A DIALOGUE Between a COUNSELLOUR of STATE, And a JUSTICE of PEACE.

NOW Sir, what think you of M. S. Iohns tryall in Star-Chamber? I know that the bruit ranne that he was hardly dealt with­all, because he was imprisoned in the Tower, seeing his disswasion from granting a Benevolence to the King was warranted by the Law.

Surely Sir it was [Page 2] made manifest at the hearing, that M. S. Iohn was rather in love with his own letter; he confessed he had seen your Lordships letter, before hee wrote his to the Major of Marleborough, and in your Lordships letter, there was not a word whereto the Statutes by Mr. Sr. Iohn alleadged, had refe­rence; for those Statutes did con­demn the gathering of money from the subject, under title of a free gift; whereas a fift, a sixt, a tenth, &c. was set down and required. But my good Lord, though divers Shires have given to his Majestie, some more, some lesse, what is this to the Kings debt?

Wee know it well e­nough, but we have many other pro­jects.

It is true my good Lord: but your Lordship will find, that when by these you have drawn many petty summes from the subjects, and those sometimes spent as fast as they are gathered, his Majesty being nothing enabled thereby, when you shall be forced to demand your great aide, the the Countrey will excuse it self in re­gard of their former payments.

What mean you by the great aide?

[Page 3]

I mean the aide of Parlia­ment.

By Parliament, I would fain know the man that durst perswade the King unto it, for if it should suc­ceed ill, in what case were he?

You say well for your self my Lord, and perchance you that are lovers of your selves (under pardon) do follow the advice of the late Duke of Alva, who was ever opposite to all resolutions in businesse of impor­tance; for if the things enterprised succeeded well, the advice never came in question; if ill, (whereto great un­dertakings are commonly subject) he then made his advantage by remem­bring his Countrey Councell: But my good Lord, these reserved Politi­tians are not the best servants, for he that is bound to adventure his life for his Master, is also bound to adventure his advice, Keep not back Councell (saith Ecclesiasticus) When it may do good.

But Sir, I speak it not in other respect then I think it dange­rous for the King to assemble the three estates, for thereby have our for­mer Kings alwayes lost somewhat of their prerogatives. And because that you shall not think that I speak it at ran­dome, [Page 4] I will begin with elder times, wherein the first contention began be­twixt the Kings of this land and their subjects in Parliament.

Your Lordship shall do me a singular favour.

You know that the Kings of England had no formal Parliament till about the 18. year of Hen. the first, for in his 17 year for the marriage of his Daughter, the King raised a tax upon every hide of land by the advice of his privy Councell alone. But you may remember how the subjects soon after the establishment of this Parlia­ment, began to stand upon termes with the King, and drew from him by strong hand and the sword the great Charter.

Your Lordship sayes well, they drew from the King the great Charter by the sword, and hereof the Parliament cannot be accused, but the Lords.

You say well, but it was after the establishment of the Parlia­ment, and by colour of it, that they had so great daring, for before that time they could not endure to hear of Sr. Edwards lawes, but resisted the con­firmation in all they could, although [Page 5] by those lawes the Subjects of this Iland were no lesse free than any of all Europe.

My good Lord, the reason is manifest; for while the Normans and other of the French that followed Conquerour made spoyle of the En­glish, they would not endure that any thing but the will of the Conquerour should stand for Law: but after a di­fcent or two when themselves were become English, and found themselves beaten with their own rods, they then began to favour the difference be­tween subjection and slavery, and in­sist upon the Law, Meum & tuum, and to be able to say unto themselves, hoc sac & vives: yea that the conquering English in Ireland did the like, your Lordship knowes it better than I.

I think you guesse a­right: And to the end the subject may know that being a faithfull servant to his Prince he might enjoy his own life, and paying to his Prince what be­longs to a Soveraigne, the remainder was his own to dispose. Henry the first to content his Vassals gave them the great Charter, and the Charter of Forrests.

What reason then had [Page 6] K. Iohn to deny the confirmation.

He did not, but he on the contrary confirmed both the Charters with additions, & required the Pope whom he had them made his superior to strengthen him with a golden Bul.

But your honour knowes, that it was not long after, that he re­pented himself.

It is rrue, and he had reason so to do for the Barons refused to follow him into France, as they ought to have done, and to say true, this great Charter upon which you in­sist so much, was not originally grant­ed Regally aud freely; for Henry the first did usurpe the Kingdome, and therefore the better to assure himself against Robert his eldest Brother, hee flattered the Nobility and people with those Charters. Yea King Iohn that con­firmed them, had the like respect for Arthur Duke of Britain, was the un­doubted heir of the Crown, upon whom Iohn usurped. And so to con­clude, these Charters had their origi­nall from Kings de facto but not de jure.

But King Iohn confirmed the Charter after the death of his Ne­phew Arthur, when he was then Rex de jure also.

[Page 7]

It is true, for he durst do no other, standing accursed, where­by few or none obeyed him, for his Nobility refused to follow him into Scotland, and he had so grieved the people by pulling down all the Parke pales before harvest, to the end his Deere might spoil the corn; And by seizing the temporalities of so many Bishopricks into his hands, and chief­ly for practising the death of the Duke of Britain his Nephew, as also having lost Normandy to the French, so as the hearts of all men were turn­ed from him.

Nay by your favour my Lord, King Iohn restored K. Edwards Laws after his absolution, and wrote his letters in the 15. of his reigne to all Sheriffes countermanding all for­mer oppressions, yea this he did not­withstanding the Lords refused to follow him into France.

Pardon me, he did not restore King Edwards Lawes then, nor yet confirmed the Charters, but he promised upon his absolution to doe both: but after his return out of France, in his 16. year he denyed it, because without such a promise he had not obtained restitution, his pro­mise [Page 8] being constrained, and not vo­luntary.

But what think you? was hee not bound in honour to performe it.

Certainly no, for it was determined the case of King Francis the first of France, that all promises by him made, whilest he was in the hands of Charles the fift his enemy, were void, by reason the Judge of ho­nour, which tells us he durst doe no other.

But King Iohn was not in prison.

Yet for all that, restraint is imprisonment, yea, fear it self is imprisonment, and the King was sub­ject to both: I know there is nothing more Kingly in a King than the per­formance of his word; but yet of a word freely and voluntarily given. Neither was the Charter of Henry the first so published, that all men might plead it for their advantage but a Charter was left ( in deposito) in the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury for the time, and so to his successours. Stephen Langthon, who was ever a Traytor to the King, produced this Charter, and shewed it to the Barons, [Page 9] thereby encouraging them to make war against the King. Neither was it the old Charter simply the Barons sought to have confirmed, but they presented unto the King other articles and orders, tending to the alteration of the whole commonwealth, which when the King refused to signe, the Barons presently put themselves into the field, and in rebellious and outra­gious fashion sent the King word, ex­cept he confirmed them, they would not desist from making war against him, till he had satisfied them therein. And in conclusion, the King being betrayed of all his Nobility, in effect was forced to grant the Charter of Magna Charta, and Charta de Forestis, at such time as he was invironed with an Army in the Meadowes of Staynes, which harters being procured by force, Pope Innocent afterward disavowed, and threatned to curse the Barons if they submitted not themselves as they ought to their Soveraigne Lord, which when the Lords refused to o­bey, the King entertained an army of strangers for his own defence, where­with having mastered and beaten the Barons, they called in Lewes of France (a most unnaturall resolution) to be [Page 10] their King Neither was Magna Char­ta a Law in the 19. of Henry the 2d. but simply a Charter which hee con­firmed in the 21. of his reigne, and made it a Law in the 25. according to Littletons opinion. Thus much for the beginning of the Great Cbarter, which had first an obscure birth from usur­pation, and was secondly fostered and shewed to the world by rebellion.

I cannot deny but that all your Lordship hath said is true; but seeing the Charters were afterwards so many times confirmed by Parliament and made Lawes, and that there is nothing in them unequall or prejudi­cial to the King, doth not your Ho­nour think it reason they should be observed?

Yes, and observed they are in all that the state of a King can permit, for no man is destroyed but by the Lawes of the land, no man dissei­zed of his inheritance but by the Lawes of the land, imprisoned they are by the prerogative where the King hath cause to suspect their loyalty: for were it otherwise, the King should never come to the knowledge of any conspiracy or Treason against his Per­son or state, and being imprisoned, yet [Page 11] doth not any man suffer death but by the Law of the land.

But may it please your Lordship, were not Cornewallis, Sharpe, and Hoskins imprisoned, being no su­spition of Treason there?

They were; but it cost them nothing.

And what got the King by it? for in the conclusion (besides the murmure of the people) Cornewallis, Sharpe, and Hoskins having greatly overshot themselves, and repented them, a fine of 5 or 600 ^l. was laid on his Majesty for their offences, for so much their diet cost his Majesty.

I know who gave the ad­vice, sure I am that it was none of mine: But thus I say, if you consult your memory, you shall find that those Kings which did in their own times comfirme the Magna Charta, did not onely imprison, but they caused of their Nobility and others to be slain without hearing or tryall,

My good Lord, if you will give me leave to speak freely, I say, that they are not well advised that per­swade the King not to admit the Mag­na Charta with the former reserva­tions. For as the King can never lose [Page 12] a farthing by it as I shall prove anon: So except England were as Naples is, and kept by Garrisons of another Na­tion, it is impossible for a King of En­gland to greaten and inrich himself by any way so assuredly, as by the love of his people: For by one rebellion the King hath more losse then by a hun­dred years observance of Magna Char­ta, For therein have our Kings been forced to compound with Roagues and Rebels, and to pardon them, yea the state of the King, the Mouarchie, the Nobility have been endangered by them.

Well Sir, let that passe, why should not our Kings raise mony as the Kings of France do by their let­ters and Edicts onely? for since the time of Lewes the 11. of whom it is said, that he freed the French Kings of their wardship, the French Kings have seldome assembled the states for any contribution.

I will tell you why: the strength of England doth consist of the people and Yeomanry, the Pefants of France have no courage nor armes: In France every Village and Burrough hath a castle, which the French call Chasteau Villain, every good City hath [Page 13] a good Cittadell, the King hath the Regiments of his guards and his men at armes alwayes in pay; yea the No­bility of France in whom the strength of France consists, doe alwayes assist the King in those leavies, because themselves being free, they made the same leavies upon ther Tennants. But my Lord, if you marke it, France was never free in effect from civill wars, and lately it was endangered either to be conquered by the Spaniard, or to be cantonized by the rebellious French themselves, since that free­dome of Wardship. But my good Lord, to leave this digression, that wherein I would willingly satisfie your Lordship, is, that the Kings of England have never received losse by Parliament, or prejudice.

No Sir, you shall find that the subjects in Parliament have decreed great things to the disadvan­tage and dishonour of our Kings in former times.

My good Lord, to avoid confusion, I will make a short repititi­on of them all, & then your Lordship may object where you see cause; And I doubt not but to give your Lord­ship satisfaction. In the sixt year of [Page 14] Henry the 3d there was no dispute, the house gave the King two shillings of every plough land within England, and in the end of the same year he had escuage payed him (to wit) for every Knights fee two marks in silver. In the fifth year of that King, the Lords demaunded the confirmation of the Great Charter which the Kings Coun­cell for that time present excused, alleadging that those priviledges, were exhorted by force during the Kings Minoritie, and yet the King was pleased to send forth his writ to the Sheriffes of every Countrey, re­quiring them to certifie what those liberties were, and how used, and in exchange of the Lords demaund, be­cause they pressed him so violently, the King required all the castles and places which the Lords held of his, and had held in the time of his Father, with those Manors and Lordships which they had heretofore wrested from the Crown, which at that time (the King being provided of forces) they durst not deny, in the 14 year he had the 15. peny of all goods given him, upon condition to confirme the Great Charter: For by reason of the wars in France, and the losse of Ro­chett, [Page 15] he was them enforced to con­sent to the Lords in all they demand­ed, in the tenth of his reigne he fined the City of London at 50000. marks, because they had received Lewis of France, in the 11. year in the Parlia­ment at Oxford, he revoked the great Charter, being granted when he was under age, and governed by the Earle of Pembroke and the Bishop of Win­chester, in this 11. year the Earles of Cornewall and Chester, Marshall, Ed­ward Earle of Pembroke, Gilbert Earle of Gloucester, Warren, Hereford, Fer­rars, and Warwick, and others rebel­led against the King, and constrained him to yeeld unto them in what they demaunded for their particular in­terest, which rebellion being appeased, he sayled into France, and in his 15. year he had a 15th of the temporali­ty, and a disme and a half of the spi­rituality, and withall escuage of every Knights fee.

But what say you to the Parliament of Westminster in the 16th. of the King, where notwithstanding the wars of France and his great charge in repulsing the Welsh rebels, he was flatly denyed the Subsidy demanded.

I confesse, my Lord, that [Page 16] the house excused themselves by rea­son of their poverty, and the Lords taking of Armes; in the next year it was manifest that the house was prac­tised aganst the King: And was it not so, my good Lord, think you in our two last Parliaments, for in the first even those whom his Majesty trusted most, betrayed him in the union, and in the second there were other of the great ones ran counter. But your Lord­ship spake of dangers of Parliaments, in this, my Lord, there was a deny­all, but there was no danger at all: but to returne where I left, what got the Lords by practizing the house at that time? I say that those that brake this staffe upon the King, were over­turned with the counterbuffe, for he resumed all those lands which he had given in his minority, he called all his exacting officers to accompt, he found them all faulty, he examined the cor­ruption of other Magistrates, and from all these he drew sufficient mo­ney to satisfie his present necessity; whereby he not onely spared his peo­ple, but highly contented them with an act of so great Iustice: Yea Hubert Earle of Kent, the chief Iustice whom he had most trusted, and most advan­ced, [Page 17] was found as false to the King as any one of the rest. And for conclu­sion in the end of that year at the as­sembly of the States at Lambeth, the King had the fortieth part of every mans goods given him freely toward his debts, for the people, who the same year had refused to give the King any thing, when they saw he had squeased those spunges of the Com­mon-wealth, they willingly yeelded to give him satisfaction.

