell, I think not, but it is grounded upon Equity.

I see little Equity in this, that those Nati­ons that are bound to equal obedience to the same King should not have equal Priviledges: and now seeing there be so very few born before King James's comeing in; What greater Privi­ledges had those Ingrafted Romans by their Natu­ralization in the State of Rome, or in the State of England, the English themselves more than the Scotch?

Those Romans, when any of them were in Rome, had their voice in the making of Laws.

And the Scotch have their Parliaments where­in their assent is required to the Law there made, which is as good; Have not many of the Provinces of France their several Parliaments, and several Constitutions? Yet they are all equally Natural Subjects to the King of France. and therefore for my part, I think they were mistaken both English and Scotch in calling one another Forreiners. How­soever that be, the King had a very sufficient Army wherewith he marched towards Scotland, and by that time he was come to York the Scotch Army was drawn up to the Frontiers, and ready to march into England, (which also they presently did) giving out all the way, that their march should be without damage to the Country, and that their Errand was onely to deliver a Petition to the King for the redress of many pretended Injuries they had received from such of the Court whose Coun­sel the King most followed so they passed through Northumberland quietly till they came to a Ford in the River of Tine a little above Newcastle▪ [Page 47] where they found some little opposition from a party of the King's Army sent thither to Stop them, whom the Scots easily mastered, and as soon as they were over, seized upon Newcastle, and coming farther on, upon the City of Duresme, and sent to the King to desire a Treaty, which was granted, and the Commissioners on both sides met at Rippon, the conclusion was that all should be re­ferred to the Parliament which the King should call to meet at Westminster the third of No­vember following in the same year 1640. And there­upon the King returned to London.

So the Armies were disbanded.

No, The Scotch Army was to be defrayed by the Counties of Northumberland and Duresme, and the King was to pay his own till the disbanding of both should be agreed upon in Parliament.

So in effect both the Armies were maintained at the King's charge, and the whole Controversie to be desided by a Parliament, almost wholly Pres­byterian, and as Partial to the Scotch as themselves could have wished.

And yet for all this they durst not presently make War upon the King; there was so much yet left of Reverence to him in the Hearts of the Peo­ple as to have made them odious if they had de­clared what they intended, they must have some co­lour or other to make it be believed, that the King made War first upon the Parliament. And be­sides they had not yet sufficiently disgraced him in Sermons and Pamphlets, nor removed from about him those they thought could best counsel him, [Page 48] therefore they resolved to proceed with him like skilfull hunters, First to single him out by men disposed in all parts to drive him into the open field, and then in case he should not seem to turn head to call that making a War against the Parliament. And first, They called in question such as had either Preached, or written, in defence of those Rights which belonging to the Crown they meant to usurp, and take from the King to themselves, where­upon some few Writers and Preachers were im­prisoned, or forced to fly: The King not protecting these, they proceeded to call in question some of the King's own Actions in his Ministers, whereof they Imprisoned some, and some went beyond Sea, and whereas certain persons having endeavoured by Book and Sermons to raise Sedition, and commit­ted other Crimes of high Nature, had therefore been censured by the Kings Council in the Star-Chamber and Imprisoned; the Parliament by their own Authority, to try (it seems) how the King and the People would take it (for their Persons were inconsiderable) ordered their set­ting at Liberty, which was accordingly done, with great Applause of the People that flocked about them in London in manner of a Triumph. This being done without resistance, the Kings Right to Ship-mony—

Ship-mony! What's that?

The Kings of England for the defence of the Sea had power to Tax all the Counties of Eng­land whether they were Maritine or not, for the Building and furnishing of Ships, which Tax the [Page 49] King had then lately found cause to impose, and the Parliament exclaimed against it as an oppressi­on: and one of their members that had been Taxed but 20 shillings, (mark the Oppression, a Parlia­ment-man of 500 lb. a year Land Taxed at 20 shillings) they were forced to bring it to a Trial at Law, he refusing payment, and he was cast a­gain: when all the Judges of Westminster were de­manded their opinions concerning the legality of it▪ of Twelve, that there are, it was judged Legal by Ten; for which though they were not punished, yet they were affrighted by the Parliament.

What did the Parliament mean when they did exclaim against it as illegal? Did they mean it was against Statute Law, or against the Judg­ments of Lawyers given heretofore, which are commonly called Reports? or did they mean it was against Equity, which I take to be the [...]ame with the Law of Nature?

It is a hard matter, or rather impossible to know what other men mean, especially, if they be crafty, but sure I am Equity was not their Ground for their pretence of Immunity from Con­tributing to the King, but at their own pleasure, for when they have laid the Burthen of defending the whole Kingdom and Governing it upon any person whatsoever; there is little Equity he should depend on others for the means of performing it, or if he do, they are his Soveraign, not he theirs, and as for the Common Law, contained in Reports, they have no force but what the King gives them, besides it were unreasonable that a corrupt or [Page 50] foolish Judge's unjust Sentence should by any time, how long soever, obtain the authority and force of a Law, but amongst the Statute Laws there is one called Magna Charta, or The great Charter of the Liberties of English men, in which there is one Article that no man shall be distrained, that is, have his Goods taken from him otherwise than by the Law of the Land.

Is not that a sufficient ground for their pur­pose?

No, that leaves us in the same doubt which you think it clears; for, where was the Law of the Land then? Did they mean another Magna Charta that was made by some King more antient yet? No, that Statute was made not to exempt any man from payments to the Publick, but for securing of every man from such as abused the King's Power by surreptitious obtaining of the King's Warrants, to the oppressing of those against whom he had any Suite in Law: but it was conducing to the end of some rebellious Spirits in this Parliament, to have it interpreted in the wrong sense, and suitable enough to the understanding of the rest, or most part of them to let it pass.

You make the members of that Parliament very simple men, and yet the People chose them for the wisest of the Land.

If Craft be Wisedom they were wise enough, but Wise as I de [...]ino it, is he that knows how to bring his business to pass without the Assistance of Knavery and ignoble shifts, by the sole strength of his good contrivance, a Fool may win from a [Page 51] better Gamester by the advantage of false Dice, and Packing of Cards.

According to your difinition there be few wise men now adays, such Wisedome is a kind of Gallantry that few are brought up to; and most think Folly, fine Cloaths, great Feathers, Civility towards men that will not swallow Injuries, and In­jury towards them that will is the present Gallan­try; but when the Parliament afterwards having gotten the power into their hands levied money to their own use, What said the People to that?

What else, but that it was legal, and to be paid as being Imposed by consent of Parlia­ment.

I have heard often that they ought to pay what was imposed by consent of Parliament to the use of the King, but to their own use, never be­fore; I see by this it is easier to gull the multi­tude than any one man amongst them, for what one man that has his Natural Judgment depraved by accident, could be so easily cousened in a mat­ter that concerns his Purse, had he not been pas­sionately carried away by the rest to change of Government, or rather to a Liberty of every one to Govern himself.

Judge then what kind of men such a multi­tude of Ignorant People were like to elect for the Burgeses, and Knights of Shires.

I can make no other Judgment, but that they who were then elected, were just such as had been elected for former Parliaments, and as are like to be elected for Parliaments to come, [Page 52] for the Common people have been, and always will be ignorant of their Duty to the Publick, as never meditating any thing, but their particular Interest, in other things following their immediate Leaders, which are either the Preachers, or the most potent of the Gentlemen that dwell amongst them as Common Souldiers for the most part fol­low their Captains, if they like them; If you think the late miseries have made them wiser, that will quickly be forgot, and then we shall be no wiser than we were?

Why may not men be taught their Duty? that is, the Science of Just and Unjust, as divers o­ther Sciences have been taught, from true Prin­ciples and Demonstrations? and much more easily than any of those Preachers and Democratical Gent. could, Rebellion and Treason.

But who can teach what none have learned? or if any Man hath been so singular as to have studied the Science of Justice and Equity, how can he teach it safely when it is against the Interest of those that are in possession of the Power to hurt him.

The Rules of the Just and Unjust sufficiently demonstrated, and from Principles evident to the meanest capacity have not been wanting, and not­withstanding the obscurity of their Author, have shined not only in this, but in forreign Countries, to men of good Education, but they are few in respect of the rest of men, whereof many cannot read; many though they can have no leasure, and of them that have leasure, the greatest part have [Page 53] their minds wholly imployed and taken up by their private businesses or pleasures: so that it is impossible that the Multitude should ever learn their Duty but from the Pulpit, and upon Holy­dayes, but then, and from thence it is that they learned their Disobedience; and therefore the light of that Doctrine has been hitherto cover­red and kept under; hereby a cloud of ad­versaries which no private man's reputation can break through, without the Authority of the U­niversities, but from the Universities came all those Preachers that taught the contrary. The Univer­sities have been to this Nation as the Wooden-Horse was to the Trojans;

Can you tell me why, and when the Uni­versities here first began?

It seems, for the time, they began in the Reign of the Emperour Charles the Great, before which time I doubt not but there were many Gram­mar Schools for the Latine Tongue, which was the Natural Language of the Roman Church, but for Universities, that is to say, Schools for the Sci­ence in general, and especially for Divinity; it is manifest that the Institution of them was recommen­ded by the Pope's Letter to the Emperor Charles the great, and recommended farther, by a Council held in his time, I think, at Chal. sur Saone; and not long after was erected an University at Paris, and the Colledge called University Colledge at Oxford, and so by degrees several Bishops, Noblemen, and Rich men, and some Kings and Queens contributing there­unto, the Universities at last obtained their present Splendor.

But what was the Pope's designe in it?

What other design was he like to have, but what you heard before? the advancement o [...] his own Authority in the Countries where the Uni­versities were erected? There they learned to Dispute for him, and with unintelligible Distincti­ons to blind mens Eyes, whilst they encroached upon the Rights of Kings; and it was an evident Argument of that Design, that they fell in hand with the work so quickly; for the first Rector of the University of Paris, as I have read some where, was Peter Lombard, who fi [...]st brought it to them the Learning called School Divinity, and was se­conded by John Scot of Duns, who lived in, or near, the same time, whom any Ingenious Reader not knowing what was the design would judge to have been the most egregious Blockhead in the world? so obscure and senseless are their Wri­tings: And from these the School-men that suc­ceeded learnt the trick of Imposing what they list upon their Readers, and declining the force of true Reason by verbal Forks, I mean distincti­ons that signify nothing, but serve only to astonish the multitude of ignorant men: as for the under­standing Readers they were so few, that these new sublime Doctors cared not what they thought, these School men were to make good all the Articles of Faith which the Pope from time to time should command to be believed: Amongst which there were very many inconsistent with the Rights of Kings, and other Civil Soveraigns, as asserting to the Pope all Authority whatsoever, they should [Page 55] declare to be necessary in ordine ad Spiritualia, (that is to say) In order to Religion.

From the Universities also it was that Preachers proceeded, and were poured out into City and Country to terrify the People into an absolute Obedience to the Pope's Canons and Commands, which for fear of wakening Kings and Princes too much, they durst not yet call them Laws.

From the Universities it was that the Phylosophy of Aristotle was made an Ingredient to Religion, as ser­ving for a Salve to a great many absurd Articles con­cerning the Nature of Christs Body, and the State of Angels and Saints in Heaven: which Articles they thought fit to have believ'd because they bring some of them profit, and others Reverence to the Cler­gy, even to the meanest of them; for when they shall have made the People believe that the meanest of them can make the Body of Christ: Who is there that will not both shew them Reverence, and be Liberal to them or to the Church, especially in the time of their sickness, when they think they make and bring to them their Saviour?

But what advantage to them in these Impo­stures was the Doctrine of Aristotle?

They have made more use of his Obscurity than his Doctrine, for none of the Ancient Phy­losophers Writings are Comparable to those of A­ristotle, for their aptness to puzzle and entangle men with words, and to breed Disputation, which must at last be ended in the Determination of the Church of Rome. And in the Doctrine of Ari­stotle [Page 56] they made use of many Points. As First, the Doctrine of separated Essenses.

What are separated Essenses?

Separated Beings.

Separated from what?

From every thing that is.

I cannot understand the Being of any thing, which I understand not to Be: But what can they make of that.

Very much in Questions concerning the Na­ture of God, and concerning the Estate of Mans Soul after Death in Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory, by which you and every▪ Man knows how great Obedience, and how much Mony they gain from the Common People: whereas Aristotle holdeth the Soul of Man to be the first giver of Motion to the Body, and consequently to it self: they make use of that in the Doctrine of Free Will, what and how they gain by that, I will not say.

He holdeth forth, that there be many things that come to pass in this World, from no necessity of Causes, but meer Contingency, Causalty and For­tune.

Me thinks in this they make God stand Idle, and to be a meer Spectator in the Games of For­tune; for what God is the cause of must needs come to pass. And in my Opinion nothing else: but be­cause there must be some Ground for Justice of the Eternal Torment of the Damned; perhaps it is this, That mens Wills and Propensions are not (they think) in the hands of God, but of them­selves. [Page 57] And in this also I see something conducing to the Authority of the Church.

This is not much, nor was Aristotle of such Credit with them, but that when his Opinion was against theirs, they could slight him; whatsoever he says is impossible in Nature, they can prove well enough to be possible from the Almighty Power of God, who can make Bodies to be in one and the self same Place, and one [...]ody to be in many Places at the same time; if the Doctrine of Transubstan­tiation require it: though Aristotle deny it, I like not the Design of drawing Religion into an Arts▪ whereas it ought to be a Law. And though not the same in all Countries, yet in every Country in­disputable; nor that they teach it not as Arts ought to be taught, by shewing first the meaning of their Terms, and then deriving from them the truth they would have us believe. Nor that their Terms are for the most part unt [...]lligible: though to make it seem rather want of Learning in the Reader, than want of fair dealing in themselves; they are for the most part Latin and Greek words [...]ryed a little the point towards the Native Langua­ges of the several Countries where they are used. But that which is most intollerable is, That all Clerks are forced to make as if they believe them: If they mean to have any Church Preferment, the Keys whereof are in the Popes Hands; and the Common People whatsoever they believe of those subtile Doctrines, are never esteemed better Sons of the Church for their Learning. There is but one way there to Salvation, that is, Extraordina­ry [Page 58] Devotion and Liberality to the Church, and readiness for the Churches sake, of it be required▪ to fight against their Natural and Lawfull▪ So­vereigns.

I see what use they make of Aristotles Logick, Physick and Metaphysick [...]. But [...] not yet how his Politicks can serve their turn.

Nor I, It has (I think) done them no Good▪ though it [...]as done us here much hurt by Accident; for m [...]n grown weary at last of th [...] Insolence of the Priests, and examining the [...] Do­ctrines that were put upon them, began to search the sense of the Scriptures as they are in the Lear­ned Languages; and consequently Studying Greek and Latin, became acquainted with the Democra­tical Principles of Aristotle and Cicero, and from the Love of their Eloquence▪ fell in [...]ove with their Politicks, and that more and more, till it grew into the Rebellion we now talk of, without any other advantage to the Roman Church, but that it was awakening to us, whom since we broke out of their Net in the time of Henry 8. they have con­tinually endeavoured to recover.

What have they gotten by teaching of Aristotles Ethicks?

It is some advantage to them, that neither the Morals of Aristotle, nor of any other, have done them any [...], nor us any good. Their Doctrine have caused a great deal of Dispute con­cerning Vertue and Vice, but no knowledge of what they are, nor any method of attaining Ver­tue, nor of avoiding Vice.

[Page 59] The end of Moral Philosophy, is to teach men of all sorts their Duty, both to the Publick, and to one another. They Estemate Virtue partly by a Mediocrity of the Passions of Men, and partly by that, that they are praised; whereas it is not the much or little praise that makes an Action Ver [...]ous, but the Cause; nor much or little Blame that makes an Action Vitious, but its being unconformable to the Laws, in such men as are subject to the Law; or its being unco [...]ormable to Equity or Charity in all men whatsoever.

It seems you make a difference between the Ethicks of Subjects, and the Ethicks of Sove­reigns.

So I do: The Vertue of a Subject is compre­hended wholly in obedience to the Laws of the Commonwealth. To obey the Laws is Justice and Equity, which is the Law of Nature, and conse­quently is Civil Law in all Nations of the World; and nothing is Injustice or Iniquity, otherwise then it is against the Law: likewise to obey the Law is the Prudence of a Subject; for without such obe­dience the Commonwealth (which is every Subjects Safety and Protection) cannot subsist. And though it be Prudence also in private men, justly and mode­rately to enrich themselves; yet craftily to with­hold from the Publick, or defraud it of such part of the Wealth as is by Law required, is no sign of Prudence, but of want of knowledge of what is necessary for their own defence.

The Vertues of Soveraigns are such as tend to the maintenance of Peace at Home, and to the [Page 60] Resistance of Forreign Enemies. Fortitude is a Royal Vertue, and though it be necessary in such private men as shall be Soldiers; yet for other men the less they dare the better it is, both for the Commonwealth, and for themselves. Frugality (though perhaps you will think it strange) is also a Royal Vertue, for it increases the publick stock, which cannot be too great for the Publick Use, not any man too sparing of what he has in trust for the good of others. Liberality also is a Royal Vertue, for the Commonwealth cannot be well serv'd without Extraordinary Diligence and Ser­vice of Ministers, and great Fidelity to their So­veraign, who ought therefore to be incouraged and especially those that do him service in the Wars. In summ, all Actions or Habits are to be esteemed Good or Evil, by their Causes and Use­fulness in reference to the Commonwealth, and not by their Mediocrity, nor by their being Commen­ded; for several men praise several Customes, and that which is vertue with one, is blam'd by others and contrarily, what one calls Vice, an other calls Vertue as their present Affections lead them.

Methinks you should have placed amongst the Vertues, that which in my Opinion is the grea­test of all Vertues, Religion.

So I have, though it seems you did not ob­serve it: But whether do we Digress from the way we were in?

I think you have not Digressed at all; for I suppose your purpose was to acquaint me with the History, not so much of those Actions that past in [Page 61] the time of the late Troubles, as of their Causes, and of the Counsels, and Artifices by which they were brought to pass. There be divers men that have Written the History, out of whom I might have Learned what they did, and somewhat also of the Contrivance: but I find little in them of it. I would ask therefore, since you were pleased to en­ter into this Discourse at my request; be pleased also to inform me after my own method. And for the danger of Confusion that may arise from that, I will take care to bring you back to the place from whence I drew you; for I well remember where it was.

Well then, to your Question concerning Religion, Inasmuch as I told you, that Vertue is comprehended in Obedience to the Laws of the Commonwealth, whereof Religion is one, I have placed Religion amongst the Vertues.

Is Religion then the Law of a Common­wealth?

There is no Nation in the World, whose Re­ligion is not Established, and receives not its Au­thority from the Laws of that Nation. It is true that the Law of God receives no obedience from the Laws of Men; but because men can never by their own Wisdom come to the knowledge of what God hath spoken and Commanded to be Observed, nor be obliged to obey the Laws, whose Author they know not; they are to acquiess in some humane Authority or other: So that the Question will be, Whether a man ought in matter of Religion, (that is to say) when there is question of his Duty to God [Page 62] and the King▪ to rely upon the Preaching of their Fellow-Subjects, or of a Stranger, or upon the Voice of the Law?

There is no great difficulty in that point, for there is none that Preach here, or any where else, at least ought to Preach, but such as have Autho­rity so to do, from him or them that have the Sove­reign Power: So that if the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully Preach as them that do, and I believe we should perform that Office a great deal better than they, that preached us into Rebel­lion.

The Church Morals are in many points very different from these that I have here set down for the Doctrine of Vertue and Vice, and yet without any conformity with that of Aristotle, for in the Church of Rome the principle Vertues are to obey their Doctrine, though it be Treason, and that is to be Religious, to be beneficial to the Clergy, that is their Piety and Liberality, and to believe upon their word, that which a man knows in his Conscience to be false, which is the Faith that they require: I could name a great many more such Points of their Morals, but that I know you know them already, being so well versed in the cases of Conscience written by their School-men, who measure the Goodness and Wickedness of all Acti­ons by their Congruity with the Doctrine of the Roman Clergy.

But what is the Moral Phylosophy of the Pro­testant Clergy in England?

So much as they shew of it in their Life and [Page 63] Conversation, is for the most part very good, and of very good example, much better than their Writing [...].

It happens many times that men live honest­ly for fear▪ who i [...] [...] had Power would live according to their own Opinions; that is, if their Opinions be not right, Unrighteously.

Do the Clergy in England pretend as the Pope does, or as the Presbyterians doe, to have a right from God immediately to Govern the King and his Subjects in all points of Religion and Man­ners? if they do, you cannot doubt but that if they had Number and Strength (which they are never like to have) they would attempt to attain that Power, as the others have done.

I would be glad to see a System of the pre­sent Morals written by some Divine of good Re­putation and Learning, and of the late King's party.

I think I can recommend unto you the best that is extant, and such an one as (except a few passages that I mislike) is very well worth your reading: the Title of it is, The whole Duty of Man, laid down in a plain and familiar way. And yet I dare say, that if the Presbyterian Ministers, even those of them that were the most dilligent Preachers of the late Sedition; were to be tried by it they would go near to be found Not Guilty. He has divided the Duty of Man into three great Branches. His Duty to God, to Himself, and to his Neighbour. In his Duty to God he puts the ac­knowledgment of him is his Essence, and his Attri­butes, [Page 64] and, in believing of his Word, his Attributes are Omnipotence, Omniscience, Infiniteness, Justice, Truth, Mercy, and all the rest that are found in Scripture; Which of these did not those Seditious Preachers acknowledge equally with the best of Christians? The Word of God are the Books of Holy Scripture received for C [...]nonical in Eng­land.

They receive the Word of God, but 'tis ac­cording to their own Interpretation.

According to whose Interpretation was it received by the Bishops and the rest of the Loy­al party but their own? He puts for another Duty Obedience and Submission to God's Will. Did any of them, nay, did any Man living, do any thing, at any time, against God's Will?

By God's Will I suppose he means there, his revealed Will (that is to say) his Command­ments, which I am sure they did most horribly break, both by their Preaching and otherwise.

As for their Actions there is no doubt but all Men are guilty enough (if God deal severely with them) to be damned: and for their Preach­ing they will say they thought it agreeable to God's revealed Will in the Scriptures, if they thought it so, it was not Disobedience but Error, and how can any man prove they thought other­wise?

Hypocrisy hath this great prerogative above other Sins, that it cannot be accused.

Another Duty he sets down is to Honour him in his House, that is the Church, in his Pos­sessions, [Page 65] in his Day, in his Word and Sacra­ments.

They perform this Duty (I think) as well as any other Ministers, I mean the Loyal Party; and the Presbyterians have always had an equal care to have Gods House free from profanation; to have Tithes duly paid, to have the Sabbath day kept Holy, the Word Preached, and the Lords Supper and Baptism duely Administred: But is not the keeping of the Feasts and of the Fasts, one of those Duties that belong to the honour of God, if it be, the Presbyterians fail in that?

Why so, They kept some Holy Days, and they had Feasts among themselves, though not upon the same Days that the Church Ordains, but when they thought fit, as when it pleased God to give the King any notable Victory, and they govern'd themselves in this point by the Holy Scriptures, as they pretend to be; and can prove they did not believe so.

Let us pass over all other Duties, and come to that Duty which we owe to the King, and con­sider whether the Doctrine taught by these Divines which adhered to the King be such, in that point, as may justifie the Presbyterians that incited the People to Rebellion; for that's the thing you call in Question.

Concerning our Duty to our Rulers, he hath these words, An obedience we must pay either Active or Passive, the Active in the Case of all Law­full Commands, that is, whenever the Magistrate Commands something which is not contrary to some Command of God we are then bound to Act accor­ding to that Command of the Magistrate, to do the thing he requires: but when he enjoyns any thing contrary to what God hath Commanded we are not then to pay him this [...] obedi­ence, we may, nay we must refuse thus to Act (yet here we must be very well ass [...]r'd that the thing is so contrary, and not pretend Conscience for a Cloak of stubborness) we are in that case to obey God ra­ther than men, but even this is a season for the Passive obedience, we must patiently suffer what he inflicts on us for such refusal, and not, to secure our selves, rise up against him.

What is there in this to give Colour to the late Rebellion?

They will say they did it in obedience to God, inasmuch as they did believe it was accor­ding to the Scripture, out of which they will bring perhaps examples of David and his Adherents, that resisted King Saul, and of the Prophets afterwards that vehemently from time to time Preached against the Idolatrous Kings of Israel and Judah, Saul was their Lawfull King; and yet they Paid him neither Active nor Passive obedience; for they did put themselves into a posture of defence [Page 67] against him, though David himself spared his Per­son, and so did the Presbyterians put into their Commission to their General, that they should spare the Kings-Person; besides, you cannot doubt but that they who in the Pulpit did animate the People to take Arms in defence of the then Parliament, al­leadged Scripture, that is the Word of God for it; if it be lawful then for Subjects to resist the K. when he Commands any thing against the Scripture, that is contrary to the Command of God, and to be Judge of the meaning of the Scripture it is impossible, that the Life of any King, or the Peace of any Chri­stian Kingdom can be long secure: It is this do­ctrine that divides a Kingdom within it self, what­soever the men be Loyal or Rebels, that Write or Preach it publickly: And thus you see, that if those seditious Ministers be tryed by this Doctrine they will come off well enough.

I see it, and wonder at People, that having never spoken with God Almighty, nor knowing one more than another, what he hath said, when the Laws and the Preacher disagree, should so keenly follow the Minister, for the most part an ignorant, though a ready tongu'd Scholar, rather than the Laws that were made by the King, with the consent of the Peers and the Commons of the Land.

Let us examine his words a little nearer; First concerning passive Obedience, when a Thief hath broken the Laws, and according to the Law, is therefore executed, can any Man understand, that [Page 68] this suffering of his is an obedience to the Law? Every Law is a Command to do or to forbear, neither of these is fulfilled by suffering, If any suf­fering can be called obedience, it must be such as is voluntary; for no involuntary Action can be counted a submission to the Law. He that means that his suffering should be taken for obedience, must not only not resist, but also not fly, nor hide himself to avoid his punishment. And who is there among them that discourses of passive obedience, when his life is in extream danger, that will volun­tarily present himself to the Officers of Justice. Do not we see that all Men when they are led to execution, are both bound and guarded, and would break loose if they could and get away? Such is their passive Obedience Christ saith, the Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses Chair, all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, Mat. 23. 3. which is a doing an active Obedience, and yet the Scribes and Pharisees appear not by the Scripture to have been such Godly men, as ne­ver to command any thing against the Revealed will of God.

Must Tyrants also be obeyed in every thing actively, or is there nothing wherein a Lawful Kings Commands may be disobeyed, what if he should command me with my own hands to Exe­cute my Father, in Case he should be Condemned to Dye by the Law?

This is a Case that need not be put, We [Page 69] never have read nor heard of any King or Tyrant so inhumane as to command it; if any did, we are to consider whether that Command were one of his Laws, for by disobeying Kings, we mean disobeying his Laws, those his Laws that were made before they were applied to any particular person for the King though as a Father of Chil­dren, and a Master of domestick Secrets, yet com­mands the people in general never but by a pre­cedent Law, and as a Publick not a Natural per­son, and if such a Command as you speak of were contrived into a general Law (which never was, nor never will be) you were bound to obey it, unless you depart the Kingdom after the publica­tion of the Law, and before the Condemnation of your Father.

You Author says farther in refusing Active obedience to the King that Commanded any thing contrary to God's Law, we must be very well assured that the thing is so contrary, I would sain know how is it possible to be assured?

I think you do not believe, that any of those Refusers do immediately from God's own Mouth receive any Command contrary to the Command of the King, who is God's Lieutenant, nor any other way than you and I do, that is to say, than by the Scriptures, and because men do for the most part rather draw the Scripture to their own sense, then follow the true sense of the Scripture, there is no other way to know certainly, and in [Page 70] all cases, what God Commands or forbids us to do, but by the sentence of him, or them, that are constituted by the King to determine the sence of the Scriptures upon hearing of the particular Case of Conscience which is in question: and they that are so constituted are easily known in all Christian Commonwealths, whether they be Bishops, or Ministers, or Assemblies that Govern the Church under him, or them that have the So­veraign Power.

Some doubts may be raised from this that you now say; for if men be to learn their Duty from the sentence which other men shall give con­cerning the meaning of the Scriptures and not from their own Interpretation, I understand not to what end they were Translated into English, and every man not only permitted, but also exhorted, to read them; for what could that produce but diversity of Opinion, and consequently (as man's nature is) Disputation, breach of Charity, Disobedience, and at last Rebellion? Again since the Scriptures were allowed to be read in English, why were not the Translations such as might make all that's read un­derstood, even by mean Capacities? Did not the Jews, such as could read, understand their Law in the Jewish Language as well as we do our Sta­tute Laws in English? and as for such places of the Scripture as had nothing of the Nature of a Law, it was nothing to the Duty of the Jews, whether they were understood or not, seeing no­thing is punishable but the Transgression of some [Page 71] Law; The same question I may ask concerning the New Testament, for I believe that those Men to whom the Original Language was natural did understand sufficiently what Commands and Coun­sels were given them by our Saviour and his Apo­stles, and his immediate Disciples: Again how will you answer that question which was put by St. Peter and St. John, Acts 4. 1 [...]. when b [...] Ananias the High-Priest, and others of the Council of Jerusalem they were forbidden any more to teach in the name of Jesus? whether is it right in the sight of God to hearken to you more than unto God?

The Case is not the same, Peter and John had seen and daily conversed with our Saviour, and by the Miracles he wrote did know he was God, and consequently knew certainly [...] their Disobe­dience to the High Priests present command was just. Can any Minister now say that he hath im­mediately from God's own Mouth received a Command to disobey the King, or know other­wise than by the Scripture, that any Command of the King that hath the form and nature of a Law is, against the Law of God, which in divers places he directly and evidently Commandeth to obey him in all things. The Text you cite doth not tell us that a Minister's Authority, rather than a Chri­stian King's shall decide the questions that arise from the different Interpretations of the Scripture. And therefore, where the King is head of the Church, and by consequence (to omit that the Scripture it self was not receieved but by the [Page 72] Authority of Kings and States) chief Judge of the Rectitude of all Interpretations of the Scripture, to obey the King's Laws and publick Edicts is not to disobey, and obey God, a Minister ought not to think that his Skill in the Latine, Greek, or He­brew Tongues, if he have any, gives him a privi­ledge to impose upon all his Fellow-subjects his own sense, or what he pretends to be his sense of every obscure place of Scripture, nor ought he, as often as he hath found some fine Interpretation not before thought on by others, to think he had it by inspiration as fine as he thinks it, is not false; and then all his Stubornness and Contumacy to­wards the King and his Laws is nothing but Pride of heart and Ambition or else Imposture, And whereas you think it needless, or perhaps hurtful to have the Scriptures in English, I am of another mind, There are so many places of Scripture easily to be understood, that teach both true Faith and good Morality, and that as fully as is necessary to Salvation, of which no Seducer is able to dispose the mind of any ordinary Readers, that the Rea­ding of them is so profitable as not to be forbid­den without great Damage to them and the Com­monwealth?

All that is required both in Faith and Man­ner's for Man's Salvation, is, I confess, set down in Scripture as plainly as can be, Children Obey you [...] Parents in all things: Servants obey your Masters: Let all men be subject to the Higher Powers, whether it be the King, or those that are sent by him: Love [Page 73] God with all your Soul, and your Neighbour as your self, are words of the Scripture, which are well enough understood; but neither Children, nor the greatest part of Men do understand why it is their Duty so to do; they see not that the safety of the Commonwealth, and consequently their own, depends upon the doing of it: Every man by Na­ture without Discipline does in all his Actions look upon, as far as he can see, the benefit that shall redound to himself by his Obedience, he Reads that Covetousness is the Root of all Evil, but he thinks, and sometimes finds it is the Root of his Estate. And so in other Cases, the Scripture says one thing and they think another, weighing the Commodities or Incommodities of this present Life only, which are in their sight, never putting into the Scales the Good and Evil of the Life to come, which they see not.

All this is no more than happens where the Scripture is sealed up in Greek and Latine, and the People taught the same things out of them by Preachers, but they that are of a Condition and Age fit to examine the sence of what they read, and that take a delight in searching out the Grounds of their Duty, certainly cannot chuse but by reading of the Scriptures come to such a sense of their Duty, as not only to obey the Laws themselves, but also to induce others to do the same, for commonly Men of Age and quality are followed by their inferiour Neighbours that look more upon the example of those Men whom [Page 74] they Reverence, and whom they are unwilling to displease then upon precepts and Laws.

These men of the condition and Age you speak of are in my opinion the unfittest of all others to be trusted with the reading of the Scriptures; I know you mean such as have studied the Greek or Latin, or both Tongues, and that are withal such as love knowledge, and consequently take delight in finding out the meaning of the most hard Texts, or in thinking they have found it in case it be new and not found out by others; these are therefore they that pretermitting the easiy places, that teach them their Duty, fall to scanning only the Mysteries of Religion: Such as are, how it may be made out with wit, that there be three that bear Rule in Heaven, and those three but one, how the De­ity could be made flesh, how that flesh could be re­ally present in many places at once? where's the place, and what the Torments of Hell and other Metaphysical Doctrines? whether the Will of Man be free, or govern'd by the Will of God, whe­ther Sanctity comes by inspiration or Education: by whom Christ now speaks to us, whether by the King, or by the Bible to every Man that reads it, and interprets it to himself, or by a private Spirit, to every private Man: These and the like points are the study of the curious and the cause of all our late mischief; and the cause that makes the plainer sort of men whom the Scriptures had taught belief in Christ, love towards God, obedience to­wards the King, and sobriety of Behaviour; for­get [Page 75] it all and place their Religion in the Disputa­ble Doctrines, of these your wise Men.

I do not think these men fit to interpret the Scriptures to the rest: nor do I say that the rest ought to take their interpretation for the word of God. Whatsoever is necessary for them to know more, does them no good; but in case any of these unnecessary Doctrines shall be Authorized by the Laws of the King or other state: I say it is the duty of every Subject not to speak against them in asmuch as 'tis every Mans Duty to obey him, or them that have the Sovereign power, and the wis­dom of all such powers, to punish such as shall publish or teach their private Interpretations when they are contrary to the Law: and likely to incline men to sedition or disputing against the Law.