But I pray you what be­came of this Hubert, whom the King had favoured above all men, betraying his Majesty as he did.

There were many that per­swaded the King to put him to death, but he could not be drawn to consent, but the King seized upon his estate which was great; yet in the end he left him a sufficient portion, and gave him his life because he had done great service in former times: For this Ma­jesty, though he tooke advantage of his vice, yet he forgot not to have consideration of his vertue. And upon this occasion it was that the King, be­trayed by those whom he most trust­ed, entertained strangers, and gave them their offices and the charge of [Page 18] his Castles and strong places in En­gland.

But the drawing in of those strangers was the cause that Mar­shall Earle of Pembroke moved war a­gainst the King.

It is true, my good Lord, but he was soon after slain in Ireland, and his whole masculine race, ten yeares extinguished, though there were five Sons of them, and Marshal. being dead, who was the mover and ring-leader of that war, the King par­doned the rest of the Lords that had assisted Marshall.

What reason had the King so to doe?

Because he was perswaded, that they loved his person, and only hated those corrupt Counsellors, that then bare the greatest sway under him, as also because they were the best men of war he had, whom if he destroyed, having war with the French, he had wanted Commanders to have served him.

But what reason had the Lords to take armes?

Because the King enter­tained the Poictovins, were not they the Kings vassals also? Should [Page 19] the Spaniards rebell, because the Spanish King trusts to the Neapolitans, Forta­gues, Millanoies, and other Nations his vassals, seeing those that are go­verned by the Vice-royes and depu­ties, are in policy to be well enter­tained & to be employed, who would otherwise devise how to free them­selves; whereas, being trusted and imployed by their Prince, they enter­tain themselves with the hopes that other the Kings vassals do, if the King had called in the Spaniards, or o­ther Nations, not his Subjects, the Nobilitie of England had reason of grief.

But what people did e­ver serve the King of England more faithfully then the Gascoynes did, even to the last of the conquest of that Duchie?

Your Lordship sayes well, and I am of that opinion, that if it had pleased the Queen of Eng. to have drawn some of the chief of the Irish Nobilitie into Eng. and by exchange to have made them good free-holders in Eng. she had saved above 2. mil­lions of pounds, which were consumed in times of those Rebellions. For what held the great Gascoigne firme to the [Page 20] Crown of England (of whom the Duke of Espernon married the Inheritrix) but his Earldome of Kendall in England, whereof the Duke of Espernon (in right of his Wife) beares the Title to this day? And to the same end I take it, hath Iames our Soveraign Lord given Lands to divers of the Nobilitie of Scotland. And if I were worthy to ad­vise your Lordship, I should think that your Lordship should do the King great service, to put him in mind to prohibite all the Scottish Nation to alienate and sell away their inheri­tance here; for they selling, they not only give cause to the English to com­plain, that the Treasure of England is transported into Scotland, but his Ma­jestie is thereby also frustrated of making both Nations one, and of as­suring the service and obedience of the Scots in future.

You say well for though those of Scotland that are advanced and enriched by the Kings Majesties will, no doubt serve him faithfully, yet how their heires and successors, ha­ving no inheritance to lose in England, may be seduced, is uncertain. But let us go on with our Parliament. And what say you to the denyall, in the [Page 21] 26th. year of his reigne, even when the King was invited to come into France by the Earle of March, who had married his Mother, and who promi­sed to assist the King in the conquest of many places lost?

It is true my good Lord, that a subsidie was then denied, and the reasons are delivered in English Histories, and indeed the King not long before had spent much Treasure in aiding the Duke of Britain to no purpose; for he drew over the King but to draw on good conditions for himself, as the Earle of March his fa­ther in law now did: As the English Barons did invite Lewes of France not long before, as in elder times all the Kings and States had done, and in late years the Leaguers of France enter­tained the Spaniards, and the French Protestants and Netherlands, Queen Elizabeth, not with any purpose to greaten those that aide them, but to purchase to themselves an advanta­geous peace. But what say the Histo­ries to this denyall? They say, with a world of payments there mentioned, that the King had drawn the Nobili­ty drie. And besides, that whereas not long before great summes of mo­ney [Page 22] were given, and the same appoint­ed to be kept in four Castles, and not to be expended but by the advice of the Peeres; it was beleeved, that the same Treasure was yet unspent.

Good Sir you have said enough; judge you whether it were not a dishonour to the King to be so tyed, as not to expend his Treasure but by other mens advice, as it were by their licence.

Surely, my Lord, the King was well advised to take the money upon any condition, and they were fooles that propounded the restraint; for it doth not appear, that the King took any great heed to those overseers: Kings are bound by their pietie, and by no other obligation. In Queen Maries time, when it was thought that she was with Child, it was propounded in Parliament, that the rule of the Realme should be given to King Philip, during the mi­noritie of the hoped Prince or Prin­cesse; and the King offered his as­surance in great summes of money, to relinquish the Government at such time as the Prince or Princesse should be of age: At which motion, when all else were silent in the House, [Page 23] Lord Da [...]res (who was none of the wi­sest) asked who shall sue the Kings Bonds? which ended the dispute, (for what other Bond is between a King and his vassals, then the Bond of the Kings Faith?) But, my good Lord, the King, notwithstanding the denyall at that time, was with gifts from par­ticular persons, and otherwise, sup­plyed for proceeding of his journey for that time into France; he took with him 30 Caskes filled with Silver and Coyne, which was a great Trea­sure in those dayes. And lastly, not­withstanding the first denyall, in the Kings absence he had Escuage grant­ed him (to wit) 20s. of every Knights Fee.

What say you then to the 28th year of that King, in which when the King demanded reliefe, the States would not consent, except the the same former order had bin taken for the appointing of 4 overseers for the treasure: as also that the Lord chief Iustice and the L. Chancelor should be chosen by the States, with some Barons of the Exchequer and o­ther officers.

My good Lord, admit the King had yeelded their demands, [Page 24] then whatsoever had been ordained by those Magistrates to the dislike of the Common-wealth, the people had been without remedie, whereas while the King made them, they had their appeal and other remedies. But those demands vanished, and in the end the King had escuage given him, with­out any of their conditions. It is an excellent vertue in a King to have pa­tience, and to give way to the furie of mens passions. The Whale when he is strucken by the fisherman, growes in­to that furie, that he cannot be re­sisted: but will overthrow all the Ships and Barkes that come into his way; but when he hath tumbled a while, he is drawn to the shore with a twin'd thred.

What say you then to the Parliament in the 29th. of that King?

I say, that the Commons being unable to pay, the King relieves him­self upon the richer sort: and so it like­wise happened in the 33. of that King, in which he was relieved chiefly by the Citie of London. But, my good Lord, in the Parliament in London in the 38th year, he had given him the tenth of all the revenues of the [Page 25] Church for 3 years, and three marks of every Knights Fee throughout the Kingdome, upon his promise and oath upon the observing of Magna Charta, but in the end of the same year, the King being then in France, he was denyed the aides which he re­quired. What is this to the danger of a Parliament? especially at this time they had reason to refuse, they had given so great a summe in the begin­ning of the same year. And again; be­cause it was known that the King had but pretended war with the King of Ca­stile, with whom he had secretly con­tracted an alliance, and concluded a Marriage betwixt his Son Edward and the Lady Elenor. These false fires do but fright Children, and it commonly falls out, that when the cause given is known to be false, the necessitie pre­tended is thought to be fained. Roy­all dealing hath evermore Royall suc­cesse: and as the King was denyed in the eight and thirtieth year, so was he denyed in the nine and thirtieth year, because the Nobilitie and the people saw it plainely, that the K. was abu­sed by the Pope, who as well in de­spite to Manfred bastard Son to the Emperour Frederick the second: as to [Page 26] cozen the King and to waste him, would needes bestow on the King the Kingdome of Sicily; to recover which the King sent all the Treasure he could borrow or scrape to the Pope, and withall gave him letters of cre­dence, for to take up what he could in Italy, the King binding himself for the payment. Now, my good Lord, the wisdome of Princes is seen in no­thing more then in their enterprises. So how unpleasing it was to the State of England to consume the Treasure of the Land, and in the conquest of Sicily so far off, and otherwise, for that the English had lost Normandie un­der their noses, and so many goodly parts of France, of their own proper inheritances: the reason of the de­nyall is as well to be considered as the denyall.

Was not the King also denyed a Subsidie in the fortie first of his reigne?

No, my Lord: for although the King required money as before, for the impossible conquest of Sicily, yet the House offered to give 52000 marks, which whether he refused or accepted, is uncertain: and whilst the King dreamed of Sicily, the Welsh [Page 27] invaded and spoyled the borders of England; for in the Parliament of London, when the King urged the House for the prosecuting the con­quest of Sicily, the Lords utterly di­sliking the attempt, urged the prose­cuting of the Welshmen: which Par­liament being proroged did again as­semble at Oxford, and was called the mad Parliament, which was no other then an assembly of rebels, for the royal assent of the King which gives life to all Lawes, form'd by the three estates, was not a royall assent, when both the King and the Prince were constrained to yeeld to the Lords. A contrained consent is the consent of a Captive and not of a King and there­fore there was nothing done their ei­ther legally or royally. For if it be not properly a Parliament where the sub­ject is not free, certainely it can be none where the King is bound, for all Kingly rule was taken from the King, and twelve Peeres appointed, and as some Writers have it 24. Peeres, to governe the Realme, and therefore the assembly made by Iack Straw and other rebels may aswell be called a Parliament as that of Oxford. Prin­cipis nomen habere, non est esse princeps, [Page 28] for thereby was the K. driven not on­ly to compound all quarrels with the French, but to have meanes to be re­venged on the rebell Lords: but he quitted his right to Normandy, An­jou and Mayne.

But Sir, what needed this extremity, seeing the Lords required but the confirmation of the former Charter, which was not prejudiciall to the King to grant?

Yes my good Lord, but they insulted upon the King, and would not suffer him to enter into his own Castles, they put down the Pur­veyor of the meat for the mainte­nance of his house: as if the King had been a bankrupt, and gave order that without ready money he should not take up a Chicken. And though there is nothing against the royalty of a King in these Charters (the Kings of England being Kings of freemen and not of slaves) yet it is so contrary to the nature of a King to be forced e­ven to those things which may be to his advantage, as the King had some reason to seek the dispensation of his oath from the Pope, and to draw in strangers for his own defence: yea jure salvo coronae nostrae is intended in­clusively [Page 29] in all oathes and promises exacted from a Soveraigne.

But you cannot be igno­rant how dangerous a thing it is to call in other Nations both for the spoil they make, as also, because they have often held the possession of the best places with which they have been trusted.

It is true my good Lord, that there is nothing so dangerous for a King as to be constrained and held as prisoner to his vassals, for by that, Edward the second, and Richard the second lost their Kingdomes and their lives. And for calling in of strangers, was not King Edward the sixth driven to call in strangers against the Rebels in Norfolke, Cornwall, Oxford­shire and elsewhere? Have not the Kings of Scotland been oftentimes constrained to entertain strangers a­gainst the Kings of England: And the King of England at this time had he not bin diverse times assisted by the Kings of Scotland & had bin endanger­ed to have been expelled for ever.

But yet you know those Kings were deposed by Parliament.

Yea my good Lord being Prisoners, being out of possession, and [Page 30] being in their hands that were Princes of the blood and pretenders. It is an old Countrey Proverbe, (that Might overcomes Right) a weak title that weares a strong sword, commonly prevailes against a strong title that weares but a weak one, otherwise Philip the second had never been Duke of Portugal, nor Duke of Millayne, nor King of Naples & Sicily. But good Lord, Errores non sunt trahendi in exem­plum. I speak of regall, peaceable, and lawfull Parliaments. The King at this time was but a King is name, for Glo­cester, Leicester and Chichester made choise of other Nine, to whom the rule of the Realme was committed, and the Prince was forced to purchase his liberty from the Earle of Leicester, by giving for his ransome the Coun­tey Pallatine of Chester. But my Lord let us judge of those occasions by their events what became of this proud Earle? was he not soon after slain in Evesham? was he not left nak­ed in the field, and left a shamfull spectacle, his head being cut off from his shoulders, his privie parts from his body, and laid on each side of his nose? And did not God extinguish his race, after which in a lawfull Par­liament [Page 31] at Westminster (confirmed in a following Parliament of Westmin­ster) were not all the Lords that fol­lowed Leycester disinheried? And when that fool Glocester after the death of Leycester (whom he had for­merly forsaken) made himself the head of a second Rebellion, and cal­led in strangers, for which not long before he had cried out against the King, was not he in the end, after that he had seen the slaughter of so many of the Barons, the spoil of their Ca­stles, and Lordships constrained to submit himself, as all the survivers did, of which they that sped best, payed their fines and ransomes, the King reserving his younger Son, the Earledomes of Leycester and Derby.

Well Sir, we have dispu­ted this King to the grave, though it be true, that he out-lived all his ene­mies, and brought them to confusion, yet those examples did not terrifie their successors, but the Earle Mar­shall, and Hereford, threatned King Edward the first, with a new War.

They did so, but after the death of Hereford, the Earle Mar­shall repented himself, and to gain the Kings favour, he made him heir [Page 32] of all his Lands. But what is this to the Parliament? for there was never King of this land had more given him for the time of his raign, then Edward the Son of Henry the third had.

How doth that appear?

In this sort my good Lord, in this Kings third year he had given him the fifteenth part of all goods. In his sixt year a twentyeth. In his twelfth year a twentyeth, in his fourteenth year he had escuage (to wit) forty shillings of every Knights Fee, in this eighteenth year he had the eleventh part of all moveable goods within the Kingdome, in his nineteenth year the tenth part of all Church livings in England, Scotland and Ireland; for six years, by agreement from the Pope, in his three and twentieth year he raised a taxe upon Wool and fels, and on a day caused all the religious houses to be searched, and all the trea­sure in them to be seized and brought to his coffers, excusing himself by lay­ing the fault upon his Treasurer, he had also in the end of the same year, of all goods of all Burgesses, and of the Commons the 10th part, in the 25th year of the Parliament of St. Ed­mundsbury, he had an 18th part of the [Page 33] goods of the Burgesses, and of the people in generall, the tenth part. He had also the same year by putting the Clergie out of his protection a fifth part of their goods, and in the same year he set a great taxe upon Woolls, to wit, from half a marke to 40s. up­on every sack, whereupon the Earle Marshall, and the Earle of Hereford refusing to attend the King into Flan­ders, pretended the greevances of the people. Put in the end the King ha­ving pardoned them, and confirmed the great Charter, he had the ninth penny of all goods from the Lords and Commons of the Clergie, in the South he had the tenth penny, and in the North the fift penny. In the two and thirtyeth year he had a subsedy freely granted. In the three and thir­tyeth year he confirmed the great Charter of his own Royall disposi­tion, and the states to shew their thankfulnesse, gave the King for one year, the fift part of all the revenues of the land, and of the Citizens the sixt part of their goods. And in the same year the King used the inquisi­tion called Trai le Baston. By which all Justices and other Magistrates were grievously fined that had used extor­tion [Page 34] or bribery, or had otherwise misdemeaned themselves to the great contentation of the people. This Commission likewise did enquire of entruders, barators, and all other the like vermine, whereby the King ga­thered a great masse of treasure with a great deal of love. Now for the whole raigne of this King, who go­verned England 35 years, there was not any Parliament to his prejudice.

But there was taking of armes by Marshall and Hereford.

That's true, but why was that? because the King, notwithstan­ding all that was given him by Parlia­ment, did lay the greatest taxes that ever King did without their consent. But what lost the King by those Lords? one of them gave the King all his lands, the other dyed in disgrace.

But what say you to the Parliament in Edward the Seconds time his successor: did not the house of Parliament banish Peirce Gaveston whom the King favoured?

But what was this Gaveston but an Esquier of Gascoine, formerly banisht the Realme by King Edward the first, for corrupting the Prince Edward, now raigning. And the whole [Page 35] Kingdome fearing and detesting his venemous disposition, they besought his Majestie to cast him off, which the King performed by an act of his own, and not by act of Parliament, yea Gavestones own father in Law, the Earle of Glocester, was one of the chief­est of the Lords that procured it. And yet finding the Kings affection to fol­ow him so strongly, they all consent­ed to have him recalled. After which when his credit so encreased, that he dispised and set at naught all the an­cient Nobility, and not onely per­swaded the King to all manner of outrages and riots, but withall tran­sported what he lifted of the Kings Treasure, and Iewels: the Lords ur­ged his banishment the second time, but neither was the first nor second banishment forced by Act of Parlia­ment, but by the forceable Lords his Enemies. Lastly he being recalled by the King, the Earle of Lancaster caused his head to be stricken off, when those of his party had taken him prisoner. By which presumptuous Act, the Earle and the rest of his company commit­ted Treason and murder: Treason by raising an Army without warrant, murder by taking away the life of the [Page 36] Kings Subject. After which Gaveston being dead, the Spencers got possession of the Kings favour, though the youn­ger of them was placed about the King, by the Lords themselves.

What say you then to the Parliament held at London about the sixt year of that King.

I say that King was not bound to performe the acts of this Parliament, because the Lords being too strong for the King, inforced his consent, for these be the words of our own History. They wrested to much beyond the bounds of reason.

What say you to the Parliaments of the White wands in the 13th of the King.

I say the Lords that were so moved, came with an Army, and by strong hand surprized the King, they constrained, (saith the story) the rest of the Lords and compelled ma­ny of the Bishops to consent unto them, yea it saith further, that the King durst not but grant to all that they required, (to wit) for the banish­ment of the Spencers. Yea they were so insolent that they refused to lodge the Queen comming through Kent in the Castle of Leedes, and sent her to [Page 37] provide her lodging where she could get it so late in the night, for which notwithstanding some that kept her out were soon after taken and hang'd, and therefore your Lordship cannot call this a Parliament for the reasons before alleadged. But my Lord what became of these Lawgivers to the King, even when they were greatest, a Knight of the North called Andrew Herkeley, assembled the Forces of the Countrey, overthrew them and their Army, slew the Earle of Hereford, and other Barons, took their generall Tho­mas Earle of Lancaster, the Kings co­zen germane at that time possessed of five Earledomes, the Lords Clifford, Talbort, Moubray, Maudiut, Willington, Warren, Lord Darcy, Withers, Knevill, Leybourne, Bekes, Lovell, Fitz williams, Watervild, and divers other Barons, Knights and Esquiers, and soon after the Lord Percy, and the Lord Warren took the Lords Baldsemere, and the Lord Audley, the Lord Teis, Gifford, Tucoet, and many others that fled from the battaile, the most of which past under the hands of the hangman, for constraining the King under colour and name of a Parliament. But this your good Lordship may judge, to [Page 38] whom, those tumultuous assemblies (which our Histories, falsely call Par­liaments have been dangerous, the King in the end ever prevailed, and the Lords lost their lives, and estates. After which the Spencers in their ba­nishment at York, in the 15th of the King, were restored to the honors and estates, and therein the King had a subsedy given him the sixt penny of goods throughout England, Ireland, and Wales.

Yet you see the Spencers were soon after dissolved.

It is true my Lord, but that is nothing to our subject of Parlia­ment, they may thank their own inso­lencie, for they branded and dispised the Queen, whom they ought to have honored as the Kings wife; they were also exceeding greedy, and built themselves upon other mens ruines, they were ambitious and exceeding malicious, whereupon that came, that when Chamberlain Spencer was hang'd in Hereford, a part of the 24th Psalm was written over his head: Quid glo­riaris in malitia potens?

Well Sir, you have all this while excused your self upon the strength and rebellions of the Lords, [Page 39] but what say you now to King Edward the third, in whose time (and during the time of this victorious King, no man durst take Armes or rebell) the three estates did him the greatest affront that ever King received or en­dured, therefore I conclude where I began, that these Parliaments are dangerous for a King,

To answer your Lordship in order, may it please you first to call to mind, what was given this great King by his subjects before the dispute betwixt him and the house happened, which was in his latter dayes, from his first year to his fift year, there was nothing given the king by his Subjects, in his eight year at the Parliament at London a tenth and a fifteenth was granted, in his tenth year he ceased upon the Ita­lians goods here in England to his own use, with all the goods of the Monkes Cluniackes and others, of the order of the Cistertians. In the eleaventh year, he had given him by Parliament a notable relief, the one half of the Woolls throughout England, and of the Clergy all their Woolls, after which, in the end of the year he had granted in his Parliament at Westmin­ster, [Page 40] forty shillings upon every sack of Wooll, and for every 30 wooll fels forty shillings, for every last of leatherne, as much, and for all other merchandizes after the same rate. The King promising that this years ga­thering ended, he would thenceforth content himself with the old custome, he had over and above this great aide the eight part of all goods of all Ci­tizens and Burgesses; and of other as of forreigne Merchants, and such as lived not of the gain of breeding of sheep and cattell the fifteenth of their goods. Nay my Lord: this was not all, though more then ever was gran­ted to any King, for the same Parlia­ment bestowed on the King the ninth sheaf of all the corn within the Land, the ninth fleece, and the ninth lambe for two years next following; now what think your Lordship of this Par­liament.

I say they were honest men.

And I say, the people are as loving to their King now, as ever they were, if they be honestly and wisely dealt withall, and so his Maje­sty hath found them in his last two Parliaments, if his Majestie had not [Page 41] been betrayed by those whom he most trusted.

But I pray you Sir, who shall a King trust, if he may not rust those whom he hath so greatly ad­vanced?

I will tell your Lordship whom the King may trust.

Who are they?

His own reason, and his own excellent Iudgement which have not deceived him in any thing, where­in his Majesty hath been pleased to exercise them, Take Councell of thine heart (saith the book of Wisedome) for there is none more faithfull unto thee then it.

It is true, but his Maje­sty found that those wanted no judge­ment whom he trusted, and how could his Majestie divine of their honesties?

Will you pardon me if I speak freely, for if I speak out of love, which (as Solomon saith) covereth all trespasses, The truth is, that his Majestie would never beleeve any man that spake against them, and they knew it well enough, which gave them boldnesse to do what they did.

What was that?

Even, my good Lord, to [Page 42] ruine the Kings estate so far as the state of so great a King may be ruin'd by men ambitious and greedy without proportion. It had been a brave in­crease of revenue, my Lord, to have raysed 50000l. land of the Kings to 20000l. revenue, and to raise the re­venue of wards to 20000l. more 40000l. added to the rest of his Maje­sties estate, had so enabled his Maje­stie, as he could never have wanted. And my good Lord, it had been an honest service to the King, to have added 7000l. lands of the Lord Cob­hams, Woods and goods being worth 30000l. more.

I know not the reason why it was not done.

Neither doth your Lord­ship, perchance know the reason why the 10000l. offer'd by Swinnerton for a fine of the French wines, was by the then Lord Treasurer conferr'd on De­vonshire and his Mistris.

What moved the Trea­surer to reject and crosse that raising of the Kings lands?

The reason, my good Lord is manifest, for had the land been rai­sed, then had the King known when he had given or exchanged land, [Page 43] what he had given or exchanged.

What hurt had been to the Treasurer whose Office is truely to informe the King of the value of all that he giveth?

So he did when it did not concerne himself nor his particular, for he could never admit any one peece of a good Manour to passe in my Lord Aubignes book of 1000l. and, till he himself had bought, and then all the remaining flowers of the Crowne were called out. Now had the Treasurer suffer'd the Kings lands to have been raised, how could his Lordship have made choice of the old [...]ents, as well in that book of my Lord Aubigne, as in exchange of Theobalds, or which he took Hatfield in it, which the greatest subject, or favo­rite Queen Elizabeth had never durst have named unto her by way of gift or exchange. Nay my Lord, so ma­ny other goodly Mannors have pas­sed from his Majestie, as the very heart of the Kingdome mourneth to remember it, and the eyes of the Kingdome shedde teares continually at the beholding it: yea the soul of the Kingdome is heavy unto death with the consideration thereof, that so [Page 44] magnanimous a Prince, should suffer himself to be so abused.

But Sir you know that Cobhams lands were entayled upon his Cofens.

Yea my Lord, but during the lives and races of George Prook his children, it had been the Kings, that is to say, for ever in effect, but to wrest the King, and to draw the in­heritance upon himself, he perswaded his Majestie to relinquish his interest for a pretty summe of mony; and that there might be no counterworking, he sent Prook 6000 l. to make friends whereof Lord Hume had 2000l. back again, Buckhurst and Barwick had the other 4000 l. and the Treasurer and his heires the masse of land forever.

What then I pray you came to the King by this great consi­scation.

My Lord, the Kings Maje­stie by all those goodly possessions, Woods and goods looseth 500l by the year which he giveth in pension to Cobham, to maintain him in prison.

Certainly, even in con­science they should have reserved so much of the land in the Crown, as to [Page 45] have given Cobham meat and apparell, and not made themselves so great gainers, and the King 500l. ( per an­num) looser by the bargain, but it's past: Consilium non est eorum quae fieri nequeunt.

Take the rest of the Sen­tence, my Lord: Sed consilium versa­tur in iis quae sunt in nostra potestate. It is yet, my good Lord, in potestate Re­gis, to right himself. But this is not all my Lord; And I fear me, know­ing your Lordships love to the King, it would put you in a feaver to hear all, I will therefore go on with my Parliaments.

I pray do so, and a­mongst the rest, I pray you what say you to the Parliament holden at Ion­don in the fifteenth year of King Ed­ward the third?

I say there was nothing con­cluded therein to the prejudice of the king. It is true, that a little before the sitting of the house, the King dis­placed his Chancellour and his Trea­surer, and most of all his Iudges and Officers of the Exchequer, and com­mitted many of them to prison, be­cause they did not supply him with money, being beyond the Seas, for [Page 46] the rest, the States assembled, be­sought the King that the Lawes of the two Charters might be observed, and that the great Officers of the Crowne might be chosen by Parliament.

But what successe had these petitions.

The Charters were obser­ved, as before, and so they will be e­ver, and the other petition was re­jected, the King being pleas'd, not­withstanding, that the great Officers, should take an oath in Parliament to do Iustice. Now for the Parliament of Westminster, in the 17th year of the King, the King had three markes and a half for every sack of Wooll, transported; and in his 18th he had a 10th of the Clergie, and a 15th of the Laity for one year. His Majestie forbare after this to charge his Sub­jects with any more payments, untill the 29th of his reigne, when there was given the King by Parliament 50 for every sack of Wool transported for six yeares, by which grant, the King received a thousand markes a day, a greater matter then a thou­sand pounds in these dayes, and a 1000l. a day amounts to 365000l. a year, which was one of the greatest [Page 47] presents that ever was given to a King of this land. For besides the cheape­nesse of all things in that age, the Kings souldiers had but 3d. a day wages, a man at armes 6d. a Knight but 2s. In the Parliament at Westminster, in the 33th year he had 26s. 8d. for e­very sack of Wooll transported, & in the 42th year 3 dismes and 3 fifteens. In his 45th year he had [...]0000l of the Laity, and because the Spiritualty disputed it, and did not pay so much, the King chang'd his Chancellour, Treasurer, & Privy Seal being Bishops, and placed Lay men in their roome.