They must punish then the most of those that have had there breeding in the Universities, for such curious questions in Divinity are first started in the Universities; and so are all those politick questions concerning the Rights of Civil and Ecclesiastical Government, and there they are furnished with ar­guments for liberty, out of the works of Aristotle, Plato, C [...]cero, Se [...]ica, and [...] of the Histories of [...] for their disputation against the [...] power of their [...] therefore I dis­pare of any [...] our selves till the [...] their studies to the [...] obedience to the Laws of the [...] to his [Page 76] publick Edicts under the great Seal of England: for I make no doubt but that solid reason backt with the Authority of so many learned men, will more prevail for the keeping of us in peace within our selves than any victory can do over the Rebells, but I am afraid 'tis unpossible to bring the Uni­versities to such a compliance with the Actions of state as is necessary for the Business; seeing the Universities have heretofore from time to time maintain'd the Authority of the Pope, contrary to all Laws; Divine, Civil, and Natural: against the Right of our Kings: why can they not as well when they have all manner of Laws and Equity on their side, maintain the Rights of him that is both sove­reign of the Kingdom and Head of the Church.

Why then were they not in all points for the Kings power presently after that King Henry the 8. was in Parliament declared Head of the Church, as much as they were before for the Authority of the Pope.

Because the Clergy in the Universities by whom all things there are Govern'd, and the Clergy without the Universities as well Bishops as inferiour Clerks did think that the pulling down of the Pope, was the setting up of them, (as to England) in his place, and made no question the greatest part of them, but that their spiritual power did depend not upon the Authority of the King but of Christ him­self derived to them by successible Imposition of hands from Bishop to Bishop? notwithstanding they knew [Page 77] that this derivation passed through the hands of Popes & Bishops whose Authority they had cast off, for though they were content that the Divine right which the Pope pretended to in England should be denied him, yet they thought it not so fit to be ta­ken from the Church of England, whom they now supposed themselves, to represent.

It seems they did not think it reasonable, that a Woman, or a Child, or a Man, that could not con­strue the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin Bible, nor know perhaps the declensions and Conjugations of Greek or Latin, Nounes and Verbs, should take upon him to govern so many learned Doctors in matters of Religion, meaning matters of Divinity for Religion has been for a long time, and is now by most people taken for the same thing with Divinity, to the great advantage of the Clergie.

And especially now amongst the Presbyterians for I see few that are esteemed by them very good Christians besides such as can repeat their Sermons and wrangle for them about the Interpretation of the Scripture, and fight for them also with their Bo­dies or purses when they shal be required to believe in Christ is nothing with them, unless you believe as they bid you, Charity is nothing with them un­less it be Charity and liberality to them, and par­taking with them in faction How we can have peace while this is our Religion, I cannot tell Haeret La­terilethalis arundo. The seditious Doctrine of the Presbyterians hath been stuck so hard in the Peoples [Page 78] heads and memories, (I cannot say into their hearts for they understood nothing in it, but that they may lawfully rebel) That I fear the Common-wealth will never be cured.

The 2 Great vertues that were severally in Henry the 7. Henry the 8. When they shall be Joyntly in one King, will easily cure it, that of Henry the 7 was without much noise of the people to [...]ill his Coffers that of Henry the 8 was an early se­verity but this without the former cannot be ex­ercised.

This that you say looks (me thinks) like an ad­vice to the King to let them alone till he have got­ten ready money enough to levy and maintain a sufficient Army, and then to fall on them and de­stroy them.

God forbid that so horrible Unchirstian and unhuman design should ever enter into the Kings heart, I would have him have money enough, readi­ly to raise an Army, able to suppress any Rebellion and to take from the Enemies all hope of success, that they may not dare to trouble him in the Re­formation of the Universities, but to put none to death, without the A [...]tual committing such crimes as are already made Capital by the Laws, the Core of Rebellion as you have seen by this, and read of other Rebellions, are the Universities, which nevertheless are not to be cast away but to be bet­ter disciplin'd that is to say, that the Politicks there [Page 79] taught be made to be (as true poli [...]icks should be) such as are fit to make men know that it is their duty to obey a [...] Laws whatsoever that shall be by the Authority of the King enacted▪ till by the same Authority they shall be repeal'd su [...] as are fit to make Men understand that the Civil Laws are Gods Laws, as they that make them, & to make Men know that the people and the Church are one thing, and have but one Head, the [...]ing; and that no Man has Title to Govern under him that has it not from him; that the King owes his Crown to God onl [...] and to no Man Ecclesiastick▪ or other, and that the Religion they teach there be a quiet wait­ing [...]or the coming again of our blessed Saviour, and in the mean time a Resolution to obey the Kings Laws, which are also Gods Laws, to injure no man, to be in charity with all Men, to cherish the Poor and Sick, and to live Soberly, and free from scan­al, without mingling our Religion with points of Natural Phylosophy, as freedom of Will, Incorporeal substance; Everlasting News, Ubiquities, Hyposta­ses. Which the people understand not, nor will e­ver care for, when the Universities shall be thus disciplined, there will come out of them from time to time, well Principled Preachers, and they that are ill Principled from time to time fall away.

I think it a very good course, and perhaps the only one that can make our peace amongst our selves constant: for if Men know not their Duty, what is there that can force them to obey the Laws? an Army youl say; But what shall force the [Page 80] Army, were not the Train'd Bands an Army? Were they not the Janisaries that not very long a­go slew Osman in his own Palace at Constantino­ple! I am therefore of your opinion, both that Men may be brought to a love of Obedience by Preachers and Gentlemen that imbibe good Princi­ples in their Youth at the Universities; and also that we never shall have a lasting peace, till the Uni­versities themselves be in such manner (as you have said) reformed, and the Ministers know they have no Authority but what the supream Civil Power gives them: and the Nobility and Gentry know, that the Liberty of a State is not an Exemption from the Laws of their own Countrey, whether made by an Assembly, or by a Monarchy, but an Exemption from the constraint and Insolence of their Neighbours.

And now I am satisfied in this Point I will bring you back to the place from whence my Curiosity drew you to this long digression; We were upon the point of Ship-money; one of those grievances, which the Parliament exclaimed against, as Tyran­ny and Arbitrary Government, thereby to single out (as you called it) the King from his Subjects, and to make a party aginst him, when they should need it: And now you may proceed if it please you, to such other Artifices as they used to the same purpose.

I think it were better to give over here our discourse of this business, and refer it to some other Day that you shall think fit.

Content that Day, I believe is not far off:

You are welcome, yet if you had stayed somewhat longer: my money would have been so much the better provided for you.

Nay! I pray you give me now what you have about you, for the rest I am content to take what time you please.

After the Parliament had made the Peo­ple believe that the Extorting of Ship-money was unlawful, and the people thereby inclind to think it Tyrannical; in the next place to increase there disaffection to his Majesty: they accused him of a purpose to introduce, and Authorize the Roman Religion in this Kingdom: than which nothing was more hateful to the People, not because it was Erroneous (which they had neither Learning nor Judgment enough to ex­amine) but because they had been used to hear it inveyed against, in the Sermons and dis­courses of the Preachers whom they trusted to, and this was indeed the most effectual cal­lumny to alienate the Peoples affections from him that could possibly be invented; the colour they had for this stand was; First, that there was one Rosseti Resident, (at and a little before the time) from the Pope with the Queen. And one Mr. George Consecretary to the Cardinal Francisco Barbarini, Nephew to Pope Urban the Eighth sent over under favour, and protecti­on of the Queen (as was conceived) to draw as many persons of quality about the Court, as he should be Able, to reconcile themselves to the [Page 82] Church of Rome, with what success I cannot tell, But [...] likely he gained some, especially of the weaker Sex, If I may say they were gained by him, when not his Arguments but hope of fa­vour from the Queen in all probability prevail­ed upon them.

In such a Conjuncture as that was, it had perhaps been better they had not been sent.

There was exception also taken at a Covent of Fryers, Capucines in Summerset-house; though allowed by the Articles of Marriage; and it was reported that the Jesuits also were shortly after to be allowed a Covent in Clarkenwel, and in the mean time the Principal Secretary Sir Francis windebank was accused for having by his Warrant set at liberty some English Jesuits that had been taken and impriso­ned for returning into England after Banishment contrary to the statute, which had made it Capi­tal, also the resort of English Catholicks to the Queens-Chappel gave them Colour to blame the Queen herself, not only for that but also for all the favours that had been shown to the Catho­licks; insomuch that some of them did not stick to say openly that the King was Governed by her.

Strange Injustice! The Queen was a Ca­th [...]lick by profession, and therefore could not but endeavour to do the Catholicks all the good she could, she had not else been truely that [Page 83] which she professed to be, but it seems they meant to force her to Hypocrisy, being Hy­pocrites themselves: Can any man think it a crime in a Devout Lady (of what Sect soever) to seek Favour and Benediction of that Church whereof she is a Member.

To give the Parliament another Colour for their Accusation on foot for the King, as to introducing of Popery, there was a great Con­troversy between the Episcopal and Presbyte­rian Clergy about Free-will. The Dispute be­gan first in the Low-Countries, between Gomar and Arminius, in the time of King James, who foreseeing it might trouble the Church of England, did what he could to compose the difference, an Assembly of Divines was thereupon got together at Dort, to which also King James sent a Divine or two, but it came to nothing, the question was left undecided, and became a Subject to be disputed of in the Universities; here all the Presbyterians were of the same mind with Gomar, but a very great many others not, and those were called here Armi­nians, who because the Doctrine of Free-will had been exploded as Papistical, and because the Presbyterians were far the greater number, and already in favour with the People, they were generally hated; it was easy therefore for the Parliament to make that Calumny pass currently with the People; when the Arch Bi­shop of Canterbury, Dr. Laud, was for Armi­nius, and had a little before, by his Power Ec­clesiastical, [Page 84] forbidden all Ministers to Preach to the People of Predestination and when all Ministers that were gracious with him, and hoped for any Church-preferment fell to Preaching and Writing for Free-will to the uttermost of their Power, as a proof of their Abillity and Merit. Besides they gave out, some of them, that the Arch-Bishop was in heart a Papist, and in case he could effect here a Tolleration of the Roman Religion to have a Cardinal's Hat, which was not only false, but also without any ground at all for a Suspicion.

It is a strange thing that Scholars obscure men, that could receive no Charity, but from the flame of the State should be suffered to bring their unnecessary Disputes, and together with them their quarrels out of the Universi­ties into the Commonwealth, and more strange that the State should engage in their Parties, and not rather put them both to silence: A State can constrain Obedience, but convince no Error, nor alter the Mind of them that believe they have the better reason; Suppres­sion of Doctrines does but unite and exaspe­rate, that is, increase both the malice and Power of them that have already believed them; But what are the Points they disagree in? Is there any Controversy between Bishop and Presbyterian concerning the Divinity o [...] Humanity of Christ? Do either of them deny the Trinity, or any Article of the Creed? Does [Page 85] either Party Preach openly, or Write di­rectly against Justice, Charity, Sobriety,, or a­ny other Duty, necessary to Salvation, except only the Duty to the King, and not that nei­ther, but when they had a mind either to Rule or Destroy the King? Lord have mercy upon us. Can no body be saved that understands not their Disputations? or is there more re­quisite either of Faith, or Honesty for the Sal­vation of one Man than another? What needs so much Preaching of Faith to us that are no Heathens, and that believe already all that Christ and his Apostles have told us is necessary to Salvation, and more too? Why is there so little Preaching of Justice? I have indeed heard Righteousness often recommended to the Peo­ple, but I have seldom heard the word Justice in their Sermons: nay, though in the the La­tine and Greek Bible the word Justice occurr exceeding often, yet in the English (though it be a word that every man understands (the word Righteousness) which few understand to signify the same, but take it rather for Righte­ousness of Opinion, than of Action or Intention) is put in the place of it.

I confess I know very few Controversies amongst Christians of points necessary to Sal­vation; they are the Questions of Authority and Power over the Church, or of Profit, or Honour to Church-men that for the most part raise all the Controversies: For, what man is he that will trouble himself, and fall out with [Page 86] his Neighbours for the saving of my Soul, or the Soul of any other than himself? When the Presbyterian Ministers, and others, did so furiously Preach Sedition, and animate men to Rebellion in these late Wars. Who was there that had not a Benefit, or having one, feared not to loose it, or some other part of his Main­tenance by the alteration of the Government, that did voluntarily, without any eye to re­ward, Preach so earnestly against Sedition, As the other party Preached for it? I confess that for ought I have observed in History and other Writings of the Heathens, Greek and Latine, that those Heathens were not at all short of us in point of Vertue and Moral Duties, not­withstanding that we have had much Preach­ing, and they none at all; I confess also that considering what harm might proceed form a Liberty that Men have upon every Sunday, and oftner, to Harangue all the People of a Nation at one time, whilst the State is ignorant what they will say, and that there is no such thing permitted in all the World out of Chri­stendom, nor therefore any Civil Wars about Religion; I have thought much Preaching an inconvenience, nevertheless I cannot think that Preaching to the People the points of their Duty both to God and Man can be too fre­quent, so it be done by Grave, Discreet, and Antient men that are Reverenced by the Peo­ple, and not by light quibling young men whom no Congregation is so simple as to look [Page 87] to be taught by, (as being a thing contrary to nature) or to pay them any Reverence, or to care what they say, except some few that may he delighted with their Jingling: I wish with all my Heart there were enough of such Di­screet and Antient men as might suffice for all the Parishes of England, and that they would undertake it; but this is but a wish, I leave it to the wisdom of the State, to do what it pleaseth,

What did they next?

Whereas the King had sent Prisoners in­to Places remote from London three Persons, that had been condemned for publishing sediti­ous Doctrine, some in Writing, some in pub­lick Sermons; that Parliament (whether with his Majesties consent or no I have forgotten) caused them to be released, and to Return to London, meaning, I think, to try how the Peo­ple would be pleased therewith, and by con­sequence, how their endeavours to draw the Peoples Affections from the King had already prospered, when these three came through London, it was a kind of Triumph, the Peo­ple flocking together to behold them, and re­ceiving them with such Acclamations, and al­most Adoration, as if they had been let down from Heaven: Insomuch that the Parliament was now sufficiently assured of a great and tu­multuous Party whensoever they should have occasion to use it, on confidence whereof, they proceeded to their next Plot, which was to de­prive [Page 88] the King of such Ministers, as by their Courage, Wisdom and Authority they thought most able to prevent, or oppose their further Designs against the King: And first the House of Commons resolv'd to impeach the Earl of Strafford; Lord Lieutenant of Ireland of High-Treason.

What was that Earl of Strafford before he had that Place: And how had he offended the Parliament, or given them cause to think he would be their Enemy? For I have heard, that in former Parliaments, he had been as Par­liamentary as any other.

His name was Sr. Thomas Wentworth, a Gentleman both for birth and estate very consi­derable in his own Country, which was York­shire; but more considerable for his Judgment in the Publick Affairs, not only of that Coun­try, but generally of the Kingdom; either as Burgess for some Borrough, or Knight of the Shire: for his Principles of Politicks, they were the same that were generally proceeded upon by all Men else, that are thought fit to be cho­sen for the Parliament: which are commonly these, To take for the Rule of Justice and the Government, the Judgments and Acts of former Parliaments, which are commonly called Prece­dents; to Endeavour to keep the People from be­ing Subject to Extra-Parliamentary Taxes of mo­ney; And from being with Parliamentary Taxes too much oppressed; to preserve to the People their Liberty of Body from their Arbitrary Power of [Page 89] the King out of Parliament: To seek Redress of Grievances.

What Grievances?

The Grievances were commonly such as these; the Kings too much Liberality to some favorite: The too much power of any Mini­ster of State or Officer, the Misdemeanours of Judges Civil or Spiritual, but especially all Unparliamentary raising of Mony upon the Subjects. And commonly of late till such grievances be redressed, they refuse, or at least make great difficulty to furnish the King with Mony necessary for the most urgent oc­casions of the Commonwealth.

How then can a King discharge his Duty, as he ought to do; or the Subject know which of his Masters he is to Obey? For here are ma­nifestly two Powers, which when they chance to differ, cannot both be Obeyed.

'Tis true, but they have not often dif­fered so much to the danger of the Common­wealth as they have done in this Parliament of 1640. In all the Parliaments of the late King Charles before the year 1640. my Lord of Strafford did appear in opposition to the Kings Demands, as much as any man, and was for that Cause very much esteemed and cried up by the People as a good Patriot, and one that couragiously stood up in defence of their Li­berties, and for the same cause was so much the more hated, when afterwards he endeavoured to maintain the Royal and Just A [...]thority of his Majesty.

How came he to change his mind so much as it seems he did.

After the Dissolution of that Parlia­ment holden in the year 1627 and 1628, the King finding no Mony to be gotten from Parlia­ments, which he was not to buy with the Blood of such Servants and Ministers as he lo­ved best, abstained a long time from calling any more, and had abstained longer, if the Rebel­lion of the Scotch had not forced him to it. During that Parliament the King made Sir Thomas Wentworth a Baron, recommended to him for his great ability, which was generally taken notice of by the disservice he had done the King in former Parliaments, but which might be usefull also for him in the times that came on, and not long after that he made him of the Counsel, and again Lieutenant of Ire­land, which place he discharged with great satisfaction and benefit to his Majesty, and con­tinued in that Office till by the Envy and Vio­lence of the Lords and Commons of that un­lucky Parliament of 1640. he died, in which year he was made General of the Kings Forces against the Scotch that then entred into Eng­land, and the year before Earl of Strafford. The Pacification being made, and the Forces on both sides Disbanded, and the Parliament at Westminster now Sitting: It was not long before the House of Commons accused him to the House of Lords of High Treason.

There was no great probability of his being [Page 91] a Traitor to the King, from whose favour he had received his greatness, and from whose Protecti­on he [...] to expect his safety: What was the Treason they laid to his Charge?

Many Articles were drawn up against him, but the summ of them was contained in these two, First, That he had traiterously en­deavour'd to subvert the Fundamental Laws and Government of the Realm, and instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrani­cal Government against Law. Secondly, That he had laboured to subvert the Rights of Par­liaments, and the Antient course of Parliamen­tary Proceedings.

Was this done by him without the know­ledge of the King?

No.

Why then if it were Treason, did not the King himself call him in Question by his Attorney? What had the House of Commons to do without his Command to accuse him to the House of Lords? They might have com­plain'd to the King, if he had not known it before, I understand not this Law.

Nor I.

Had this been by any former Statutes made Treason?

Not that I ever heard of; nor do I un­derstand that any thing can be Treason against the King, that the King hearing and know­ing does not think Treason: But it was a piece of that Parliaments Artifice to put the word Traiterously to any Article exhibited [Page 92] against a man whose life they meant to take away.

Was there no particular Instance of acti­on or words out of which they argued, that en­deavour of his, to subvert the fundamental Laws of Parliament whereof they accused him.

Yes, they said he gave the King Counsel to reduce the Parliament to their duty by the Irish Army, which not long before my Lord of Strafford himself had caused to be leavied there for the Kings service; but it was never proved against him, that he advised the King to make use of it against the Parliament.

What are those Laws that are called fundamental? for I understand not how one Law can be more fundamental than another, except only that Law of Nature that binds us all to obey him whosoever he be, whom lawfully and for our own safety wee have promised to obey▪ nor any other fundamental Law to a King but Salus Populi, The safety and well being of his People.

This Parliament in the use of these words when they accused any Man never regarded the signification of them, but the weight they had to aggravate their accusation to the Ignorant multitudes which think all faults heinous that are exprest in heinous termes: If they hate the Reason accused as they did this Man not only for being of the Kings party, but also for desert­ing the Parliaments party as an Apostate.

I pray you tell me also what they meant [Page 93] by Arbitrary Government, which they seemed so much to hate: Is there any Governour of a People in the World that is forced to Govern them, or forced to make this and that Law whether he will or no! I think, or if any be that forces him, does certainly make Laws and Govern Arbitrarily.

That is true, and the true meaning of the Parliament was, that not the King but they them­selves should have the Arbitrary Government; not only of England but of Ireland, and (as it appeared by the event) of Scotland also.

How the King came by the Government of Scotland and Ireland By descent of his An­cesters, every body can tell; but if the King of England and his heirs should chance (which God-forbid) to fail I cannot imagine what Title the Parliament of England, can acquire thereby to either of those Nations.

Yet they say they have been conquered Antiently by the English Subjects Money

Like enough, and suitable to the rest of their Impudence.

Impudence In Democratical Assemblies does almost all that is done 'Tis the Goddess of Rheto­rick and carries on proof with it for ought ordi­nary Man will not from so great boldness of Af­firmation conclude, there is great boldness of af­firmation, conclude there is great probability in the King affirmed upon this accusation; he was brought to his Tryal at Westminster hall before the House of Lords, and found guilty; [Page 94] and presently after declared a Traytor by a Bill of attainder, that is by Act of Parliament.

It is a strange thing that the Lords should be induced upon so light Grounds, to give [...] sentence, or give their assent to a Bill so preju­dicial to themselves, and their posterity.

'Twas not well done, and yet (as it seems) not ignorantly, for there is a clause in the Bill, that it should not be taken hereafter for an ex­ample, that is for a prejudice in the like case hereafter.

That is worse then the Bill it self, and is a plain con [...]ession that their sentence was unjust, for what harm is there in the example of just sentences; besides if hereafter the like case should happen the sentence is not at all made weaker by such a provision.

Indeed I believe that the Lords most of them were not willing to condemn him of Trea­son, they were awed to it by the clamor of the Common People that came to West­minster, crying out Justice, Justice against the Earl of Strafford, the which were caused to flock thither by some of the House of Commons that were well assured after the Triumphant Welcom of Prinne, Burton, and Bastwick, to put the People into Tumult upon any occasion they desired, they were awed unto it partly also, by the House of Commons, it self, which if it desired to undo a Lord had no more to do but to Vote him a Delinquent.

A Delinquent! what's that? A Sinner, [Page 95] is't not? Did they mean to undoe all Sinners?

By Delinquent they meant only a Man to whom they would do all the hurt they could, but the Lords did not yet, I think, suspect they meant to Cashier their whole House.

It's a strange thing the whole House of Lords should not perceive the ruine of the King's Power, or weakening of themselves; for they could not think it likely that the People ever meant to take the Soveraignty from the King to give it to them who were few in num­ber and less in Power than so many Commoners, because less beloved by the People.

But it seemes not so strange to me for the Lords, [...]or their personal abilities, as they were no less, so also were they no more Skil­full in the Publick affairs than the Knights and Burgesses, for there is no reason to think that if one that is to day a Knight of the Shire in the Lower House, be to morrow made a Lord, and a Member of the Higher House, is therefore wiser than he was before; they are all of both Houses prudent and able Men as any in the Land, in the business of their private Estates, which requires nothing but dilligence and Natural Wit to Govern them, but for the Government of a Commonwealth, neither Wit nor Prudence, nor Dilligince is enough with­out infallible rules, and the true Science of Equity and Justice.

If this be true it is impossible any Com­monwealth in the World, whether Monarchy, [Page 96] Aristocracy, or Democracy should continue long without Change, or Sedition tending to change either of the Government or of the Governours.

'Tis true, nor have any the greatest Com­monwealths in the World been long from Se­dition, the Greeks had it, first their petty Kings and then by Sedition came to be Petty Com­monwealths, and then growing to be greater Commonwealths, by Sedition again became Mo­narchies,, and all for want of rules of Justice for the Common people to take notice of, which if the People had known in the beginning of every of these Seditions, the Ambitious per­sons could never have had the hope to disturb their Government after it had been once settled, for Ambition can do little without hands, and few hands it could have if the Common People were as dilligently instructed in the true Prin­ciples of their Duty, as they are terrified and amazed by Preachers with fruitless and dange­rous Doctrines, concerning [...] Nature of Man's will, and many other Phylosophical points that tend not at all to the Salvation of the Soul in the World to come, nor to their ease in this life, but only to the Discretion to­wards the Clergy, of that Duty which they ought to perform to the King.

For ought I see all the States of Christen­dom will be subject to those fits of Rebellion as long as the World lasteth.

Like enough, and yet the fault (as I [Page 97] have said) may be easily mended by mending the Universities.

How long had the Parliament now sitten?

It began Novemb. 3. 1640. My Lord of Strafford was Impeached of Treason before the Lords, November 12. sent to the Tower Nov. 22. his Trial began March 22. and ended April 13. After his Trial he was voted guilty of High Treason in the House of Commons, and after that in the House of Lords May 6. and on the 12 of May Beheaded.

Great expedition! But could not the King for all that have saved him by a Pardon?

The King had heard all that passed at his Trial, and had declared he was unsatisfied con­cerning the Justice of their Sentence, and (I think) notwithstanding the danger of his own Person from the sury of the People, and that he was counselled to give way to his Execution, not only by such as he most relied on, but also by the Earl of Strafford himself, He would have pardoned him, if that could have preser­ved him from the Tumult raised and counte­nanced by the Parliament it self, for the terrify­ing o [...] those they thought might favour him, and yet the King himself did not stick to confess af­terwards that he had done amiss in that he did not rescue him.

'Twas an Argument of a good disposition in the King, but I never read that Augustus Cae­sar acknowledged that he had a fault in aban­doning [Page 98] Cicero to the fury of his Enemy Antoni­us, perhaps because Cicero having been of the contrary Faction to his Father had done Au­gustus no service at all, out of favour to him, but only out of enmity to Antonius and of love to the Senate, that is indeed out of love to him­self that swayed the Senate, as it is very likely the Earl of Strafford came over to the King's party for his own ends, having been so much a­gainst the King in former Parliaments.

We cannot safely judge of Men's Inten­tions, but I have observed often that such as feek preferment by their Stubbornness have missed of their aim, and on the other side, that those Princes, that with preferment are forced to buy the Obedience of their Subjects, are al­ready, or must be soon after in a very weak condition, for in a Market where Honour is to to be bought with Stubborness, there will be a great many as able to buy as my Lord Straf­ford was.

You have read that when Hercules fight­ing with the Hydra, had cut of any one of his many Heads, there still arose two other Heads in it's place, and yet at last he cut them off all.

The Story is told false for Hercules at first did not cut off those Heads but bought them off, and afterwards when he saw that did him no good, then he cut them off and g [...]t the Victory.

What did they next.

After the first Impeachment of the Earl of Strafford, the House of Commons upon De­cember 18. accused the Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury also of High Treason, that is, of a design to introduce Arbitrary Government, &c. For which he was (February 18.) sent to the Tower, but his Trial and Execution were deferred a long time, till January 10. 1643. for the en­tertainment of the Scots that were come into England to aid the Parliament.

Why did the Scots think there was so much danger in the Arch-Bishop of Canterbu­ry? he was not a Man of War, nor a Man able to bring an Army into the Field; but he was perhaps a very great Politician.

That did not appear by any remarkable events of his Councils, I never heard but he was a very honest man for his Morals; and a very zealous promoter of the Church Govern­ment by Bishops, and that he desired to have the Service of God performed, and the House of God adorned as suitably as was possible, to the honour we ought to do to the Divine Ma­jesty. But to bring, as he did, into the State his Former Controversies, I mean his squab­lings in the University about Free Will, and his standing upon Punctilio's concerning the Service-Book and its Rubricks was not (in my opinion) an Argument of his sufficiency in Affairs of State. About the same time they passed an Act (which the King consented [Page 100] to) for a Triennial Parliament, wherein was Enacted, That after the present Parliament, there should be a Parliament call'd by the King within the space of three years, and so from three years to three years to meet at West­minster upon a certain day named in the Act.

But what if the King did not call it; finding it perhaps inconvenient or Hurtfull to to the Safety or Peace of his People which God hath put into his Charge; for I do not well comprehend how any Soveraign can well keep a People in order when his hands are ti [...]d, or when he hath any other Obligation upon him, than the benefit of those he Governs. And at this time for any thing you told me they acknowledged the King for their Sove­reign.

I know not, but such was the Act: And it was farther Enacted, That if the King did it not by his own Command, then the Lord Chancellour or the Lord Keeper for the time being should send out the Writs of Summons: And if the Chancellour refused, then the Sheriffs of the several Counties of themselves at the next County Courts before the day set down for the Parliaments meeting, should pro­ceed to the Election of the Members for the said Parliament.

But what if the Sheriffs refused?

I think they were to be sworn to it, but for that and other particulars I refer you to the Act.

To whom should they be sworn when there is no Parliament?

No doubt, but to the King whether there be a Parliament sitting or no.

Then the K. may Release them of their Oath.

Besides, They obtained of the King the putting down the Star Chamber and the High Commission Courts.

Besides, If the King upon the refusal, should fall upon them in Anger, Who shall (the Parliament not sitting) Protect either the Chancellor or the Sheriffs in their Disobedi­ence?

I pray you do not ask me any Reason of such things, I understand no better than you; I tell you only an Act passed to that purpose and was S [...]gned by the King in the middle of February, a little before the Arch Bishop was sent to the Tower. Besides this Bill, the two Houses of Parliament agreed upon another, wherein it was Enacted, That the present Par­liament would continue till both the Houses did consent to the Dissolution of it; which Bill also the King Signed the same day he Sign­ed the Warrant for the Execution of the Earl of Strafford.

What a great Progress made the Parlia­ment towards the ends of the most seditious Members of both Houses in so little time. They sat down in November, and now it was May; in this space of time, which is but half a [Page 102] year, they won from the King the Adhearance which was due to him from his People: they drove his faithfullest Servants from him, beheaded the Earl of Strafford▪ Imprisoned the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, obtain­ed a Triennial Parliament after their Own dissolution, and a continuance of their own sitting as long as they listed; which last a moun­ted to a total extinction of the Kings right in case that such a grant were vaild, which I think it is not: unless the soveraignty it self be in plain termes renounced; which it was not, but what money by way of subsidue or otherwise did they grant the King in recompence of all these his large concessions.

None at all, but often promised they would make him the most glorious King that ever was in England; which were words that passed well enough for wel meaning with the common People.

But the Parliament was contented now: for I cannot imagine what they should desire more from the King, than he had now granted them.

Yes they desired the whole and absolute soveraignty; and to change the Monarchical go­vernment into an Oligarchie, that is, to say to make the Parliament consisting of a few Lords, and a­bout 400 Commoners, absolute in the soveraign­ty for the present, and shortly after to lay the house of Lords aside, for this was the design of the Presbyterian Ministers, who taking themselves to be, by Divine right, the onely Lawful govern­ers [Page 103] of the Church, endeavoured to bring the same form of Government into the Civil state, and as the spiritual Laws were to be made by their Synods so their Civil Laws should be made by the House of Commons; who as they thought would no less be ruled by them afterwards, than formerly they had been: wherein they were deceived, and found themselves out gon by their own Disciples, though not in malice yet in Wit.

What followed after this.

In August, following the King supposing he had now sufficiently obliged the Parliament, to proceed no farther against him; took a jour­ney into Scotland, to satisfy his Subjects there, as he had done here; intending perhaps so to gain their good wills, that in case the Parlia­ment here should levy Armes against him; they should not be aided by the Scots, wherein he al­so was deceived, for though they seemed satisfi­ed with what he did (whereof one thing was his giveing away to the A [...]olction of Episcopacy) Yet afterwards they made a League with the Parliament, and for money (when the King be­gan to have the better of the Parliament) inva­ded England, in the Parliaments Quarrel, but this was a Year or two after.

Before you go any farther, I desire to know the ground and Original of that Right which either the House of Lords, or House of Commons, or both together pretend to.

It is a question of things so long past that [Page 104] they are now forgotten; nor have we any thing to conjecture by, but the Records of our own Nation: and some small and obscure fragments of Roman Histories: And for the Records see­ing they are of things only done sometimes just­ly, sometimes unjustly, you can never by them know what Right they had, but only what right they pretended.

Howsoever let me know what light we have in this matter from the Roman Histories▪

It would be too long, and an useless digres­sion to cite all the Antient Authors that speake of the formes of those Common-wealths, which were amongst our first Ancesters, the Saxons and other Germans, and of other Nations; from whom we derive the Titles of Honour; now in use in England; nor will it be possible to de­rive from them any Arguments of Right, but only examples of fact, which by the Ambition of Potent Subjects have been oftner unjust then o­therwise; and for those Saxons or Angels, that in Antient times by several Invasions made them­selves Masters of this Nation, they were not in themselves one Body of a Common-wealth but only a League of Divers Petty German Lords and states such as was the Graecian Army in the Trojan War, without other Obligations, than that which proceeded from their own fear and weakness; nor were these Lords for the most part the soveraigns at home in their own Country, but chosen by the People, for the Captains of the forces they brought with them▪ [Page 103] And therefore it was not without Equity, that when they had conquer'd any part of the Land, and made some one of them King thereof, the rest should have greater Priviledges than the Common People and Souldiers, amongst which Priviledges a man may easily conjecture this to to be one; That they should be made acquaint­ed, and be of Council with him that hath the Soveraignty in matters of Government, and have the greatest and most honourable Offices, both in Peace and War: But because there can be no Government where there is more than one Soveraign, it cannot be inferr'd that they had a Right to oppose the Kings Resolutions by force, nor to enjoy those honours and places longer than they should continue good Subjects: And we find that the Kings of England did upon eve­ry great occasion call them together by the name of Discreet and Wise men of the Kingdom, and hear their Councils, and make them Judges of all Causes that during their Sitting were brought before them. But as he summon'd them at his own pleasure; so had he also ever at his pleasure power to Dissolve them. The Normans also that Descended from the Germans, as we did, had the same Customs in this particu­lar; and by this means, this Priviledge have the Lords to be of your Kings great Council; and when they were assembled, to be the highest of the Kings Court of Justice, continued still after the Conquest to this day. But though there be amongst the Lords divers Names or Titles of [Page 104] Honour, yet they have their Priviledge by the only name of Baron, a name receiv'd from the Antient Gauls, amongst whom that name signi­fied the King's Man, or rather one of his great Men: By which it seems to me, that though they gave him Council when he requir'd it, yet they had no Right to make War upon him, if he did not follow it.

When began first the House of Commons to be part of the King's great Council?