It seems that in those dayes the Kings were no longer in love with their great Chancellors, then when they deserved well of them.

No my Lord, they were not, and that was the reason they were well served, and it was the cu­stome then, and in many ages after, to change the Treasurer & the Chan­cellour every 3 years, and withall to hear all mens complaints against them.

But by this often change, the saying is verified, that there is no inheritance in the favour of Kings. He that keepeth the figge-tree (saith So­lomon) shall eate the fruit thereof; [Page 48] for reason it is that the servant live by the Master.

My Lord, you say well in both, but had the subject an inheri­tance in the Princes favour, where the Prince hath no inheritance in the Sub­jects fidelity, then were Kings in more unhappy estate then common persons, for the rest, Solomon meaneth not, that he that keepeth the figge tree should surfet, though he meant he should eat, he meant not he should break the branches in gathering the figs, or eat the ripe; and leave the rotten for the owner of the tree; for what saith he in the following chapter, he saith that he that maketh hast to be [...]ich, cannot be innocent. And before that, he saith, that the end of an inheri­tance hastily gotten, cannot be blessed. Your Lordship hath heard of few or none great with Kings, that have not used their power to oppresse, that have not growne insolent and hatefull to the people; yea, insolent towards those Princes that advanced them.

Yet you see that Princes can change their fancies.

Yea my Lord, when favo­rites change their faith, when they forget that how familiar soever Kings [Page 49] make themselves with their Vassals, yet they are Kings: He that provoketh a King to anger (saith Solomon) sinneth against his own soul. And he further saith, that pride goeth before distruction, and a high mind before afall. I say there­fore, that in discharging those Luci­fers, how dear soever they have been, Kings make the world know that they have more of Iudgement then of pas­sion, yea they thereby offer a satis­factory sacrifice to all their people, too great benefits of subjects to their king, where the mind is blown up with their own deservings, and to great benefits of Kings conferr'd up­on their Subjects, where the mind is not qualified with a great deal of mo­desty are equally dangerous. Of this later and insolenter, had King Richard the second delivered up to Iustice but three or four, he had still held the love of the people, and thereby his life and estate.

Well, I pray you go on with your Parliaments.

The life of this great King Edward drawes to an end, so do the Parliaments of this time, wherein 50 years raigne, he never received any affront, for in his 49th year he had a [Page 50] disme and a fifteen granted him free­ly.

But Sir it is an old say­ing, that all is well that ends well, Iudge you whether that in his 50th. year in Parliament at Westminster he received not an affront, when the house urged the King to remove and discharge from his presence the Duke of Lancaster, the Lord Latimer his Chamberlaine, Sir Richard Stur­ry, and others whom the King favour­ed and trusted. Nay, they pressed the King to thrust a certain Lady out of Court, which at that time bare the greatest sway therein.

I will with patience answer your Lordship to the full, and first your Lordship may remember by that which I even now said, that never King had so many gifts as this King had from his subjects, and it hath ne­ver grieved the subjects of England to give to their King, but when they knew there was a devouring Lady, that had her share in all things that passed, and the Duke of Lancaster was as scraping as shee, that the Chan­cellour did eat up the people as fast as either of them both. It grieved the subjects to feed these Cormorants. [Page 51] But my Lord there are two things by which the Kings of England have been prest, (to wit) by their subjects, and by their own necessities. The Lords in former times were farre stronger, more warlike, better followed, living in their Countries, then now they are. Your Lordship may remember in your reading, that there were many Earles could bring into the field a thousand Barbed horses, many a Ba­ron 5. or 600. Barbed horses, where­as now very few of them can furnish twenty fit to serve the King. But to say the truth my Lord, the Iustices of peace in England, have oppos'd the injusticers of war in England, the Kings writ runs over all, and the great Seal of England, with that of the next Constables will serve the turn to affront the greatest Lords in England, that shall move against the King. The force therefore by which our Kings in former times were troubled is vanisht away. But the necessities remain. The people therefore in these later ages, are no lesse to be pleased then the Peeres, for as the later are become lesse, so by reason of the trayning through England, the Commons have all the weapons in their hand.

[Page 52]

And was it not so ever?

No my good Lord; for the Noblemen had in their Armories, to furnish some them a thousand, some two thousand, some three thousand men, whereas now there are not many that can arme fifty.

Can you blame them? But I will onely answer for my self, be­tween you and me be it spoken, I hold it not safe to mantain so great an Armory or Stable, it might cause me, or any other Nobleman to be suspected, as the preparing of some Innovation.

Why so my Lord, rather to be commended as preparing against all danger of Innovation.

It should be so, but call your observation to accompt, and you shall find it as I say, for (indeed) such a jealousie hath been held ever since the time of the Civill wars, over the Military greatness of our Nobles, as made them have little will to bend their studies that wayes: wherefore let every man provide according as he is rated in the Muster Book, you un­derstand me.

Very well my Lord, as what might be replyed in the percei­ving [Page 53] so much; I have ever (to deal plainly and freely with your Lord­ship) more fear'd at home popular violence, then all the forreine that can be made, for it can never be in the power of any forraigne Prince, with­out a Papisticall party, rather to disor­der or endanger his Majesties Estate.

By this it seems, it is no lesse dangerous for a King to leave the power in the people, then in the Nobility.

My good Lord, the wis­dome of our own age, is the foolish­nesse of another, the time present ought not to be preferr'd to the poli­cy that was, but the policy that was, to the time present; so that the power of the Nobility being now withered, and the power of the people in the flower, the care to content them would not be neglected, the way to win them often practized, or at least to defend them from oppression. The motive of all dangers that ever this Monarchy hath undergone, should be carefully heeded, for this Maxime hath no posterne, Potestas humana ra­dicatur in voluntatibus hominum. And now my Lord, for King Edward, it is true, though he were not subject to [Page 54] force, yet was he subject to necessity, which because it was violent, he gave way unto it, Potestas (saith Pithago­ras) juxta necessitatem habitat. And it is true, that at the request of the house he discharged and put from him those before named, which done, he had the greatest gift (but one) that ever he received in all his dayes (to wit) from every person, man and woman, above the age of fourteen years 4d. of old mony, which made many Millions of Groats, worth 61. of our mony. This he had in generall, besides he had of every benificed Priest, 12d. And of the Nobility and Gentry. I know not how much, for it is not set down. Now my good Lord, what lost the King by satisfying the desires of the Parlia­ment house, for assoon as he had the money in purse, he recalled the Lords, and restored them, and who durst call the King to accompt, when the As­sembly were dissolued. Where the word of a King is, there is power (saith Eccle­siasticus) who shall say unto him, what doest thou! saith the same Author, for every purpose there is a time and judgement, the King gave way to the time, and his judgement perswaded him to yeeld to necessity, Consularius [Page 55] nemo melior est quam tempus.

But yet you see the king was forc'd to yeeld to their de­maunds.

Doth your Lordship re­member the saying of Monsier de Lange, that he that hath the profit of the war, hath also the honour of the war, whether it be by battaile or retreate, the King you see had the profit of the Parliament, and therefore the honour also, what other end had the King then to supply his wants. A wise man hath evermore respect unto his ends: and the King also knew that it was the love that the people bare him, that they urged the removing of those Lords, there was no man a­mong them that sought himself in that desire, but they all sought the king, as by the successe it appear­ed. My good Lord, hath it not been ordinary in England and in France to yeeld to the demaunds of rebels, did not King Richard the second graunt pardon to the outragious rogues and murtherers that followed Iack Straw, and Wat T [...]ler, after they had mur­thered his Chancellor, his Trea­surer, Chief Iustice, and others, brake open his Exchequer, and committed [Page 56] all manner of outrages and villanies, and why did he do it, but to avoid a greater danger: I say the Kings have then yeelded to those that hated them and their estates, (to wit) to perni­cious rebels. And yet without disho­nour, shall it be called dishonour for the King to yeeld to honest desires of his subjects. No my Lord, those that tell the King those tales, fear their own dishonour, and not the Kings; for the honour of the King is su­preame, and being guarded by Iustice and piety, it cannot receive neither wound nor stain.

But Sir, what cause have any about our King to fear a Parlia­ment?

The same cause that the Earle of Suffolke had in Richard the se­conds time, and the Treasurer Fartham, with others, for these great Officers being generally hated for abusing both the King and the Subject, at the request of the States were discharged, and others put in their roomes.

And was not this a disho­nour to the King?

Certainly no, for King Richard knew that his Grandfather had done the like, and though the [Page 57] King was in his heart utterly against it, yet had he the profit of this ex­change; for Suffolke was fined at 20000 markes, and 1000l. lands.

Well Sir, we will speak of those that fear the Parliament some other time, but I pray you go on with that, that happened in the troublesome raigne of Richard the se­cond who succeeded, the Grandfather being dead.

That King my good Lord, was one of the most unfortunate Princes that ever England had, he was cruell, extreame prodigall, and wholly carryed away with his two Minions, Suffolk, and the Duke of Ireland, by whose ill advice and others, he was in danger to have lost his estate; which in the end (being led by men of the like temper) he miserably lost. But for his subsedies he had given him in his first year being under age two tenths, and two fifteenes: In which Parliament, Alice Peirce, who was removed in King Edwards time, with Lancaster, Latimer, and Sturry, were confiscate and banished in his second year at the Parliament at Glocester, the King had a marke upon every sack of Wooll, and 6d. the pound upon [Page 58] wards. In his third year at the Parlia­ment at Winchester, the Commons were spared, and a subsedy given by the better sort, the Dukes gave 20 markes, and Earles 6 markes, Bi­shoppes and Abbots with myters six markes, every marke 35. 4d. and every Knight, Iustice, Esquire, Shrieve, Per­son, Vicar, & Chaplaine, paid propor­tionably according to their estates.

This me thinks was no great matter.

It is true my Lord, but a little mony went far in those dayes: I my self once moved it in Parliament in the time of Queen Elizabeth, who desired much to spare the Common people, & I did it by her Commande­ment; but when we cast up the subse­dy Books, we found the summe but small, when the 30l. men were left out. In the beginning of his fourth year, a tenth with a fifteen were grant­ed upon condition, that for one whole year no subsedies should be demand­ed; but this promise was as suddenly forgotten as made, for in the end of that year, the great subsedy of Poll mony was granted in the Parliament at Northampton.

Yea but there followed [Page 59] the terrible Rebellion of Baker, Straw, and others, Leister, Wrais, and others.

That was not the fault of the Parliament my Lord, it is ma­nifest that the subsedy given was not the cause; for it is plain that the bond­men of England began it, because the were girevously prest by their Lords in their tenure of Villenage, as also for the hatred they bate to the Lawyers and Atturneyes: for the sto­ry of those times say, that they de­stroyed the houses and Mannors of men of Law, & such Lawyers as they caught, slew them, and beheaded the Lord chief Iustice, which commotion being once begun, the head mony was by other Rebels pretended: A fire is of­ten kindled with a little straw, which oftentimes takes hold of greater tim­ber, & consumes the whole building: And that this Rebellion was begun by the discontented slaves (whereof there have been many in Elder times the like) is manifest by the Charter of Ma­numission, which the King granted in hec verba, Rich. Dei gratid &c. Sciatis quod de gratiâ nostrâ spirituali manumissi­mus, &c. to which seeing the King was constrained by force of armes, he revoked the letters Pattents, [Page 60] and made them voide, the same re­vocation being strengthened by the Parliament ensuing, in which the King had given him a subsedy upon Woolls, called a Maletot: In the same fourth year was the Lord Treasurer discharged of his Office, and Hales Lord of St. Iohns chosen in his place, in his fift year was the Treasurer a­gain changed, and the Staffe given to Segrave, and the Lord Chancellour was also changed, and the staffe given to the Lord Scroope: Which Lord Scroope was again in the beginning of his sixt year turned off, and the King after that he had for a while kept the Seal in his own hand, gave it to the Bishop of London, from whom it was soon after taken and bestowed on the Earle of Suffolke, who they say had abused the King, and converted the Kings Treasure to his own use. To this the King condiscended, and though (saith Walsingham) he deserved to loose his life and goods, yet he had the fa­vour to go at liberty upon good sure­ties, and because the King was but young, & that the reliefe granted was committed to the trust of the Earle of Arundell for the furnishing of the Kings Navy against the French.

[Page 61]

Yet you see it was a dishonour to the King to have his be­loved Chancellour removed.

Truly no, for the King had both his fine 1000l. lands and asub­sedy to boot. And though for the pre­sent it pleased the King to fancy a man all the world hated (the Kings passion overcomming his judgement) yet it cannot be call'd a dishonour, for the King is to believe the generall coun­sell of the Kingdome, and to preser it before his affection, especially when Suffolke was proved to be false even to the King; for were it otherwise love and affection might be called a frenzie and a madnesse, for it is the nature of humane passions, that the love bred by fidelity, doth change it self into hatred, when the fidelity is first chang­ed into falshood.

But you see there were thirteen Lords chosen in the Parlia­ment, to have the oversight of the government under the King.

No my Lord, it was to have the oversight of those Officers, which (saith the story) had imbezeled, lewdly wasted, and prodigally spent the Kings Treasure, for to the Com­mission to those Lords, or to any six [Page 62] of them, joyn'd with the Kings Coun­sell, was one of the most royall and most profitable that ever he did, if he had bin constant to himself. But my good Lord, man is the cause of his own misery, for I will repeat the sub­stance of the commission granted by the King, and confirmed by Parlia­ment, which, whether it had bin pro­fitable for the King to have prose­cured, your Lordship may judge. The preamble hath these words: Where­as our Sovereigne Lord the King percei­veth by the grievous complaints of the Lords and Commons of this Realme, that the rents, profits, and revenues of this Realme, by the singular and insufficient Councell and evill government, as well of some his late great Officers and others, &c. are so much withdrawen, wasted, given, granted, alienated, destroyed, and evill dispended, that he is so much impo­verished and void of treasure and goods, and the substance of the Crown so much di­minished and destroyed, that his estate may not honorably be sustained as apper­taineth. The King of his free will at the request of the Lords and Commons, hath ordained William Archbishop of Can­terbury and others with his Chancellour, Treasurer, keeper of his privy seal, to [Page 63] survey and examine as well the estate and governance of his house, &c. as of all the rents, and profits, and revenues that to him appertaineth, and to be due, or ought to appertain and be due, &c. And all manner of gifts, grants, alienations and confirma­tions made by him of lands, tenements, rents, &c. bargained and sold to the pre­judice of him and his Crown, &c. And of his jewels & goods which were his Grand­fathers at the time of his death, &c. and where they be become.

This is in effect the substance of the commission, which your Lordship may read at large in the book of Sta­tutes, this commission being enacted in the tenth year of the Kings reigne. Now if such a commission were in these dayes granted to the faithfull men that have no interest in the sales, gifts nor purchases, nor in the keep­ing of the jewells at the Queens death, nor in the obtaining, grants of the Kings best lands, I cannot say what may be recovered, and justly re­covered; and what say your Lord­ship, was not this a noble act for the King, if it had been followed to ef­fect?

I cannot tell whether it were or no, for it gave power to the [Page 64] Commissiouers to examine all the grants.

Why my Lord, doth the King grant any thing, that shames at the examination? are not the Kings grants on record?

But by your leave, it is some dishonour to a King, to have his judgement called in question.

That is true my Lord, but in this, or whensoever the like shall be granted in the future, the Kings judge­ment is not examined, but their knave­ry that abused the King. Nay by your favour, the contrary is true, that when a King will suffer himself to be eaten up by a company of petty fellows, by himself raised, therein both the judge­ment and courage is disputed, And if your Lordship will disdain it at your own servants hands, much more ought the great heart of a King to disdain it. And surely my Lord, it is a greater treason (though it undercreep the law) to tear from the Crown the or­naments thereof: And it is an in­falliable maxime, that he that loves not his Majesties estate, loves not his person.

How came it then, that the act was not executed?

[Page 65]

Because these, against whom it was granted, perswaded the King to the contrary: as the Duke of Ireland, Suffolk, the chief Iustice Tre­silian, and others, yea, that which was lawfully done by the King, and the great Councell of the kingdome, was (by the mastery which Ireland, Suffolk, and Tresilian had over the Kings affections) broken and disa­vowed. Those that devised to relieve the King, not by any private inventi­on, but by generall Councell, were by a private and partiall assembly ad­judged traitors, and the most ho­nest Iudges of the land, enforced to subscribe to that judgement. In so much that Iudge Belknap plainly told the Duke of Ireland, and the Earl of Suffolk, when he was constrain­ed to set his hand, plainly told these Lords, that he wanted but a rope, that he might therewith receive a reward for his subscription. And in this Coun­cell of Nottingham was hatched the ruine of those which governed the King, of the Iudges by them con­strained, of the Lords that loved the King, and sought a reformation, and of the King himself; for though the King found by all the Shrieves of [Page 66] the shires, that the people would not fight against the Lords, whom they thought to bee most faithfull unto the King, when the Citizens of Lon­don made the same answer, being at that time able to arme 50000. men, and told the Major that they would never fight against the Kings friends, and defenders of the Realme, when the Lord Ralph Passet, who was near the King, told the King boldly that he would not adventure to have his head broken for the Duke of Irelands plea­sure, when the Lord of London told the Earle of Suffolk in the Kings pre­sence, that he was not worthy to live, &c. yet would the King in the defence of the destroyers of his estate, lay ambushes to intrap the Lords, when they came upon his faith, yea when all was pacified, and that the King by his Proclamation had clear'd the Lords, and promised to produce Ire­land, Suffolk, and the Archbishop of Yorke, Tresiltan, and Bramber, to an­swer at the next Parliament, these men confest, that they durst not appear; and when Suffolk fled to Cal­lice, and the Duke of Ireland to Chester, the King caused an army to be leavied in Lancashire, for the safe conduct of [Page 67] the Duke of Ireland to his presence, when as the Duke being encountered by the Lords, ranne like a coward from his company, and fled into Hol­land. After this was holden a Parlia­ment, which was called that wrought wonders. In the Eleventh year of this King, wherein the fornamed Lords, the Duke of Ireland and the rest, were condemned and confiscate, the Chief Iustice hanged with many others, the rest of the Iudges condemned, and banisht, and a 10. and a 15. given to the King,

But good Sir: the King was first besieged in the Tower of London, and the Lords came to the Parliament, and no man durst contra­dict them.

Certainly in raising an ar­my, they committed treason, and though it appear, that they all loved the King, (for they did him no harm, having him in their power) yet our law doth construe all leavying of war without the Kings commission, and all force raised to be intended for the death and destruction of the King, not attending the sequell. And it is so judged upon good reason, for every unlawfull and ill action is supposed [Page 68] to be accompanied with an ill intent. And besides, those Lords used too great cruelty, in procuring the sen­tence of death against divers of the Kings servants, who were bound to follow and obey their Master and Soveraigne Lord, in that he com­manded.

It is true, and they were also greatly to blame to cause then so many seconds to be put to death, see­ing the principalls, Ireland, Suffolk, and York, had escaped them, And what rea­son had they to seek to enform the State by strong hand, was not the Kings estate as dear to himself, as to them? He that maketh a King know his errour mannerly and private, and gives him the best advice, he is discharged before God and his own conscience. The Lords might have [...]tired themselves, when they saw they could not prevail, and have left the King to his own wayes, who had more to lose then they had.

My Lord, the taking of Arms cannot be excused in respect of the law, but this might be said for the Lords that the King being under yeares, and being wholly governed by [Page 69] their enemies, and the enemies of the kingdome, and because by those evil mens perswasions, it was advised, how the Lords should have been murthered at a feast in London, they were excusable during the kings minority to stand upon their guard against their particular ene­mies. But we will passe it over & go on with our parliaments that followed, whereof that of Cambridge in the Kings 12th year was the next, there­in the King had given him a 10th and a 15th, after which being 20. yeares of age rechanged (saith H. Kinghton) his Treasurer, his Chancellour, the Iustices of either bench, the Clerk of the privy seal and others, and took the government into his own hands. He also took the Admirals place from the Earl of Arundell, and in his room he placed the Earl of Huntingdon in the yeare following, which was the 13th year of the K. in the Parliament at Westminster there was given to the King upon every sack of wooll 14s. and 6d. in the gound upon other Mer­chandise,

But by your leave, the King was restrained this parliament, that he might not dispose of, but a third part of the money gathered.

[Page 70]

No my Lord, by your fa­vour. But true it is that part of this mony was by the Kings consent as­signed towards the wars, but yet left in the Lord Treasurers hands, and my Lord it would be a great ease, and a great saving to his Majesty our Lord and Master, if it pleased him to make his assignations upon some part of his revenewes, by which he might have 1000l. upon every 10000l. and save himself a great deale of clamour. For seeing of necessity the Navy must be maintained, and that those poor men as well Carpenters as ship-keepers must be paid, it were better for his Majesty to give an assignation to the Treasurer of his Navy for the recei­ving of so much as is called ordinary, then to discontent those poor men, who being made desperate beggars, may perchance be corrupted by them that lye in wait to destroy the Kings estate. And if his Majesty did the like in all other payements, especially where the necessity of such as are to receive, cannot possible give dayes, his Majesty might then in a little rowle behold his receipts and expen­ces, he might quiet his heart when all necessaries were provided for, and [Page 71] then dispose the rest at his pleasure. And my good Lord, how excellently and easily might this have been done, if the 400000l. had been raised as a­foresaid upon the Kings lands, and wards I say that his Majesties House, his Navy, his guards, his pensioners, his munition, his Ambassadors and all else of ordinary charge might have been defrayed, and a great summe left for his Majesties casuall expences and rewards, I will not say they were not in love with the Kings estate, but I say they were unfortunately borne for the King that crost it.

Well Sir, I would it had been otherwise, But for the assign­ments, there are among us that will not willingly indure it. Charity be­gins with it self, shall we hinder our selves of 50000l. per annum to save the King 20? No Sir, what will become of our New years gifts, our presents and gratuities? We can now say to those rhat have warrants for money, that there is not a penny in the Ex­chequer, but the King gives it away unto the Scots faster then it comes in.

My Lord you say well, at least you say the truth, that such are [Page 72] some of our answers, and hence comes that generall murmure to all men that have money to receive, I say that there is not a penny given to that nation; be it for service or otherwise but is spread over all the kingdome: yea they ga­ther notes, and take copies of all the privy seals and warrants that his Maje­sty hath given for the money for the Scots, that they may shew them in Parliament. But of his Majesties gifts to the English, there is no bruit though they may be tenne times as much as the Scots. And yet my good Lord, howsoever they be thus answer­ed that to them sue for money out of the Echequer, it is due to them for 10. or 12. or 20. in the hundred, abated ac­cording to their qualities that shew, they are alwaies furnished. For con­clusion, if it would please God to put into the Kings heart to make their as­signations, it would save him many a pound, and gain him many a prayer, and a great deal of love, for it griev­eth every honest mans heart to see the abundance which even the petty officers in the Exchequer, and others gather both from the king and sub­ject, and to see a world of poore men [Page 73] runne after rhe King for their ordinary wages.

Well, well, did you ne­ver hear this old tale, that when there was a great contentation about the weather the Seamen complaining of contrary windes, when those of the high Countreys desired rain, and those of the valleys sunshining dayes, Iupiter sent them word by Mercury, then, when they had all done, the weather should be as it had been, And it shall ever fall out so with them that complain, the course of payments shall be as they have been, what care we what petty fellows say? or what care we for your papers? have not we the Kings eares, who dares contest with us? though we cannot be revenged on such as you are for telling the truth, yet upon some other pretence, wee'le clap you up, and you shall sue to us ere you get out. Nay wee'le make you con­fesse that you were deceived in your projects, and eat your own words: learn this of me Sir, that as a little good fortune is better then a great deal of virtue: so the least authority hath advantage over the greatest wit, was he not the wisest man that said the battel [Page 74] was not the strongest, nor yet bread for the wise, nor riches to men of understanding, nor favour to men of knowledge: but what time and chance came to them all.

It is well for your Lordship that it is so. But Qu: Elizabeth would set the reason of a mean man, before the authority of the greatest Coun­cellor she had, and by her patience therein she raised upon the usuall and ordinary customes of London with­out any new imposition above 50000l a year, for though the Treasurer Bur­leigh, and the Earle of Leicester and Secretary Walshingham, all three pen­sioners to Customer Smith, did set themselves against a poor waiter of the Custome-house called Carwarden, and commanded the groomes of the privy Chamber not to give him ac­cesse, yet the Queen sent for him, and gave him countenance against them all. It would not serve the turn, my Lord, with her; when your Lordships would tell her, that the disgracing her great officers by hearing the com­plaints of busie heads, was a disho­nour to her self, but she had alwayes this answer, That if any men complain unjustly against a Magistrate, it were rea­son he should be severely punished, if just­ly, [Page 75] shee was Queen of the small, as well as of the great, and would hear their com­plaints. For my good Lord, a Prince that suffereth himself to be besieged, forsaketh one of the greatest regali­ties belonging to a Monarchie, to wit, the last appeal, or as the Trench call it, le dernier resort.

Well Sir, this from the matter, I pray you go on.

Then my Lord, in the Kings 15. year he had a tenth and a fifteen graunted in Parliament of London. And that same year there vvas a great Councell called at Stam­ford to vvhich diverse men vvere sent for, of diverse counties besides the Nobility, of vvhich the King took ad­vice vvhether he should continue the vvar, or make a finall end vvith the French.

What needed the King to take the advice of any but of his ovvn Councell in matter of peace or vvarre.

Yea my Lord, for it is said in the Proverbs, where are many coun­sellers, there is health. And if the King had made the vvarre by a generall consent, the Kingdome in generall vvere bound to maintain the vvarre, [Page 76] and they could not then say when the King required aid, that he undertook a needlesse vvarre.

You say vvell, but I pray you go on.

After the subsedy in the 15. yeare, the King desired to borrovv 10000l. of the Londoners, vvhich they refused to lend.

And vvas not the King greatly troubled there vvith.

Yea but the King troubled the Londoners soon aftar, for the king took the advantage of a ryot made upon the Bishop of Salisbury his men, sent for the Major, and other the a­blest citizens, comitted the Major to prison in the Castle of Windsor, and others to other castles, and made a Lord Warden of this citie, till in the end vvhat vvith 10000l. ready money, and other rich presents, instead of lending 10000l. it cost them 2000l. Betvveen the fifteenth yeare and tvventieth yeare, he had tvvo aides given him in the Parliaments of Winchester and Westminster: and this later vvas given to furnish the Kings journey into Ire­land, to establish that estate vvhich vvas greatly shaken since the death of [Page 77] the Kings Grandfather, vvho received thence yearly 30000l. and during the Kings stay in Ireland he had a 10th and a 5th granted.

And good reason, for the King had in his army 4000. horse and 30000. foot.