I do not doubt but that before the Con­quest, some Discreet Men, and known to be so, by the King, were called by special Writ to be of the same Council, though they were not Lords. But that is nothing to the House of Commons: the Knights of Shires, and Burgesses were never called to Parliament, for ought that I know, till the beginning of Edward the first, or the latter end of the Reign of Henry the third, immediately after the mis behaviour of the Ba­rons; and for ought any man knows, were called on purpose to weaken that Power of the Lords, which they had so freshly abused. Before the time of Henry the third, the Lords were De­scended most of them from such as in the Inva­sions and Conquests of the Germans were Peers and Fellow Kings, till one was made King of them all, and their Tenants were their Subjects, as it is at this day with the Lords of France. But after the time of Henry the third, the Kings be­gan to make Lords in the place of them, whose Issue fail'd Titularly only; without the Lands [Page 105] belonging to their Title; and by that means their Tenants being bound no longer to serve them in the Wars, they grew every day less and less able to make a Party against the King, though they continued still to be his Great Coun­cil: And as their Power decreased, so the Power of the House of Commons increased: But I do not find that they were part of the Kings Coun­cil at all, nor Judges over other men, though it cannot be denied but a King may ask their ad­vice, as well as the advice of any other. But I do not find that the end of their summoning was to give advice; but only in case they had any Petitions for Redress of Grievances, to be ready there with them whilst the King had his Great Council about him.

But neither they, nor the Lords, could pre­sent to the King as a Grievance; That the King took upon him to make the Laws, to chuse his own Privy Council, to raise Money and Souldiers, to defend the Peace and Honour of the King­dom, to make Captains in his Army, to make Go­vernours of his Castle whom he pleased; for this had been to tell the King that it was one of their Grievances that he was King.

What did the Parliament do whilst the King was in Scotland?

The King went in August; after which the Parliament September the 8th. adjourn'd till the 20th. of October, and the King return'd about the end of November following, in which time the most Seditious of both Houses, and which [Page 106] had Designed the Change of Government, and to cast off Monarchy (but yet had not wit enough to set up another Government in its place, and consequently lest it to the Chance of War) made a Cabal amongst themselves, in which they projected how by seconding one another to Govern the House of Commons; and in­vented how to put the Kingdom by the Power of that House into a Rebellion, which they then called a posture of Defence against such Dangers from abroad as they themselves should feign and publish. Besides, whilst the King was in Scotland, the Irish Papists got togeter a great Party, with an Intention to Massacre the Pro­testants there, and had laid a Design for the seizing of Dublin Castle October the 20th. where the King's Officers of the Government of the County made their Residence, and had effect­ed it, had it not been Discovered the night be­fore: The Manner of the Discovery, and the Murders they committed in the Country after­wards I need not tell you, since the whole story of it is extant.

I wonder they did not expect & provide for a Rebellion in Ireland as soon as they began to quarrel with the King in England: For was there any body so ignorant as not to know that the Irish Papists did long for a Change of Reli­gion there, as well as the Presbyterians in England? Or that in general the Irish Nation did hate the name of Subjection to England, or would longer be quiet than they feared an Ar­my [Page 107] out of England to chastize them? What bet­ter time then, could they take for their Rebel­lion than this, wherein they were encouraged, not only by our weakness caused by this Divi­sion between the King and his Parliament, but also by the Example of the Presbyterians, both of the Scotch and English Nation? But what did the Parliament do upon this occasion in the King's absence?

Nothing; but consider what use they might make of it to their own ends; partly by imputing it to the King's evil Councillors, and partly by occasion thereof to demand of the King the Power of Pressing and Ordering of Souldiers, which Power whosoever has, has also without doubt the whole Soveraignty.

When came the King back?

He came back the 25th. of November, and and was welcomed with the Acclamations of the Common People, as much as if had been the most beloved of the Kings before him, but found not a Reception by the Parliament answerable to it: They presently began to pick new Quarrels against him out of every thing he said to them. December the 2d. the King called together both Houses of Parliament, and then did only re­commend unto them the raising of Succours for Ireland.

What Quarrel could they pick out of that?

None but in order thereto, as they may pretend, they had a Bill in Agitation to assert [Page 108] the power of Levying & Pressing Souldiers to the two Houses of the Lords and Commons; which was as much as to take from the King the Power of the Militia, which is in effect the whole So­veraign Power; for he that hath the Power of Levying, and Commanding of the Souldiers, has all other Rights of Soveraignty which he shall please to claim: The King hearing of it, called the Houses of Parliament together again on De­cember the 14th. and then pressed again the bu­siness of Ireland, (as there was need) for all this while the Irish were murdering the English in Ireland, and strengthening themselves against the Forces they expected to come out of Eng­land) and withall told them, he took notice of the Bill in Agitation for Pressing of Souldiers; and that he was content it should pass with a Salvo Jure both for him and them, because the present time was unreasonable to dispute it in.

What was there unreasonable in this?

Nothing; what's unreasonable is one question; what they quarrelled at is another: They quarrelled at this, that His Majesty took notice of the Bill while it was in debate in the House of Lords, before it was presented to him, in the Course of Parliament: And also that he shewed himself displeased with those that pro­pounded the third Bill; both which they de­clared to be against the Priviledges of Parlia­ment, and petitioned the King to give them Re­paration against those by whose evil Council he [Page 109] was induced to it, that they might receive condign punishment.

This was cruel proceeding: Do not the Kings of England use to sit in the Lords House when they please? And was not this Bill then in debate in the House of Lords? It is a strange thing that a man should be lawfully in the com­pany of men, where he must needs hear and see what they say and do; and yet must not take notice of it, so much as to the same Company; for though the King was not present at the Debate it self, yet it was lawful for any of the Lords to make him acquainted with it. Any one of the House of Commons, though not present at a Proposition, or Debate, in the House, ne­vertheless hearing of it from some of his fellow-Members, may certainly, not only take notice of it, but also speak to it in the House of Com­mons: But to make the King give up his Friends and Councillors to them to be put to Death, Banishment or Imprisonment, for their good will to him, was such a Tyranny over a King, no King ever exercised over any Subject, but in cases of Treason, or Murder, and seldom then.

Presently hereupon grew a kind of War between the Peers of Parliament, and those of the Secretaries, and other able Men that were with the King. For upon the 15th. of December they sent to the King a Paper called a Remon­strance of the Sate of the Kingdom, and with it a Petition, both which they caused to be pub­lished; [Page 110] in the Remonstrance they complained of certain mischievous Designs of a Malignant Par­ty then before the beginning of the Parliament grown ripe, and did set forth what means had been used for the preventing of it by the Wis­dom of the Parliament; what Rubs they had found therein, what course was fit to be taken for the restoring and establishing the Antient Honour, Greatness and Safety of the Crown and Nation: And of those Designs the Promoters and Actors were, they said,

1. Jesuits and Papists.

2. The Bishops, and part of the Clergy, that cherish Formality as a support of their own Ec­clesiastical Tyranny and Usurpation.

3. Councillors and Courtiers, that for pri­vate ends (they said) had engaged themselves to farther the Interests of some Forein Princes.

It may well be, that some of the Bishops, and also some of the Court may have, in pursuit of their private Interest, done something in­discreetly, and perhaps wickedly; therefore I pray to tell me particularly what their Crimes were; for methinks the King should not have conniv'd at any thing against his own Supream Authority.

The Parliament were not very keen a­gainst them that were against the King. They made no doubt but all they did was by the King's Command, but accused thereof the Bi­shops, Councillors and Courtiers, as being a more mannerly way of Accusing the King himself, and [Page 111] and defaming him to his Subjects. For the truth is, the Charge they brought against them was so general, as not to be called an Accusation, but Railing. As first; They said, they nourished Questions of Prerogatives and Liberty between the King and his People, to the end, that seeming much addicted to His Majesties Service, they might get themselves into places of greatest Trust and Power in the Kingdom.

How could this be call'd an Accusation, in which there is no Fact for any Accusers to ap­ply their Proof to, or their Witnesses? for, granting that these Questions of Prerogative had been moved by them, who can prove that their End was to gain to themselves and Friends the Places of Trust and Power in the Kingdom?

A second Accusation was, that they en­deavour'd to suppress the Purity and Power of Religion.

That's Canting. It is not in Mans power to suppress the Power of Religion.

They meant, that they supprest the Do­ctrine of the Presbyterians; that is to say, the very Foundation of their Parliaments Treache­rous Pretensions.

A third; That they cherished Arminians, Pa­pists, and Libertines (by which they meant the common Protestants that meddle not with Dis­putes) to the end they might compose a body fit to Act according to their Counsels and Reso­lutions.

A fourth; That they endeavoured to put the [Page 112] King upon other courses of Raising Money, than by the ordinary way of Parliaments. Judge whe­ther these may be properly called Accusations, or not rather spightful Reproaches of the King's Government.

Methinks this last was a very great fault; for what good could there be in putting the King upon any odd course of getting Money when the Parliament was willing to supply him as far as to the security of the Kingdom, or to the honour of the King should be necessary?

But I told you before they would give him none, but with a Condition he should cut off the heads of whom they pleased, how faithfully soever they had serv'd him; and if he would have sacrificed all his Friends to their Ambi­tion, yet they would have found other excuses to deny him Subsidies; for they were resolv'd to take from him the Soveraign Power to them­selves, which they would never do without taking great care that he should have no Money at all. In the next place, they put into the Re­monstrance as faults of them whose Council the King followed, All those things which since the beginning of the King's Reign were by them mis-liked, whether faults or not, and whereof they were not able to judge for want of know­ledge of the Causes and Motives that induced the King to do them, and were known only to the King himself, and such of his Privy-Council as he revealed them to.

But what were those particular pretended faults?

First, The Dissolution of his last Parlia­ment at Oxford.

Secondly, The Dissolution of his second Par­liament, being in the second year of his Reign.

Thirdly, The Dissolution of his Parliament in the fourth year of his Reign.

Fourthly, The fruitless Expedition against Cales.

Fifthly, The Peace made with Spain, where­by the Palatine's Cause was deserted and left to chargeable and hopeless Treaties.

Sixthly, The sending of Commissions to raise Money by way of Loan.

Seventhly, Raising of Ship-money.

Eighthly, Enlargements of Forrests contrary to Magna-Charta.

Ninthly, The Designment of Engrossing all the Gun-powder into one hand, and keeping it in the Tower of London.

Tenthly, A Design to bring in the Use of Brass-Money.

Eleventhly, The Fines, Imprisonments, Stig­matizings, Mutilations, Whippings, Pillories, Gaggs, Confinements and Banishments, by Sen­tence in the Court of Star-Chamber.

Twelfthly, The Displacing of Judges.

Thirteenthly, The Illegal Acts of Council-Table.

Fourteenthly, The Arbitrary and Illegal Power of the Earl-Marshal's Court.

Fifteenthly, The Abuses in Chancery, Ex­chequer-Chamber, and Court of Wards.

[Page 114] Sixteenthly, The selling of Titles of Honour, of Judges and Serjeants Places, and other Of­fices.

Seventeenthly, The Insolence of Bishops, and other Clarks in Suspensions, Excommunications, and Degradations of divers painful, and learned, and pious Ministers.

Were there any such Ministers Degraded, Depraved, or Excommunicated?

I cannot tell: But I remember I have heard threatned divers painful, unlearned and se­ditious Ministers.

Eighteenthly, The Excess of Severity of the High Commission-Court.

Nineteenthly, The Preaching before the King against the Property of the Subject, and for the Prerogative of the King above the Law, and di­vers other petty Quarrels they had to the Go­vernment; which though they were laid upon this Faction, yet they knew they would fall upon the King himself in the Judgment of the People, to whom by Printing it was communi­cated.

Again, After the Dissolution of the Parliament May the 5th. 1640. they find other faults; as the Dissolution it self; the Imprisoning some Members of both Houses; a forced Loan of Money attempted in London; the Continuance of the Convocation when the Parliament was ended; and the favour shewed to Papists by Se­cretary Windebank and others.

All this will go current with common [Page 115] people for Mis-government; and for faults of the King's, though some of them were Mis­fortunes, and both the Mis-fortunes and the Mis-government (if any were) were the faults of the Parliament, who by denying to give him Money, did both frustrate his Attempts abroad, and put him upon those extraordinary waies (which they call Illegal) of raising Money at home.

You see what a heap of Evils they have raised to make a shew of ill Government to the People, which they second with an enumeration of the many services they have done the King in overcoming a great many of them, though not all, and in divers other things, and say, that though they had contracted a Debt to the Scots of 22000 l. and granted six Subsidies, and a Bill of Pole-money worth six Subsidies more, yet that God had so blessed the Endeavours of this Par­liament, that the Kingdom was a gainer by it; and then follows the Catalogue of those good things they had done for the King and Kingdom: For the Kingdom they had done (they said) these things; They had abolished Ship [...] money, They had taken away Coat and Conduct-money, and other Military Charges, which they said amounted to little less than the Ship-money; That they supprest all Monopolies, which they reckoned above a Million yearly sav'd by the Subject; That they had quell'd Living Grie­vances, meaning, Evil Councillors and Actors by the Death of my Lord Strafford; by the flight [Page 116] of the Chancellor Finch, and of Secretary Winde­bank, by the Imprisonment of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and Judges; that they had past a Bill for a Triennial Parliament, and another for the Continuance of the present Parliament, till they should think fit to Dissolve themselves.

That is to say, for ever, if they be suffer­ed. But the summe of all those things which they had done for the Kingdom, is, that they had left it without Government, without Strength, without Money, without Law, and without good Council.

They reckoned also putting down of the High Commission, and the abating of the Power of the Council-Table, and of the Bishops, and their Courts; the taking away of unnecessary Ceremonies in Religion; removing of Ministers from their Livings, that were not of their Faction, and putting in such as were.

All this was but their own, and not the Kingdoms business.

The Good they had done the King was, first, (they said) the giving of 25000 l. a month for the Relief of the Northern Counties.

What need of Relief had the Northern more than the rest of the Counties of England?

Yes, In the Northern Counties were quar­tered the Scotch Army, which the Parliament call'd in to oppose the King, and consequently their Quarter was to be discharged.

True, but by the Parliament that call'd them in.

But they say no; and that this Money was given the King, because he is bound to protect his Subjects.

He is no farther bound to that, than they to give him Money wherewithal to do it. This is very great Impudence, to raise an Army a­gainst the King, and with that Army to oppress their Fellow-subjects, and then require that the King should relieve them; that is to say, be at the Charge of Paying the Army that was raised to fight against him.

Nay farther, they put to the King's Accompts the 30000 l. given to the Scots, without which they would not have Invaded England; besides many other things that I now remember not.

I did not think there had been so great Impudence and Villany in Mankind.

You have not observ'd the world long enough to see all that's ill: Such was their Re­monstrance▪ as I have told you; with it they sent a Petition containing three points.

First, That His Majesty would deprive the Bishops of their Votes in Parliament, and remove such Oppressions in Religion, Church, Govern­ment, and Discipline, as they had brought in.

Secondly, That he would remove from his Council, all such as should promote the Peoples Grievances, and Imploy in his great and publick Affairs such as the Parliament should confide in.

Thirdly, That he would not give away the Lands Escheated to the Crown by the Rebellion in Ireland.

This last point, methinks, was not wisely put in at this time; it should have been reserv'd till they had subdued the Rebels, against whom there were yet no Forces sent over: 'Tis like selling the Lions Skin, before they had kill'd him. But what answer was made to the other two Propositions?

What answer should be made but a De­nial?

About the same time the King himself Exhi­bited Articles against six persons of the Parlia­ment, five whereof were of the House of Com­mons, and one of the House of Lords, accusing them of High Treason: and upon the fourth of January went himself to the House of Commons to demand those five of them; but private no­tice having been given by some Treacherous person about the King, they had absented them­selves, and by that means frustrated His Ma­jesties Intention; and after he was gone, the House making a hainous matter of it, and a High Breach of their Priviledges, adjourned themselves into London, there to sit as a General Committee, pretending they were not safe at Westminster; for the King, when he went to the House to demand those persons, had somewhat more attendance with him (but not otherwise armed than his servants used to be) than he or­dinarily had, and would not be pacified (though the King did afterwards wave the prosecution of those persons) unless he would also discover to them those that gave him Counsel to go in that [Page 119] manner to the Parliament-House, to the end they might receive condign punish­ment, which was the Word they used instead of Cruelty.

This was a harsh Demand: Was it not e­nough that the King should forbear his Enemies, but also that he must betray his Friends? If they thus Tyrani [...]e over the King before they have gotten the Soveraign Power into their Hands, how will they Tyranize over their Fellow-Sub­jects when they have gotten it?

So as they did.

How long staid that Committee in London?

Not above 2 or 3 Days, and then were brought from London to the Parliament-House by Water in great Triumph, guarded with a tumul­tuous number of Armed Men there to sit in secu­rity in despite of the King, and make Traiterous Acts against Him, such and as many as they listed, and under favour of these Tumults, to frighten away from the House of Peers all such as were not of their own Faction; for at this time t [...]e Rabble was so insolent, that scarce any of the Bi­shops durst go to the House for fear of Violence upon their Persons: insomuch that Twelve of them excused themselves of Coming thither, and by way of Perition to the King remonstrated that they were not permitted to go quietly to the Performance of that Duty, and protesting against all Determinations as of none Effect, that should pass in the House of Lords during their [Page 120] forced Absence which the House of Commons taking hold of, sent up to the Peers one of their Members to accuse them of High Trea­son; whereupon Ten of them were sent to the Tower, after which time there was no more words of their High Treason, but there passed a Bill, by which they were deprived of their Votes in Parliament: And to this Bill they got the Kings Assent, and in the beginning of Sept. after they Voted the Bishops should have no more to do in the Government of the Church, but to this they had not the Kings Assent, the War being now begun.

What made the Parliament so averse to Episcopacy, and especially the House of Lords, whereof the Bishops were Members: For I see no reason why they should do it to gratifie a number of poor Parish Priests that were Presbyterians, and that were never likely to serve the Lords; but, on the contrary, to do their best, to pull down their power, and subject them to their Synods and Classes.

For the Lords, very few of them did perceive the intention of the Presbyterians; and besides that, they durst not, I believe, op­pose the Lower House.

But why were the Lower-House so ear­nest against them?

Because they meant to make use of their Tenants; and with pretended Sanctity, to make the King and his Party odious to the People, [Page 121] by whose help they were to set up Democrasie, and Depose the King; or to let him have the Title only so long as he should Act for their purposes: But not only the Parliament, but in a manner all the People of England, were their Enemies upon the account of their behaviour, as being (they said) too imperious. This was all that was colourably laid to their charge; the main of the pulling them down was the Envy of the Presbyterians, that incensed the People against them, and against Episcopacy it self.

How would the Presbyterians have the Church to be govern'd?

By National and Provincial Synods.

Is not this to make the National Assembly an Arch-Bishop, and the Provincial Assemblies so many Bishops?

Yes; but every Minister shall have the delight of sharing the Government, and con­sequently of being able to be reveng'd on them that do not admire their Learning, and help to fill their purses, and win to their ser­vice them that do.

'Tis a hard Case, that there should be two Factions to trouble the Common-wealth without any Interest of their own, other than every particular man may have; and that their quarrels should be only about Opinions, that is, about who has the most Learning, as if their Learning ought to be the Rule of Governing the whole world. What is it they are Learned [Page 122] in? is it Politicks and Rules of State? I know it is called Divinity; but I hear almost nothing preacht but matter of Philosophy; for Religion in it self admits of no Controversie: 'Tis a Law of the Kingdom, and ought not to be disputed. I do not think they pretend to speak with God, and know his will by any other way than reading the Scriptures, which we also do.

Yes, some of them do, and give themselves out for Prophets, by extraordinary Inspiration; but the rest pretend only (for their Advance­ment to Benefices, and Charge of Souls) a grea­ter skill in the Scriptures than other men have by reason of their breeding in the Universities, and knowledge there gotten of the Latin Tongue, and some also of the Greek and Hebrew Tongues, wherein the Scrlptures was written; besides their knowledge of Natural Philosophy, which is there publickly taught.

As for the Latin, Greek and Hebrew, it was once (to the Detection of the Roman Fraud, and to the Ejection of the Romish Power) very profitable, or rather necessary. But now that is done, and we have the Scripture in English, and Preaching in English, I see no great need of La­tin, Greek and Hebrew: I should think my self better qualified by understanding well the Lan­guages of our Neighbours, French, Dutch, and Italian. I think it was never seen in the world, before the Power of Popes was set up, that Phi­losophy was much conducing to Power in a Common-wealth.

But Philosophy, together with Divinity, hath very much conduced to the Advancement of the Professors thereof, to places of the grea­test Authority, next to the Authority of Kings themselves, in most of the Antient Kingdoms of the world, as is manifestly to be seen in the Hi­story of those times.

I pray you cite me some of the Authors and places.

First, what were the Druids of old time in Britany and France, what Authority these had you may see in Caesar, Strabo, and others, and espe­cially in Diodorus Siculus, the greatest Antiquary perhaps that ever was, who speaking of the Druids (which he calls Sarovides) in France, says thus; There be also amongst them certain Philo­sophers and Theologians that are exceedingly honoured, whom they also use as Prophets. These men by their skill in Augury, and Inspection into the Bowels of Beasts sacrificed, foretell what is to come, and have the multitude in obedience to them, and a little after. It is a custom amongst them, that no man may sacrifice without a Philo­sopher, because (say they) men ought not to pre­sent their Thanks to the Gods, but by them that know the Divine Nature, and are as it were of the same Language with them; and that all good things ought by such as these to be prayed for.

I can hardly believe that those Druids were very skilful either in Natural Philosophy or Moral.

Nor I; for they held and taught the [Page 124] Transmigration of souls from one body to ano­ther, as did Pythagoras, which Opinion, whe­ther they took from him, or he from them, I cannot tell. What were the Magi in Persia but Philosophers and Astrologers? you know how they came to find our Saviour by the Conduct of a Star, either from Persia it self, or from some Country more Eastward than Judea: were not these in great Authority in their Country? And are they not in most part of Christendom, thought to have been Kings? Aegypt hath been thought by many the most Antient Kingdom and Nation of the world, and their Priests had the greatest power in Civil Affairs that any Subject ever had in any Nation. And what were they but Phi­losophers and Divines? Concerning whom the same Diodorus Siculus saies thus; The whole Country of Egypt being divided into three parts, the Body of the Priests have One as being of most credit with the peo­ple, both for their Devotion towards the Gods, and also for their Understanding got­ten by Education, and presently after: for generally those men in the greatest Affairs of all the King's Councillors, partly Executing, and partly Informing and Advising; foretelling him also (by their skill in Astrology and Art in the Inspection of Sacrifices) the things that are to come; and reading to him out of their Holy Books such of the Actions there recorded, as are profitable for him to know. [Page 125] 'Tis not there as in Greece, one man, or one woman that has the Priesthood, but they are many that attend the Honours and Sacrifices of the Gods, and leave the same Imployment to their posterity, which next to the King have the greatest Power and Authority, concerning the Judicature amongst the Aegyptians, he saith thus; from out of the most eminent Cities, Hie­ropolis, Thebes and Memphis, they those Judges, which are a Council not inferiour to that of A­reopagus in Athens, or that of the Senate in La­cedaemon; when they are met, being in number thirty, they chuse one from among themselves to be Chief Justice; and the City whereof he is sendeth another in his place: This Chief Justice wore about his neck, hung in a gold Chain, a Jewel of precious Stones; the name of which Jewel was Truth, which when the Chief Justice had put on, then began the Pleading, &c. And when the Judges had agreed on the Sentence, then did the Chief Justice put this Jewel of Truth to one of the Pleas. You see now what power was acquir'd in Civil matters by the Conjuncture of Philosophy and Divinity: Let us come now to the Common-wealth of the Jews; was not the Priesthood in a Family (namely the Levites) as well as the Priesthood of Aegypt? Did not the High Priest give Judgment by the Breastplate of Urim and Thummim? Look upon the Kingdom of Assyria, and the Philosophers and Chaldaeans; had not they Lands and Cities belonging to their Family, even in Abraham's time, who dwelt (you [Page 126] know) in Ur of the Chaldaeans; of these the same Author says thus; The Chaldaeans are a Sect in Politicks, like to that of the Aegyptian Priests; for being ordained for the service of the gods▪ they spend the whole time of their life in Philosophy, being of exceed [...]ng great reputation in Astrology, and pretending much also to Prophecy, foretell­ing things to come by Purifications & Sacrifices; and to find out by certain Incantations the pre­venting of harm, and the bringing to pass of good. They have also skill in Augury, and in the Inter­pretation of Dreams and Wonders; nor are they unskilful in the Art of Foretelling by the Inwards of Beasts sacrificed, and have their Learning not of the Greeks; for the Philosophy of the Chal­daeans goes to their Family by Tradition, and the Son receives it from his Father. From Assyria let us pass into India, and see what esteem the Philosophers had there. The whole Multitude (says Diodoru) of the Indians, is divided into seven parts, whereof the first is the Body of the Philosophers, for number the least, but for emi­nency the first; for they are free from Taxes; and as they are not Masters of others, so are no others Masters of them. By private Men they are called to the Sacrifices, and to the care of Burials of the Dead, as being thought most beloved of the gods, and skilful in the Doctrine concerning Hell; and for this Imployment receive Gifts and Ho­nours very considerable. They are also of great Use to the People of India, for being taken at the beginning of the year in the great Assembly [Page 127] they foretell them of great D [...]ouths great Rains, also of Winds and of Sicknesses, and of whatsoe­ver is profitable for them to know beforehand.

The same Author concerning the Laws of the Aethiopians, saith thus, The Laws of the Aethi­opians seem very different from those of other Nations; and especially about the Election of their Kings: for the Priests propound some of the Chief Men among them named in a Cata­logue: and when the God (which according to a certain Custom is carried about to Feastings) does accept of him, the Multitude Elect for their King▪ and presently adore and honour him, as a God put into the Government by Divine Providence. The King being chosen, he has the manner of his Life limited to him by the Laws, and does all other things according to the Cu­stom of the Country, neither rewarding nor pu­nishing any man otherwise than from the begin­ing is establisht amongst them by Law; nor use they to put any man to death though he be con­demn'd to it, but to send some Officer to him with a Token of Death, who seeing the Token, goes presently to his own house, and kills himself presently after. But the strangest thing of all is that which they do concerning the Death of their Kings for the Priests that live in Meroe, and spend their time about the worship and honour of the gods, and are in greatest Authority; when they have a mind to it, send a Messenger to the King, to bid him die, for that the gods have gi­ven such order, and that the Commandments of [Page 128] the Immortals are not by any means to be neg­lected by those that are by nature Mortal, using also other speeches to him, with men of simple Judgment, that have not reason enough to dis­pute against those unnecessary Commands, as be­ing educated under an old and indelible Custom, are content to admit of; therefore in former times the Kings did obey the Priests, not as mastered by force and Arms, but as having their reason mastered by superstition. But in the time of Ptolomy the second, Ergamenes, King of the Aethiopians, having had his Breeding in Philosophy after the manner of the Greeks, be­ing the first that durst dispute their power, took heart as befitted a King; came with souldiers to a place called Abaton, where was then the gol­den Temple of the Aethiopians; killed all the Priests, abolished the Custom, and rectified the Kingdom according to his will.

Though they that were kill'd were most damnable Impostors, yet the Act was cruel.

It was so; But were not the Priests cruel to cause their Kings, whom a little before they adored as Gods, to make away themselves? The King kill'd them for the safety of his person, they him, out of Ambition, or love of Change. The King's Act may be coloured with the good of his People; the Priests had no pretence a­gainst their Kings, who were certainly very godly, or else would never have obeyed the Command of the Priests by a Messenger unarm­ed to kill themselves. Our late King, the best [Page 129] King perhaps that ever was (you know) was murdered, having been first persecuted by War at the Incitement of Presbyterian Ministers, who are therefore guilty of the Death of all that fell in that War, which were, I believe, in England, Scotland and Ireland near one hun­dred thousand persons. Had it not been much better that those seditious Ministers which were not perhaps a thousand, had been all kill'd before that they had Preached? It had been (I confess) a great Massacre; but the killing of a hundred thousand is a greater.

I am glad the Bishops were out at this business; as ambitious as some say they are, it did not appear in that business; for they were Enemies to them that were in it.

But I intend not by these Quotations to commend either the Divinity, nor the Phi­losophy of those Heathen People, but to shew only what the Reputation of those Scien­ces can effect among the People: For their Divinity was nothing but Idolatry, and their Philosophy (excepting the knowledge of the Aegyptian Priests, and from them the Chal­daeans had gotten by long Observation and Study in Astronomy, Geometry, and Arith­metick, very little, and that in great part abu­sed in Astrology and Fortune-telling; where­as the Divinity of the Clergy in this Nation now considered apart from the mixture that has been introduced by the Church of Rome, and in part retained here) of the babling Phi­losophy [Page 130] of Aristotle, and other Greeks, that has no Affinity with Religion, and serves only to breed Disaffection, Dissention, and finally Sedition and Civil War (as we have lately found by dear Experience in the Diffe­rences between the Presbyterians and Episco­pals) is the true Religion. But for these Differences, both Parties as they were in Power, not only suppressed the Tenents of one another, but also whatsoever Doctrine lookt with an ill aspect upon their Interest; and consequently all true Philosophy, especially Civil and Moral, which can never appear pro­pitious to Ambition, or to an Exemption from Obedience due to the Soveraign Power.

After the King had accused the Lord Kimbolton, a Member of the Lords House, and Hollis, Hasl [...]rig, Hampden, Prinn, and Stroud, Five Members of the Lower House, of High Treason; and after the Parliament had Voted out the Bishops from the House of Peers, they pursued especially two things in their Petitions to His Majesty, the one was, that the King would declare who were the persons that advised him to go as he did to the Parliament-House to apprehend them; and that he would leave them to the Par­liament to receive condign punishment; and this they did to stick upon His Majesty the dishonour of Deserting his Friends, and be­traying them to his Enemies: the other was, [Page 131] that he would allow a Guard out of the Ci­ty of London to be commanded by the Earl of Essex; for which they pretended they could not else sit in safety, which pretence was nothing but an upbraiding of His Maje­sty for coming to Parliament, better accom­panied than ordinary to seize the said five se­ditious Members.

I see no reason in petitioning for a Guard, they should determine it to the City of London in particular, and the Command by name to the Earl of Essex, unless they meant the King should understand it a Guard against himself.

Their meaning was, that the King should understand it so, and as (I verily be­lieve) they meant he should take it as an af­front; and the King himself understanding it so, denied to grant it, though he were willing; if they could not otherwise be satisfied, to Com­mand such a Guard to wait upon them, as he would be responsible for to God Almighty. Besides this, the City of London petition'd the King (put upon it, no doubt, by some Mem­bers of the Lower House) to put the Tower of London into the hands of persons of Trust, meaning such as the Parliament should ap­prove of, And so appoint a Guard for the safety of His Majesty and the Parliament. This method of bringing petitions in a Tumultary Manner by great Multitudes of Clamorous people, was or­dinary with the House of Commons, whose Am­bition could never have been served by way of [Page 130] Prayer and Request, without extraordinary ter­ror.

After the King had waved the prosecution of the Five Members, but denied to make known, who had advised Him to come in per­son to the House of Commons, they question­ed the Attorney General, who, by the King's Command, had Exhibited the Articles against them, and voted Him, A Breaker of the Privi­ledge of Parliameut. And no doubt had made him feel their Cruelty, if he had not speedily fled the Land.

About the end of January, they made an Order of both Houses of Parliament, to pre­vent the going over of Popish Commanders into Ireland; not so much fearing that, as that by this the King Himself choosing his Comman­ders for that Service, might aid Himself out of Ireland against the Parliament. But this was no great matter, in respect of a Petition they sent His Majesty about the same time, that is to say, about the Twenty seventh, or Twenty eighth of January, 1641. wherein they desi­red, in effect, the absolute Sovereignty of England, though by the name of Sovereignty they challeng'd it not, whil'st the King was living; for to the End that the Fears and Dan­gers of this Kingdom might be removed, and the mischievous Designs of those who are Ene­mies to the Peace of it, might be prevented, they pray that His Majesty would be pleased to put forthwith,

[Page 131] First, The Tower of London.

Secondly, All other Forts.

Thirdly, The whole Militia of the Kingdom into the hands of such persons as should be re­commended to him by both the Houses of Par­liament.

And this they stile a necessary Petition.

Were there really any such Fears and Dan­gers generally conceived here? or did there ap­pear any Enemies at that time with such Designs as are mentioned in the Petition.

Yes, but no other fear of Danger, but such as discreet and honest Men might justly have of the Designs of the Parliament it self, who were the greatest Enemies to the Peace of the Kingdom that could possibly be. 'Tis also worth observing, that this Petition began with these words, Most Gracious Sovereign; so stu­pid they were, as not to know, that he that is Master of the Militia, is Master of the King­dom, and consequently is in possession of a most absolute Sovereignty. The King was now at Winsor, to avoid the Tumults of the Com­mon People before the Gates at Whitehall, to­gether with the Clamors and Affronts there the Ninth of February; after he came to Hampton Court, and thence went to Dover with the Queen, and the Princess of Orange his Daugh­ter, where the Queen, with the Princess of Orange, embarked for Holland, but the King returned to Greenwich, whence he sent for the [Page 134] Prince of Wales, and the Duke of York, and so went with them towards York.

Did the Lords join with the Commons in this Petition for the Militia?

It appears so by the Title, but I believe they durst not but do it; the House of Com­mons took them but for a Cypher, Men of Title onely, without real power, but they were very much mistaken; for the House of Commons never intended they should be sharers in it.

What Answer made the King to this Pe­tition?

That when He shall know the Extent of Power which is intended to be established in those persons, whom they desire to be the Commanders of the Militia in the several Counties, and likewise to what time it shall be limited; that no Power shall be Executed by His Majesty alone, without the advice of Par­liament, then he will declare that (for the se­curing them from all Dangers or Jealousies of any) then His Majesty will be content to put into all the places, both Forts and Militia in the several Counties, such persons as both the Hou­ses of Parliament shall either approve, or re­commend unto him, so that they declare be­fore unto His Majesty, the names of the per­sons whom they approve, or recommend, un­less such persons shall be nam'd, against whom he shall have just and unquestionable Excep­tions.

What Power? For what Time? And to whom did the Parliament grant concerning the Militia?

The same Power which the King had before planted in his Lieutenants, and his Depu­ty-Lieutenants in the several Counties, and with­out other limitation of time, but their own plea­sure.