That by your favour, vvas the Kings savity: for great armies do rather devour themselves then de­stroy enemies. Such an army, (vvhere­of the fourth part vvould have con­quered all Ireland) vvas in respect of Ireland such an army as Xerxes led into Greece in this tvventieth yeare, vvhere­in he had a tenth of the Clergy, vvas the great conspiracy of the Kings un­kle, the Duke of Glocester, and of Moubrey, Arundell, Nottingham, and Warvvick, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Abbbot of West­minster, and others vvho in the one and tvventieth yeare of the King vvere all redeemed by Parliament, and vvhat thinks your Lordship, vvas not this assemble of the 3. states for the kings estate, vvherein he so prevailed, that he not onely overthrevv those popular Lords, but besides (the English Chro­nicle saith, the king so vvrought and brought things about, that he obtained [Page 78] the power of both houses to be grant­ed to certain persons, to 15. Noble­men and Gentlemen, or to seven of them.

Sir, whether the King wrought well or il I cannot judge, but our Chronicles say, that many things were done in this Parliament, to the displeasure of no small number of people, to wit, for that diverse right­full heires were disinherited of their lands and livings, with which wrong­full doings the people were much of­fended, so that the King with those that were about him, and chief in Counsell, came into great infamy & slander.

My good Lord, if your Lordship will pardon mee, I am of opinion that those Parliaments where­in the Kings of this land have satis­fied the people, as they have been e­ver prosperous, so where the King hath restrained the house, the contra­ry hath happened, for the Kings at­chievments in this Parliament, were the ready preparations to his ruine.

You mean by the generall discontentment that followed, and because the King did not proceed le­gally with Glocester and others. Why [Page 79] Sir, this was not the first time that the Kings of England have done things without the Counsell of the land: yea, contrary to the law.

It is true my Lord in some particulars, as even at this time the Duke of Glocester was made away at Call [...]ce by strong hand, without any lawfull triall: for he was a man so be­loved of the people and so allied, ha­ving the Dukes of Lancaster, and York his brethren, the Duke of Au­marle, and the Duke of Hereford his Nephewes, the great Earles of Arun­dell and Warwicke, with diverse o­ther of his part in the conspiracy, as the King durst not trie him according to the law: for at the triall of Arun­dell and Warwicke, the King was forced to entertaine a petty army about him. And though the Duke was greatly lamented, yet it cannot be denyed but that he was then a tray­tor to the King And was it not so my Lord with the Duke of Guise: your Lordship doth remember the spur­gald proverb, that necessitie hath no law: and my good Lord, it is the pra­ctice of doing wrong, and of generall wrongs done, that brings danger, and not where Kings are prest in this or [Page 80] that particular, for there is great dif­ference between naturall cruelty and accidentall. And therefore it was Machiavels advice, that all that a King did in that kind, he shall do at once, and by his mercies afterwards make the world know that his cruelty was not affected. And my Lord take this for a generall rule, that the immortall policy of a state cannot admit any law or priviledge whatsoever, but in some particular or other, the same is necessarily broken, yea in an Aristocratia or popular estate, which vaunts so much of equality and common right, more outrage hath been committed then in any Chri­stian Monarchy.

But whence came this hatred between the Duke and the King his Nephew.

My Lord, the Dukes con­straining the King, when he was young, stuck in the Kings heart, and now the Dukes proud speech to the King when he had rendred Brest for­merly engaged to the Duke Brittain, kindled again these coales that were not altogether extinguished, for he u­sed these words: Your grace ought to put your body in great pain to winne a strong hold or town by feats of armes, ere you [Page 81] take upon you to sell or deliver any town gotten by the manhood and strong hand and policy of your noble progenitors. Where­at, saith the story, the King changed his countenance, &c. and to say truth, it was a proud and maisterly speech of the Duke; besides that inclusively he taxed him of sloath and cowardise, as if he had never put himself to the adventure of winning such a place, undutifull words of a subject do often take deeper root then the memory of ill deeds do: The Duke of Biron found it when the King had him at advantage. Yea the late Earle of Es­sex told Queen Elizabeth that her con­ditions was as crooked as her carkasse: but it cost him his head, which his in­surrection had not cost him, but for that speech, who will say unto a King (saith Iob) thou art wicked. Certainly it is the same thing to say unto a La­dy, thou art crooked (and perchance more) as to say unto a King that he is wicked, and to say that he is a co­ward, or to use any other words of disgrace, it is one and the same er­rour.

But what say you for Arun­dell, a brave and valiant man, who had [Page 82] the Kings pardon of his contempt du­ring his minority.

My good Lord, the Parlia­ment which you say disputes the Kings prerogative, did quite contra­ry, and destroyed the Kings charter and pardon formerly given to Arun­dell. And my good Lord, do you re­member, that at the Parliament that wrought wonders, when these Lords compounded that Parliament, as the King did this, they were so mercilesse towards all, that they thought their enemies, as the Earle of Arundell most insolently suffered the Qu: to kneel unto him three houres for the saving of one of her servants, and that scorne of his manebat alto mente repo­stum. And to say the truth, it is more barbarous & unpardonable then any act that ever he did to permit the wife of his Soveraign to kneel to him being the Kings vassell. For if he had saved the Lords servant freely at her first request, as it is like enough that the Qu: would also have saved him, Miseris succurrens paria obtenibis ali­quando: For your Lordship sees that the Earle of Warwicke who was as farre in the treason as any of the rest, was pardoned. It was also at this Par­liament [Page 83] that the Duke of Hereford ac­cused Moubray Duke of Norfolke, and that the Duke of Hereford Sonne to the Duke of Lancaster, was banished to the Kings confusion, as your Lord­ship well knows.

I know it well and God knows that the King had then a silly and weak Councell about him, that perswaded him to banish a Prince of the bloud, a most valiant man, and the best beloved of the people, in generall of any man living, especially consi­dering that the King gave every day more then other offence to his sub­jects. For besides that he fined the in­habitants that assisted the Lords in his Minority (of the 17. shires) which of­fence he had long before pardoned, his blank Charters, and letting the Realme to farme to meon persons, by whom he was wholly advised, increased the peoples hatred towards the pre­sent government.

You say well my L. Princes of an ill destiny do alwayes follow the worst counsell, or at least imbrace the best after opportunity is lost, Qui consi­lia non ex suo corde sed alienis viribus colli­gunt, non animo sed auribus cogillant. And this was not the least grief of the subject [Page 84] in generall, that those men had the greatest part of the spoil of the com­monwealth, which neither by virtue, valour or counsell could adde any thing unto it: Nihil est sordidius, nihil crudelius (saith Anto: Pius) quamsi Remp. i [...] arrode, qui nihil in eam suo labore conferent.

Indeed the letting to farm the Realm was very grievous to the subject.

Will your Lordship pardon me if I tell you that the letting to farm of his Majesties Customes (the great­est revenue of the Realm) is not very pleasing.

And why I pray you, doth not the King thereby raise his profits every third yeare, & one farmer outbids another to the Kings advantage

It is true my Lord, but it grieves the subject to pay custome to the subject, for what mighty men are those Farmers become, and if those Farmers get many thousands every yeare, as the world knows they do, why should they not now (being men of infinite wealth) declare unto the King upon oath, what they have gain­ed, and henceforth become the Kings collectours of his Custome, did not [Page 85] Queen Elizabeth who was reputed both a wise and juft Princesse, after she had brought Customer Smith from 14000l. a yeare to 42000l. a yeare, made him lay down a recompence for that which he had gotten? and if these Farmers do give no recompence, let them yet present the King with the truth of their receivings and profits. But my Lord for conclusion, after Bullingbrook arriving in England with a small troop: Notwithstanding the King at his Landing out of Ireland, had a suffici­ent and willing army: yet he wanting courage to defend his right gave leave to all his Souldiers to depart, and put himself into his hands that cast him in­to his grave.

Yet you see he was de­pos'd by Parliament.

Aswell may your Lord­ship say he was knock't in the head by Parliament, for your Lordship knows that if King Richard had e­ver escaped out of their fingers that deposed him, the next Parliament would have made all the deposers trai­tours and Rebels, and that justly. In which Parliament, or rather unlawfull assembly, there appeared but one ho­nest man, to wit, the B. of Carlile, who [Page 86] scorned his life, and estate, in respect of right and his allegiance, and de­fended the right of his Soveraigne Lord against the Kings elect and his partakers.

Well I pray goe on with the Parliaments held in the time of his successor Henry the fourth.

This King had in his third year a subsedv, and in his fift a tenth of the Clergy without a Parllament; In his sixt year he had so great a subsedie, as the House required there might be no record thereof left to posteri­ty, for the House gave him 20s. of every Knights Fee, and of every 20l. land, 20d. and 12d. the pouud of goods.

Yea in the end of this year, the Parliament prest the King to annex unto the Crown all tempo­rall possessions belonging to Church­men within the land, which at that time, was the third foot of all England. But the Bishops made friends, and in the end saved their estates.

By this you see, my Lord, that Cromwell was not the first that thought on such a business. And if King Henry the 8. had reserved the Abbeyes, and other Church lands, which he had [Page 87] given at the time, the revenue of the Crown of England, had exceeded the revenue of the Crown of Spaine, with both the Indies, whereas used as it was, (a little enriched the Crown) served but to make a number of pettifoggers, and other gentlemen.

But what had the King in steed of this great revenue

He had a 15th of the Com­mons, and tenth, and a half of the Clergy, and withall, all pensions graunted by King Edward, and King Richard were made void. It was also moved that all Crown lands former­ly given (at least given by King Edw: and King Richard) should be taken back.

What think you of that, Sir? would it not have been a disho­nour to the King? and would not his Successors have done the like to those that the King had advanced?

I cannot answer your Lord­ship, but by distinguishing, for where the Kings had given land for services, and had not been over reached in his gifts, there it had been a dishonour to the King, to have made void the graunts of his predecessors, or his graunts, but all those graunts of the [Page 88] Kings, wherein they were deceived, the very custome and policy of England makes them voyd at this day.

How mean you that, for his Majestie hath given a great deal of Land among us since he came into England, and would it stand with the K. honour to take it from us again.

Yea my Lord, very well with the Kings honour, if your Lord­ship, or any Lord else, have under the name of 100l. land a year, gotten 500l. land, and so after that rate.

I will never believe that his Majesty will ever doe any such thing.

And I believe as your Lord­ship doth, but we spake e're while of those that disswaded the King from calling it a Parliament: And your Lordship asked me the reason, why any man should disswade it, or fear it, to which, this place gives me an opportunity to make your Lordship answer, for though his Majesty will of himself never question those grants yet when the Commons shall make humble petition to the King in Par­liament, that it will please his Majesty to assist them in his relief, with that which ought to be his own, which, if it will please his Majesty to yeild unto [Page 89] the house will most willingly furnish & supply the rest, with what grace can his Majesty deny that honest suit of theirs, the like having been done in many Kings times before? This pro­ceeding may good Lord, my perchance prove all your phrases of the Kings honour, false English.

But this cannot concern many, and for my self, I am sure it concerns me little.

It is true my Lord, & there are not many that disswade his Maje­stie from a Parliament.

But they are great ones, a few of which will serve the turn wel enough.

But my Lord, be they never so great (as great as Gyants) yet if they disswade the King from his ready and assured way of his subsistence, they must devise how the K. may be else­where supplied, for they otherwise [...]nne into a dangerous fortune.

Hold you contented Sir, the King needs no great disswasion.

My Lord, learn of me, that [...]here is none of you all, than can [...]erce the King. It is an essentiall pro­perty of a man truely wise, not to o­ [...]en all the boxes of his bosome, even [...]o those that are near'st & dear'st unto [Page 90] him, for when a man is discovered to the very bottome, he is after the lesse esteemed. I dare undertake, that when your Lordship hath served the King twice twelve years more, you will find, that his Majesty hath reser­ved somewhat beyond all your capa­cities, his Majesty hath great reason to put off the Parliament, at his last refuge, and in the mean time, to make tryall of all your loves to serve him, for his Majesty hath had good experience, how well you can serve your selves: But when the King finds, that the building of your own for­tunes and factions, hath been the di­ligent studies, and the service of his Majesty, but the exercises of your lea­sures: He may then perchance cast himself upon the generall love of his people, of which (I trust) he shall never be deceived, and leave as many of your Lordships as have pilfered from the Crown, to their exa­mination.

Well Sir, I take no great pleasure in this dispute, goe on pray.

In that Kings 5th year, he had also a subsedy, which is got by holding the house together from Ea­ster [Page 91] to Christmas, and would not suf­fer them to depart. He had also a sub­sedy in his ninth year. In his eleventh year the commons did again presse the King to take all the temporalities of the Church men into his hands, which they proved sufficient to main­tain 150. Earls, 1500. Knights, and 6400. Esquiers, with a hundred hospi­tals, but they not prevailing, gave the king a subsedy.

As for the notorious Prince, Henry the fift, I find, that he had given him in his second year 300000. markes, and after that two other subsedies, one in his fifth year, another in his ninth, without any disputes.

In the time of his successor Henry the sixt, there were not many subse­dies. In this third year, he had a subse­dy of a Tunnage and poundage. And here (saith Iohn Stow) began those payements, which we call customes, because the payement was continued, whereas before that time it was gran­ted but for a year two or three, ac­cording to the Kings occasions. He had also an ayde & gathering of mo­ney in his fourth year, and the like in his tenth year, and in his thirteenth year a 15th He had also a fifteenth for [Page 92] the conveying of the Queen out of France into England. In the twenty eight year of that King was the act of Resumption of all honours, towns, castles, Signeuries, villages, Manors, lands, tenements, rents, reversions, fees, &c. But because the wages of the Kings servants, were by the strictness of the act also restrained, this act of Resumption was expounded in the Parliament at Reading the 31th year of the Kings reigne.

I perceive that those [...] of Resumption were ordinary in for­mer times; for King Stephen resumed the lands, which in former times he had given to make friends during the Civill wars. And Henry the second resumed all (without exception) which King Stephen had not resumed; for although King Stephen took back a great deal, yet he suffered his trustiest servants to enjoy his gift.