Who were the Men that had this Power?

There is a Catalogue of them Printed, they are very many, and most of them Lords; nor is it necessary to have them nam'd, for to name them, is (in my opinion) to brand them with the mark of Disloyalty, or of Folly. When they had made a Catalogue of them, they sent it to the King, with a new Petition for the Mi­litia.

Also presently after they sent a Message to His Majesty, praying Him to leave the Prince at Hampton Court; but the King granted nei­ther.

Howsoever it was well done of them to get Hostages (if they could) of the King, be­fore He went from them.

In the mean time, to raise Mony, for the reducing of Ireland, the Parliament invited Men to bring in Mony by way of Adventure, according to these Propositions.

First, That two Millions, and five hundred thousand Acres of Land in Ireland, should be as­signed to the Adventurers in this proportion.

• [Page 136]200 l.—1000 Acres in Ulster.
• 300 l.—1000 Acres in Conaught.
• 450 l.—1000 Acres in Munster.
• 600 l.—1000 Acres in Leinster.

All according to English Measure, and consist­ing of Meadow, arable and profitable Pasture, Bogs, Woods, and Barren Mountains, being cast in over and above.

Secondly, A Revenue was reserv'd to the Crown, from 1d. to 3d. on every Acre.

Thirdly, That Commissions should be sent by the Parliament, to erect Mannors, settle Wastes and Commons, maintain preaching Mini­sters, to create Corporations, and to regulate Plantations. The rest of the Propositions con­cern only the times and manner of payment of the Sums subscribed by the Adventurers▪ and to those Propositions His Majesty assented, but to the Petition for the Militia, His Majesty denied His Assent.

If He had not, I should have thought it a great Wonder. What did the Parliament after this?

They sent Him another Petition, which was presented to Him when He was at Theobalds, in his way to York; wherein they tell Him plainly, That unless He be pleased to assure them by those Messengers them sent, that He would spee­dily apply His Royal Assent to the satisfaction of their former Desires, they shall be forc'd, for the [Page 137] Safety of His Majesty and His Kingdoms, to dis­pose of the Militia by the Authority of both Hou­ses, &c.

They Petition'd His Majesty also, to let the Prince stay at St. James 's, or some other of His Majesties Houses near London. They tell him al­so, That the Power of Raising, Ordering and Dis­posing of the Militia, cannot be granted to any Cor­poration, without the Authority and Consent of Parliament. And those Parts of the Kingdom, that have put themselves into a posture of Defence, have done nothing therein, but by direction of both Houses, and what is justifiable by the Laws of this Kingdom.

What Answer made the King to this?

It was a putting of themselves into Arms, and under Officers, such as the Parliament should approve of.

Fourthly, They Voted that His Majesty should be again desir'd, that the Prince might continue about London.

Lastly, They Voted a Declaration to be sent to His Majesty by both the Houses, wherein they accuse His Majesty of a design of altering Religion, though not directly Him, but them that counsel'd Him; whom they also accus'd of being the Inviters and Fomenters of the Scotch War, and Framers of the Rebellion in Ireland. And upbraid the King again, for accusing the Lord Kimbolton, and the Five Members; and of being privy to the purpose of bringing up His Army, which was rais'd against the Scots, to be [Page 138] employ'd against the Parliament. To which His Majesty replied from Newmarket.

Whereupon it was Resolv'd by both Houses, That in this Case of extream Danger, and of His Majesties Refusal, the Ordinance agreed upon by both Houses, for the Militia, doth oblige the People by the Fundamental Laws of this Kingdom. And also that whosoever should execute any Power over the Militia, by colour of any Commission of Lieu­tenancy, without Consent of both Houses of Par­liament, shall be accounted a Disturber of the Peace of the Kingdom.

Whereupon His Majesty sent a Message to both Houses from Huntingdon, Requiring Obe­dience to the Laws Established, and Prohibiting all Subjects, upon pretence of their Ordinance, to Exe­cute any thing concerning the Militia, which is not by those Laws warranted.

Upon this the Parliament Vote a standing to their former Votes; as also, That when the Lords and Commons in Parliament, which is the Supreme Court of Judicature in the Kingdom, shall declare what the Law of the Land is, to have this not only questioned, but contradicted, is a high Breach of the Priviledge of Parliament.

I thought that he that makes the Law, ought to declare what the Law is; for what is it else to make a Law, but to declare what it is; so that they have taken from the King not only the Militia, but also the Legislative Power.

They have so. But I make account the Legislative Power (and indeed all Power pos­sible) is contain'd in the Power of the Mi­litia.

After this they seize such Mony as was due to His Majesty upon the Bill of Tunnage and Poundage, and upon the Bill of Subsidies, that they might disable him every way they possibly could. They sent Him also many other contu­melious Messages and Petitions after His coming to York, amongst which one was, That whereas the Lord Admiral, by indisposition of Body, could not command the Fleet in Person, He would be pleased to give Authority to the Earl of Warwick to supply his place; when they knew the King had put Sir John Pennington in it before.

To what End did the King entertain so many Petitions; Messages, Declarations, and Re­monstrances, and vouchsafe His Answers to them, when He could not choose but clearly see they were resolv'd to take from Him His Royal Pow­er, and consequently His Life? For it could not stand with their safety, to let either Him or His Issue live, after they had done Him so great In­juries.

Besides this, the Parliament had at the same time a Committee residing at York, to spie what His Majesty did, and to inform the Par­liament thereof; and also to hinder the King from gaining the People of that County to His Party: so that when His Majesty was Courting the Gentlemen there, the Committee was Insti­gating [Page 140] of the Yeomanry against him [...]; to which also the Ministers did very much contribute, so that the King lost his opportunity at York.

Why did not the King seize the Com­mittee into his hands, or drive them out of his Town?

I know not; but I believe, he knew the Parliament had a greater Party than he, not only in Yorkshire, but also in York.

Towards the End of April the King, upon Petition of the People of Yorkshire, to have the Magazine of Hull to remain still there, for the greater security of the Northern Parts, thought fit to take it into his own hands. He had a little before appointed Governor of the Town the Earl of Newcastle, but the Townsmen having been already corrupted by the Parliament, refu­sed to receive him, but refus'd not to receive Sir John Hotham, appointed to be Governor by the Parliament. The King therefore coming be­fore the Town, Guarded only by a few of his own Servants, and a few Gentlemen of the Country thereabouts, was deny'd Entrance by Sir John Hotham that stood upon the Wall; for which Act, he presently caused Sir John Hotham to be proclaim'd Traytor, and sent a Message to the Parliament, requiring Justice to be done upon the said Hotham, and that the Town and Maga­zine might be delivered into his hands.

To which the Parliament made no Answer, but instead thereof published another Declaration, in which they omitted nothing of their former [Page 141] Slanders against His Majesties Government, but inserted certain Propositions declarative of their own pretended Right, viz.

I. That whatsoever they declare to be Law, ought not to be question'd by the King.

II. That no Precedent can be Limits, to bound their Proceedings.

III. That a Parliament, for the Publick Good, may dispose of any thing wherein the King or Sub­ject hath a Right; and that they, without the King, are this Parliament, and the Judge of this Publick Good, and that the King's consent is not necessary.

IV. That no Member of either House ought to be troubled for Treason, Felony, or any other Crime, unless the Cause be first brought before the Parlia­ment, that they may judge of the Fact, and give leave to proceed, if they see Cause.

V. That the Sovereign Power resides in both Hous [...]s; and that the King ought to have no Ne­gative Voice.

VI. That the Levying of Forces against the Personal Commands of the King, (though accom­panied with his presence) is not Levying War against the King, but the Levying of War against his Politique Person, viz. his Laws, &c.

[Page 142] VII. That Treason cannot be committed against his Person, otherwise than as he is intrusted with the Kingdom, and discharges that Trust; and that they have a Power to judge, whether he hath dis­charged his Trust, or not.

VIII. That they may dispose of the King when they will.

This is plain-dealing, and without hypo­crisie; Could the City of London swallow this?

Yes, and more too, if need be; London (you know) has a great Belly, but no palate nor taste of Right and Wrong.

In the Parliament Roll of Henry IV. amongst the Articles of the Oath the King at his Corona­tion took, there is one runs thus:

Concedes Justas Leges & Consuetudines esse te­nendas, & promitos per te eas esse protegendas, & ad honorem Dei corroborandas quas Vulgus elege­rit.

Which the Parliament urged for their Legisla­tive Authority, and therefore interpret quas Vulgus el [...]gerit, which the People shall choose; as if the King should swear to protect and cor­roborate Laws before they were made, whether they be Good or Bad: whereas the words sig­nifie no more, but that he shall protect and cor­roborate such Laws, as they have chosen; that is to say, the Acts of Parliament then in being.

[Page 143] And in the Records of the Exchequer it is thus, Will you grant to hold and keep the Laws, and rightful Customs, which the Commonalty of this your Kingdom have? And will you defend and uphold them, &c?

And this was the Answer His Majesty made to that Point.

I think his Answer very full and clear; but if the words were to be interpreted in the other sense, yet I see no reason why the King should be bound to swear to them; for Henry IV. came to the Crown by the Votes of a Parliament, not much inferior in wickedness to this Long Parlia­ment, that Deposed and Murdered their Lawful King, saving that it was not the Parliament it self, but the Usurper that murdered King Richard II.

About a week after, in the beginning of May, the Parliament sent the King another Paper, which they stil'd, The Humble Petition and Ad­vice of both Houses: Containing Nineteen Pro­positions, which when you shall hear, you shall be able to judge what Power they meant to leave to the King, more than to any of his Sub­jects. The first of them is this:

I. That the Lords, and other of His Majesties Privy Council, and all great Officers of State, both at home and abroad, be put from their Imployments, and from his Council, save only such as should be approved of by both Houses of Parliament; and none put into their places, but by approbation of the [Page 144] said Houses. And that all Privy Councillors take an Oath for the due Execution of their places, in such form as shall be agreed upon by the said Houses.

II. That the great Affairs of the Kingdom be Debated, Resolv'd and Transacted only in Parlia­ment; and such as shall presume to do any thing to the contrary, to be reserv'd to the Censure o [...] the Parliament; and such other Matters of State as are proper for His Majesties Privy Couneil, shall be Debated and Concluded by such as shall from time to time be chosen for that place by both Houses of Parliament. And that no Publick Act concerning the Affairs of the Kingdom which are proper for his Privy Council, be esteemed valid, as proceeding from the Royal Authority, unless it be done by the Advice and Consent of the Major part of the Council, attested under their Hands; and that the Council be not more than 25, nor less than 15; and that when a Councillors place falls, it shall not be supplied, without the Assent of the Major part of the Council; and that such Choice also shall be void, if the next Parliament after confirm it not.

III. That the Lord High Steward of England, Lord High Constable, Lord Chancellor, or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privy Seal, Earl Marshal, Lord Admiral, Warden of the Cinque Ports, Chief Governor of Ireland, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Master of the Wards, Secretaries of State, Two Chief Justices and Chief Baron, be always chosen with the Approbation of [Page 145] both Houses of Parliament; and in the Intervals of Parliament, by the Major part of the Privy Council.

IV. That the Government of the King's Chil­dren shall be committed to such as both Houses shall approve of; and in the Intervals of Parliament, such as the Privy Council shall approve of, that the Servants then about them, against whom the Hou­ses have just exception, should be remov'd.

V. That no Marriage be concluded, or treated of, for any of the King's Children, without consent of Parliament.

VI. That the Laws in force against Jesuits, Priests, and Popish Recusants, be strictly put in exe­cution.

VII. That the Votes of Popish Lords in the House of Peers be taken away; and that a Bill be passed for the Education of the Children of Pa­pists in the Protestant Religion.

VIII. That the King will be pleas'd to reform the Church-Government and Liturgy, in such man­ner as both Houses of Parliament shall advise.

IX. That he would be pleased to rest satisfied with that course the Lords and Commons have ap­pointed for ordering the Militia, and recall his De­clarations and Proclamations against it.

[Page 146] X. That such Members as have been put out of any Place or Office since this Parliament began, may be restor'd, or have satisfaction.

XI. That all Privy Councillors and Judges take an Oath, the form whereof shall be agreed on, and set­led by Act of Parliament, for the maintaining the Petition of Right, and of certain Statutes made by the Parliament.

XII. That all the Judges and Officers placed by Approbation of both Houses of Parliament, may held their places quamdiu bene se gesserint.

XIII. That the Justice of Parliament may pass upon all Delinquents, whether they be within the Kingdom, or fled out of it; and that all persons ci­ted by either House of Parliament, may appear and abide the Censure of Parliament.

XIV. That the General Pardon offered by his Majesty, be granted with such Exceptions as shall be advised by both Houses of Parliament.

What a spightful Article was this? All the rest proceeded from Ambition, which many times well-natur'd men are subject to; but this proceeded from an inhumane and devilish cru­elty.

XV. That the Forts and Castles be put un­der [Page 147] the Command of such Persons, as with the Ap­probation of the Parliament the King shall appoint.

XVI. That the extraordinary Guards about the King be discharged, and for the future none raised but according to the Law, in case of actual Rebel­lion or Invasion.

Methinks these very Propositions sent to the King, are an actual Rebellion.

XVII. That His Majesty enter into a more strict Alliance with the United Provinces, and other Neighbour Protestant Princes and States.

XVIII. That His Majesty be pleased, by Act of Parliament, to clear the Lord Kimbolton, and the Five Members of the House of Commons, in such manner, as that future Parliaments may be secur'd from the consequence of evil Precedent.

XIX. That His Majesty be pleased to pass a Bill for restraining Peers, made hereafter from sitting or voting in Parliament, unless they be admitted with consent of both Houses of Parliament. These Propositions granted, they promise to apply them­selves to regulate His Majesties Revenue to his best advantage, and to settle it to the support of his Royal Dignity, in Honour and Plenty; and also to put the Town of Hull into such hands as His Maje­sty shall appoint, with consent of Parliament.

Is not that to put it into such hands as His Majesty shall appoint by the consent of the Pe­titioners, which is no more than to keep it in their hands, as it is? Did they want, or think the King wanted common sense, so as not to perceive that their promise herein was worth nothing?

After the sending of these Propositions to the King, and His Majesties refusal to grant them, they began on both sides to prepare for War, the King raising a Guard for his Person in Yorkshire, and the Parliament thereupon having Voted, That the King intended to make War upon his Parliament, gave Order for the Mustering and Exercising the People in Arms, and published Propositions to invite and encourage them to bring in either ready Money or Plate, or to pro­mise under their hands to maintain certain num­bers of Horse, Horsemen and Arms, for the de­fence of the King and Parliament, (meaning by King, as they had formerly declar'd, not his Person, but his Laws) promising to repay their Money with Interest of 8 l. in the hundred, and the value of their Plate with 12 d. the ounce for the fashion. On the other side the King came to Nottingham, and there did set up his Standard Royal, and sent out Commissioners of Array to call those to him, which by the ancient Laws of England were bound to serve him in the Wars. Upon this occasion there passed divers Declarati­ons between the King and Parliament, concerning the Legality of this Array, which are too long to tell you at this time.

Nor do I desire to hear any Mooting about this Question, for I think that general Law of Salus Populi, and the Right of defending him­self against those that had taken from him the Sovereign Power, are sufficient to make Legal whatsoever he should do, in order to the reco­very of his Kingdom, or the punishing of the Rebels.

In the mean time the Parliament raised an Army, and made the Earl of Essex General thereof; by which Act they declar'd what they meant formerly, when they Petition'd the King for a Guard, to be commanded by the said Earl of Essex. And now the King sends out his Pro­clamations, forbidding Obedience to the Orders of the Parliament concerning the Militia; and the Parliament send out Orders against the Exe­cutions of the Commissions of Array; hitherto (though it were a War before) yet there was no Blood shed, they shot at one another nothing but Paper.

I understand now how the Parliament de­stroy'd the Peace of the Kingdom, and how easi­ly, by the help of seditious Presbyterian Mini­sters, and of ambitious ignorant Orators, they reduced the Government into Anarchy: but I believe it will be a harder task for them to bring in Peace again, and settle the Government either in themselves, or in any other Governor, or form of Government; for granting that they obtain'd the Victory in this War, they must be beholding for it to the Valor, good Conduct, or Felicity of [Page 150] those to whom they give the Command of their Armies, especially to the General, whose good success will, without doubt, bring with it the love and admiration of the Soldiers; so that it will be in his power either to take the Govern­ment upon himself, or to place it where himself thinks good. In which Case, if he take it not to himself, he will be thought a Fool; and if he do, he shall be sure to have the Envy of his subor­dinate Commanders, who will look for a share either in the present Government, or in the Suc­cession to it; for they will say, has he obtain'd this Power by his own without our Danger, Valor and Council? And must we be his Slaves, whom we have thus rais'd? Or is not there as much Justice on our side against him, as was on his side against the King?

They will and did insomuch that the rea­son why Cromwel, after he had gotten into his own hands the absolute Power of England, Scot­land, and Ireland, by the Name of Protector, did never dare to take upon him the Title of King, nor was ever able to settle it upon his Children, his Officers would not suffer it, as pretending after his death to succeed him; nor would the Army consent to it, because he had ever decla­red to them against the Government of a Single Person.

But to return to the King, What Means had he to pay? What Provision had he to Arm, nay Means to Levy an Army, able to resist the Army of the Parliament, maintained by the [Page 151] great Purse of the City of London, and Contri­butions of almost all the Towns Corporate in England, and furnished with Arms as fully as they could require?

'Tis true, the King had great disadvanta­ges, and yet by little and little he got a conside­rable Army, with which he so prospered, as to grow stronger every day, and the Parliament weaker, till they had gotten the Scotch with an Army of 21000 Men to come into England to their assistance; but to enter into the particular Narrative of what was done in the War, I have not now time.

Well then, we will talk of that at next meeting.

WE left at the Preparations on both sides for War, which when I consi­dered by my self, I was mightily puzled to find out what possibility there was for the King to equal the Parliament in such a course, and what hopes▪ He had of Money, Men, Arms, For­tified Places, Shipping, Council, and Military Of­fices, sufficient for such an Enterprize against the Parliament, that had Men and Money as much at Command, as the City of London, and other Corporation Towns were able to furnish, which was more than they needed. And for the Men they should set forth for Soldiers, they were almost all of them spightfully bent against the King, and his whole Party, whom they took to be either Papists, or Flatterers of the King, or that had design'd to raise their Fortunes by the Plunder of the City, and other Corporation Towns; and though I believe not that they were more valiant than other Men, nor that they had so much experience in the War, as to be accounted good Soldiers; yet they had that in them, which in time of Battel is more condu­cing to Victory than Valor, and Experience both together, and that was Spight.

And for Arms, they had in their hands the chief Magazines, the Tower of London, and [Page 153] Kingston upon Hull, besides most of Powder and Shot that lay in several Towns, for the use of the Trained Bonds.

Fortified places there were not many then in England, and most of them in the hands of the Parliament.

The King's Fleet was wholly in their Com­mand, under the Earl of Warwick; Councillors they needed no more, than such as were of their own Body, so that the King was every way in­ferior to them, except it were perhaps in Offi­cers.

I cannot compare their chief Officers for the Parliament, the Earl of Essex (after the Par­liament had Voted the War) was made General of all their Forces, both in England and Ireland, from whom, all other Commanders were to re­ceive their Commissions.

What moved them to make the Earl of Essex General? And for what cause was the Earl of Essex so displeased with the King, as to accept that Office?

I do not certainly know what to answer to either of those Questions, but the Earl of Essex had been in the Wars abroad, and wanted nei­ther Experience, Judgment nor Courage to per­form such an undertaking; and besides that, you have heard, (I believe) how great a Darling of the people, his Father had been before him; and what Honour he had gotten by the success of his Enterprize upon Cales, and in some other Military actions.

[Page 154] To which I may add, That this Earl himself was not held by the People to be so great a Fa­vourite at Court, as that they might not trust him with their Army against the King, and by this you may perhaps conjecture the cause for which the Parliament made choice of him for General.

But why did they think him discontented with the Court?

I know not that, nor indeed that he was so; he came to Court as other Noblemen did, when occasion was to wait upon the King, but had no Office till a little before this time, to oblige him to be there continually; but I be­lieve verily, that the unfortunateness of his Mar­riage, had so discountenanced his Conversation with Ladies, that the Court could be his proper Element, unless he had had some extraordinary savour there, to balance that calamity for parti­cular discontent from the King, or intention of revenge for any supposed disgrace, I think he had none; nor that he was any wayes addicted to Presbyterian Doctrines, or other Fanatick Te­nets in Church or State, saving only that he was carried away with the stream, (in a manner) of the whole Nation, to think that England was not an absolute, but a mixt Monarchy, not con­sidering that the Supreme Power must alwayes be absolute, whether it be in the King, or in the Parliament.

Who was General of the Kings Army?

None yet but Himself, nor indeed had He yet any Army but there, coming to him at that time two Nephews, the Princes Rupert and Maurice; He put the Command of His Horse into the hands of Prince Rupert, a Man then whom no man living has a better courage, nor was more active and diligent in prosecuting his Commission; and though but a young Man then, was not without experience in the conducting of Soldiers, as having been an Actor in part of his Fathers Wars in Germany.

But how would the King find money to pay such an Army as was necessary for Him, against the Parliament?

Neither the King nor Parliament had much money at that time in their own hands, but were fain to relie upon the Benevolence of those that took their parts, wherein (I confess) the Parliament had a mighty great advantage; those that helped the King in that kind, were only Lords and Gentlemen, which not appro­ving the proceedings of the Parliament, were willing to undertake the payment every one of a certain number of Horse, which cannot be thought any very great assistance, the persons that payed them being so few; for other Mo­nies that the King then had, I have not heard of any but what he borrow'd upon Jewels in the Low-Countries; whereas the Parliament had a very plentiful Contribution, not only from Lon­don, but generally from their Faction in all other places of England, upon certain Propositi­ons, [Page 156] (published by the Lords and Commons in June 1642.) at which time they had newly Voted, That the King intended to make War up­on them, for bringing in of Money or Plate, to maintain Horse and Horsemen, and to buy Arms for the preservation of the Publick Peace, and for the defence of the King, and both Houses of Parliament; for the Re-payment of which Mo­ney and Plate, they were to have the Publick Faith.

What Publick Faith is there, when there is no Publick? What is it that can be call'd Pub­lick, in a Civil War, without the King?

The Truth is, the Security was nothing worth, but serv'd well enough to gull those sedi­tious Blockheads that were more fond of change, than either of their peace or profit, having by this means gotten Contributions from those that were the well-affected to their Cause, they made use of it afterwards, to force the like Contribu­tion from others; for in November following, they made an Ordinance for Assessing also of those that had not Contributed then, or had Contributed, but not proportionably to their Estates. And yet this was contrary to what the Parli [...]ment promised and declar'd in the Propo­sitions themselves; for they declar'd in the first Proposition, That no mans Affection should be measured by the pr [...]portion of his Offer, so that he expressed his good will to the Service in any propor­tion whatsoever.

[Page 157] Besides this, in the beginning of March fol­lowing, they made an Ordinance to Levy week­ly a great Sum of money upon every County, City, Town, Place and Person of any Estate al­most in England; which weekly Sum (as may appear by the Ordinance it self, printed and pub­lished in March 1642, by Order of both Hou­ses) comes to almost 33000 l. and consequent­ly to above 1700000 l. for the year. They had, besides all this, the Profits of the King's Lands and Woods, and whatsoever was remaining un­paid of any Subsidy formerly granted Him, and the Tunnage and Poundage usually received by the King, besides the profit of the Sequestration of great persons, whom they pleas'd to vote Delinquents, and the profits of the Bishops Lands, which they took to themselves a year, or a little more after.

Seeing then the Parliament had such ad­vantage of the King in Money, Arms, and mul­titude of Men, and had in their hands the King's Fleet, I cannot imagine what hope the King could have either of Victory (unless He resign'd into their hands the Sovereignty, or subsisting:) for I cannot well believe He had any advantage of them either in Councillors, Conducts, or in the Resolution of his Soldiers.

On the contrary, I think He had also some disadvantage in that; for though He had as good Officers at least as any then serv'd the Parlia­ment, yet I doubt He had not so useful Council as was necessary. And for His Soldiers, though [Page 158] they were Men as stout as theirs, yet because their Valor was not sharpned so with Malice, as theirs was of the other side, they sought not so keenly as their Enemies did, amongst whom there was a great many London Apprentices, who, for want of experience in the War, would have been fearful enough of death and wounds approaching visibly in glittering Swords, but for want of judgment scarce thought of such a death as comes invisibly in a Bullet, and therefore were very hardly to be driven out of the Field.

But what fault do you find in the King's Councils, Lords, and other Persons of Quality and Experience?

Only that fault which was generally in the whole Nation, which was, That they thought the Government of England was not an abso­lute, but a mixt Monarchy; and that if the King should clearly subdue this Parliament, that His power would be what He pleased, and theirs as little as He pleased, which they counted Tyran­ny. This opinion, though it did not les [...]en their endeavors to gain the Victory for the King in a Battel, when the Battel could not be avoided, yet it weakned their endeavors to procure him an absolute Victory in the War. And for this cause, notwithstanding that they saw that the Parliament was firmly resolv'd to take all King­ly power whatsoever out of His Hands, yet their Council to the King was upon all occasions to of­fer Propositions to them of Treaty and Accom­modation, and to make and publish Declarations [Page 159] which any Man might easily have foreseen would be fruitless; and not only so, but also of great disadvantage to those Actions by which the King was to recover His Crown, and preserve His Life; for it took off the courage of the best and forwardest of his Soldiers that lookt for great benefit out of the Estates of the Rebels, in case they could subdue them, but none at all if the business should be ended by a Treaty.

And they had reason, for a Civil War never ends by Treaty, without the Sacrifice of those, who were on both sides the sharpest. You know well enough how things past the Reconciliation of Augustus and Antonius in Rome▪ But I thought that after they once began to Levy Soldiers one against another, that they would not any more have return'd of either side to Declarations, or other Paper War, which if it could have done any good, would have done it long before this.

But seeing the Parliament continued wri­ting, and set forth their Declarations to the People against the Lawfulness of the King's Commission of Array, and sent Petitions to the King as fierce and rebellions as ever they had done before, demanding of him, That he would di [...]band his Soldiers, and come up to the Parlia­ment, and leave those whom the Parliament cal­led Delinquents, (which were none but the King's best Subjects) to their Mercy, and pass such Bills as they should advise Him. Would you not have the King set forth Declarations and Proclamations, against the Illegality of their [Page 160] Ordinances, by which they Levied Soldiers against him, and answer those insolent Petitions of theirs?

No, it had done him no good before, and therefore was not likely to do him any after­wards; for the Common People, whose hands were to decide the Controversie, understood not the Reasons of either Party; and for those that by Ambition were once set upon the Enterprize of changing the Government, they cared not much what was Reason and Justice, in the Cause, but what Strength they might procure, by re­ducing the multitude with Remonstrances from the Parliament-House, or by Sermons in the Churches; and to their Petitions, I would not have had any answer at all more than this, That if they would disband their Army, and put them­selves upon his Mercy, they should find Him more Gracious than they expected.

That had been a gallant answer indeed, if it had proceeded from Him after some extraor­dinary great Victory in Battel, or some extraor­dinary assurance of a Victory at last in the whole War.

Why, what could have hapned to Him worse, than at length He suffered, notwithstand­ing His gentle answer, and all His reasonable De­clarations?

Nothing, but, who knew that?

Any Man might see, that He was never like to be restor'd to His Right without Victory, and such His Statutes being known to the Peo­ple, [Page 161] would have brought to His assistance many more hands, than all the arguments of Law, or force of Eloquence, couched in Declarations, and other Writings, could have done by far; and I wonder what kind of Men they were, that hin­dered the King from taking this Resolution.

You may know by the Declarations themselves, which are very long, and full of Quotations of Records, and of Cases formerly Reported, that the Penners of them were ei­ther Lawyers by Profession, or such Gentlemen as had the ambition to be thought so. Besides, I told you before, that those which were then likeliest to have their counsel asked in this busi­ness, were averse to absolute Monarchy, as also to absolute Democracy, or Aristocracy; all which Governments they esteemed Tyranny, and were in love with Monarchy, which they us'd to praise by the name of mixt Monarchy, though it were indeed nothing else but pure Anarchy: and those Men whose Pens the King most us'd in these Controversies of Law, and Politick, were such (if I have not been misinformed) as ha­ving been Members of this Parliament, had de­claim'd against Ship-money, and other Extra-Parliamentary Taxes, as much as any: but when they saw the Parliament grow higher in their demands, than they thought they would have done, went over to the King's Party.

Who were those?

It is not necessary to name any Man, seeing I have undertaken only a short Narration of the [Page 162] Follies and other Faults of Men during this trouble, but not (by naming of persons) to give you or any man else occasion to esteem them the less, now that the Faults on all sides have been forgiven.

When the Business was brought to this heighth, by levying of Soldiers, and seizing on the Navy, Arms, and other Provisions on both sides, that no Man was so blind, as not to see they were in an estate of War one against ano­ther, why did not the King (by Proclamation or Message) according to His undoubted Right, Dissolve the Parliament, and thereby diminish in some part the Authority of their Levies, and of other their unjust Ordinances?

You have forgotten that I told you that the King Himself, by a Bill that He passed at the same time when He passed the Bill for the Exe­cution for the Earl of Strafford, had given them Authority to hold the Parliament, till they should by consent of both Houses dissolve them­selves: If therefore He had by any Proclama­tion or Message to the Houses dissolv'd them, they would, to their former De [...]amations of His Majesties actions, have added this, That He was a Breaker of His Word, and not only in Con­tempt of Him, have continued their Session, but also have made advantage of it, to the increase and strengthning of their own Party.

Would not the King's raising of an Army against them, be interpreted as a purpose to dis­solve them by force? And was it not as great a [Page 163] breach of promise to scatter them by force, as to dissolve them by Proclamation? Besides, I cannot conceive that the passing of that Act was otherwise intended than conditionally, so long as they should not ordain any thing contrary to the Sovereign Right of the King, which condition they had already by many of their Ordinances broken; and, I think, that even by the Law of Equity, which is the unalterable Law of Na­ture, a man that has the Sovereign Power can­not, if he would, give away the right of any thing which is necessary for him to retain, for the good Government of his Subjects, unless he do it in express words, saying, That he will have the Sovereign Power no longer; for the giving away that which by consequence only draws the So­vereignty along with it, is not (I think) a giv­ing away of the Sovereignty, but an error, such as work nothing but an invalidity in the Grant it self. And such was the King's passing this Bill, for the continuing of the Parliament, as long as the Two Houses pleas'd. But now that the War was resolv'd on, on both sides, what needed any more dispute in writings?

I know not what need they had, but on both sides they thought it needful to hinder one another as much as they could from levying of Soldiers, and therefore the King did set forth Declarations in Print; to make the people know that they ought not to obey the Officers of the new Militia set up by Ordinance of Parliament, [Page 164] and also to let them see the Legality of His own Commissions of Array; and the Parliament on their part did the like, to justifie to the people the said Ordinance, and to make the Commission of Array appear unlawful.

When the Parliament were Levying of Soldiers, was it not lawful for the King to Levy Soldiers, to defend Himself and His Right, though there had been no other Title for it, but His own preservation, and that the name of Commission of Array had never been heard of?

For my part, I think there cannot be a better Title for War, than the defence of a Man's own Right, but the People at that time thought nothing lawful for the King to do, for which there was not some Statute made by Parliament. For the Lawyers, I mean the Judges of the Courts of Westminster, and some few others, though but Advocates, yet of great Reputation for their skill in the Common Laws, and Statutes of England, had infected most of the Gentry of England with their Maxims and Cases prejudg'd, which they call Precedents, and made them think so well of their own knowledge in the Law, that they were of this occasion to shew it against the King, and thereby to gain a Reputa­tion with the Parliament, of being good Pa­triots, and wise Statesmen.

What was this Commission of Array?

King William the Conqueror had gotten into his hands by Victory, all the Lands in England, of which he disposed some part, as Forests and Chaces for his own Recreation, and some part to Lords and Gentlemen, that had as­sisted him, or were to assist him in the Wars; up­on which he laid a charge of service in his Wars, some with more Men, and some with less, ac­cording to the Lands he had given them; where­by, when the King sent Men unto them with Commission to make use of their Service, they were obliged to appear with Arms, and to ac­company the King to the Wars, for a certain time at their own Charges, and such were the Commissions by which this King did then make his Levies.

Why then was it not Legal?

No doubt but it was Legal, but what did that amount to with Men that were already re­solv'd to acknowledge for Law, nothing that was against their design of abolishing Monarchy, and placing a sovereign and absolute Arbitrary power in the House of Commons.

To destroy Monarchy, and set up the House of Commons, are two Businesses.

They found it so at last, but did not think it so then.

Let us come now to the Military power.

I intended only the Story of their In­justice, Impudence and Hypocrisie; therefore [Page 166] for the proceeding of the War, I refer you to the History thereof, written at large in En­glish.

I shall only make use of such a Thread as is necessary for the filling up of such Knavery and Folly also, as I shall observe in their several Actions.

From York the King went to Hull, where was His Magazine of Arms for the Northern Parts of England, to try if they would admit Him; the Parliament had made Sir John Hotham Governor of the Town, who caused the Gates to be shut, and presenting himself upon the walls, flatly de­nied Him entrance; for which the King caused him to be proclaim'd Traytor, and sent a Mes­sage to the Parliament, to know if they own'd the Actions?

Upon what grounds?

Their pretence was this, That neither this, nor any other Town in England was otherwise the Kings, than in Trust for the People of Eng­land.

But what was that to the Parlia­ment?

Yes, say they, for we are the Representa­tive of the People of England.

I cannot see the force of this Argument: We represent the People; Ergo, all that the People has is ours: The Mayor of Hull did re­present the King, Is therefore all the King had in Hull the Mayor's? The People of England [Page 167] may be represented with Limitations, as to de­liver a Petition, or the like, does it follow, that they who deliver the Petition, have Right to all the Towns in England? When began this Parlia­ment to be a Representative of England? Was it not November 3. 1640? Who was it the day before that had the Right to keep the King out of Hull, and possess it for themselves? For there was then no Parliament, whose was Hull then?

I think it was the King's; not only be­cause it was called the King's Town upon Hull, but because the King Himself did then and ever represent the Person of the People of England. If He did not, who then did, the Parliament ha­ving no Being?

They might perhaps say, the People had then no Representative.

Then there was no Commonwealth, and consequently all the Towns of England being the Peoples, you and I, and any Man else, might have put in for his share. You may see by this, what weak People they were, that were carried into the Rebellion, by such weak reasoning as this Parliament used; and how impudent they were, that did put such Fallacies upon them.

Surely they were such, as were esteem'd the wisest Men in England, being upon that ac­count chosen to be the Parliament.

And were they also esteem'd the wisest Men of England, that chose them?

I cannot tell that; for I know it is usual with the Freeholders in the Counties, and the Tradesmen in the Cities and Burroughs to choose, as near as they can, such as are most re­pugnant to the giving of Subsidies.

The King in the beginning of August, af­ter He had summon'd Hull, and tryed some of the Counties thereabout, what they would do for Him, set up His Standard at Nottingham, but there came not in thither Men enough to make any Army sufficient to give Battel to the Earl of Essex.

From thence He went to Shrewsbury, where He was quickly furnished; and appointing the Earl of Lins [...]y to be General, He resolv'd to march towards London.

The Earl of Essex was at Worcester with the Parliament Army, making no offer to stop Him in His passage, but as soon as He was gone by, marched close after Him.

The King therefore, to avoid being inclosed between the Army of the Earl of Essex, and the City of London, turned upon him, and gave him Battel at Edge-hill; where, though He got not an intire Victory, yet He had the better, if either had the better; and had certainly the fruit of a Victory, which was to march on, in his intended way towards London, in which the next morning He took Banbury Castle, and from thence went to [Page 169] Oxford, and thence to Brentford, where he gave a great Defeat to Three Regiments of the Par­liaments Forces, and so return'd to Ox­ford.

Why did not the King go on from Brent­ford?

The Parliament, upon the first notice of the King's marching from Shrewsbury, caused all the Trained Bands, and the Auxiliaries of the Ci­ty of London (which were so frighted, as to shut up all their shops) to be drawn forth; so that there was a complete and numerous Army ready for the Earl of Essex, that was crept into London just at that time to head it, and this was it that made the King retire to Oxford.

In the beginning of February, after Prince Ru­port took Cirencester from the Parliament, with many Prisoners, and many Arms, for it was new­ly made a Magazine. And thus stood the business between the King's, and the Parliaments For­ces.

The Parliament in the mean time, caused a Line of Communication to be made about Lon­don, and the Suburbs, of 12 miles in compass, and constituted a Committee for the Assotiation, and the putting into a posture of defence the Coun­ties of Essex, Cambridge, Suffolk, and some others; and one of those Commissioners was Oliver Cromwel, from which employment he came to his following greatness.

What was done, during this time, in other Parts of the Countrey?

In the West, the Earl of Stamford had the employment of putting in execution the Ordi­nance of Parliament for the Militia; and Sir Ralph Hopton, for the King, executed the Com­mission of Array. Between those two was fought a Battel at Liscard in Cornwal, where Sir Ralph Hopton had the Victory, and presently took a Town called Saltash, with many Arms, and much Ordnance, and many Prisoners. Sir William Waller in the mean time seized Winchester and Chichester for the Parliament.

In the North, for the Commission of Array, my Lord of Newcastle; and for the Militia of the Parliament, was my Lord Fairfax. My Lord of Newcastle took from the Parliament Tad­caster, in which were a great part of the Parlia­ments Forces for that County, and had made himself, in a manner, Master of all the North, about this time, that is to say, in February; the Queen landed at Barlington, and was conducted by my Lord of Newcastle, and the Marquis of Mon­tross, to York; and not long after, to the King.

Divers other little advantages, besides these, had the King's Party of the Parliaments in the North.

There hapned also between the Militia of the Parliament, the Commission of Array in Staf­fordshire, under my Lord Brook for the Parlia­ment, and my Lord of Northampton for the King, [Page 171] great contention, wherein both these Com­manders were slain; for my Lord Brook besieg­ing Lichfield-Close, was kill'd with a shot, not­withstanding which they gave not over the Siege, till they were Masters of the Close. But presently after my Lord of Northampton be­sieged it again for the King, which to relieve, Sir William Brereston, and Sir John Gell, advanced towards Lichfield, and were met at Hopton-heath by the Earl of Northampton, and routed, the Earl himself was slain, but his Forces with Victory return'd to the Siege again; and shortly after seconded by Prince Rupert, who was then abroad in that Countrey, carried the place.

These were the chief Actions of this year 164 [...]. wherein the King's Party had not much the worse.

But the Parliament had now a better Ar­my, insomuch that if the Earl of Essex had im­mediately followed the King to Oxford (not yet well fortified) he might, in all likelihood, have taken it; for he could not want either Men or Ammunition, whereof the City of London (which was wholly at the Parliaments devotion) had store enough.

I cannot judge of that; but this is mani­fest, considering the estate the King was in at his first marching from York, when He had neither Money, nor Men, nor Arms enough, to put Him in hope of Victory, that this year (take it alto­gether) was very prosperous.

But what great Folly or Wickedness do you observe in the Parliaments Actions for this first year?

All that can be said against them in that point, will be excus'd with the pretext of War, and come under one Name of Rebellion, saving that when they summoned any Town, it was al­wayes in the Name of the King and Parlia­ment.

The King being in the contrary Army, and many times beating them from the Siege, I do not see how the right of War can justifie such Impudence as that. But they pretended that the King was alwayes vertually in the Two Houses of Parliament making a distinction between His Person Natural and Politique, which made the Impudence the greater, besides the folly of it: For this was but an University Quibble, such as Boyes make use of, in maintaining (in the Schools) such Tenets as they cannot otherwise defend.

In the end of this year, they sollicited also the Scots to enter England, with an Army to sup­press the power of the Earl of Newcastle in the North, which was a plain Confession, that the Parliament Forces were at this time inferior to the Kings; and most Men thought, that if the Earl of Newcastle had then marched South­ward, and joined his Forces with the Kings, that most of the Members of Parliament would have fled out of England.

[Page 173] In the beginning of 1643. the Parliament see­ing the Earl of Newcastle's power in the North grown formidable, sent to the Scots, to hire them to an Invasion of England; and (to Com­pliment them in the mean time) made a Cove­nant among themselves, such as the Scots before had made against Episcopacy, and demolished Crosses, and Church-windows, (such as had in them any Images of Saints) throughout all England.

Also in the middle of the year, they made a Solemn League with the Nation, which was cal­led, The Solemn League and Covenant.

Are not the Scots as properly to be called Foreigners, as the Irish? seeing then they perse­cuted the Earl of Strafford, even to death, for advising the King to make use of Irish For­ces against the Parliament; with what face could they call in a Scotch Army against the King?

The King's Party might easily here have discern'd their design, to make themselves abso­lute Masters of the Kingdom, and to dethrone the King.

Another great Impudence, or rather a Bestial Incivility it was of theirs, That they Voted the Queen a Traytor, for helping the King with some Ammunition, and English Forces, from Holland.

Was it possible that all this could be done, and Men not see that Papers and Declarations [Page 174] must be useless? And that nothing could satisfie them, but the Deposing of the King, and setting up of themselves in His place.

Yes, very possible, for who was there of them, though knowing that the King had the Sovereign Power, that knew the Essential Rights of Sovereignty? They dreamt of a mixt Power of the King and the Two Houses, That it was a divided Power, in which there could be no Peace, was above their understanding, therefore they were alwayes urging the King to Declara­tions, and Treaties, (for fear of subjecting them­selves to the King in an absolute obedience) which increased the hope and courage of the Rebels, but did the King little good; for the People either understand not, or will not trouble themselves with Controversies in writing, but ra­ther by his compliance by Messages, go away with an opinion, That the Parliament was likely to have the Victory in the War.

Besides, seeing that the Penners and Contri­vers of those Papers, were formerly Members of the Parliament, and of another mind, and now revolted from the Parliament, because they could not bear that sway in the House which they expected, Men were apt to think, they be­lieved not what they write.

As for Military Actions (to begin at the Head-quarters) Prince Rupert took Brinnin­gram, a Garison of the Parliaments.

[Page 175] In July, after the King's Forces had a great Victory over the Parliaments near Devizes on Roundway-down, where they took 2000 Pri­soners, four Brass-Pieces of Ordnance, 28 Co­lours, and all their Baggage. And shortly after Bristol was surrender'd to Prince Rupert for the King; and the King Himself marching into the West, took from the Parliament many other con­siderable places.

But this good fortune was not a little allay'd, by His besieging of Glocester, which, after it was reduc'd to the last gasp, was reliev'd by the Earl of Essex, whose Army was before greatly wast­ed, but now recruited with Train'd Bands, and Apprentices of London.

It seems not only by this, but also by ma­ny Examples in History, That there can hardly arise a long or dangerous Rebellion, that has not some such overgrown City, with an Army or two in its belly, to foment it.

Nay more, those great Capital Cities, when Rebellion is upon pretence of Grievances, must needs be of the Rebel Party, because the Grievances are but Taxes to which Citizens, that is Merchants, whose profession in their private gain are naturally mortal Enemies, their onely glory being, to grow excessively rich, by the wisdom of buying and selling.

But they are said to be, of all Callings, the most beneficial to the Commonwealth, by setting the poorer sort of people on work.

That is to say, by making poor people sell their labour to them at their own prizes, so that poor people, for the most part, might get a bet­ter Living by working in Bridewell, than by spin­ning, weaving, and other such labour as they can do, saving that by working slightly, they may help themselves a little, to the disgrace of our Manufacture. And as most commonly they are the first Encouragers of Rebellion, presuming in their strength; so also are they, for the most part, the first to repent, deceiv'd by them that command their strength.

But to return to the War: Though the King withdrew from Glocester, yet it was not to flie from, but to fight with the Earl of Essex, which presently after He did at Newbury, where the Battel was bloody, and the King had not the worst, unless Cirencester be put into the Scale, which the Earl of Essex had in his way a few days before surpriz'd.

But in the North and the West the King had much the better of the Parliament; for in the North, at the beginning of the year, May 29. the Earls of Newcastle and Cumberland defeated the Lord Fairfax (who commanded in those Parts for the Parliament) at Bramham-moor, which made the Parliament to hasten the assistance of the Scots.

In June following, the Earl of Newcastle rout­ed Sir Thomas Fairfax (Son to the Lord Fair­fax) upon Adderton-heath, and in pursuit of [Page 177] them to Bradford, took and kill'd 2000 Men, and the next day took the Town▪ and 2000 Prisoners more, (Sir Thomas himself hardly escaping) with all their Arms and Ammunition; and be­sides, this made the Lord Fairfax quit Hallifax, and Beverly.

Lastly, Prince Rupert reliev'd Newark, be­sieged by Sir John Meldrum, for the Parliament, with 7000 Men, whereof 1000 were slain, the rest upon Articles departed, leaving behind them their Arms, Bag and Baggage.

To balance in part this success, the Earl of Manchester, whose Lieutenant General was Oli­ver Cromwel, got a Victory over the Royalists near Horn-Castle, of which he slew 400, took 800 Prisoners, and 1000 Arms, and presently af­ter took and plundered the City of Lin­coln.

In the West, May 16. Sir Ralph Hopton at Stratton in Devonshire, had a Victory over the Parliamentarians, wherein he took 1700 Pri­soners, 13 Brass Pieces of Ordnance, and all their Ammunition, which was 70 Barrels of Pow­der, and their Magazine of their other Provisi­ons in the Town.

Again at Landsdown, between Sir Ralph Hop­ton, and the Parliamentarians under Sir William Waller, was fought a fierce Battel, wherein the Victory was not very clear on either side, saving that the Parliamentarians might seem to have the better, because presently after Sir William [Page 178] Waller follow'd Sir Ralph Hopton to Devizes in Wiltshire, though to his cost; for there he was overthrown, as I have already told you.

After this, the King in Person marched into the West, and took Exeter, Dorcester, Barnstable, and divers other places, and had He not at His Return besieged Glocester, and thereby giving the Parliament time for new Levies, 'twas thought by many He might have routed the House of Commons. But the end of this year was more favourable to the Parliament; from January the Scots entered England, and March the first crossed the Tyne; and whil'st the Earl of Newcastle was marching to them, Sir Thomas Fairfax gathered together a considerable Party in Yorkshire, and the Earl of Manchester from Lyn advanced towards York; so that the Earl of Newcastle having two Armies of Rebels behind him, and another before him, was forced to retreat to York, which those three Armies joining presently besieged, and these are all the considerable Military Actions in the year 1643.

In the same year the Parliament caused to be made a new great Seal, the Lord Keeper had carried the former Seal to Oxford: Hereupon the King sent a Messenger to the Judges at West­minster, to forbid them to make use of it; this Me [...]enger was taken, and condemn'd at a Coun­cil of War, and Hang'd for a Spie?

Is that the Law of War?

I know not: But, it seems, when a Sol­dier comes into the Enemies Quarters, without address, or notice given to the chief Comman­der, that it is presum'd he comes as a Spie.

The same year, when certain Gentlemen at London received a Commission of Array from the King, to Levy Men for His Service in that City, being discover'd, they were Condemn'd, and some of them Executed. This Case is not unlike the former.

Was not the making of a new great Seal, a sufficient proof that the War was raised, not to remove evil Councillors from the King, but to remove the King Himself from the Govern­ment; what hope then could there be had in Messages and Treaties?

The Entrance of the Scots was a thing unexpected to the King, who was made to be­lieve by continual Letters from His Commissio­ners in Scotland, and Duke Hamilton, that the Scotch never intended any Invasion. The Duke be­ing then at Oxford, the King (assur'd that the Scotch were now entered) sent him Prisoner to Pendennis Castle in Cornwal.

In the beginning of this year 1644. the Earl of Newcastle being (as I told you) besieged by the joint Forces of the Scots, the Earl of Manchester, and Sir Thomas Fairfax, the King sent Prince Rupert to relieve the Town, and as soon as he could, to give the Enemy Battel; Prince Rupert passing through Lancashire, and by [Page 180] the way having storm'd the seditious Town of Bolton, and taken in Stockford and Leverpool, came to York, July 1. and relieved it, the Ene­my being risen thence, to a place called Mar­ston-moor, about four miles off, and there was fought that unfortunate Battel, that lost the King, in a manner, all the North; Prince Rupert re­turn'd by the way he came, and the Earl of Newcastle to York, and thence with some of His Officers over the Sea to Hamburgh.

The Honour of this Victory was attributed chiefly to Oliver Cromwel (the Earl of Man­chester's Lieutenant General) the Parliamenta­rians return'd from the Field, to the Siege of York, which, not long after, upon honourable Articles was surrendred; not that they were fa­voured, but because the Parliament employ­ed not much time, nor many men in the Siege.

This was a great and sudden abatement of the King's Prosperity.

It was so, but amends was made Him for it within 5 or 6 weeks after; for Sir William Waller (after the loss of his Army at Round­way-down) had another raised for him by the City of London, who, for the payment thereof, impos'd a weekly Tax of the value of one Meals meat upon every Citizen. This Army, with that of the Earl of Essex, intended to besiege Oxford, which the King understanding, sent the Queen into the West, and marched Himself towards [Page 181] Worcester. This made them to divide again, and the Earl to go into the West, and Waller to pur­sue the King. By this means it so fell out, that both their Armies were defeated; for the King turn'd upon Waller, routed him at Copredy-Bridge, took his Train of Artillery, and many Officers, and then presently followed the Earl of Essex into Cornwal, where he had him at such advan­tage, that the Earl himself was fain to escape in a small Boat to Plymouth; his Horse broke through the King's Quarters by night, but the Infantry were all forc'd to lay down their Arms, and upon Conditions never more to bear Arms against the King, were permitted to de­part.

In October following, was fought a second and sharp Battel at Newbury; for this Infantry ma­king no Conscience of the Conditions made with the King, being now come towards London, as far as Basing stoke, had Arms put again into their hands; to whom some of the Train'd Bands be­ing added, the Earl of Essex had suddenly so great an Army, that he attempted the King again at Newbury; and certainly had the better of the day, but the night parting them, had not a complete Victory. And it was observ'd here, That no part of the Earls Army fought so keen­ly, as they who had laid down their Arms in Cornwal.

These were the most important Fights in the year 1644. and the King was yet (as both Him­self [Page 182] and others thought) in as good a condition as the Parliament, which despair'd of Victory by the Commanders then us'd, therefore they vo­ted a new modelling of the Army, suspecting the Earl of Essex, though I think wrongfully, to be too much a Royalist, for not having done so much as they look'd for in this second Battel at Newbury.

The Earls of Essex and Manchester perceiving what they went about, voluntarily laid down their Commissions; and the House of Commons made an Ordinance, That no Member of either House, should enjoy any Office or Command Milita­ry or Civil.

With which oblique Blow they shook off those that had hitherto serv'd them too well, and yet out of this Ordinance they excepted Oliver Cromwel, in whose Conduct and Valor they had very great confidence, (which they would not have done, if they had known him as well then, as they did afterwards) and made him Lieu­tenant General.

In the Commission to the Earl of Essex, there was a Clause for Preservation of His Majesties Person, which in this new Commission was left out, though the Parliament (as well as the General) were as yet Presbyterians.

It seems the Presbyterians also (in order to their Ends) would fain have had the King murdered.

For my part, I doubt it not for a Right­ful King living, an Usurping Power can never be sufficiently secur'd. In this same year the Parlia­ment put to death Sir John Hotham and his Son, for tampering with the Earl of Newcastle, about the Rendition of Hull. And Sir Alexander Ca­r [...]w, for endeavouring to deliver up Plymouth, where he was Governor for the Parliament. And the Archbishop of Canterbury, for nothing but to please the Scots. For the general Article of going about to subvert the Fundamental Laws of the Land, was no Accusation, but only foul words.

They then also voted down the Book of Common-Prayer, and ordered the Use of a Di­rectory, which had been newly compos'd by an Assembly of Presbyterian Ministers.

They were also then with much ado prevail'd with for a Treaty with the King at Uxbridge, where they remitted nothing of their former de­mands.

The King had also at this time a Parliament at Oxford, consisting of such discontented Members as had left the Houses at Westminster, but few of them had changed their old Principles, and there­fore that Parliament was not much worth. Nay rather, because they endeavour'd nothing but Messages and Treaties; that is to say, defeating of Soldiers hope of benefit by the War, they were thought by most Men to do the King more hurt than good.

The year 1645. was to the King very unfor­tunate; [Page 184] for by the loss of one great Battel, He lost all He had formerly gotten, and at length His life.

The new model'd Army, after consultation whether they should lay Siege to Oxford, or march Westward, to the relief of Taunton (then besieged by the Lord Goring, and defended by Blake, famous afterward for his Actions at Sea) resolv'd for Taunton, leaving Cromwel to attend the motions of the King, though not strong enough to hinder Him. The King upon this ad­vantage drew his Forces and Artillery out of Oxford. This made the Parliament to call back their General Fairfax, and order him to besiege Oxford. The King in the mean time relieved Chester, which was besieged by Sir William Brereton, and coming back, took Leicester by force, a place of great importance, and well pro­vided of Artillery and Provision. Upon this suc­cess it was generally thought, that the King's Party was the stronger. The King Himself thought so, and the Parliament, in a manner, con­fest the same, by commanding Fairfax to rise from the Siege, and endeavor to give the King Battel; for the Successors of the King, and the treacherous divisions growing now among them­selves, had driven them to relie upon the fortune of one day, in which at Naseby the King's Army was utterly overthrown, and no hope left Him to raise another; therefore after the Battel he went up and down, doing the Parliament here and there some shrewd turns, but never much increasing His number.

[Page 185] Fairfax in the mean time first recovered Leicester, and then marching into the West, sub­dued it all, except only a few places, forcing, with much ado, my Lord Hopton, (upon hono­rable Conditions) to disband his Army, and with the Prince of Wales, to pass over to Scilly, whence not long after they went to Paris.

In April 1646. General Fairfax began to march back to Oxford, in the mean time Rains­burrough, who besieged Woodstock, had it sur­render'd. The King therefore, who was now al­so return'd to Oxford, from whence Woodstock is but six miles, not doubting but that He should there by Fairfax be besieg'd, and having no Ar­my to relieve Him, resolv'd to get away disgui­sed to the Scotch Army about Newark, and thi­ther he came the 4th of May; and the Scotch Army being upon remove homewards, carried Him with them to Newcastle, whither He came May the 13th.

Why did the King trust Himself with the Scots? They were the first that Rebell'd. They were Presbyterians, i. e. cruel. Besides, they were indigent, and consequently might be suspected would sell Him to His Enemies for money. And lastly, They were too weak to defend Him, or keep Him in their Countrey.

What could He have done better? for He had in the Winter before sent to the Parliament, to get a Pass for the Duke of Richmond, and others, to bring them Propositions of Peace, it was denied; He sent again, it was denied again. [Page 186] Then He desir'd He might come to them in Per­son; this also was denied. He sent again and again to the same purpose; but instead of granting it, they made an Ordinance, That the Commanders of the Militia of London, in the case the King should attempt to come within the Line of Communicati­on, should raise what Force they thought fit to sup­press Tumults, to apprehend such as came with Him; and to secure (i. e. to imprison) His Person from danger.

If the King had adventur'd to come, and had been imprison'd, what would the Parliament have done with Him? They had dethron'd Him by their Votes, and therefore could have no secu­rity while He liv'd, though in Prison; it may be they would not have put Him to death by a High Court of Justice publickly, but secretly, some other way.

He should have attempted to get beyond Sea.

That had been from Oxford very difficult. Besides, it was generally believ'd, that the Scotch Army had promis'd Him, that not only His Maje­sty, but also His Friends that should come with Him, should be in their Army safe, not only for their Persons, but also for their Honours and Consciences. 'Tis a pretty Trick, when the Ar­my, and the particular Soldiers of that Army are different things, to make the Soldiers pro­mise what the Army means not to perform.

July 11. the Parliament sent their Propositi­ons to the King at Newcastle, which Propositions [Page 187] they pretended to be the onely way to a setled and well-grounded Peace. They were brought by the Earl of Pembroke, the Earl of Suffolk, Sir Walter Earl, Sir John Hyppesley, Mr. Goodwin, and Mr. Robinson, whom the King asked, If they had power to Treat? And when they said No, why they might not as well have been sent by a Trumpeter. The Propositions were the same dethroning ones which they used to send, and therefore the King would not assent to them. Nor did the Scots swallow them at first, but made some Exceptions against them; only it seems, to make the Parliament perceive they meant not to put the King into their hands gratis; and so at last the bargain was made between them, and upon payment of 200000 l. the King was put into the hands of the Commissioners, which the English Parliament sent down to receive Him.

What a vile Complexion hath this Action, compounded of feigned Religion, and very Co­vetousness, Cowardize, Perjury, and Trea­chery?

Now the War that seemed so just, by ma­ny unseemly things is ended, you will see almost nothing in these Rebels, but Baseness and False­ness, besides their Folly.

By this time the Parliament had taken in all the rest [...]f the King's Garisons, whereof the last was Pendennis Castle, whither Duke Hamilton had been sent Prisoner by the King.

What was done during this time in Ireland and Scotland?

In Ireland there had been a Peace made, by Order from His Majesty, for a time, which by divisions by the Irish was ill kept. The Popish Party (the Pope's Nuncio being then there) took this to be the time for delivering them­selves from their subjection to the English; be­sides, the time of the Peace was now expir'd.

How were they subject to the English, more than the English to the Irish? They were subject to the King of England, but so also were the English to the King of Ireland.

The distinction is somewhat too subtile for common understanding. In Scotland the Marquis of Montross, for the King with a very few Men had miraculously with Victories over-run all Scotland, where many of his Forces (out of too much security) were permitted to be absent for a while, of which the Enemy having intelli­gence, suddenly came upon them, and forced them to flie back into the High-lands to recruit; where he began to recover strength, when the King commanded him (being then in the hands of the Scots at Newcastle) to disband, and he departed from Scotland by Sea.

In the end of the same year 1646. the Par­liament caused the King's great Seal to be bro­ken. Also the King was brought to Holmeby, and there kept by the Parliaments Commissioners, and here was an end of that War as to England and Scotland, but not to Ireland. About this time also dyed the Earl of Essex, whom the Parlia­ment had discarded.

Now that there was Peace in England, and the King in Prison, in whom was the Sovereign Power?

The Right was certainly in the King, but the exercise was yet in no body, but contended for, as in a Game at Cards, without fighting all the years 1647. and 1648. between the Parlia­ment and Oliver Cromwel, Lieutenant General to Sir Thomas Fairfax. You must know that when King Henry VIII. abolished the Pope's Au­thority here, and took upon him to be the Head of the Church, the Bishops, as they could not re­sist him, so neither were they discontented with it. For whereas the Pope before allowed not the Bishops to claim Jurisdiction in their Diocesses, Jure Divino, that is, of Right immediately from God, but by the Gift and Authority of the Pope; now that the Pope was outed, they made no doubt but the Divine Right was in them­selves.

After this the City of Geneva, and divers other places beyond Sea, having revolted from the Papacy, set up Presbyteries for the Government of thier several Churches; and divers English Scholars that went beyond Sea, during the Per­secution of Queen Mary, were much taken with this Government; and at their return in the time of Queen Elizabeth, and ever since, have endeavor'd, to the great trouble of the Church and Nation, to set up that Government here, wherein they might domineer, and applaud their own Wit and Learning. And these took upon [Page 190] them not only a Divine Right, but also a Divine Inspiration; and having been connived at, and countenanced sometimes in their frequent Preaching, they introduced many strange and many pernicious Doctrines, out-doing the Refor­mation (as they pretended both of Luther and Calvin) receding from the former Divinity, or Church-Philosophy, (for Religion is another thing) as much as Luther and Calvin had rece­ded from the Pope, and distracted their Auditors into a great number of Sects, as Brownists, Ana­baptists, Independents, Fifth-Monarchy Men, Qua­kers, and divers others, all commonly called by the name of Fanaticks, insomuch as there was no so dangerous an Enemy to the Presbyterians, as this Brood of their own hatching [...].

These were Cromwel's best Cards, whereof he had a very great number in the Army, and some in the house, whereof he himself was thought one, though he were nothing certain, but apply­ing himself always to the Faction that was strongest, was of a colour like it. There was in the Army a great number (if not the part) that aimed only at Rapine, and sharing the Lands and Goods of their Enemies; and these also up­on the opinion they had of Cromwel's Valor and Conduct, thought they could not any way bet­ter arrive at their Ends, than by adhering to him.

Lastly, In the Parliament it self, though not the major part, yet a considerable number were Fanaticks, enough to put in doubts, and cause de­lay [Page 191] in the Resolutions of the House; and some­times also by advantages of a thin House, to car­ry a Vote in favour of Gromwel, as they did upon the 26th of July; for whereas on the 4th of May precedent, the Parliament had Voted, That the Militia of London should be in the hands of a Committee of Citizens, whereof the Lord Mayor, or the time being, should be one.

Shortly after the Independents chancing to be the major, made an Ordinance, whereby it was put into hands more favourable to the Army. The best Cards the Parliament had, were the City of London, and the Person of the King. The General, Sir Thomas Fairfax, was right Presbyterian, but in the hands of the Army, and the Army in the hands of Cromwel, but which Party should prevail, depended on playing of the Game. Cromwel protested still Obedience and Fi­delity to the Parliament, but meaning nothing less, bethought him, and resolv'd on a way to ex­cuse himself of all that he should do to the con­trary upon the Army; therefore he and his Son-in-law, Commissary General Ireton, as good at contriving as himself, and at speaking and writing, better contrive how to mutiny the Army against the Parliament. To this end they spread a whis­per through the Army, that the Parliament, now they had the King, intended to disband them, to cheat them of their Arrears, and to send them into Ireland, to be destroy'd by the Irish.

The Army being herewith inrag'd, were taught [Page 192] by Ireton to erect a Council among themselves of two Soldiers out of every Troop, and every Company to consult for the good of the Army, and to assist at the Council of War, and to ad­vise for the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom. These were called Adjutators, so that whatsoever Cromwel would have to be done, he needed no­thing to make them to do it, but secretly to put it into the head of these Adjutators; the effect of the first Consultation, was to take the King from Holmeby, and to bring him to the Ar­my.

The General hereupon, by Letters to the Par­liament, excuses himself and Cromwel, and the Body of the Army, as ignorant of the Fact; and that the King came away willingly with those Soldiers that brought Him, assuring them with­all, That the whole Army intended nothing but Peace, nor opposed Presbytery, nor affected Inde­pendency, nor did hold any licentious freedom in Religion.

'Tis strange, that Sir Thomas Fairfax could be so abused by Cromwel, as to believe this which he himself here writes.

I cannot believe that Cornet Joyce could go out of the Army with 1000 Soldiers to fetch the King, and neither the General, nor the Lieu­tenant-General, nor the Body of the Army take notice of it; and that the King went willingly, appears to be false, by a Message sent on purpose from His Majesty to the Parliament.

Here is Perfidy upon Perfidy; first the Per­fidy of the Parliament against the King, and then the Perfidy of the Army against the Parlia­ment.

This was the first Trick Cromwel play'd, whereby he thought himself to have gotten so great an advantage, that he said openly, That he had the Parliament in his Pocket, (as indeed he had) and the City too. For upon the news of it, they were both the one and the other in very great disorder; and the more, because there came with it a Rumor, that the Army was marching up to London.

The King in the mean time, till his Residence was setled at Hampton Court, was carried from place to place, not without some ostentation; but with much more Liberty, and with more Respect shewn Him by far, than when He was in the hands of the Parliaments Commissioners; for His own Chaplains were allow'd Him, and His Children, and some Friends, permitted to see Him: besides, that He was much Complimented by Cromwel, who promised Him in a serious and seeming passionate manner, to restore Him to His Right against the Parliament.

How was he sure he could do that?

He was not sure, but he was resolv'd to march up to the City and Parliament, to set up the King again, and be the second Man; unless in the attempt he found better hopes than yet he had, to make himself the first Man, by disposses­sing the King.

What assistance against the Parliament and the City, could Cromwel expect from the King?

By declaring directly for Him, he might have had all the King's Party, which were many more now since His misfortune, than ever they were before; for in the Parliament it self, there were many that had discover'd the hypocrisie and private aims of their Fellows. Many were converted to their Duty, by their own natural Reason; and their Compassion for the King's Sufferings, had begot generally an Indignation against the Parliament; so that if they had been by the protection of the present Army brought together, and embodied, Cromwel might have done what he pleas'd in the first place for the King, and in the second for himself; but it seems he meant first to try what he could do without the King, and if that prov'd enough to rid his hands of him.

What did the Parliament and City do, to oppose the Army?

First the Parliament sent to the General, to have the King re-deliver'd to their Commis­sioners.

Instead of an answer to this, the Army sent Articles to the Parliament, and with them a Charge against Eleven of their Members, all of them active Presbyterians; of which Articles these are some:

[Page 195] I. That the House may be purged of those, who, by the Self-denying Ordinance, ought not to be there.

II. That such as abused, and endeavoured the Kingdom might be disabled, to do the like here­after.

III. That a day might be appointed to deter­mine this Parliament.

IV. That they would make an Accompt to the Kingdom of the vast Sums of Money they had re­ceived.

V. That the Eleven Members might presently be suspended sitting in the House.

These were the Articles that put them to their Trumps, and they answered none of them, but that of the Suspension of the Eleven Mem­bers, which they said they could not do by Law, till the particulars of the Charge were produced.

But this was soon answer'd, with their own Proceedings against the Archbishop of Canter­bury, and the Earl of Strafford.

The Parliament being thus somewhat aw'd, and the King made somewhat confident, he un­dertakes the City, requiring the Parliament to put the Militia into other hands.

What other hands? I do not well under­stand you.

I told you that the Militia of London was on the 4th of May, put into the hands of the Lord Mayor, and other Citizens, and soon after put into the hands of other Men more favou­rable unto the Army. And now I am to tell you, that on July 26. the violence of certain Appren­tices, and disbanded Soldiers, forced the Parlia­ment to resettle it as it was in the Citizens; and hereupon the two Speakers, and divers of the Members, ran away to the Army where they were invited, and contented to sit and vote in the Council of War, in the nature of a Parlia­ment; and out of these Citizens hands they would have the Militia taken away, and put again into those hands out of which it was ta­ken the 26th of July.

What said the City to this?

The Londoners mann'd their works, viz. the Line of Communication, rais'd an Army of valiant Men within the Line, chose good Offi­cers, all being desirous to go out and fight, when­soever the City should give them Order; and in that posture stood, expecting the Enemy. The Soldiers in the mean time enter into an Engage­ment to live and dye with Sir Thomas Fairfax; the Parliament, and the Army.

That's very fine; they imitate that which the Parliament did, when they first took up Arms against the King, stiling themselves, The King and Parliament; maintaining, That the King was al­wayes [Page 197] vertually in His Parliament: So the Army now making War against the Parliament, called themselves, the Parliament and the Army; but they might with more reason say, That the Par­liament (since it was in Cromwel's Pocket) was virtually in the Army.

Withall they send out a Declaration of the grounds of their March towards London, where­in they take upon them to be Judges of the Par­liament, and of who are fit to be trusted with the business of the Kingdom, giving them the name, not of the Parliament, but of the Gentle­men at Westminster; for since the violence they were under July 26. the Army denied them to be a lawful Parliament.

At the same time they sent a Letter to the Mayor and Aldermen of London, reproaching them with those late Tumults, telling them, They were Enemies to the Peace, Treacherous to the Parliament, Vnable to defend either the Parliament or themselves, and demanded to have the City de­livered into their hands, to which purpose (they said) they were now coming to them.

The General also sent out his Warrants to the Counties adjacent, summoning their Train'd Sol­diers to join with them.

Were the Train'd Soldiers part of the Generals Army?

No, nor at all in Pay, nor could be, with­out an Order of Parliament. But what might not an Army do, that had master'd all the Laws of the Land?

[Page 198] The Army being come to Hounsloe-heath, distant from London but 10 Miles, the Court of Aldermen was called, to consider what to do; the Captains and Soldiers of the City were wil­ling, and well-provided to go forth, and give them Battel; but a Treacherous Officer, that had charge of a work on Southwark side, had let in within the Line a small Party of the Enemies, who marched as far as to the Gate of London-Bridge, and then the Court of Aldermen (their hearts failing them) submitted on these Con­ditions:

To relinquish their Militia.