Yes my Lord, and in after times also; for this was not the last, nor shall be the last, I hope. And judge you my Lord, whether the Parlia­ments doe not only serve the King, whatsoever is said to the contrary; for as all King Henry the 6. gifts & graunts [Page 93] were made void by the Duke of York when he was in possession of the Kingdome by Parliament. So in the time of K. H. when K. Edw. was beaten out again, the Parliament of West­minster made all his acts voyd, made him and all his followers traytors, and gave the King many of their heads & lands. The Parliaments of England do alwayes serve the King in posses­sion. It served Rich. the second to condemne the popular Lords. It served Bollingbrooke to depose Rich. When Edw. the 4. had the Scepter, it made them all beggars that had fol­lowed H. the 6. And it did the like for H. when Edw. was driven out. The Parliaments are as the friendship of this world is, which alwayes fol­loweth prosperity. For King Edw. the 4. after that he was possessed of the Crown, he had in his 13. year a subsedy freely given him: and in the year following he took a benevo­lence through England, which arbi­trary taking from the people, ser­ved that ambitious traytor the Duke of Bucks. After the Kings death was a plausible argument to per­swade the multitude, that they should not permit (saith Sir [Page 94] Thomas Moore) his line to raigne any longer upon them.

Well Sir, what say you to the Parliament of Richard the third his time?

I find but one, and therein he made diverse good Laws. For King Henry the seventh in the beginning of his third year he had by Parliament an ayde granted unto him, towards the relief of the Duke of Brittain, then assailed by the French King. And al­though the King did not enter into the warre, but by the advice of the three estates, who did willingly con­tribute: Yet those Northern men which loved Richard the third, raised rebellion under colour of the money impos'd, and murthered the Earle of Northumberland whom the King em­ployed in that Collection. By which your Lordship sees, that it hath not been for taxes and impositions alone, that the ill disposed have taken Armes; but even for those payments which have been appointed by Parlia­ment.

And what became of these Rebels?

They were fairly hang'd, & the money levied notwithstanding [Page 95] in the Kings first year he gathered a marvailous great masse of money, by a benevolence, taking pattern by this kind of levie from Edw. 4th. But the King caused it first to be moved in Parliament where it was allowed, be­cause the poorer sort were therein spared. Yet it is true that the King used some art, for in his Letters he declared that he would measure every mans affections by his gifts. In the thirteenth year he had also a subsedy, whereupon the Cornish men took Armes, as the Northern men of the Bishoprick had done in the third year of the King,

It is without example, that ever the people have rebelled for any thing granted by Parliament, save in this Kings dayes.

Your Lordship must con­sider, that he was not over much be­loved, for he took many advantages upon the people and the Nobility both.

And I pray you what say they now of the new impositions lately laid by the Kings Majesty? do they say that they are justly or unjust­ly laid?

[Page 96]

To Impose upon all things brought into the Kingdome is very ancient: which imposing when it hath been continued a certain time, is then called Customes, because the subjects are accustomed to pay it, and yet the great taxe upon wine is still called Impost, because it was imposed after the ordinary rate of payement, had lasted many years. But we do now a dayes understand those things to be impositions, which are raised by the command of Princes, without the ad­vice of the Common-wealth, though (as I take it) much of that which is now called custome, was at the first imposed by Prerogative royall: Now whether it be time or consent that ma­kes them just, I cannot define, were they just because new, and not justi­fied yet by time, or unjust because they want a generall consent: yet is this rule of Aristotle verified in respect of his Majestie: Minus timent homines in justum pati à principe quem cultorem Dei putant. Yea my Lord, they are also the more willingly borne, because all the world knows they are no new In­vention of the Kings. And if those that advised his Majestie to impose [Page 97] them, had raised his lands (as it was offered them) to 20000l. more then it was, and his wards to asmuch as afore­said, they had done him farre more acceptable service. But they had their own ends in refusing the one, and ac­cepting the other. If the land had been raised, they could not have se­lected the best of it for themselves: If the impositions had not been laid, some of them could not have their silks, other pieces in farme, which in­deed grieved the subject ten times more then that which his Majestie en­joyeth. But certainly they made a great advantage that were the advi­sers, for if any tumult had followed his Majesty, ready way had been to have delivered them over to the people.

But think you that the King would have delivered them if any troubles had followed?

I know not my Lord, it was Machiavels counsell to Caesar Bor­gia to doe it, and King H the 8. deli­vered up Empson and Dudley: yea the same King, when the great Car­dinall Woolsey, who governed the [Page 98] King and all his estate, had (by requi­ring the sixt part of every mans goods for the King) raised a rebellion, the King I say disavowed him absolutely, that had not the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk appeased the people, the Cardinall had sung no more Masse: for these are the words of our Story: The King then came to Westminster to the Cardinals Palace, and assembled there a great Councell, in which he protested, that his mind was never to aske any thing of his commons which might sound to the breach of his Laws. Wherefore he then willed them to know by whose means they were so strictly given forth. Now my Lord, how the Cardinall would have shift­ed himself, by saying, I had the opi­nion of the Iudges, had not the re­bellion been appeased, I greatly doubt.

But good Sir, you blanch my question, and answer me by exam­ples. I aske you whether or no in any such tumult, the people pretending against any one or two great Officers, the King should deliver them, or de­fend them?

My good Lord, the people have not stayed for the Kings delivery, [Page 99] neither in England, nor in France: Your Lordship knows how the Chancellour, Treasurer, and Chief Iustice, with ma­ny others at severall times have been used by the Rebels: And the Marshals, Constables, and Treasurers in France, have been cut in pieces in Charles the sixt his time. Now to your Lordships question, I say that where any man shall give a King perilous advice, as may either cause a Rebellion, or draw the peoples love from the King, I say, that a King shall be advised to banish him: But if the King do absolutely command his servant to do any thing displeasing to the Common-wealth, and to his own perill, there is the King bond in honour to defend him. But my good Lord for conclusion, there is no man in England that will lay any in­vention ether grievous or against law upon the Kings Majesty: and there­fore your Lordships must share it a­mongst you.

For my part, I had no hand in it, (I think) Ingram was be that propounded it to the Treasurer.

Alas, my good Lord, eve­ry poor waiter in the Custome-house, or every promooter might have done it, there is no invention in these things, [Page 100] To lay impositions, and sell the Kings lands, are poor and common devices. It is true that Ingram and his fellows are odious men, and therefore his Ma­jesty pleas'd the people greatly to put him from the Coffership. It is better for a Prince to use such a kind of men, then to countenance them, hangmen are necessary in a common wealth: yet in the Netherlands, none but a hang­mans sonne will marry a hangmans daughter. Now my Lord, the last ga­thering which Henry the seventh made, was in his twentieth year, wherein he had another benevolence both of the Clergy and Laity, a part of which taken of the poorer sort, he ordained by his testament that it should be re­stored. And for King Henry the eight, although he was left in a most plenti­full estate, yet he wonderfully prest his people with great payments, for in the beginning of his time it was in­finite that he spent in Masking and Til­ting, Banquetting, and other vanities, before he was entred into the most consuming expence of the most fond and fruitlesse warre that ever King un­dertook. In his fourth yeare he had one of the greatest subsedies that ever [Page 101] was granted; for besides two fifteens and two dismes, he used Davids Law of Capitation or head money, and had of every Duke ten marks, of every Earl five pounds, of every Lord four pounds, of every Knight four marks and every man rated at 8l. in goods, 4. marks, and so after the rate: yea eve­ry man that was valued but at 401 paid 12d, and every man and woman a­bove 15. yeares 4d. He had also in his sixt yeare divers subsedies granted him. In his fourteenth their was a tenth demanded of every mans goods, but it was moderated. In the Parlia­ment following, the Clergie gave the King the half of their spirituall livings for one yeare, and of the Laity there was demanded 800000l, which could not be leavied in England, but it was a marvellous great gift that the king had given him at that time. In the Kings seventeenth yeare was the Re­bellion before spoken of, wherein the King disavowed the Cardinall: In his seventeenth yeare he had the tenth and fifteenth given by Parlia­ment, which were before that time paid to the Pope. And before that al­so, the moneys that the King borrowed [Page 102] in his fifteenth yeare were forgiven him by Parliament in his seventeenth yeare. In his 35. yeare a subsedy was granted of 4d. the pound of every man worth in goods from 20s. to 5l, from 5l. to 10l. and upwards of every pound 2s. And all strangers, denisens and others doubled this summe stran­gers not being inhabitants above 16. yeares 4d. a head. All that had Lands, Fees, and Annuities, from 20. to 5. and so double as they did for goods: And the Clergy gave 6d. the pound. In the thirty seventh yeare, a Benevo­lence was taken not voluntary, but ra­ted by Commissioners, which because one of the Aldermen refused to pay, he was sent for a souldier into Scot­land. He had also another great subse­dy of six shillings the pound of the Clergy, and two shillings eight pence of the goods of the Laity, and four shillings the pound upon Lands.

In the second yeare of Edward the sixt, the Parliament gave the King an aid of twelve pence the pound of goods of his Naturall subjects, and two shillings the pound of strangers, and this to continue for three yeares, and by the statute of the second and third of Edward the sixt, it may appear, [Page 103] the same Parliament did also give a se­cond aid, as followeth, (to wit) of eve­ry Ewe kept in severall pastures, 3d: of every weather kept as aforesaid 2d: of every sheep kept in the Common, 1d, ob. The House gave the King also 8d. the pound of every woollen cloath made for the sale throughout England for three years. In the third and fourt, of the King, by reason of the trou­blesome gathering of the poly money upon sheep, and the tax upon cloath, this act of subsedy was repeal'd, and other relief given the King, and in the seventh yeare he had a subsedy and two fifteens.

In the first yeare of Queen Mary, tunnage and poundage were granted. In the second yeare a subsedy was gi­ven to King Philip, and to the Queen, she had also a third subsedy in Annis 4. & 5.

Eliz. Reg, Now my Lord, for the Parliaments of the late Queens time, in which there was nothing new, nei­ther head money, nor sheep money, nor escuage, nor any of these kinds of payments was required, but onely the ordinary subsedies, and those as easily graunted as demanded, I shall not need to trouble your Lordship with a­ny [Page 104] of them, neither can I inform your Lordship of all the passages and acts which have passed, for they are not extant, nor printed.

No, it were but time lost to speak of the latter, and by those that are already remembred, we may judge of the rest, for those of the greatest importance are publick. But I pray you deal freely with me, what you think would be done for his Majesty, If he should call a Parliament at this time, or what would be required at his Maje­sties hands?

The first thing that would be required, would be the same that was required by the Commons in the thirteenth yeare of Hen. the eight (to wit) that if any man of the commons house should speak more largely, then of duty he ought to do, all such offences to be pardoned, and that to be of record.

So might every Compa­nion speak of the King what they list.

No my Lord, the reverence which a Vassall oweth to his Sove­raigne, is alwaies intended for every speech, howsoever it must import the good of the King, and his estate, and so long it may be easily pardoned, o­therwise [Page 105] not; for in Queen Elizabeths time, who gave freedome of speech in all Parliaments, when Wentworth made those motions, that were but sup­posed dangerous to the Queens e­state, he was imprisoned in the Tower, notwithstanding the priviledge of the house, and there died.

What say you to the Sci­cilian vespers remembred in the last Par­liament?

I say, he repented him heartily that used that speech, and in­deed besides that, it was seditious, this example held not: The French in Sci­cily usurped that Kingdome, they nei­ther kept law nor faith, they took a­way the inheritance of the Inhabi­tants, they took from them their wives, and ravished their daughters, committing all other insolencies that could be imagined. The Kings Maje­sty is the Naturall Lord of England, his Vassals of Scotland obey the Eng­lish Laws, if they break them, they are punished without respect. Yea his Majesty put one of his Barons to a shamefull death, for being consenting onely to the death of a Common Fen­cer: And which of these ever did or durst commit any outrage in England, [Page 106] but to say the truth, the opinion of packing the last, was the cause of the contention and disorder that happened.

Why sir? do you not think it best to compound a Parlia­ment of the Kings servants and others, that shall in all obey the Kings de­sires?

Certainly no, for it hath ne­ver succeeded well, neither on the kings part, nor on the subjects, as by the Parliament before-remembred your Lordship may gather, for from such a composition do arise all jealousies, and all contentions. It was practized in el­der times, to the great trouble of the kingdome, and to the losse and ruine of many. It was of latter time used by King Henry the eight, but every way to his disadvantage. When the King leaves himself to his people, they assure them­selves that they are trusted and beloved of their king, and there was never any assembly so barborus, as not to answer the love and trust of their King. Hen­ry the sixt when his estate was in effect utterly overthrown, and utterly impo­verished at the humble request of his Treasurer made the same known to the House: Or other wise, using the Treasurers own words. He humbly de­sired [Page 107] the King to take his Staffe, that he might save his wardship.

But you know, they will presently be in hand with those impo­sitions, which the King hath laid by his own Royall Prerogative.

Perchance not my Lord; but rather with those impositions that have been by some of your Lordships laid upon the King, which did not some of your Lordships fear more then you do the impositions laid upon the Subjects, you would never disswade his Majesty from a Parliament: For no man doubted, but that his Majesty was advised to lay those impositions by his Councell, and for particular things on which they were laid, the advice came from petty fellows (though now great ones) belonging to the Custome-House. Now my Lord, what prejudice hath his Majesty (his Revenue being kept up) if the imposi­tions that were laid by the generall Councell of the Kingdome, which takes off all grudging and complaint.

Yea Sir, but that which is done by the King, with the advice of his private or privy Councell, is done by the Kings absolute power.