To desert the Eleven Members.

To deliver up the Forts and Line of Communi­cation, together with the Tower of London, and all Magazines and Arms therein to the Army.

To disband their Forces, and turn out all the Reformadoes, i. e. all Essex's old Soldiers.

To draw off their Guards from the Parlia­ment.

All which was done, and the Army marched triumphantly through the principal Streets of the C [...]ty.

'Tis strange that the Mayor and Aldermen having such an Army, should so quickly yield. Might they not have resisted the Party of the Enemies at the Bridge, with a Party of their own, and the rest of the Enemies, with the rest of their own?

I cannot judge of that: but to me it would have been strange if they had done other­wise; for I consider the most part of rich Sub­jects, that have made themselves so by Craft and Trade, as men that never look upon any thing but their present profit, and who to every thing not lying in that way are in a manner blind, be­ing amaz'd at the very thought of Plundering: If they had understood what vertue there is to pre­serve their Wealth in obedience to their lawful Soveraign, they would never have sided with the Parliament; and so we had had no need of arm­ing: The Mayor and Aldermen therefore assur'd by this submission to save their Goods, and not sure of the same by resisting, seem to me to have taken the wisest course: Nor was the Par­liament less tame than the City, for presently, August 6. the General brought the Fugitive Speakers and Members to the House with a strong Guard of Souldiers, and re-placed the Speakers in their Chairs; and for this they gave the General thanks, not only there in the House, but appointed also a day for a holy Thanks­giving; and not long after made him Generalis­sim [...] of all the Forces of England, and Consta­ble of the Tower: But in effect, all this was the advancement of Cromwel, for he was the Usu­fructuary, though the Property were in Sir Tho. Fairfax; for the Independents immediately cast down the whole Line of Communication, divide the Militia of London, Westminster, and Southwark, which were before united, displaced such Gover­nours [Page 200] of Towns and Forts as were not for their turn, though placed thereby Ordinance of Par­liament, instead of whom they put in men of their own Party: They also made the Parlia­ment to declare null all that had passed in the Houses, from July the 26th to Aug. the 6th, and clapt in Prison some of the Lords, and some of the most Eminent Citizens, whereof the Lord Mayor was one.

Cromwel had power enough now to restore the King, why did he not?

His main end was to set himself in his place; the restoring of the King was but a re­serve against the Parliament, which being in his Pocket, he had no more need of the King, who was now an impediment to him: To keep him in the Army was a trouble, to let him fall into the hands of the Presbyterians had been a stop to his hopes, to murder him privately (besides the horrour of the act) now whilst he was no more than Lieutenant General, would have made him odious, without farthering his design; there was nothing better for his purpose, than to let him escape from Hampton-Court (where he was too near the Parliament) whither he pleased beyond Sea: For though Cromwel had a great Party in the Parliament Houses, whilst they saw not his Ambition to be their Master, yet they would have been his Enemies as soon as that had ap­pear'd. To make the King attempt an escape, some of those that had him in Custody, by Crom­wel's direction told him, that the Adjutators [Page 201] meant to murder him; and withal, caused a ru­mour of the same to be generally spread; to the end it might that way also come to the Kings Ear, as it did.

The King therefore in a dark and rainy night (his Guards being retir'd, as it was thought on purpose) left Hampton-Court, and went to the Sea-side, about Southampton, where a Vessel had been bespoken to transport him, but fail'd; so that the King was forced to trust himself with Colonel Hammond, then Governour of the Isle of Wight, expecting perhaps some kindness from him for Doctor Hammonds sake, Brother to the Colonel, and his Majesties much-favour'd Chap­lain; but it prov'd otherwise, for the Colo­nel sent to his Masters of the Parliament, to re­ceive their Orders concerning him. This going into the Isle of Wight was not likely to be any part of Cromwel's design, who neither knew whither, nor which way he would go, nor had Hammond known any more than other men, if the Ship had come to the appointed place in due time.

If the King had escaped into France, might not the French have assisted him with Forces to recover his Kingdom, and so frustrated the de­signs, both of Cromwel, and all other the Kings Enemies?

Yes much, just as they assisted his Son, our present most gracious Soveraign, who two years before fled thither out of Cornwal.

'Tis methinks no great policy in Neigh­bouring [Page 202] Princes, to favour, so often as they do, one anothers Rebels, especially when they rebel against Monarchy it self; they should rather first make a League against Rebellion, and after­wards (if there be no remedy) fight one against another: Nor will that serve the turn among Christian Soveraigns, till Preaching be better lookt to; whereby the Interpretation of a Verse in the Hebrew, Greek, or Latine Bible, is often­times the cause of Civil War, and the deposing and assassinating of Gods Anointed; and yet converse with those Divinity Disputers as long as you will, you will hardly find one in a hundred discreet enough to be imployed in any great Af­fairs, either of War or Peace: It is not the Right of the Soveraign, though granted to him by every mans consent expresly, that can inable a Subject to do his Office, it is the obedience of the Subject; and then by and by to cry out (as some Ministers did in the Pulpit) to your Tents, O Israel! Common people know nothing of right or wrong by their own Meditation; they must therefore be taught the grounds of their Duty, and the reasons why Calamities ever fol­low Disobedience to their lawful Soveraigns: But to the contrary, our Rebels were publickly taught Rebellion in the Pulpits, and that there was no sin, but the doing of what the Preachers forbad, or the omitting of what they advis'd: But now the King was the Parliaments Prisoner, why did not the Presbyterians advance their own Interest, by restoring him?

The Parliament, in which there were more Presbyterians yet than Independents, might have gotten what they would of the King, during his life, if they had not by an unconscionable and sottish Ambition obstructed the way to their Ends: They sent him four Propositions to be signed, and past by him as Acts of Parliament, telling him, when these were granted, they would send Commissioners to Treat with him of any other Articles.

First, The Propositions are these:

That the Parliament should have the Militia, and power of levying Money to maintain it for twenty years; and after that term, the exercise thereof to return to the King, in case the Par­liament think the safety of the Kingdom con­cern'd in it.

This first Article takes from the King the Militia, and consequently the whole Soveraign­ty for ever.

The second was, That the King should ju­stifie the proceedings of the Parliament against himself, and declare void all Oaths and Decla­rations made by him against the Parliament.

This was to make him guilty of the War, and of all the Blood spilt therein.

The third was, To take away all Titles of Honour conferred by the King, since the Great Seal was carried to him in May 1642.

The fourth was, That the Parliament should Adjourn themselves, when, and to what place, and for what time they pleas'd.

[Page 204] These Propositions the King refus'd to grant, as he had reason, but sent others of his own, not much less advantagious to the Parliament, and desir'd a Personal Treaty with the Parlia­ment, for the settling of the Peace of the King­dom; but the Parliament denying them to be sufficient for that purpose, voted, that there should be no more Addresses made to him, nor Messages receiv'd from him, but they would settle the Kingdom without him: And this they voted, partly upon the Speeches and Menaces of the Army-Faction then present in the House of Commons, whereof one advised these three Points.

1. To secure the King in some In-land Castle with Guards.

2. To draw up Articles of Impeachment a­gainst him.

3. To lay him by, and settle the Kingdom without him.

Another said, that his denying the four Bills, was the denying Protection to his Subjects; and that therefore they might deny him Subjecti­on; and added, that till the Parliament for­sook the Army, the Army would never forsake the Parliament: This was Threatning. Last of all, Cromwel himself told them, it was now ex­pected that the Parliament should govern and defend the Kingdom, and not any longer let the people expect their safety from a Man whose heart God had hardned; nor let those that had so well defended the Parliament, be left after­ward [Page 205] to the rage of an irreconcileable Enemy, lest they seek their safety some other way. This again was threatning; as also laying his hand upon his Sword when he spake it.

And hereupon the Vote of Non-Addresses was made an Ordinance, which the House would af­terward have recalled, but were forc'd by Crom­wel to keep their word.

The Scotch were displeas'd with it, partly be­cause their Brethren the Presbyterians had lost a great deal of their Power in England, and part­ly also, because they had sold the King into their hands. The King now published a passionate Complaint to his People of this hard dealing with him, which made them pity him, but not yet rise in his behalf.

Was not this, think you, the true time for Cromwel to take possession?

By no means, there were yet many Obsta­cles to be removed; he was not General of the Army; the Army was still for a Parliament; the City of London discontented about their Mi­litia; the Scots expected with an Army to rescue the King; his Adjutators were Levellers, and a­gainst Monarchy, who though they had helped him to bring under the Parliament, yet like Dogs that are easily taught to fetch, and not easily taught to render, would not make him King; so that Cromwel had these businesses fol­lowing to overcome.

1. To be Generalissimo.

2. To remove the King.

[Page 206] 3. To suppress all Insurrections.

4. To oppose the Scots! And

Lastly, To dissolve the present Parliament: Mighty businesses, which he could never promise himself to overcome; therefore I cannot be­lieve he then thought to be King, but only by serving the strongest Party (which was always his main policy) to proceed as far as Fortune, and that would carry him.

The Parliament were certainly no less foolish than wicked, in deserting thus the King, before they had the Army at a better Command than they had.

In the beginning of 1648. the Parliament gave Commission to Philip Earl of Pembroke (then made Chancellour of Oxford, together with some of the Doctors there, as good Divines as he) to purge the University; by vertue whereof they turn'd out all such as were not of their Faction, and all such as had approved the use of the Common-Prayer-Book; as also divers scanda­lous Ministers and Scholars (that is, such as cu­stomarily and without need took the Name of God into their mouths, or used to speak wan­tonly, or use the company of lewd Women) and for this last I cannot but commend them.

So shall not I; for it is just such another piece of Piety, as to turn Men out of an Hospi­tal because they are lame: Where can a man probably learn Godliness, and how to correct his Vices better, than in the Universities erected for that purpose?

It may be the Parliament thought other­wise; for I have often heard the Complaint of Parents, that their Children were debauched there to Drunkenness, Wantonness, Gaming, and other Vices, consequent to these: Nor is it a wonder among so many Youths, if they did not corrupt one another in despite of their Tu­tors, who oftentimes were little Elder than themselves: And therefore (I think) the Parlia­ment did not much reverence the Institution of Universities, as to the bringing up of young men to Vertue, though many of them learn'd there to Preach, and became thereby capable of Preferment and Maintenance; and some others were sent thither by their Parents, to save them­selves the trouble of governing them at home, during that time wherein Children are least go­vernable. Nor do I think the Parliament car'd more for the Clergy than other men did: But certainly an University is an excellent servant to the Clergy, and the Clergy if it be not carefully lookt to, (by their Dissentious Doctrines, and by the advantage to publish their Dissentions) is no extraordinary means to divide a Kingdom in­to Faction.

But seeing there is no place in this part of the World, where Philosophy and other Hu­mane Sciences are not highly valued, where can they be learned better, than in the Universities?

What other Sciences? Do not Divines comprehend all Civil and Moral Philosophy within their Divinity? And as for Natural Phi­losophy, [Page 208] is it not remov'd from Oxford and Cambridge, to Gresham-College in London, and to be learn'd out of their Gazets? But we are gone from our Subject.

No, we are indeed gone from the great bu­siness of the Kingdom, to which, if you please, let us return.

The first Insurrection, or rather Tumult, was of the Apprentices, on the ninth of April; but this was not upon the Kings account, but a­rose from a customary assembly of them for re­creation in Moor-fields, whence some zealous Of­ficers of the Train'd-Bands would needs drive them away by force, but were themselves routed with stones, and had their Ensign taken away by the Apprentices, which they carried about in the Streets, and frighted the Lord Mayor into his House, where they took a Gun, called a Drake, and then they set Guards at some of the Gates, and all the rest of the day Childishly swagger'd up and down: but the next day the General himself marching into the City, quickly disper­sed them. This was but a small business, but e­nough to let them see that the Parliament was ill belov'd of the people. Next, the Welch took Arms against them; there were three Colonels in Wales, Langhorn, Poyer, and Powel, who had formerly done the Parliament good services, but now were commanded to disband, which they refus'd to do; and the better to strengthen them­selves, declar'd for the King, and were about eight thousand.

[Page 209] About the same time in Wales also was ano­ther Insurrection, headed by Sir Nocholas Key­mish, and another under Sir John Owen; so that now all Wales was in Rebellion against the Par­liament: And yet all these were overcome in a Months time by Cromwel, and his Officers, but not without store of blood-shed on both sides.

I do not much pity the loss of those men, that impute to the King that which they do up­on their own quarrel.

Presently after this, some of the people of Surrey sent a Petition to the Parliament for a Personal Treaty between the King and Parlia­ment, but their Messengers were beaten home again by the Souldiers that quartered about West­minster; and then the Kentish men having a like Petition to deliver, and seeing how it was like to be receiv'd, threw it away, and took up Arms; they had many gallant Officers, and for General, the Earl of Norwich, and increas'd daily by Ap­prentices, and old disbanded Souldiers, inso­much as the Parliament was glad to restore to the City their Militia, and to keep Guards upon the Thames side; and then Fairfax marched to­wards the Enemy.

And then the Londoners, I think, might easi­ly and suddenly have Master'd, first the Parlia­ment, and next Fairfax his eight thousand, and lastly Cromwels Army, or at least have given the Scotch Army opportunity to march unfought to London.

'Tis true, but the City was never good at [Page 210] venturing; nor were they, or the Scots, princi­pled to have a King over them, but under them. Fairfax marching with eight thousand against the Royalists, routed a part of them at Maid­stone; another part were taking in of places in Kent farther off, and the Earl of Norwich, with the rest, came to Black-Heath, and thence sent to the City to get passage through it, to joyn with those which were risen in Essex, under Sir Charles Lucas, and Sir George Lisle; which being denied, the greatest part of his Kentish men deserted him; with the rest, not above five hundred, he crossed the Thames unto the Isle of Dogs, and so to Bow, and thence to Colchester: Fairfax having notice of this, crossed the Thames at Graves-End, and overtaking them, be­sieg'd them in Colchester: The Town had no de­fence but a Bulwark, and yet held out, upon hope of the Scotch Army to relieve them, the space of two Months.

Upon the news of the defeat of the Scots, they were forced to yield; the Earl of Norwich was sent Prisoner to London, Sir Charles Lucas and Sir George Lisle, two Loyal and Gallant Per­sons, were shot to Death. There was also ano­ther little Insurrection headed by the Earl of Holland about Kingston, but quickly supprest, and he himself taken Prisoner.

How came the Scots to be so soon di­spatcht?

Meerly, as it is said, for want of Con­duct: The Army was led by Duke Hamilton, who [Page 211] was then set at liberty, when Pendennis Castle, where he was Prisoner, was taken by the Parlia­ment: He entred England with Horse and Foot 10000, to which came above 3000 English Roy­alists. Against these Cromwel marched out of Wales, with Horse and Foot 11000, and near to Preston in Lancashire, in less then two hours, de­feated them; and the cause of it is said to be, that the Scotch Army was so ordered, as they could not all come to the Fight, nor relieve their Fellows: After the Defeat they had no way to fly but farther into England, so that in the Pur­suit they were almost all taken, and lost all that an Army could lose, for the few that got home, did not all bring home their Swords, Duke Hamil­ton was taken, and not long after sent to Lon­don, but Cromwel marched to Edenburrough, and there, by the help of the Faction which was con­trary to Hamilton's, he made sure not to be hin­dred in his designs, the first whereof was to take away the Kings Life by the hand of the Parlia­ment: whilst these things passed in the North, the Parliament (Cromwel being away) came to it self, and recalling their Vote of Non-Addresses, sent to the King new Propositions, somewhat, but not much easier than the former, and upon the King's answer to them, they sent Commissio­ners to treat with him at Newport in the Isle of Wight, where they so long dodged with him a­bout Trifles, that Cromwel was come to London before they had done, to the Kings destruction, for the Army was now wholly at the Devotion [Page 212] of Cromwel, who set the Adjutators on work to make a Remonstrance to the House of Com­mons; wherein they require: 1. That the King be brought to Justice. 2. That the Prince, and Duke of York, be summon'd to appear at a day appointed, and proceeded with, according as they should give satisfaction. 3. That the Par­liament settle the future Government, and set a reasonable period to their own sitting, and make certain future Parliaments Annual, or Biennial. 4. That a competent number of the Kings chief Instruments be executed; and this to be done both by the House of Commons, and by a general agreement of the people, te­stified by their Subscriptions: Nor did they stay for an answer, but presently set a Guard of Souldiers at the Parliament-House Door, and o­ther Souldiers in Westminster-Hall, suffering none to go into the House, but such as would serve their turns; all others were frighted away, or made Prisoners, and some upon divers quarrels suspended. About ninety of them, because they had refus'd to Vote against the Scots; and others, because they had voted against the Vote of Non-Addresses; and the rest were a House for Crom­wel. The Phanaticks also in the City being coun­tenanced by the Army, pack a new Common Council, whereof any forty was to be above the Mayor, and their first work was to frame a Pe­tition for Justice against the King; which Tich­bourn the Mayor (involving the City in the Regi­cide) deliver'd to the Parliament.

[Page 213] At the same time, with like violence they took the King from Newport, in the Isle of Wight, to Hurst Castle, till things were ready for his Tryal; the Parliament, in the mean time, to a­void Perjury, by an Ordinance declar'd void the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance; and presently after made another to bring the King to his Tryal.

This is a piece of Law that I understood not before, that when many men swear fingly; they may when they are assembled (if they please) absolve themselves.

The Ordinance being drawn up, was brought into the House, where after three seve­ral readings, it was voted, That the Lords and Commons of England assembled in Parliament, do declare, that by the Fundamental Laws of the Realm, it is Treason in the King of England to levy War a­gainst the Parliament: And this Vote was sent up to the Lords, and they denying their consent, the Commons in anger made another Vote, That all Members of Committees should proceed and act in any Ordinance, whether the Lords concurr'd or no; and that the People, under God, are the Original of all just Power; and that the House of Commons have the Supreme Power of the Nation; and that whatsoever the House of Commons Enacted, is Law. All this passed nemine contradicente.

These Propositions fight not only against a King of England, but against all the Kings of the World: It were good they thought on't; but yet I believe, that, under God, the Original of all Laws was in the People.

But the People, for them and their Heirs, by consent and Oaths, have long ago put the Supreme Power of the Nation into the hands of their Kings, for them and their Heirs; and consequently into the hands of this King, their known and lawful Heir.

But does not the Parliament represent the People?

Yes, to some purposes; as to put up Peti­tions to the King when they have leave, and are griev'd; but not to make a grievance of the Kings Power: Besides, the Parliament never re­presents the People, but when the King calls them: Is it to be imagin'd, that he calls a Par­liament to depose himself? Put the case every County and Burrough should have given for a benevolence a sum of Money, and that every County meeting in their County Court, or else­where, and that every Burrough in their Town-Hall, should have chosen certain men to carry their several sums respectively to the Parlia­ment, had not these men represented the whole Nation?

Yes, no doubt.

Do you think the Parliament would have thought it reasonable to be called to account by this Representative?

No, sure; and yet, I must confess, the Case is the same.

This Ordinance contained; First, a Sum­mary of the Charge against the King; in sub­stance this, That not content with the Incroachments [Page 215] of his Predecessors upon the freedom of the People, he had design'd to set up a Tyrannical Power; and to that end, had rais'd and maintain'd in the Land a Civil War against the Parliament, whereby the Country hath been miserably wasted, the Publick Treasure exhausted, thousands of people murdered, and infinite other mischiefs committed.

Secondly, A Constitution passed of a High Court of Justice; that is, of a certain number of Commissioners, of whom any twenty had power to try the King, and proceed to Sentence, according to the Merit of the Cause, and see it speedily executed. The Commissioners met on Saturday, January 20. in Westminster-Hall, and the King was brought before them, sitting in a Chair: He heard the Charge read, but denied to plead to it, either Guilty, or not Guilty, till he should know by what lawful Authority he was brought thither: The President told him, that the Parliament affirm'd their own Authority; and the King persevered in his refusal to plead; though many words passed between him and the President, yet this is the sum of all: on Monday, January 22. the Court met again, and the Solli­citor moved, that if the King persisted in de­nying the Authority of the Court, the Charge might be taken pro confesso; but the King still denied their Authority.

They met again, January 23. and then the Sol­licitor moved the Court for Judgment; where­upon the King was requir'd to give his Final An­swer, which was again a denial of their Autho­rity.

[Page 216] Lastly, They met again, January 27. where the King then desir'd to be heard before the Lords and Commons in the Painted Chamber; and promising after that to abide the Judgment of the Court; the Commissioners retir'd for half an hour to consider of it; and then returning, caused the King again to be brought to the Bar, and told him, that what he propos'd, was but another denial of the Courts Jurisdiction; and that if he had no more to say, they would pro­ceed to Judgment: Then the King answering, that he had no more to say, the President began a long Speech, in justification of the Parlia­ments proceedings, producing the Examples of many Kings kill'd or depos'd by wicked Parlia­ments, Ancient and Modern, in England, Scot­land, and other parts of the World: All which he endeavour'd to justifie from this only Princi­ple, that the People have the Supreme Power, and the Parliament is the People. This Speech ended, the Sentence of Death was read, and the same upon Tuesday after, January the 30. execu­ted at the Gate of his own Palace of White-Hall. He that can delight in reading how villanously he was used by the Souldiers, between the Sen­tence and Execution, may go to the Chronicle it self, in which he shall see what courage, pa­tience, wisdom, and goodness was in this Prince, whom in their Charge the Members of that wicked Parliament stil'd Traytor, Tyrant, and Murderer.

The King being dead, the same day they [Page 217] made an Act of Parliament, That whereas seve­ral pretences might be made to the Crown, &c. it is Enacted by this present Parliament, and Authority of the same, that no Person shall presume to declare, proclaim, or publish, or any way promote Charles Stuart, Son of Charles late King of England, commonly called Prince of Wales, or any other Person, to be King of England and Ireland, &c.

Seeing the King was dead, and his Succes­sors barr'd, by what declar'd Authority was the Peace maintained?

They had in their anger against the Lords formerly declar'd the Supreme Power of the Nation to be in the House of Commons; and now, on February the fifth, they Vote the House of Lords to be useless, and dangerous. And thus the Kingdom was turn'd into a Demo­cracy, or rather an Oligarchy; for presently they made an Act, That none of those Members who were secluded for opposing the Vote of Non-Addresses, should ever be re-admitted: And these were commonly called the Secluded Members, and the rest were by some stiled a Parliament, and by others a Rump.

I think you need not now have a Catalogue either of the Vices, or of the Crimes, or of the Follies of the greatest part of them that compo­sed the Long-Parliament, than which greater cannot be in the World: What greater Vices than Irreligion, Hypocrisie, Avarice, and Cruel­ty, which have appear'd so eminently in the actions of Presbyterian Members, and Presbyterian [Page 218] Ministers? What greater Crimes than Bla­sphemy, and killing Gods Anointed, which was done by the hands of the Independents, but by the folly and first Treason of the Presbyterians, who betrayed and sold him to his Murderers? Nor was it a little folly in the Lords, not to see that by the taking away of the Kings Power, they lost withall their own Priviledges; or to think themselves either for number or judgment any way a considerable assistance to the House of Commons: And for those men who had skill in the Laws, it was no great sign of understanding, not to perceive that the Laws of the Land were made by the King, to oblige his Subjects to Peace and Justice, and not to oblige himself that made them: Lastly, and generally, all men are Fools which pull down any thing which does them good, before they have set up something better in its place: He that would set up De­mocracy with an Army, should have an Army to maintain it; but these men did it, when those men had the Army that were resolv'd to pull it down. To these follies, I might add the follies of those five men, which out of their reading of Tully, Seneca, and other Antimonarchicks, think themselves sufficient Politicks, and shew their discontents when they are not called to the management of the State, and turn from one side to the other upon every neglect they fancy from the King, or his Enemies.

YOU have seen the Rump in possession (as they believ'd) of the Supreme Power over the two Nations of England and Ire­land, and the Army their Servant, though Crom­wel thought otherwise, serving them diligently for the advancement of his own purpose; I am now therefore to shew you their proceedings.

Tell me first, how this kind of Govern­ment, under the Rump or Relick of a House of Commons, is to be call'd.

'Tis doubtless an Oligarchy; for the Su­preme Authority must needs be in one man, or in in more; if in one, it is Monarchy; the Rump therefore was no Monarchy; if the Authority were in more than one, it was in all, or in fewer than all; when in all, it is Democracy; for eve­ry man may enter into the Assembly which makes the Soveraign Court, which they could not do here: It is therefore manifest, the Authority was in a few, and consequently the State was an Oligarchy.

It is not impossible for a people to be well govern'd, that are to obey more Masters than one.

Both the Rump, and all other Soveraign Assemblies, if they have but one voice, though they be many men, yet are they but one Person; for contrary Commands cannot consist in one and the same voice, which is the voice of the greatest part; and therefore they might govern well enough, if they had honesty and wit e­nough.

[Page 220] The first Act of the Rump, was the Exclusion of those Members of the House of Commons which had been formerly kept out by violence, for the procuring of an Ordinance for the Kings Tryal; for these men had appear'd against the Ordinance of Non-Addresses, and therefore to be excluded, because they might else be an im­pediment to their future designs.

Was it not rather, because in the Authori­ty of few, they thought the fewer the better, both in regard of their shares, and also of a nearer approach in every one of them to the Dignity of a King?

Yes certainly, that was their principal end.

When these were put out, why did not the Counties and Burroughs chuse others in their places?

They could not do that without Order from the House: After this, they constituted a Council of forty persons, which they termed a Council of State, whose Office was to execute what the Rump should command.

When there was neither King, nor House of Lords, they could not call themselves a Par­liament; for a Parliament is a meeting of the King, Lords, and Commons, to confer together about the businesses of the Common-wealth: with whom did the Rump confer?

Men may give to their Assembly what Name they please, what signification soever such Name might formerly have had, and the Rump [Page 221] took the Name of Parliament, as most suitable to their purpose; and such a Name, as being Ve­nerable among the people for many hundred years, had countenanced and sweetned Subsi­dies, and other Levies of Money, otherwise ve­ry unpleasant to the Subject: They took also af­terwards another name, which was, Custodes Li­bertatis Angliae, which Title they used only in their Writs issuing out of the Courts of Ju­stice.

I do not see how a Subject that is tyed to the Laws, can have more liberty in one form of Government than another.

Howsoever, to the people that understand by Liberty, nothing but leave to do what they list, it was a Title not ingrateful.

Their next work was to set forth a publick De­claration, that they were fully resolv'd to main­tain the Fundamental Laws of the Nation, as to the preservation of the Lives, Liberties, and Proprieties of the people.

What did they mean by the Fundamental Laws of the Nation?

Nothing but to abuse the people; for the only Fundamental Law in every Commonwealth, is to obey the Laws from time to time, which he shall make, to whom the People have given the Supreme Power: How likely then are they to uphold the Fundamental Laws, that had mur­dered him, who was by themselves so often ac­knowledged their lawful Soveraign: Besides, at the same time that this Declaration came forth, [Page 222] they were erecting the High Court of Justice, which took away the lives of Duke Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, and the Lord Capel; what­soever they meant by a Fundamentall Law, the erecting of this Court was a breach of it, as be­ing warranted by no former Law, or Example in England.

At the same time also they levied Taxes by Souldiers, and permitted Free Quarter to them; and did many other Actions, which if the King had done, they would have said had been done against the Liberty and Propriety of the Sub­ject.

What silly things are the common sort of people, to be cozen'd as they were so grosly?

What sort of people, as to this matter, are not of the common sort; the craftiest Knaves of all the Rump were no wiser than the rest whom they cozen'd; for the most of them did believe, that the same things which they impos'd upon the generality, were just and reasonable; and especially the great Haranguers, and such as pre­tended to Learning: for who can be a good Sub­ject in a Monarchy, whose Principles are taken from the Enemies of Monarchy? such as were Cicero, Seneca, Cato, and other Polititians of Rome, and Aristotle of Athens, who spake of Kings but as Wolves, and other ravenous Beasts? You may perhaps think a man has need of no­thing else, to know the duty he owes to his Go­vernour, and what right he has to order him, but a good Natural Wit: But it is otherwise; [Page 223] for it is a Science, and built upon sure and clear Principles, and to be learn'd by deep and careful study, or from Masters that have deeply studied it: And who was there in the Parliament, or in the Nation, that could find out those evident Principles, and derive from thence the necessary Rules of Justice, and the necessary Connexion of Justice and Peace? The people have one day in seven the leisure to hear Instructions, and there are Ministers appointed to teach them their duty: But how have these Ministers per­form'd their Office? A great part of them, namely, the Presbyterian Ministers, throughout the whole War, instigated the people against the King; so did also Independent, and other fana­tick Ministers: The rest contented with their Livings, preached in their Parishes points of Controversie, to Religion importinent, but to the breach of Charity, among themselves, very effectual; or else Eloquent things, which the people either understood not, or thought them­selves not concern'd in: But this sort of Prea­chers, as they did little good, so they did little hurt; the mischief proceeded wholly from the Presbyterian Preachers, who by a long practis'd Histrionick Faculty, preached up the Rebellion powerfully.

To what end?

To the end, that the State becoming po­pular, the Church might be so too, and govern'd by an Assembly; and consequently (as they thought) seeing Politicks are subservient to [Page 224] Religion, they might govern, and thereby satis­fie their covetous humour with Riches, and also their malice with Power to undo all men that admir'd not their wisdom. Your calling the people silly things, oblig'd me by this digression to shew you, that it is not want of Wit, but want of the Science of Justice that brought them into these troubles. Perswade, if you can, that man that has made his Fortune, or made it greater, or an Eloquent Orator, or a ravishing Poet, or a subtil Lawyer, or but a good Hun­ter, or a cunning Gamester, that he has not a good Wit; and yet there were of all these a great many so silly as to be deceived by the Rump. They wanted not wit, but the knowledge of the Causes, and grounds upon which one person has a right to govern, and the rest an ob­ligation to obey; which grounds are necessary to be taught the people, who without them cannot live long in peace among themselves.

Let us return, if you please, to the pro­ceedings of the Rump.

In the rest of the year, they voted a new Stamp for the Coyn of this Nation: They con­sidered also of Agents to be sent into foreign parts; and having lately receiv'd Applause from the Army for their work done by the High Court of Justice, and encouragement to extend the same farther, they perfected the said High Court of Justice, in which were tryed Duke Ha­milton, the Earl of Holland, the Lord Capel, the Earl of Norwich, and Sir John Owen; whereof [Page 225] (as I mention'd before) the first three were be­headed. This affrighted divers of the Kings Party out of the Land, for not only they, but all that had born Arms for the King, were at that time in very great danger of their lives: for it was put to the question by the Army at a Council of War, whether they should be all massacred or no; where the No's carried it but by two Voices. Lastly, March 24. they put the Mayor of London out of his Office, fined him two thousand pound, disfranchised him, and con­demn'd him to two Months imprisonment in the Tower, for refusing to proclaim the Act for a­bolishing of the Kingly Power. And thus end­ed the year 1648. and the Monthly Fast, God ha­ving granted that which they fasted for, the Death of the King, and the possession of his In­heritance. By these their proceedings, they had already lost the hearts of the generality of the people, and had nothing to trust to but the Ar­my, which was not in their power, but in Crom­wel's, who never fail'd, when there was occasi­on, to put them upon all Exploits that might make them odious to the people, in order to his future dissolving them, whensoever it should conduce to his ends. In the beginning of 1649. the Scots discontented with the proceedings of the Rump against the late King, began to levy Souldiers, in order to a new Invasion of England. The Irish Rebels, for want of timely resistance from England, were grown terrible; and the English Army at home, infected by the Adjuta­tors, [Page 226] began to cast about, how to share the Land among the Godly, meaning themselves, and such others as they pleas'd, who were there­fore called Levellers: Also the Rump, for the present, were not very well provided of Mo­ney; and therefore the first thing they did, was the laying of a Tax upon the people, of ninety thousand pound a Month, for the Maintenance of the Army.

Was it not one of their Quarrels with the King, that he had levied Money without the consent of the people in Parliament?

You may see by this what reason the Rump had to call it self a Parliament; for the Taxes imposed by Parliament, were always un­derstood to be by the peoples consent, and con­sequently legal.

To appease the Scots, they sent Messengers with flattering Letters, to keep them from in­gaging for the present King; but in vain, for they would hear nothing from a House of Com­mons (as they call'd it) at Westminster, without a King, and Lords: But they sent Commission­ers to the King, to let him know what they were doing for him, for they were resolv'd to raise an Army of seventeen thousand Foot, and six thousand Horse for themselves. To relieve Ireland, the Rump had resolv'd to send eleven Regiments thither out of the Army in England. This happened well for Cromwel, for the Level­ling Souldiers, which were in every Regiment many, and in some the major part, finding that [Page 227] instead of dividing the Land at home, they were to venture their lives in Ireland, flatly denied to go; and one Regiment having cashier'd their Colonel about Salisbury, was marching to joyn with three Regiments more of the same resolu­tion: but both the General, and Cromwel, fal­ling upon them at Burford, utterly defeated them, and soon after reduced the whole Army to their obedience: And thus another of the Impedi­ments to Cromwel's Advancement was soon re­mov'd. Thus done, they came to Oxford, and thence to London; and at Oxford, both the Ge­neral, and Cromwel, were made Doctors of the Civil Law; and at London feasted and present­ed by the City.

Were they not first made Masters, then Doctors?

They had made themselves Masters alrea­dy, both of the Laws, and Parliament. The Army being now obedient, the Rump sent over those eleven Regiments into Ireland, under the Command of Doctor Cromwel, entituled, Go­vernour of that Kingdom, the Lord Fairfax be­ing still General of all the Forces, both here, and there.

The Marquess, now Duke of Ormond, was the Kings Lieutenant of Ireland; and the Rebels had made a Confederacy among themselves, and those Confederates had made a kind of League with the Lieutenant, wherein they agreed upon liberty given them in the exercise of their Reli­gion, to be faithful to, and assist the King. To [Page 228] these also were joyned some Forces raised by the Earls of Castlehaven, and Clanriccard, and my Lord Inchequin, so that they were the greatest United Strength in the Island; but there were among them a great many other Papists that would by no means subject themselves to Prote­stants, and these were called the Nuncio's Par­ty, as the other were called the Confederate Party. These Parties not agreeing, and the Confederate Party having broken their Articles, the Lord Lieutenant seeing them ready to be­siege him in Dublin, and not able to defend it; to preserve the place for the Protestants, surren­ders it to the Parliament of England, and came over to the King, at this time when he was car­ried from place to place by the Army. From England he went over to the Prince, now King, residing then at Paris: But the Confederates af­frighted with the news that the Rump was send­ing over an Army thither, desir'd the Prince, by Letters, to send back my Lord of Ormond, ingaging themselves to submit absolutely to the Kings Authority, and to obey my Lord of Or­mond as his Lieutenant: And thereupon he was sent back. This was about a year before the going over of Cromwel; in which time, by the Dissentions in Ireland between the Confederate Party, and the Nuncio's Party, and discontents about Command, this otherwise sufficient Power effected nothing, and was at last defeated, Au­gust the second, by a Salley out of Dublin, which they were besieging. Within a few days after [Page 229] arriv'd Cromwel, who with extraordinary dili­gence, and horrid Executions, in less than a Twelvemonth that he staid there, subdued, in a manner, the whole Nation, having kill'd or exterminated a great part of them, and lea­ving his Son-in-law Ireton to subdue the rest: But Ireton died there (before the business was quite done) of the Plague. This was one step more towards Cromwel's Exaltation to the Throne.

What a miserable condition was Ireland reduced to by the Learning of the Roman, as well as England was by the Learning of the Presbyte­rian Clergy?

In the latter end of the preceding year, the King was come from Paris to the Hague, and shortly after came thither from the Rump, their Agent Dorislaus, Doctor of the Civil Law, who had been imployed in the drawing of the Charge against the late King: But the first night he came, as he was at Supper, a Compa­ny of Cavaliers, near a dozen, entred his Cham­ber, kill'd him, and got away. Not long after also, their Agent at Madrid, one Ascham, that had written in defence of his Masters, was kill'd in the same manner. About this time came out two Books; one written by Salmasius, a Presbyterian, against the Murder of the King; another written by Milton, an Independent in Eng­land, in Answer to it.

I have seen them both; they are very good Latine both, and hardly to be judged which is [Page 230] better; and both very ill reasoning, and hardly to be judged which is worst: like two Decla­mations Pro and Con, for exercise only in a Rhe­torick School, by one and the same man: so like is a Presbyterian to an Independent.

In this year the Rump did not much at home, save that in the beginning they made England a Free State, by an Act which runs thus, Be it Enacted and Declared by this present Parlia­ment, and by to Authority thereof, That the Peo­ple of England, and all the Dominions and Terri­tories thereunto belonging, are and shall be, and are hereby constituted, made, and declared a Common-wealth, and Free State, &c.

What did they mean by a Free State and Common-wealth? were the people no longer to be subject to Laws? They could not mean that: for the Parliament meant to Govern them by their own Laws, and punish such as broke them. Did they mean that England should not be subject to any foreign Kingdom or Common-wealth? That needed not be Enacted, seeing there was no King nor People pretended to be their Masters. What did they mean then?

They meant that neither this King, nor any King, nor any single person, but only that they themselves would be the Peoples Masters; and would have set it down in those plain words, if the people could have been cozen'd with words intelligible as easily as with words not intelligible.

After this they gave one another Money and [Page 231] Estates out of the Lands and Goods of the Loy­al Party. They Enacted also an Engagement to be taken by every man, in these words, You shall promise to be true and faithful to the Common-wealth of England, as it is now established, without King or House of Lords.

They banished also from within 20 Miles of London all the loyal Party, forbidding every one of them to depart more than five Miles from his dwelling-house.

They meant perhaps to have them ready, if need were, for a Massacre: But what did the Scots in this time?

They were considering of the Officers of the Army which they were levying for the King, how they might exclude from Command all such as had loyally serv'd his now Majesty's Fa­ther, and all Independents, and all such as commanded in Duke Hamilton's Army: And these were the main things that passed this year.

The Marquess of Montross, that had in the year 1645. with a few men, and in a little time, done things almost incredible against the late King's Enemies in Scotland, landed now again in the beginning of the Year 1650. in the North of Scotland, with Commission from the present King, hoping to do him as good ser­vice as he had formerly done his Father; but the case was alter'd, for the Scotch Forces were then in England, in the service of the Parlia­ment; whereas now they were in Scotland, and many more (for their intended Invasion) newly [Page 232] rais'd: Besides, the Souldiers which the Mar­quess brought over were few, and Forreigners; nor did the High-landers come in to him, as he expected, insomuch as he was soon defeated, and shortly after taken; and (with more spiteful u­sage than revenge requir'd) Executed by the Covenanters at Edinborough, May the 2d.

What good could the King expect from joyning with these men, who, during the Trea­ty, discover'd so much malice to him in one of his best Subjects?

No doubt (their Church-men being then prevalent) they would have done as much to this King, as the English Parliament had done to his Father, if they could have gotten by it that which they foolishly aspir'd to, the Government of the Nation: I do not believe that the Inde­pendents were worse than the Presbyterians; both the one and the other were resolv'd to destroy whatsoever should stand in the way to their Am­bition: but necessity made the King pass over both this and many other Indignities from them, rather than suffer the pursuit of his Right in England to cool, and be little better than extin­guished.

Indeed, I believe the Kingdom, if suffered to become an old Debt, will hardly ever be re­cover'd: Besides, the King was sure, where ever the Victory lighted, he could lose nothing in the War but Enemies.

About the time of Montrosses death, which was in May, Cromwel was yet in Ireland, and his [Page 233] work unfinished; but finding, or by his Friends advertis'd, that his presence in the Expedition now preparing against the Scots, would be neces­sary to his Design, sent to the Rump, to know their pleasure, concerning his return: But for all that, he knew, or thought it was not necessa­ry to stay for their Answer, but came away, and arriv'd at London the sixth of June following, and was welcom'd by the Rump. Now had General Fairfax (who was truly what he pre­tended to be, a Presbyterian) been so Catechis'd by the Presbyterian Ministers here, that he refus'd to fight against the Brethren in Scotland; nor did the Rump, nor Cromwel, go about to rectifie his Conscience in that point. And thus Fairfax lay­ing down his Commission, Cromwel was now made General of all the Forces in England and Ireland, which was another step to the Soveraign Power.

Where was the King?

In Scotland, newly come over, he landed in the North, and was honourably conducted to Edinborough, though all things was not yet well agreed upon between the Scots and him: for he had yielded to as hard Conditions, as the late King had yielded to in the Isle of Wight; yet they had still somewhat to add, till the King en­during no more, departed from them towards the North again: But they sent Messengers after him, to pray him to return; but they furnished these Messengers with strength enough to bring him back▪ if he should have refus'd. In fine, [Page 234] they agreed, but would not suffer the King, or any Royalist, to have Command in the Army.

The sum of all is, the King was their Pri­soner.

Cromwel from Berwick sends a Declaration to the Scots, telling them, he had no Quarrel a­gainst the people of Scotland, but against the Malignant Party that had brought in the King, to the disturbance of the Peace between the two Nations; and that he was willing by Conference to give and receive satisfaction, or to decide the Justice of the Cause by Battel: To which the Scots answering, declare, That they will not pro­secute the Kings Interest, before and without his acknowledgment of the sins of his House, and his former ways; and satisfaction given to Gods people in both Kingdoms. Judge by this, whe­ther the present King were not in as bad a condi­tion here, as his Father was in the hands of the Presbyterians of England.

Presbyterians are every where the same; they would fain be absolute Governours of all they converse with, and have nothing to plead for it; but that where they reign, 'tis God that reigns, and no where else. But I observe one strange demand, that the King should acknow­ledge the sins of his House; for I thought it had been certain from all Divines, that no man was bound to acknowledge any mans sins but his own.

The King having yielded to all that the Church requir'd, the Scots proceeded in their [Page 235] intended War. Cromwel marched on to Edinbo­rough, provoking them all he could to Battel; which they declining, and provisions growing scarce in the English Army, Cromwel retir'd to Dunbar, despairing of success, and intending by Sea or Land to get back into England: And such was the condition which this General Crom­wel, so much magnified for Conduct, had brought his Army to, that all his Glories had ended in shame and punishment, if Fortune's, and the faults of his Enemies, had not reliev'd him: for as he retir'd, the Scots followed him close all the way, till within a mile of Dunbar. There is a ridge of Hills, that from beyond Edinborough goes winding to the Sea, and crosses the High­way between Dunbar and Barwick, at a Village called Copperspeith, where the passage is so diffi­cult, that if the Scots had sent timely thither a very few men to guard it, the English could ne­ver have passed: for the Scots kept the Hills, and needed not have [...]ought, but upon great ad­vantage, and were almost two to one. Crom­wel's Army was at the Foot of those Hills, on the North side; and there was a great Ditch, or Channel of a Torrent, between the Hills and it; so that he could never have got home by Land, nor without utter ruine of the Army attempted to ship it, nor have stayed where he was for want of provisions. Now Cromwel knowing the Pass was free, and commanding a good Party of Horse and Foot to possess it, it was necessary for the Scots to let them go, whom they brag'd they [Page 236] had impounded, or else to fight, and therefore with the best of their Horse charged the English, and made them at first to shrink a little, but the English Foot coming on, the Scots were put to flight, and the flight of their Horse hindred the Foot from engaging, who therefore fled, as did also the rest of their Horse. Thus the folly of the Scotish Commanders brought all these odds to an even lay between two small and equal Parties, wherein Fortune gave the Victory to the English, who were not many more in number than those that were killed and taken Prisoners of the Scots, and the Church lost their Cannon, Bag and Bag­gage, with 10000 Arms, and almost their whole Army; the rest were got together by Lesby to Sterling.

This Victory hapned well for the King, for had the Scots been Victors, the Presbyterians both there and here would have domineer'd a­gain, and the King been in the same condition his Father was in at Newcastle, in the hands of the Scotish Army. For in pursuit of this Victory, the English at last brought the Scots to a pretty good habit of obedience for the King, whenso­ever he should recover his Right.

In pursuit of this Victory the English marched to Edinborrough, quitted by the Scots, fortified Leith, and took in all the strength and Castles they thought fit on this side the Frith, which now was become the Bounds betwixt the two Nations; and the Scotch Ecclesiasticks be­gan to know themselves better, and resolved [Page 237] in their new Army, which they meant to raise, to admit some of the Royalists into Command: Cromwel from Edinborrough march'd towards Sterling to provoke the Enemy to fight, but find­ing danger in it returned to Edinborrough, and be­sieged the Castle: In the mean time he sent a Party into the West of Scotland to suppress Strangham and Kerr, two great Presbyterians, that were there levying of Forces for their new Army. And in the same time the Scots Crown­ed the King at Schone.

The rest of this year was spent in Scotland, on Cromwel's part in taking of Edinburrough Castle, and in attempts to pass the Frith, or any other ways to get over to the Scotish Forces; and on the Scots part, in hastening their Levies for the North.

What did the Rump at home during this time?

They voted Liberty of Conscience to the Sectaries; that is, they pluckt out the sting of Presbytery, which consisted in a severe imposing of odd Opinions upon the people, impertinent to Religion, but conducing to the advance­ment of the power of the Presbyterian Mini­sters. Also they levyed more Souldiers, and gave the Command of them to Harrison, now made Major General, a Fifth-Monarchy man; and of those Souldiers, two Regiments of Horse and one of Foot were raised by the Fifth-Monarchy men, and other Sectaries, in thankfulness for this their liberty from the Presbyterian Tyran­ny. [Page 238] Also they pull'd down the late Kings Sta­tue in the Exchange, and in the place where it stood caused to be written these words, Exit Tyrannus Regum ultimus, &c.

What good did that do them? and why did they not pull down the Statues of all the rest of the Kings?

What account can be given of actions that proceed not from Reason, but spight and such like passions? Besides this, they received Am­bassadors from Portugal and Spain, acknowledg­ing their Power: And in the very end of the year, they prepared an Ambassador to the Ne­therlands, to offer them friendship: All they did besides, was persecuting and executing of Royalists.

In the beginning of the Year 1651. General Dean arrived in Scotland; and on the 11th. of April the Scotish Parliament assembled, and made certain Acts in order to a better uniting of themselves, and better obedience to the King, who was now at Sterling with the Scotish Forces he had, expecting more now in levying. Crom­wel from Edinborough went divers times to Ster­ling, to provoke them to fight: There was no Ford there to pass over his men: At last, Boats being come from London and Newcastle, Colonel Overton (though it were long first, for it was now July) transported 1400 Foot of his own, besides another Regiment of Foot and four Troops of Horse, and intrencht himself at North-Ferry on the other side, and before any [Page 239] help could come from Sterling Major General Lambert also was got over with as many more; by this time Sir John Brown was come to oppose them with 4500 men, whom the English there defeated, killing about 2000, aud taking Pri­soners 1600. This done, and as much more of the Army transported as was thought fit, Crom­wel comes before St. Johnston's (from whence the Scotish Parliament, upon news of his passing the Frith, was removed to Dundee) and sum­mons it; and the same day had news brought him, that the King was marching from Sterling towards England, which was true; but notwith­standing the King was three days march before him, he resolved to have the Town before he followed him, and accordingly had it the next day by surrender.

What hopes had the King in coming into England, having before and behind him none, at least none armed, but his Enemies?

Yes there was before him the City of Lon­don, which generally hated the Rump, and might easily be reckoned for 20000 well armed Soul­diers; and most men believed they would have taken his part had he come near the City.

What probability was there of that? Do you think the Rump was not sure of the service of the Mayor, and those that Commanded the Ci­ty Militia? And if they had been really the Kings Friends, what need had they to stay his coming up to London? They might have seiz'd the Rump if they had pleas'd, which had no possibility [Page 240] of defending themselves; at least, they might have turn'd them out of the House.

This they did not, but on the contrary permitted the recruiting of Cromwel's Army, and the raising of men to keep the Country from coming in to the King. The King began his march from Sterling the last of July, and Aug. 22. came to Worcester, by the way of Carlisle, with a weary Army, of about 13000; whom Cromwel followed, and joining with the new Levies, en­viron'd Worcester with 40000, and on the third of September utterly defeated the Kings Army: Here Duke Hamilton, brother of him that was beheaded, was slain.

What became of the King?

Night coming on before the City was quite taken, he left it, being dark, and none of the Enemies Horse within the Town to fol­low him; the plundering Foot having kept the Gates shut, lest the Horse should enter, and have a share of the Booty: The King before morning got into Warwickshire, 25 Miles from Worcester, and there lay disguised a while, and afterwards went up and down in great danger of being discovered, till at last he got over in­to France from Brighthempstead in Sussex.

When Cromwel was gone what was farther done in Scotland.

Lieutenant Gen. Monk whom Cromwel left there with 7000 took Sterling, August the 14th, by surrender; and Dundee the third of September by Storm, because it resisted; this the Souldiers [Page 241] plundered, and had good booty, because the Scots for safety had sent thither their most precious Goods from Edinburrough and St. Johnston's; he took likewise by surrender Aberdeen, and the place where the Scotish Ministers first learn'd to play the Fools, St. Andrews; Also in the High­lands Colonel Alured took a knot of Lords and Gentlemen, viz. four Earls, and four Lords, and above twenty Knights and Gentlemen, whom he sent Prisoners into England, so that there was nothing more to be fear'd from Scot­land: all the trouble of the Rump was to resolve what they should do with it, at last they resolv'd to Unite and Incorporate it into a Common-wealth with England and Ireland, and to that end sent thither St. Johns, Vane, and other Com­missioners, to offer them this Union by publique Declaration, and to warn them to chuse their Deputies of Shires, and Burgesses of Towns, and send them to Westminster.

This was a great favour.

I think so; and yet it was by many of the Scots, especially by the Ministers and other Pres­byterians refused: the Ministers had given way to the Levying of Mony for the payment of the English Souldiers, but to comply with the Decla­ration of English Commissioners they absolutely forbad.

Methinks this Contributing to the Pay of their Conquerors was some mark of Servitude, where entring into the Union made them Free, and gave them equal Priviledge with the English.

The cause why they refused the Union, ren­dered by the Presbyterians themselves, was this, That it drew with it a subordination of the Church to the Civil State in the things of Christ.

This is a down-right Declaration to all Kings and Common-wealths in general, that a Presbyterian Minister will be a true Subject to none of them in the things of Christ, which things what they are they will be Judges them­selves: what then have we gotten by our Delive­rance from the Popes Tyranny, if these pretty Men succeed in the place of it, that have nothing in them that can be beneficial to the Publique, except their silence? for their Learning, it a­mounts to no more than an imperfect knowledge of Greek and Latin, and acquired readiness in the Scripture Language, with a Gesture and Tone suitable thereunto: but of Justice and Charity (the Manners of Religion) they have neither Knowledge nor Practice, as is manifest by the Stories I have already told you: nor do they distinguish between the Godly and Ungodly, but by Conformity of Design in Men of Judg­ment: or by Repetition of their Sermons in the Common sort of People.

But this fullenness of the Scots was to no purpose, for they at Westminster Enacted the U­nion of the two Nations, and the Abolition of Monarchy in Scotland, and ordained Punishment for those that should transgress the Act.

What other business did the Rump this year?

They sent St. Johns and Strickland Ambas­sadors to the Hague, to offer League to the United Provinces, who had Audience March the third: St. Johns in a Speech shewed those States what advantage they might have by this League, in their Trade and Navigations, by the use of the English Ports and Harbors; the Dutch, though they shewed no great forwardness in the business, yet appointed Commissioners to Treat with them about it, but the People were generally against it, calling the Ambassadors and their Followers (as they were) Traytors and Murderers, and made such Tumults about their House, that their Fol­lowers durst not go abroad till the States had quieted them: the Rump advertis'd hereof, pre­sently recall'd them; the Complement which St. Johns gave to the Commissioners, at their taking leave, is worth your hearing; You have (said he) an Eye upon the Event of the Affairs of Scotland, and therefore do refuse the Friendship we have offered now. I can assure you many in the Par­liament were of Opinion that we should not have sent any Ambassadors to you, till we had ex­pected your Ambassadors to us: I now perceive our Error, and that those Gentlemen were in the right: In a short time you shall see that Busi­ness ended, when it shall perplex you that you have refus'd our Proffer.

S. Johns was not sure that the Scotish bu­siness would end as it did; for though the Scots were beaten at Dunbar, he could not be sure of the Event of their entering of England, which happened afterward.

But he guess'd well; for within a Month after the Battel at Worcester, an Act passed, for­bidding the importing of Merchandize in o­ther than English Ships: The English also molest­ed their Fishing upon our Coast: They also ma­ny times searched their Ships (upon occasion of our War with France) and made some of them Prize: and then the Dutch sent their Ambassa­dours hither, to desire what they before refus'd; but partly also to inform themselves what Na­val Forces the English had ready, and how the people were contented with the Government.

How sped they?

The Rump shewed now as little desire of Agreement, as the Dutch did then, standing up­on terms never likely to be granted. First, For the Fishing on the English Coast, that they should not have it without paying for it. Secondly, That the English should have free Trade from Middleburgh to Antwerp, as they had before their Rebellion against the King of Spain. Third­ly, They demanded amends for the old (but never-to-be-forgotten) business of Amboyna; so that the War was already certain, though the Season kept them from Action till the Spring following. The true Quarrel on the English part was, that their proffer'd Friendship was scorn'd, and their Ambassadours affronted: On the Dutch part, was their greediness to Ingross all Traffick, and a false Estimate of our and their own Strength. Whilst these things were doing, the Reliques of the War, both in Ireland and [Page 245] Scotland, were not neglected, though these Na­tions were not fully pacified till two years after: The Persecution of Royalists also still con­tinued, among whom was beheaded one M. Love, for holding Correspondence with the King.

I had thought Presbyterian Ministers, whilst they are such, could not be Royalists, because they think their Assembly have the Supreme Power in the things of Christ; and by conse­quence they are in England by a Statute Tray­tors.

You may think so still; for though I called Mr. Love a Royalist, I meant it only for that one act for which he was condemned. It was he, who, during the Treaty at Uxbridge, preach­ing before the Commissioners there, said, It was as possible for Heaven and Hell, as for the King and Parliament to agree. Both he and the rest of the Presbyterians are and were Enemies to the Kings Enemies, Cromwel and his Phanaticks, for their own, not for the Kings sake: Their Loy­alty was like that of Sir John Hotham, that kept the King out of Hull, and afterwards would have betrayed the same to the Marquess of New­castle. These Presbyterians therefore cannot be rightly called Loyal, but rather doubly per­fidious; unless you think that as two Negatives make an Affirmative, so two Treasons make Loyalty.

This Year also were reduced to the obedience of the Rump, the Islands of Scilly and Man, and the Barbado's, and St. Christophers. One thing [Page 246] fell out that they liked not, which was that Cromwel gave them warning to determine their sitting according to the Bill for Triennial Par­liaments.

That I think was harsh.

In the year 1652. May 14. began the Dutch War in this manner, three Dutch Men of War, with divers Merchants from the Straights, be­ing discovered by one Captain Young, who com­manded some English Frigats, the said Young sent to their Admiral to bid him strike his Flag (a thing usually done in acknowledgment of the English Dominion in the Narrow Seas) which accordingly he did. Then came up the Vice-Admiral, and being called so as the other was to take down his Flag, he answered plainly he would not; but after the exchange of four or five Broadsides, and mischief done on either part, he took it down; but Captain Young de­manded also either the Vice-Admiral himself, or his Ship, to make satisfaction for the dam­mage already sustained. To which the Vice-Admiral answered, that he had taken in his Flag, but would defend himself and his Ship: where­upon Captain Young consulting with the Cap­tains of his other Ships, lest the beginning of the War in this time of Treaty should be charg­ed upon himself, and night also coming on, thought fit to proceed no farther.

The War certainly began at this time; but who began it?

The Dominion of the Sea belonging to [Page 247] the English, there can be no question but the Dutch began it; and that the said Dominion be­longed to the English, it was confest at first by the Admiral himself peaceably, and at last by the Vice-Admiral, taking in their Flags.

About a Fortnight after there happened ano­ther Fight upon the like occasion, upon Tromp with 42 Men of War, who came back to the back of Godwin-Sands (Major Bourn being then with a few of the Parliament's Ships in the Downs, and Blake with the rest farther West­ward) and sent two Captains of his to Bourn to excuse his coming thither: To whom Bourn returned this answer, that the Message was ci­vil, but that it might appear real, he ought to depart. So Tromp departed, meaning (now Bourn was satisfied) to sail towards Blake, and he did so; but so did also Bourn, for fear of the worst: When Tromp and Blake were near one another, Blake made a shot over Tromp's Ship, as a warning to him to take in his Flag: This he did thrice, and then Tromp gave him a Broad-side, and so began the Fight (at the be­ginning whereof Bourn came in) and lasted from two a Clock till night, the English having the better, and the Flag as before making the quarrel.

What need is there, when both Nations were heartily resolved to fight, to stand so much upon this Complement of who should be­gin? For as to the gaining of Friends and Con­federates thereby, I think 'tis in vain; seeing [Page 248] Princes and States, on such occasions, look not much upon the Justice of their Neighbours, but upon their own concernment in the Event.

It is commonly so: but in this case the Dutch knowing the Dominion of the Narrow Seas, to be a gallant Title, and envied by all the Nations that reach the Shore, and conse­quently that they were likely to oppose it, did wisely enough in making this point the state of the quarrel.

After this Fight the Dutch Ambassadors resi­ding in England, sent a Paper to the Council of State, wherein they stiled this last Encounter a rash action, and affirmed it was done without the knowledge, and against the will of their Lords, the States General, and desired them that nothing might be done upon it in heat, which might become irreparable. The Parlia­ment hereupon voted, First, That the States Ge­neral should pay the Charges they were at, and for the Dammages they sustained upon this oc­casion. Secondly, That this being paid, there should be a Cessation of all Acts of Hostility, and a mutual Restitution of all Ships and Goods taken. Thirdly, And both these agreed so, that there should be made a League between the two Common-wealths. These Votes were sent to the Dutch Ambassadors, in answer of the said Paper; but with a Preamble setting forth the former kindnesses of England to the Netherlands, and taking notice of their new Fleet of 150 Men of War, without any other [Page 249] apparent Design than the Destruction of the English Fleet.

What answer made the Dutch to this?

None. Tromp sailed presently into Zealand, and Blake with 70 Men of War to the Orkney-Islands, to seize their Busses, and to wait for five Dutch Ships from the East-Indies; and Sir George Ascue, newly return'd from the Barbados, came into the Downs with fifteen Men of War, where he was commanded to stay for a Recruit out of the Thames. Tromp, being recruited to 120 Sail, made account to get in between Sir George Ascue and the Mouth of the River, but was hindred so long by contrary Winds, that the Merchants cal­ling for his Convoy he could stay no longer, and so he went back into Holland, and thence to Ork­ney, where he met with the said five East-India Ships, and sent them home: and then he endea­vour'd to engage with Blake; but a sudden Storm forced him to Sea, and so dissipated his Fleet, that only forty two came home in one Body, the rest singly as well as they could; Blake also came home, but went first to the Coast of Holland, with 900 Prisoners and six Men of War taken, which were part of twelve which he found and took Guarding their Busses. This was the first Bout after the War declar'd.

In August following there hapned a Fight be­tween De Ruiter the Admiral of Zeland, with fifty Men of War, and Sir George Ascue near Plimouth, with forty; wherein Sir George had the better, and might have got an entire Victory, had [Page 250] the whole Fleet ingaged. Whatsoever was the matter, the Rump (though they rewarded him) never more imployed him, after his return, in their Service at Sea: but Voted for the year to come three Generals, Blake that was one alrea­dy, and Dean, and Monk.

About this time Arch-Duke Leopold Besieging Dunkirk, and the French sending a Fleet to re­lieve it, General Blake lighting on the French at Calais, and taking seven of their Ships, was cause of the Towns Surrender.

In September they fought again, De Wit and Ruiter commanding the Dutch, and Blake the English; and the Dutch were again worsted.

Again, in the end of November, Van Tromp with 80 Men of War shewed himself at the back of Godwin-sands, where Blake, though he had with him but 40, adventur'd to fight with him, and had much the worst, and (night parting the Fray) retir'd into the River of Thames; whilst Van Tromp keeping the Sea, took some inconsi­derable Vessels from the English; and thereupon, (as it is said) with a Childish Vanity, hung out a Broom from his Main Top-Mast, signifying he meant to sweep the Sea of all English Shipping.

After this, in Frebruary, the Dutch with Van Tromp, were encountred by the English under Blake and Dean, near Ports-mouth, and had the worst. And these were all the Encounters be­tween them this year in the narrow Seas: they fought also once at Legorn, where the Dutch had the better.

I see no great odds yet on either side, if there were any the English had it.

Nor did either of them e're the more in­cline to Peace, for the Hollanders, after they had sent Ambassadors into Denmark, Sweeden, Poland, and the Hans Towns (whence Tar and Cordage are usually had) to signifie the Declaration of the War, and to get them to their Party, re­called their Ambassadours from England, and the Rump without delay gave them their parting au­dience, without abating a Syllable of their for­mer severe Propositions, and presently to main­tain the War for the next year, laid a Tax upon the People of 120000 l. per Mensem.

What was done in the mean time at home?

Cromwel was now quarrelling (the last and greatest Obstacle to his Design) the Rump, and to that end there came out daily from the Army Petitions, Addresses, Remonstrances, and other such Papers, some of them urging the Rump to dissolve themselves, and make way for another Parliament; to which the Rump unwil­ling to yield, and not daring to refuse, determin'd for the end of their sitting the 5th of Novem­ber, 1654. but Cromwel meant not to stay so long. In the mean time the Army in Ireland was taking Submissions, and granting Transportations of the Irish, and condemning who they pleased in a High Court of Justice erected there for that pur­pose. Among these that were executed was hang'd Sir Phelim Oncale, who first began the Rebellion in Scotland; the English built some Ci­tadels [Page 252] for the bridling that stubborn Nation: and thus ended the year, 1652.

Come we then to the year, 1653.

Cromwel wanted now but one step to the end of his Ambition, and that was, To set his Foot upon the Neck of this Long-Parliament, which he did April the 23th of this present year, 1653. a time very seasonable; for though the Dutch were not master'd, yet they were much weakened, and what with Prizes from the Ene­my, and squeezing the Royal Party, the Trea­sury was pretty full, and the Tax of 120000 l. a Month began to come in, all which was his own in right of the Army: Therefore without any more ado, attended by the Major Generals, Lambert and Harrison, and some other Officers, and as many Souldiers as he thought fit, he went to the Parliament-house and dissolv'd them, turn'd them out, and lock'd up the Doors; and for this Action he was more applauded by the peo­ple, than for any of his Victories in the War, and the Parliament men as much scorn'd and derided.

Now that there was no Parliament, who had the Supreme Power?

If by Power you mean the right to Govern, no body had it; if you mean the Supreme Strength, it was clearly in Cromwel, who was o­beyed as General of all the Forces in England, Scotland, and Ireland.

Did he pretend that for Title?

No, but presently after he intended a Ti­tle, which was this, That he was necessitated for [Page 253] the defence of the Cause, for which at first the Parliament had taken up Arms, (that is to say Rebell'd) to have recourse to extraordinary A­ctions: You know the pretence of the Long-Par­liaments Rebellion was Salus Populi, the safety of the Nation against a dangerous Conspiracy of Papists, and a Malignant Party at home; and that every man is bound, as far as his Power ex­tends, to procure the safety of the whole Na­tion, (which none but the Army were able to do, and the Parliament had hitherto neglected) was it not then the General's Duty to do it? had he not therefore right? for that Law of Salus Po­puli is directed only to those that have Power e­nough to defend the People; that is, to them that have the Supreme Power.

Yes certainly, he had as good a Title as the Long-Parliament, but the Long-Parliament did represent the People, and it seems to me that the Soveraign Power is essentially annexed to the Representative of the People.

Yes, if he that makes a Representative, that is (in the present case) the King, do call them together to receive the Soveraign Power, and he divest himself thereof, otherwise not; nor was ever the lower House of Parliament the Representative of the whole Nation, but of the Commons only; nor had that House the Power to oblige by their Acts, or Ordinances, any Lord or any Priest.

Did Cromwel come in upon the only Title of Salus Populi? For this is a Title very few un­derstand?

His way was to get the Supreme Power conferr'd upon him by Parliament; therefore he call'd Parliament, and gave it the Supreme Power, to the end that they should give it to him again; was not this witty: First therefore he published a Declaration of the Causes why he dissolv'd the Parliament; the sum whereof was, That instead of endeavouring to promote the good of God's people, they endeavour'd (by a Bill then ready to pass) to recruit the House, and perpetuate their own Power. Next he constitu­ted a Council of State of his own Creatures to be the Supreme Authority of England, but no longer than till the next Parliament should be call'd and met: Thirdly he summon'd a hundred forty two Persons, such as he himself or his tru­sty Officers made choice of, the greatest part of whom were instructed what to do, obscure Per­sons, and most of them Phanaticks, though stil'd by Cromwel, men of approv'd Fidelity and Ho­nesty; to these the Council of State surrendred the Supreme Authority; and not long after these Men surrendred it to Cromwel. July the fourth this Parliament met, and chose for their Speaker one Mr. Rous, and called themselves from that time forward the Parliament of England. But Cromwel, for the more surety, constituted also a Council of State, not of such petty Fellows as most of these were, but of himself and of his prin­cipal Officers. These did all the business both publique and private, making Ordinances, and giving Audience to Foreign Ambassadors. But [Page 255] he had now more Enemies than before: Harrison, who was the Head of the Fifth-Monarchy-Men, laying down his Commission, did nothing but a­nimate his party against him, for which after­ward he was Imprisoned. This little Parliament in the mean time were making of Acts so ridicu­lous and displeasing to the People, that it was thought he chose them on purpose to bring all Ruling Parliaments into contempt, and Monar­chy again into Credit.

What Acts were these?

One of them was, That all Marriages should be made by a Justice of Peace, and the Banes asked three several days in the next Mar­ket. None were forbidden to be married by a Minister, but without a Justice of Peace the Mar­riage was to be void: so divers wary Couples (to be sure of one another, howsoever they might repent it afterwards) were married both ways: also they Abrogated the Engagement whereby no man was admitted to sue in any Court of Law, that had not taken it, that is, that had not acknowledged the late Rump.

Neither of these did any hurt to Cromwel.

They were also in Hand with an Act to Cancel all the present Laws, and Law-Books, and to make a new Code more suitable to the Humor of the Fifth-Monarchy-Men, of whom there were many in this Parliament; their Te­nent being; That there ought none to be Sove­raign but King Jesus, nor any to Govern under him but the Saints; but their Authority ended before this Act passed.

What is this to Cromwel?

Nothing yet; but they were likewise upon an Act, now almost ready for the Question; That Parliaments hence forward, one upon the end of another, should be Perpetual.

I understand not this, unless Parliaments can beget one another like Animals, or like the Phoenix.

Why not like the Phoenix? Cannot a Par­liament at the day of their Expiration send out Writs for a new one?

Do you think they would not rather Sum­mon themselves anew, and, to save the labour of coming again to Westminster, sit still where they were? or if they summon the Counties to make new Elections, and then Dissolve them­selves, by what Authority shall the People meet in their County-Courts, there being no Supreme Authority standing?

All they did was absurd: though they knew not that, no nor this, whose Design was upon the Soveraignty; the Contrivers of this Act it seems perceiv'd not, but Cromwel's Party in the House saw it well enough: and therefore as soon as it was laid, there stood up one of the Members and made a Motion, that since the Common-Wealth was like to receive little benefit by their Sitting, they should Dissolve themselves. Harrison and they of his Sect was troubled hereat, and made Speeches against it: but Cromwel's party, of whom the Speaker was one, left the House, and with the Mace before them went to White-Hall, [Page 257] and surrendred their Power to Cromwel that had given it them; and so he got the Soveraignty by an Act of Parliament: and within four days after, (viz.) December 16th. was Installed Pro­tector, and took his Oath to observe certain Rules of Governing engrossed in Parchment, and read before him, the writing was called, The In­strument.