And by whose power it is [Page 108] done in parliament, but by the Kings absolute power? Mistake it not my Lord: The three Estates do but ad­vise, as the privy Councell doth, which advice if the King imbrace, it becomes the Kings own Act in the one, and the Kings Law in the other, for without the Kings acceptation, both the pub­lick and private advices be but as empty Egg shels: and what doth his Majesty lose if some of those things, which concerns the poorer sort to be made free again, and the Revenue kept up upon that which is superfluous? Is it a losse to the King to be beloved of the Commons? If it be revenue which the King seeks, is it not better to take it of those that laugh, then of those that cry? Yea if all be conten to pay upon moderation & change of the Species: Is it not more honourable and more safe for the King, that the Subject pay by perswasion, then to have them con­strained? If they be contented to whip themselves for the King, were it not better to give them the Rod into their hands, then to commit them to the Ex­ecutioner? Certainly it is farre more happy for a Soveraigne Prince, that a Subject open his purse willingly, then that the same be opened by violence. [Page 109] Besides, that when impositions are laid by Parliament, they are gathered by the authority of the Law, which (as aforesaid) rejecteth all complaints, and stoppeth every mutinous mouth: It shall ever be my prayer that the King embrace the Councel of Honour and safety, and let other Princes imbrace that of force.

But good Sir, it is his Prerogative which the King stands up­on, & it is the Prerogative of the Kings, that the Parliaments do all diminish.

If your Lordship would pardon me, I would say then, that your Lordships objection against Parlia­ments is ridiculous. In former Parlia­ments three things have been supposed dishonour of the King. The first, that the Subjects have conditioned with the King, when the King hath needed them, to have the great Charter con­firmed: The second, that the Estates have made Treasurers for the necessary and profitable disbursing of those sums by them given, to the end, that the Kings, to whom they were given, should expend them for their own defence, & for the defence of the Common-wealth: The third, that these have prest the King to discharge some great Officers of the [Page 110] Crown, and to elect others. As touch­ing the first my Lord, I would fain learn what disadvantage the Kings of this Land have had by confirming the great Charter, the breach of which have served onely men of your Lord­ships rank, to assist their own passions, and to punish and imprison at their own discretion the Kings poor Sub­jects. Concerning their private ha­tred, with the colour of the Kings ser­vice, for the Kings Majestie take no mans inheritance, (as I have said be­fore) nor any mans life, but the Law of the Land, according to the Char­ter. Neither doth his Majesty imprison any man (matter of practice, which concerns, the preservation of his estate excepted) but by the law of the land. And yet he useth his prerogative as all the Kings of England have ever used to: for the supream reason cause to pra­ctise many things without the advice of the law. As insurrections and rebel­lions, it useth the marshall, and not the common law, without any breach of the Charter, the intent of the Char­ter considered truely. Neither hath a­ny Subject made complaint, or been grieved, in that the Kings of this land, for their own safeties, and preservation [Page 111] of their estates, have used their Prero­gatives, the great Ensigne, on which there is written soli Deo. And my good Lord, was not Buckingham in England, and Byron in France condemned, their Peers uncalled? And withall, was not Byron utterly (contrary to the custome & priviledges of the French) denyed an advocate to assist his defence? For where lawes forecast cannot provide remedies for future dangers, Princes are forced to assist themselves by their Prerogatives. But that which hath been ever grievous, and the cause of many troubles, very dangerous is, that your Lordships abusing the reasons of state, do punish and imprison the K. Subjects at your pleasure. It is you my Lords, that when Subjects have sometimes need of the Kings preroga­tive, do then use the strength of the Law, and when they require the law, you afflict them with the prerogative, and tread the great Charter (which hath been confirmed by 16 Acts of Parliament) under your feet, as a torn parchment or waste paper?.

Good Sir, which of us do in this sort break the great Charter? perchance you mean, that we have ad­vised the King to lay the new imposi­tious.

[Page 112]

No my Lord: there is no­thing in the great Charter against im­positions: and besides that, necessity doth perswade them. And if necessity do in somewhat excuse a private man à fortiori, it may then excuse a Prince. Again the Kings Majesty hath profit and increase of revenue by the impo­sitions. But there are of your Lord­ships (contrarie to the direct Letter of the Charter) that imprison the Kings Subjects and deny them the benefit of the Law, to the Kings disprofit. And what do you otherwise thereby (if the impositions be in any sort grievous) but Renovare dolores? And with all digg out of the dust the long buried me­morie of the Subjects former inten­tions with their Kings.

What mean you by that?

I will tell your Lordship when I dare, in the mean time it is e­nough for me, to put your Lordship in mind, that all the Estates in the World, in the offence of the people, have either had profit or necessity to perswade them to adventure it, of which, if neither be urgent, and yet the Subject exceedingly grieved, your Lordship may conjecture, that the House will be humble suitors for a re­dresse. And if it be a Maxime in policy [Page 113] to please the people in all things in­different, and never suffer them to be beaten, but for the Kings benefit (for there are no blows forgotten with the smart but those) then I say to make them Vassals to Vassals, is but to batter down those mastering buildings, erect­ed by K Henry the 7. & fortified by his Son, by which the people the Gentry of England were brought to depend upon the King alone. Yea my good Lord, our late dear Soveraign Q. Eliz. kept them up, & to their advantage, as wel repaired as ever Prince did Defend me, & spend me, faith the Irish Churle.

Then you think that this violent breach of the Charter will be the cause of seeking the conformation of it in the next Parliament, which o­therwise could never have bin moved.

I know not my good Lord perchance not, for if the House presse the King to graunt unto them all that is theirs by the Law, they cannot (in Iustice) refuse the King all that is his by the Law. And where will be the is­sue of such a contention? I dare not divine, but sure I am that it will tend to the prejudice both of the King and Subject.

If they dispute not their own liberties, why should they then [Page 114] the Kings liberties, which we call his Prerogative.

Among so many and so di­vers Spirits, no man can foretell what may be propounded, but howsoever, if the matter be not slightly handled on the Kings behalf, these disputes will soon dissolve for the King hath so lit­tle need of his Prerogative, & so great advantage by the Lawes, as the fear of imparing the one, to wit, the Preroga­tive, is so impossible, and the burthen of the other, to wit, the Law, so weigh­ty, as but by a branch of the Kings Prerogative, namely, of his remission and pardon, the Subject is no way able to undergo it. This my Lord is no matter of flourish that I have said, but it is the truth, and unanswerable.

But to execute the Laws very severely, would be very grievous.

Why my Lord, are the Laws grievous which our selves have re­quired of our Kings? And are the Pre­rogatives also which our Kings have reserved to themselves also grievous? How can such a people then be well pleased? And if your Lordship confess that the Lawes give too much, why does your Lordship urge the Prero­gative that gives more? Nay I will be bold to say it, that except the Lawes [Page 115] were better observed, the Prerogative of a Religious Prince hath manifold lesse perils then the Letter of the Law hath. Now my Lord, for the second & third, to wit, for the appointing of Treasures, and removing of Coun­cellors, our Kings have evermore laught them to scorn that have prest either of these, & after the Parliament dissolved, took the money of the Trea­surers of the Parliament and recalled & restored the Officers discharged, or else they have been contented, that some such persons should be removed at the request of the whole Kingdom, which they themselves out of their Noble natures, would not seem wil­ling to remove.

Well Sir, Would you notwithstanding all these arguments advise his Majesty to call a Parlia­ment?

It belongs to your Lord­ships who enjoy the Kings favour, & are chosen for your able wisedome to advise the K. It were a strange bold­nesse in a poor and private person, to advise Kings, attended with so under­standing a Councell. But be like your Lorpships have conceived some other way, how money may be gotten other­wise. If any trouble should happen, [Page 116] your Lordship knows, that then there were nothing so dangerous for a K as to be without money: A Parliament cannot assemble in haste, but present dangers require hasty remedies. It will be no time then to discontent the sub­jects by using any unordinary wayes.

Well Sir, all this notwith­standing we dare not advise the King to call a Parliament, for if it should succeed ill, we that advise, should fall into the Kings disgrace. And if the King be driven into any extremity, we can say to the King that because we found it extremely unpleasing to his Majesty to hear of a Parliament, we thought it no good manners to make such a Motion.

My Lord, to the first let me tell you, that there was never any just Prince that hath taken any advantage of the successe of Councels, which have been founded on reason, To fear that, were to fear the losse of the bell, more then the losse of the steeple, and were also the way to beat all men from the studies of the Kings service. But for the second, where you say you can excuse your selves upon the Kings own protesting against a Parliament, the King upon better consideration may encounter that fineness of yours.

[Page 117]

How I pray you?

Even by declaring himself to be indifferent, by calling your Lord­ships together, and by delivering unto you that he heares how his loving sub­jects in generall are willing to supply him, if it please him to call a Parlia­ment, for that was the common an­swer to all the Sheriffes in England, when the late benevolence was com­manded. In which respect, and because you come short in all your projects, & because it is a thing most dangerous for a King to be without treasure, he requires such of you, as either mislike, or rather fear a Parliment, to set down your reasous in writing, which you ei­ther mislike, or feared it. And such as with and desire it, to set down an­swers to your objections: And so shall the King prevent the calling or not cal­ling on his Majesty, as some of your great Councellers have done in many other things shrinking up their shoul­ders, and saying, the K. will have it so.

Well Sir, it grows late, & I will bid you farewell, onely you shall take well with you this advice of mine, that in all that you have said against our greatest, those men in the end shall be your Iudges in their own cause, you [Page 118] that trouble your self with reformation; are like to be well rewarded hereof you may assure your self, that we will never allow of any invention how profitable soever, unlesse it proceed, or seem to proceed from our selves.

If then my Lord, we may presume to say that Princes may be un­happy in any thing, certainly they are unhappy in nothing more then in suf­fering themselves to be so inclosed. A­gain, if we may believe Pliny, who tels us, that 'tis an ill signe of prosperity in any kingdome or state, where such as deserve well, find no other recompence then the contentment of their own con­seiences, a farre worse signe is it where the justly accused shall take revenge of the just accuser. But my good Lord, there is this hope remaining, that see­ing he hath been abused by them he trusted most, he will not for the future dishonour of his judgement (so well informed by his own experience) as to expose such of his vassals as have had no other motives to serve him, then simply the love of his person and his e­state) to their revenge, who have onely been moved by the love of their own fortunes, and their glory.

But good Sir, the King hath not been deceived by all.

[Page 119]

No my Lord, neither have all been trusted, neither doth the world accuse all, but believe, that there be a­mong your Lordships very just and worthy men, aswell of the Nobility as others, but those though most honour­ed in the Common-wealth, yet have not been most imployed: Your Lord­ship knows it well enough, that three or 4 of your Lordships have thought your hands strong enough to beat up alone the weightiest affairs in the Com­monwealth, and strong enough, all the Land have found them to beat down whom they pleased.

I understand you, but how shall it appear that they have onely sought themselves.

There needs no perspective glasse to discern it, for neither in the treaties of Peace and Warre, in matters of Revenue, and matters of Trade, any thing hath hapned either of love or of judgement. No my Lord, there is not any one action of theirs eminent, great or small, the greatnesse of themselves onely excepted.

It is all one, your Papers can nei­ther answer nor reply, we can. Besides you tell the King no news in delivering these Complaints, for he knows as much as can be told him.

[Page 120]

For the first my Lord, whereas he hath once the reasons of things de­livered him, your Lordships shall need to be well advised, in their answers there is no sophistry will serve the turn, where the Iudge, & the understanding are both supreme. For the second, to say that his Majesty knows, and cares not, that my Lord were but to despaire all his faithfull Subjects. But by your fa­vour my Lord, we see it is contrary, we find now that there is no such singular power as there hath been, Iustice is de­scribed with a Balance in her Hand, holding it even, and it hangs as even now as ever it did in any Kings dayes, for singular authority begets but gene­rall oppression.

Howsoever it be, thats nothing to you, that gave no interest in the Kings favour, nor perchance in his opinion, and concerning such a one, the misliking, or but misconceiving of any one hard word, phrase, or sentence, will give argument to the King either to condemne or reject the whole dis­course. And howsoever his Majesty may neglect your informations, you may be sure that others (at whom you point will not neglect their revenges, you will therefore confesse it (when it is too late) that you are exceeding sory [Page 121] that you have not followed my advise. Remember Cardinall Woolsey, who lost all men for the Kings service, & when their malice (whom he grieved) had out-lived the Kings affection, you know what became of him as vvell as I.

Yea, my Lord, I know it well, that malice hath a longer life, than ei­ther love or thankfulnesse hath, for as we alwaies take more care to put off pain, than to enjoy pleasure, because the one hath no intermission, & with the o­ther we are often satisfied, so it is in the smart of iniury & the memory of good turns: Wrongs are written in marble: Benefits are (sometimes) acknowledged, rarely re­quited. But my Lord, we shall do the K. great wrong, to judge him by common rules, or ordinary examples, for seeing his Majesty hath greatly enriched and advanced those that have but preten­ded his service, no man needs to doubt of his goodnesse towards those that shall performe any thing worthy re­ward. Nay, the not taking knowledge of those of his own vassals that have done him wrong, is more to be lamen­ted, than the relinquishing of those that do him right, is to be supected. I am therefore, my good Lo: held to my re­solution by these 2, besides the former. The 1, that God would never have blest [Page 122] him with so many years, and in so ma­ny actions, yea in all his actions, had he paid his honest servants with evill for good. The 2d. where your Lordship tels me, that I will be sorry for not fol­lowing your advice, I pray your Lord­ship to believe, that I am no way sub­ject to the common sorrowing of worldly men, this Maxime of Plato being true, Dolores omnes ex amore animi erga corpus nascuntur. But for my body, my mind values it at nothing.

What is it then you hope for or seek?

Neither riches, nor honour, or thanks, but I onely to seek to satisfie his Majesty (which I would have been glad to have done in matters of more importance that I have lived and will die an honest man.