What were the Rules he sware to?

One was to call a Parliament every third year, of which the first was to begin September the third following.

I believe he was a little Superstitious in the Choice, September the third, because it was lucky in 1650 and 1651 at Dunbar and Worcester, but he knew not how lucky the same would be to the whole Nation, in 1658. at White-Hall.

Another was; That no Parliament should be Dissolv'd till it had sitten five Moneths, and those Bills that they then presented to him should be passed within twenty days by him, or else they should pass without him.

A third, That he should have a Council of State of not above twenty one, nor under thir­teen, and that upon the Protectors Death this Council should meet, and before they parted chuse a new Protector. There were many more besides, but not necessary to be inserted.

How went on the War against the Dutch?

The Generals for the English were Blake, and Dean, and Monk; and Van Tromp for the Dutch; between whom was a Battel fought the [Page 258] second of June (which was a Month before the beginning of this little Parliament) wherein the English had the Victory, and drove the Ene­mies into their Harbours, but with the loss of General Dean, slain by a Cannon-shot. This Victory was great enough to make the Dutch send over Ambassadors into England in order to a Treaty. But in the mean time they prepared and put to Sea another Fleet, which likewise in the end of July was defeated by General Monk, who got now a greater Victory than before: And this made the Dutch descend so far, as to buy their Peace with the payment of the Charge of the War, and with the acknowledgment, a­mong other Articles, that the English had the right of the Flag. This Peace was concluded in March, being the end of this year, but not pro­claimed till April; the Money it seems being not paid till then.

The Dutch War being now ended, the Pro­tector sent his youngest Son, Henry, into Ireland, whom also some time after he made Lieutenant there; and sent Monk Lieutenant General into Scotland; to keep those Nations in Obedience. Nothing else worth remembring was done this year at home, saving the discovery of a Plot of Royalists (as was said) upon the life of the Pro­tector, who all this while had intelligence of the Kings Designs from a Traytor in his Court, who afterwards was taken in the manner, and kill'd.

How came he into so much trust with the King?

He was the Son of a Colonel that was slain in the Wars on the late King's side: Be­sides he pretended Employment from the Kings loyal and loving Subjects here, to convey to his Majesty Money, as they from time to time should send him: And to make this credible, Cromwel him­self caused Money to be sent to him. The fol­lowing year 1654. had nothing of War, but was spent in Civil Ordinances, in appointing of Judges, preventing of Plots (for Usurpers are jealous) and in executing of the Kings Friends, and selling their Lands. The third of September, according to the Instrument, the Parliament met; in which there was no House of Lords, and the House of Commons was made as formerly of Knights and Burgesses, but not as formerly two Burgesses of a Burrough, and two Knights for a County; for Burroughs for the most part had but one Burgess, and some Counties six or seven Knights; besides there were twenty Members for Scotland, and as ma­ny for Ireland: So that now Cromwell had no­thing to do, but to shew his Art of Govern­ment upon six Coach-Horses newly presented him, which being as rebellious as himself, threw him out of the Coach-box, and had almost kill'd him.

This Parliament which had seen how Crom­wel handled the two former, the long and the short one, had surely learnt the wit to behave [Page 260] themselves better to him than those had done.

Yes, especially now that Cromwel in his Speech at their first meeting, had expresly for­bidden them to meddle with the Government of a single Person and Parliament, or with the Militia, or with perpetuating of Parlia­ments, or taking away Liberty of Conscience. And he told them also, that every Member of the House, before they sate, must take a Recog­nition of his Power in divers points; where­upon, of above 400 there appear'd not above 200 at first; though afterwards some relenting, there sate about 300 again: Just at their sitting down, he published some Ordinances of his own, bearing date before their meeting, that they might see he took his own Acts to be as valid as theirs. But all this could not make them know themselves, for they proceeded to the debate of every Article of the Recognition.

They should have debated that before they had taken it.

But then they had never been suffered to sit: Cromwell, being informed of their stubborn proceedings, and out of hope of any Supply from them, dissolv'd them.

All that passed besides in this year, was the Excise of the High-Court of Justice upon some Royalists for Plots.

In the Year 1655. the English, to the number of near 10000, landed in Hispaniola in hope of the plunder of the Gold and Silver, whereof they thought there was great abundance in the [Page 261] Town of Santo Domingo; but were well beaten by a few Spaniards, and with the loss of near 1000 Men, went off to Jamaica, and possessed it.

This year also the Royal Party made another Attempt in the West, and proclaimed there King Charles the Second; but few joining with them, and some falling off, they were soon suppressed, and many of the Principal Persons Executed.

In these many Insurrections, the Royalists, tho they meant well, yet they did but dis-service to the King by their impatience. What hope had they to prevail against so great an Army as the Protector had ready? What cause was there to despair of seeing the King's business better done by the Dissention and Ambition of the great Commmanders in that Army, whereof many had the favour to be esteem'd among them as well as Cromwel himself?

That was somewhat incertain: The Pro­tector being frustrated of his hope of Money at Santo Domingo, resolv'd to take from the Royalists the 10th part yearly of their Estates: And to this end chiefly, he divided England into eleven Major-General-Ships, with Commission to every Major-General to make a Roll of the Names of all suspected persons of the King's party, and to receive the 10th part of their E­states within his Precinct: As also to take cau­tion from them not to act against the State, and to reveal all Plots that should come to their knowledge, and to make them engage the like for their Servants: They had Commission also to [Page 262] forbid Horse-races, and concourse of people, and to receive and account for this Decima­tion.

By this the Usurper might easily inform himself of the value of all the Estates in Eng­land, and of the Behaviour and Affection of e­very person of Quality, which has heretofore been taken for very great Tyranny.

The year 1656 was a Parliament-year, by the instrument; between the beginning of this year, and the day of the Parliaments sitting, these Major-Generals resided in several Pro­vinces, behaving themselves most Tyrannically.

Amongst other of their Tyrannies was the awing of Elections, and making themselves, and whom they pleas'd, to be return'd Members for the Parliament, which was also thought a part of Cromwel's Design in their Constitution; for he had need of a giving Parliament, having lately upon a Peace made with the French, drawn upon himself a War with Spain.

This year it was that Captain Stainer set upon the Spanish Plate-fleet, being 8 in number, near Cadiz, whereof he sunk two and took two, there being in one of them two millions of pieces of 8, which amounts to 400000 l. sterling.

This year also it was that James Naylor appear'd at Bristol, and would be taken for Jesus Christ; he wore his Beard forked, and his Hair com­pos'd to the likeness of that in the Volto Santo; and being questioned, would sometimes answer, Thou sayest it. He had also his Disciples that [Page 263] would go by his Horse side to the mid-leg in dirt. Being sent for by the Parliament, he was Sentenced to stand on the Pillory, to have his Tongue bored through, and to be marked in the Fore-head with the Letter B for Blasphemy, and to remain in Bridewell. Lambert, a great Favourite of the Army, endeavour'd to save him, partly because he had been his Souldier, and partly to carry favour with the Sectaries of the Army; for he was now no more in the Pro­tector's Favour, but meditating how he might succeed him in his Power.

About two years before this there appear'd in Cromwel's time a Prophetess much fam'd for her Dreams and Visions, and hearkened to by many, whereof some were Eminent Officers, but she and some of her Complices being imprison'd, we heard no more of her.

I have heard of another, one Lilly, that Prophesied all the time of the Long-Parliament, what did they to him?

His Prophesies were of another kind; he was a Writer of Almanacks, and a Preten­der to a pretended Art of Judicial Astrologie, a meer Cozener to get Maintenance from a Multitude of ignorant people, and no doubt had been call'd in question, if his Prophesies had been any wayes disadvantageous to the Parlia­ment.

I understand not how the Dreams and Prognostications of mad me [...] (for such I take to be all those that foretel future Contingences) [Page 264] can be of any great disadvantage to the Com­mon-Wealth.

Yes, yes: know there is nothing that ren­ders Humane Councils difficult, but the incertain­ty of future time, nor that so well directs men in their deliberations, as the fore-sight of the sequels of their Actions▪ Prophesie, being many times the Principal Cause of the Event foretold. If upon some prediction the people should have been made to believe confidently, That Oliver Cromwel and his Army should be upon a day to come utterly defeated, would not every one have endeavour'd to assist, and to deserve well of the Party that should give him the de­feat: upon this account it was that Fortune-tel­lers and Astrologers were so often banished out of Rome.

The last memorable thing of this year was a Motion made by a Member of the House, an Alderman of London, That the Protector might be petitioned and advised by the House to leave the Title of Protector, and take upon him that of King.

That was indeed a bold Motion, and which would, if prosperous, have put an end to many mens Ambition, and to the licentiousness of the whole Army. I think the Motion was made on purpose to ruine both the Protector himself, and his ambitious Officers.

It may be so. In the year 1657, the first thing the Parliament did was the drawing up his Petition to the Protector, to take upon him [Page 265] the Title or King; as of other Parliaments, so of this, the greatest part had been kept out of the House by force, or else themselves had for­born to sit, and became guilty of setting up this King Oliver, but those few that sate presented their Petition to the Protector.

April the 9th, in the Banquetting house at Whitehall, where Sir Thomas Widdrington, the Speaker, used the first Arguments, and the Pro­tector desired some time to seek God, the Busi­ness being weighty: The next day they sent a Committee to him to receive his answer, which answer being not very clear, they pressed him again for a resolution, to which he made answer in a long Speech that ended in a peremptory Re­fusal, and so retaining still the Title of Protector, he took upon him the Government according to certain Articles contained in the said Petition.

What made him refuse the Title of King?

Because he durst not take it at that time, the Army being addicted to their great Officers, and among their great Officers many hoping to succeed him, and the Succession having been pro­mised to Major General Lambert, would have mutinied against him, he was therefore forced to stay for a more propitious Conjuncture.

What were those Articles?

The most important of them were, first, That he would exercise the Office of chief Ma­gistrate of England, Scotland, and Ireland, under the Title of Protector, and govern the same according to the said Petition and advice; and [Page 266] that he would in his life time name his Succes­sor.

I believe the Scots, when they first Rebell'd, never thought of being Governed absolutely as they were by Oliver Cromwel.

Secondly, That he should call a Parlia­ment every three years at farthest. Thirdly, That those persons which were legally chosen Members should not be secluded without consent of the House. In allowing this Clause, the Pro­tector observed not that the secluded Members of this same Parliament are thereby re-admitted. Fourthly, The Members were qualified. Fifth­ly, The Power of the other House was defin'd. Sixthly, That no Law should be made but by Act of Parliament. Seventhly, That a constant yearly Revenue of a Million of pounds should be setled for the maintenance of the Army and Navy, and 300000 l. for the support of the Government; besides other Temporary sup­plies, as the House of Commons should think sit. Eighthly, That all the Officers of State should be chosen by the Parliament. Ninthly, That the Protector should encourage the Mini­stry. Lastly, That he should cause a profession of Religion to be agreed on and published. There are divers others of less importance. Having signed the Articles, he was presently with great Ceremonies installed a-new.

What needed that, seeing he was still but Protector?

But the Articles of this Petition were not all the same with those of his former Instru­ment; for now there was to be another House; and whereas before his Council was to name his Successors, he had Power now to do it himself; so that he was an absolute Monarch, and might leave the Succession to his Son, if he would; and so successively, or transfer it to whom he pleas'd. The Ceremony being ended, the Par­liament adjourn'd to the 20th of January fol­lowing, and then the other House also sate with their Fellows.

The House of Commons being now full, took little notice of the other House, wherein there were not of 60 persons above nine Lords, but fell a questioning all that their Fellows had done during the time of their Seclusion; whence had follow'd the avoidance of the Power newly pla­ced in the Protector. Therefore going to the house, he made a Speech to them, ending in these words, By the living God I must and do dissolve you.

In this year the English gave the Spaniard ano­ther great Blow at Santa Cruz, not much less than that they had given him the year before at Cadiz.

About the time of the dissolution of this Par­liament the Royalists had another Design against the Protector, which was to make an Insurre­ction in England, the King being then in Flan­ders ready to second them from thence with an Army: But this also was discover'd by Trea­chery, [Page 268] and came to nothing, but the ruine of those that were ingaged in it, whereof many in the beginning of the next year were by a High Court of Justice imprison'd, and some executed. This year also was Major General Lambert put out of all employment, a Man second to none but Oliver in the favour of the Army: but because he expected by that favour, or by promise from the Protector to be his Successor in the Supreme Power, it would have been dangerous to let him have Command in the Army, the Protector having design'd his Successor his Eldest Son Ri­chard.

In the year 1658. September the third, the Pro­tector died at White-Hall, having ever since his last Establishment been perplexed with fear of being kill'd by some desperate attempts of the Royalists.

Being importun'd in his sickness by his Privy Council to name his Successor, he nam'd his Son Richard; who incouraged thereunto, not by his own Ambition, but by Fleetwood, Desborough, Thurloe, and other of his Council, was content to take it upon him; and presently Addresses were made to him from the Armies, in England, Scotland, and Ireland: His first business was, the chargeable and splendid Funeral of his Fa­ther.

Thus was Richard Cromwel seated in the Impe­rial Throne of England, Scotland, and Ireland, Successor to his Father, lifted up to it by the Offi­cers of the Army then in Town, and congratula­ted [Page 269] by all the parts of the Army throughout the three Nations, scarce any Garrison omitting their particular flattering Addresses to him.

Seeing the Army approv'd of him, how came he so soon cast off?

The Army was inconstant, he himself irreso­lute, and without any Millitary Glory; and though the two principal Officers had a near relation to him, yet neither of them, but Lam­bert, was the great Fovorite of the Army, and by courting Fleetwood to take upon him the Prote­ctorship, and by [...]ampering with the Souldiers, had gotten again to be a Colonel; he and the rest of the Officers had a Council at Wallingfod House (where Fleetwood dwelt) for the dispossessing of Richard, though they had not yet considered how the Nations should be govern'd afterwards. For from the beginning of Rebellion the method of Ambition was constantly this, first to destroy, and then to consider what they should set up.

Could not the Protector, who kept his Court at White-Hall, discover what the busi­ness of the Officers was at Wallingford House, so near him?

Yes: He was by divers of his Friends in­form'd of it, and counsell'd by some of them, who would have done it, to kill the chief of them, but he had not courage enough to give them such a Commission: he took therefore the counsel of some milder persons, which was to call a Parliament, whereupon Writs were present­ly sent out to those that were in the last Parlia­ment [Page 270] of the other House, and other Writs to the Sheriffs for the Election of Knights and Bur­gesses to Assemble on the twenty seventh of Ja­nuary following. Elections were made according to the antient manner, and a House of Commons now of the right English Temper, and about four hundred in number, including twenty for Scot­land, as many for Ireland; being met, they take themselves, without the Protector and other House, to be a Parliament; and to have the Su­preme Power of the three Nations. For the first business they intended the Power of that other House; but because the Protector had recom­mended to them for their first Business an Act (already drawn up) for the Recognition of his Protectoral Power, they began with that, and Voted (after a fortnights deliberation) that an Act should be made, whereof this Act of Recog­nition should be part, and that another part should be for the bounding of the Protectors Power, and for the securing the Priviledges of Parliament and Liberties of the Subject, and that all should pass together.

Why did these Men own the Protector at first in meeting upon his only Summons; was not that as full a Recognition of his Power as was needful? why, by this example, did they teach the People that he was to be obeyed, and then by putting Laws upon him teach them that he was not? was it not the Protector that made the Parliament? why did they not acknowledge their Maker?

I believe it is the desire of most men to bear Rule, but few of them know what title one has to it more than another, besides the right of the Sword.

If they acknowledged the right of the Sword, they were neither just nor wise to oppose the present Government, set up and approved by all the Forces of the three Kingdoms. The Prin­ciples of this House of Commons were no doubt the very same with theirs, who began the Re­bellion, and would (if they could have raised a sufficient Army) have done the same against the Protector: and the General of their Army would in like manner have reduced them to a Rump; for they that keep an Army and cannot master it, must be subject to it, as much as he that keeps a Lion in his house. The temper of all the Par­liaments since the time of Queen Elizabeth have been the same with the temper of this Parlia­ment, and shall always be such as long as the Presbyterians, and Men of Democratical Princi­ples have the like influence upon Elections.

After they resolv'd concerning the other House, That during this Parliament they would transact with it, but without intrenching upon the Right of the Peers to have Writs sent to them in all future Parliaments. These Votes being pas­sed they proceed to another, wherein they as­sume to themselves the power of the Militia; also to shew their Supreme Power, they deliver'd out of Prison some of those that had been (they said) illegally committed by the former Prote­ctor. [Page 282] Other points concerning Civil Rights, and concerning Religion, very pleasing to the Peo­ple were now also under consideration; so that in the end of this year the Protector was no less jealous of the Parliament than of the Council of Officers at Wallingford House.

Thus 'tis when ignorant men will under­take Reformation: There are three Parties, the Protector, the Parliament, and the Army; the Protector against the Parliament and Army, the Parliament against the Army, and Protector; and the Army against the Protector and Parliament.

In the beginning of 1659. the Parliament passed divers other Acts, one was to forbid the Meetings in Council of the Army Officers, with­out Order from the Protector and both Houses. Another that no man shall have any Command or Trust in the Army, who did not first under his Hand engage himself never to interrupt any of the Members, but that they might freely Meet and Debate in the House. And to please the Souldiers, they Voted to take presently into their consideration the means of paying them their Arrears: But whilst they were considering this, the Protector (according to the first of those Acts) forbad the meeting of Officers at Walling­ford-House. This made the Government, which by the disagreement of the Protector and Army, was already loose, to fall in pieces. For the Of­ficers, from Wallingford-House, with Souldiers e­nough, came to White-Hall, and brought with them a Commission ready drawn (giving power [Page 283] to Desborough to Dissolve the Parliament) for the Protector to sign; which also, his heart and his party fai [...]ing him, he signed. The Parliament nevertheless continued sitting; but at the end of the week the House Adjourned, till the Mon­day after, being April the twenty fifth. At their coming on Monday morning they found the Door shut up, and the passages to the House fill'd with Souldiers, who plainly told them they must sit no longer. Richard's Authority and business in Town being thus at an end, he retir'd into the Coun­try, where within a few days (upon promise of the payment of his Debts, which his Fathers Fu­neral had made great) he signed a Resignation of his Protectorship.

To whom?

To no body. But, after ten days cessation of the Soveraignty, some of the Rumpers that were in Town, together with the old Speaker Mr. William Lenthall, resolv'd among themselves, and with Lambert, Heslerig, and other Officers, who were also Rumpers, in all forty two, to go into the House, which they did, and were by the Army declar'd to be the Parliament. There were also in Westminister-Hall at that time about their private business some few of those whom the Ar­my had secluded 1648. and were called the se­cluded Members. These knowing themselves to have been Elected by the same Authority, and having the same Right to fit, attempted to get into the House, but were kept out by the Soul­diers: The first Vote of the Rump, reseated, was, [Page 274] That such persons as heretofore Members of this Parliament have not sitten since the year 1648. shall not sit in this House till farther Order of the Parliament: And thus the Rump recover'd their Authority May the seventh 1659. which they lost in April 1653.

Seeing there have been so many shiftings of the Supreme Authority, I pray you, for me­mories sake repeat them briefly in time and or­der.

First from 1640 to 1648. when the King was murthered, the Soveraignty was disputed between King Charles the First, and the Presby­terian Parliament: Secondly, From 1648. to 1653. The Power was in that part of the Parlia­ment which voted the Tryel of the King, and declar'd themselves, without King or House of Lords, to have the Supreme Authority of Eng­land and Ireland. For there were in the Long-Parliament two Factions, the Presbyterian and In­dependents. The former whereof sought only subjection of the King, nor his destruction direct­ly; the latter sought his destruction: and this part is it which was called the Rump. Thirdly, From April the twentieth to July the fourth, the Supreme Power was in the Hands of a Council of State constituted by Cromwel. Fourthly, From July the fourth to December the twelfth of the same year it was in the Hands of Men called unto it by Cromwel, whom he termed men of Fidelity and Integrity, and made them a Parliament, which was called in contempt one of the Mem­bers, [Page 275] Barebone's Parliament. Fifthly, From De­cember the twelfth 1653 to September the third 1658. it was in the hands of Oliver Cromwel, with the Title of Protector. Sixthly, From September 1658 to April the twenty fifth 1659. Richard Cromwel had it as Successor to his Father. Se­venthly, From April the twenty fifth 1659 to May the seventh of the same year it was no where. Eighthly, From May the seventh 1659. the Rump, which was turn'd out of Door 1653. recovered it again, and shall lose it again to the Committee of Safety, and again recover it, and again lose it to the right Owner.

By whom and by what Art came the Rump to be turn'd out the second time?

One would think them safe enough, the Army in Scotland, which when it was in London, had helped Oliver to pull down the Rump, sub­mitted now, beg'd pardon, and promis'd Obe­dience. The Souldiers in Town had their pay mended; and the Commanders every where took the old Engagement, whereby they had acknow­ledged their Authority heretofore; they also received their Commissions in the House it self from the Speaker, who was Generalissimo, Fleet­wood was made Lieutenant-General, with such and so many limitations as were thought necessa­ry by the Rump, that remembred how they had been serv'd by their General Oliver: Also Hen­ry Cromwel, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, having resign'd his Commission by Command, return'd into England.

[Page 286] But Lambert, to whom (as was said) Oliver had promis'd the succession, and as well as the Rump knew the way to the Protectorship by Olivers own foot-steps, was resolv'd to proceed in it upon the first opportunity, which presented it self presently after.

Besides some Plots of Royalists, whom after the old fashion they again persecuted, there was an Insurrection made against them by Presbyteri­ans in Cheshire, headed by Sir George Booth, one of the secluded Members, they were in number about three thousand, and their pretence was for a Free-Parliament: There was a great talk of another Rising or endeavour to Rise in Devonshire and Cornwal at the same time: To suppress Sir George Booth, the Rump sent down more then a sufficient Army under Lambert, which quickly de­feated the Cheshire party, and recover'd Chester, Leverpool, and all the other places they had seized; divers of their Commanders in and after the Battel were taken Prisoners, whereof Sir George Booth himself was one.

This exploit done, Lambert, before his re­turn, caressed his Souldiers with an entertain­ment, at his own House in York-shire, and got their consent to a Petition to be made to the House; that a General might be set up in the Army; as being unfit that the Army should be judged by any Power extrinsick to it self.

I do not see that unfitness.

Nor I. But it was (as I have heard) an Acti­on of Sir Henry Vane's: But it so much displeas­ed [Page 287] the Rump, that they Voted; that the hav­ing of more General's in the Army, than were already setled, was unnecessary, burthensome, and dangerous to the Common-Wealth.

This was not Oliver's Method: for though this Cheshire Victory had been as glorious as that of Oliver at Dunbar; yet it was not the Victory that made Oliver General, but the Resignation of Fairfax, and the proffer of it to Cromwel by the Parliament.

But Lambert thought so well of himself, [...] to expect it; therefore at his return to London, he and other Officers assembling at Wallingford-house, drew their Petition into form, and called it a Representation, wherein the Chief point was to have a General; with many other of less Importance that were added; and this they re­presented to the House Octob. the 4th. by Major General Desborough: And this so far forth awed them, as to reach them so much good manners, as to promise to take it presently into Debate, which they did; and Octob. the 12th having re­covered their Spirits, Voted, That the Com­missions of Lambert, Desborough, and others of the Council at Wallingford-house, should be void. Item, That the Army should be govern­ed by a Commission to Fleet-wood, Monk, Hesle­rig, Walton, Morley, and Overton, till February the 12th following; and to make this good a­gainst the Force they expected from Lambert, they ordered Heslerig and Morley to issue War­rants to such Officers as they could trust to bring [Page 278] their Souldiers next Morning into VVestminster, which was done somewhat too late, for Lam­bert had first brought his Souldiers thither, and beset the house, and turn'd back the Speaker which was then coming to it; but Heslerig's Forces, marching about St. James's Park wall, came into St. Margarets Church-yard, and so both Parties looked all day one upon another like Enemies, but offered not to fight; where­by the Rump was put out of possession of the House, and the Officers continued their Meet­ing, as before, at Wallingford-house; there they chose from among themselves, with some few of the City, a Committee, which they called, The Committee of safety, whereof the chief were Lambert and Vane; who, with the advice of a General Council of Officers, had Power to call Delinquents to Tryal; to suppress Rebellions; to treat with Foreign States, &c. You see now the Rump cut off, and the Supreme Power, (which is charged with Salus Populi) transferred to a Council of Officers, and yet Lambert hopes for it in the end: But one of their Limitations was, That they should within six Weeks present to the Army a new Model of the Government; if they had done so, do you think they would have preferr'd Lambert, or any other, to the Supreme Authority rather than themselves?

I think not: when the Rump had put into Commission (among a few others) for the Government of the Army, that is, for the Go­vernment of the three Nations, General Monk, [Page 279] already Commander in chief of the Army in Scotland, and that had done much greater things in this War than Lambert, how durst they leave him out of this Committee of safety? or how could Lambert think that Gen. Monk would for­give it and not endeavor to fasten the Rump again.

They thought not of him, his Gallantry had been shown on remote Stages, Ireland and Scotland; his Ambition had not appeared here in their Contentions for the Government, but he had complyed both with Richard and the Rump. After General Monk had signified by Letter his d [...]slike of the Proceedings of Lambert and his Fellows, they were much surpris'd, and began to think him more considerable than they had done, but it was too late.

Why, was his Army not too small for so great an Enterprize?

The General knew very well his own and their Forces, both what they were then, and how they were to be augmented, and what ge­nerally City and Country wished for, which was the Restitution of the King; which to bring about, there needed no more but to come with his Army (though not very great) to London, to the doing whereof there was no obstacle but the Army with Lambert. What could he do in this Case? If he had declar'd presently for the King, or for a free Parliament, all the Armies in England would have joyned against him, and, assuming the Title of a Parliament, would have furnished themselves with Money. General [Page 280] Monk, after he had thus quarrelled by his Let­ter with the Council of Officers, he secur'd first those Officers of his own Army which were A­nabaptists, and therefore not to be trusted, and put others into their places; then drawing his Forces together, march'd to Berwick. Being there he indicted a Convention of the Scots, of whom he desired, That they would take order for the security of the Nation in his absence, and raise some maintenance for his Army in their March. The Convention promised, for the se­curity of the Nation, their best endeavour, and rais'd him a sum of Money, not great, but e­nough for his purpose, excusing themselves up­on their present wants. On the other side, the Committee of Safety, with the greatest and best part of their Army, sent Lambert to oppose him; but at the same time, by divers Messages and Mediators, urged him to a Treaty, which he consented to, and sent three Officers to Lon­don to treat with as many of theirs. These six suddenly concluded, without power from the General, upon these Articles; That the King be excluded, a Free State setled, the Ministry and Universities incouraged, with divers which the General liked not, and imprison'd one of his Commissioners for exceeding his Commission; whereupon another Treaty was agreed on, of five to five: but whilst these Treaties were in hand, Haslerig, a Member of the Rump, seized on Portsmouth; and the Souldiers sent by the Committee of Safety to reduce it, instead of [Page 281] that entred into the Town, and joyned with Ha­slerig. Secondly, The City renewed their Tu­mults for a Free Parliament. Thirdly, The Lord Fairfax, a Member also of the Rump, and greatly favour'd in Yorkshire, was raising Forces there behind Lambert; who being now between two Armies, his Enemies, would glad­ly have fought the General. Fourthly, there came news that Devonshire and Cornwal were listing of Souldiers. Lastly, Lambert's Army wanting Money, and sure they should not be furnished from the Council of Officers, which had neither Authority nor Strength to levy Mo­ney, grew discontented, and for their Free-Quarter were odious to the Northern Countries.

I wonder why the Scots were so ready to furnish General Monk with Money, for they were no Friends to the Rump.

I know not; but I believe the Scots would have parted with a greater sum, rather than the English should not have gone together by the Ears among themselves. The Council of Officers being now beset with so many Enemies, produ­ced speedily their Model of Government, which was to have a free Parliament, which should meet December the fifteenth, but with such Qualificati­ons of no King, no House of Lords, as made the City more angry than before. To send Soul­diers into the West, to suppress those that were rising there, they durst not, for fear of the City; nor could they raise any other, for want of Mo­ney; there remain'd nothing but to break, and [Page 282] quitting Wallingford-House, to shift for them­selves. This coming to the knowledge of their Army in the North, they deserted Lambert; and the Rumpers the 26th of December re-possessed the House.

Seeing the Rump was now re-seated, the business pretended by General Monk for his marching to London was at an end.

The Rump, though seated, was not well setled; but (in the midst of so many Tumults for a free Parliament) had as much need of the General's coming up now, as before: He there­fore sent them word, that because he thought them not yet secure enough, he would come up to London with his Army; which they not only accepted of, but entreated him so to do, and vo­ted him for his service 1000 l. a year.

The General marching towards London, the Country every where Petition'd him for a free Parliament. The Rump to make room in Lon­don for his Army, dislodged their own; the Ge­neral, for all that, had not let fall a word in all this time, that could be taken for a Declaration of his Final Design.

How did the Rump revenge themselves on Lambert?

They never troubled him: nor do I know any cause of their so gentle dealing with him; but certainly Lambert was the ablest of any Offi­cer they had to do them service, when they should have means and need to imploy him. Af­ter the General was come to London, the Rump [Page 283] sent to the City for their part of a Tax of 100000 l. a Month for six Months, according to an Act which the Rump had made formerly be­fore their Disseism by the Committee of Safety: But the City, who were averse to the Rump, and keen upon a free Parliament, could not be brought to give their Money to their Enemies, and to purposes repugnant to their own; where­upon the Rump sent Order to the General to break down the City Gates, and their Portculli­ces, and to imprison certain obstinate Citizens: This he perform'd, and it was the last service he did them.

About this time the Commission by which Ge­neral Monk with others had the Government of the Army put into their hands by the Rump, be­fore the Usurpation of the Council of Officers, came to expire, which the present Rump renewed.

He was thereby the sixth part of the Ge­neral of the whole Forces of the Common-wealth; if I had been as the Rump, he should have been sole General. In such cases as this, there cannot be a greater Vice than pinching: Ambition should be liberal.

After the pulling down of the City Gates, the General sent a Letter to the Rump, to let them know that this service was much against his Nature; and to put them in mind, how well the City had serv'd the Parliament in the whole War.

Yes; but for the City the Parliament could never have made the War, nor the Rump ever have murdered the King.

The Rump considered not the Merit of the City, nor the good nature of the General, they were busie, they were giving out Commissions, making of Acts for Abjuration of the King and his Line, and for the Old Engagement, and con­ferring with the City to get Money. The Gene­ral also desir'd to hear Conference between some of the Rump, and some of the secluded Members, concerning the Justice of their Se­clusion, and of the hurt that could follow upon their re-admission, and it was granted. After long Conference, the General finding the Rumps pretences unreasonable and ambitious, declar'd himself with the City for a free Parliament, and came to Westminster with the secluded Members, (whom he had appointed to meet and stay for him at White-Hall) and re-placed them in the House among the Rumpers; so that now the same Cattle that were in the House of Commons in 1640. (except those that were dead, and those that went from them to the late King at Oxford) are all there again.

But this methinks was no good service to the King, unless they had learnt better Princi­ples.

They had learnt nothing; the major part was now again Presbyterian. 'Tis true, they were so grateful to General Monk, as to make him General of all the Forces in the three Nations: They did well also to make void the Engagement; but it was because those Acts were made to the prejudice of their Party, but recalled none of [Page 285] their own Rebellious Ordinances, nor did any thing in order to the good of the present King; but on the contrary, they declar'd by a Vote, that the late King began the War against his two Houses.

The two Houses, considered as two Per­sons, were they not two of the Kings Subjects? If a King raise an Army against his Subject, is it lawful for the Subject to resist with force, when (as in this case) he might have had Peace upon his submission.

They knew they had acted vilely and sottishly; but because they had always so greater than ordinary wisdom and godliness, they were loth to confess it: The Presbyterians now saw their time to make a Confession of their Faith, and presented it to the House of Com­mons, to shew they had not changed their Prin­ciples; which (after six Readings in the House) was voted to be printed, and once a year to be read publickly in every Church.

I say again, this re-establishing of the Long Parliament was no good service to the King.

Have a little patience: they were re-esta­blished with two Conditions; one to determine their sitting before the end of March, another to send out Writs before their rising for new E­lections.

That qualifies.

That brought in the King; for few of the Long-Par­liament (the Country having felt the smart of their former service) could get themselves chosen again. This new Par­liament [Page 286] began to sit April the 25. 1660. How soon these called in the King, with what Joy and Triumph he was re­ceiv'd▪ how earnestly his Majesty pressed the Parliament for the Act of Oblivion, and how few were excepted out of it, you know as well as I.

But I have not yet observ'd in the Presbyterians a­ny Oblivion of their former principles, we are but return'd to the state we were in at the beginning of the Sedition.

Not so; for before that time, though the Kings of England had the right of the Militia in vertue of the Sove­raignty, and without dispute, and without any particular Act of Parliament directly to the purpose; yet now after this bloody dispute, the next, which is the present Parlia­ment, in proper and express terms hath declar'd the same to be the Right of the King only, without either of his Houses of Parliament; which Act is more instructive to the peo­ple, than any Arguments drawn from the Title of Sove­raignty, and consequently fitter to disarm the Ambition of all seditious Haranguers for the time to come.

Pray God it be so; howsoever I must confe [...] that this Parliament has done all that a Parliament can do for the se­curity of our peace; which I think also would be enough, if our Preachers would take heed of instilling evil Principles into their Auditory. I have seen in this Revolution a cir­cular motion of the Soveraign Power, [...]through two Usur­pers, from the late King, to this his Son; for (leaving out the power of the Council of Officers, which was but tem­porary, and no otherwise owned by them, but in trust) it moved from King Charles the First to the Long Parliament, from thence to the Rump, from the Rump to Oliver Crom­wel, and then back again from Richard Cromwel to the Rump, thence to the Long Parliament, and thence to King Charles the Second, where long may it remain.

Amen: And may he have, as often as there shall be need, such a General.

You have told me little of the General, till now in the end: but truly, I think, the bringing of his little Army entirely out of Scotland up to London, was the greatest Stratagem that is extant in History.