The First day.
Monday, March 22. 1640.

THe Lords being set in a place prepared in Westminster-hall, pur­posely for the Arraignment of Thomas Earl of Strafford, upon a charge of High Treason laid upon him by the Commons House of Parliament, in the Name of themselves, and of all the Com­mons of England. And the House of Commons being there likewise, seated as a Committee; and those who were to manage the Evidence on be­half of the House of Commons, being Members of that House, standing at the Barr, The Prisoner was called for; And being brought by Sir William Balfour, Lieutenant of the Tower, after Obeisances given, he came to the Barr and kneeled; and after standing up, The Right Honourable The Prisoner at the Barr. Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Lord High Steward of England, spake to him as follows.

Your Lordship is called here this day before the Lords in Parliament, to Lord High Steward. Answer to, and to be Tryed upon, the Impeachment presented to them by the Commons House of Parliament, in the Name of themselves, and all the Commons of England: And that their Lordships are resolved to hear both the Accusation and Defence, with all Equity. And therefore think fit in the first place, That your Lordship should hear the Impeachment of High Treason read.

The Impeachment was accordingly read by the Clerk of the Parliament.

A little after the entrance into it, a Chair was brought to the Prisoner by the Gentleman Usher, and the Prisoner sate down thereon by their Lordships direction.

After the Charge was read, the Earl of Straffords Answer was likewise read. And no more of proceedings that day.

[Page 102] Only the Lord Steward said further to the Prisoner, That his Lordship Lord High Steward. had heard the whole Impeachment of the House of Commons read; And his own Answer: on which he hath put himself for Trial. That which is now to follow, their Lordships have commanded him to say, is the managing of the Evidence by those the House of Commons shall please to appoint, for the proving of this Charge.

But likewise they have Commanded him to say, That the time being so far spent, it may not be so proper now to proceed further in the business; That this shall be sate upon only once a day, which will be fittest both for their Lordships, and for the House of Commons: And that they conceive it will agree with the sense of the House of Commons, not to fall into the particular management of the Evidence so late, but to defer it till the mor­row, at the hour of nine of the Clock.

My Lord of Strafford did then desire to know, whether he might with E. of Strafford. their Lordships good leave and favour, say any thing at that time or no.

The Lord High Steward answered, that their Lordships Commandment is, Lord High Steward. to let his Lordship know, That if the House of Commons proceed not by their Members to manage the Evidence this day, then what his Lordship hath to say to this House, may be put off to another time.

And so their Lordships Adjourned to the House above, (by which is meant the House where the Lords use to sit in Parliament) and appointed the next morning to proceed in this business.

The Second day.
Tuesday, March 23. 1640

THeir Lordships being set, the Lord Steward recited in brief the pro­ceedings of the day before, adding, that naturally and properly, it Lord High Steward. belongs (in the next place) for those whom the House of Commons have deputed to manage their Evidence, in pursuance of the Articles of Impeach­ment, to begin the work of the day.

Then Mr. Pym, one of the Committee appointed for the manage­ment of the Evidence, began as followeth.

My Lords,

We stand here by the Commandment of the Knights, Citizens and Bur­gesses, Mr. Pym. now assembled for the Commons in Parliament. And we are ready to make good that Impeachment whereby Thomas Earl of Strafford stands charged in their Name, and in the Name of all the Commons of England, with High Treason.

This, My Lords, is a Great Cause, and we might sink under the weight of it, and be astonished with the Lustre of this Noble Assembly, if there [Page 103] were not in the Cause strength and vigour to support it self, and to encou­rage us; It is the Cause of the King, it concerns His Majesty in the Ho­nour of His Government, in the Safety of His Person, in the Stability of His Crown.

It is the Cause of the Kingdom, It concerns not only the Peace and Prosperity, but even the Being of the Kingdom. We have that piercing Eloquence, the Cries and Groans, and Tears, and Prayers of all the Sub­jects assisting us. We have the three Kingdoms, England, and Scotland, and Ireland, in Travail and Agitation with us, bowing themselves, like the Hindes spoken of in Iob, to cast out their Sorrows.

Truth and Goodness (My Lords) they are the Beauty of the Soul, they are the Perfection of all created Natures, they are the Image and Character of God upon the Creatures.

This Beauty, Evil Spirits, and Evil Men, have lost; but yet there are none so wicked, but they desire to march under the shew and shadow of it, though they hate the reality of it.

This unhappy Earl, now the Object of your Lordships Justice, hath ta­ken as much care, hath used as much cunning to set a face and counte­nance of Honesty and Justice upon his Actions, as he hath been negligent to observe the rules of Honesty in the Performance of all these Actions. My Lords, it is the greatest baseness of wickedness, that it dares not look in his own Colours, nor be seen in its natural Countenance. But Virtue, as it is amiable in all respects, so the least is not this. That it puts a Noble­ness, it puts a Bravery upon the Mind, and lifts it above Hopes and Fears, above Favour and Displeasure; it makes it always uniform and constant to it self.

The Service Commanded me and my Colleagues here, is to take off those Vizards of Truth and Uprightness, which hath been sought to be put upon this Cause, and to shew you his Actions and his Intentions, in their own natural Blackness and Deformity.

My Lords, He hath put on a Vizard of Truth in these words, (wherein he says) That he should be in his Defence more careful to observe Truth, than to gain Advantage to himself. He says, he would endure any thing rather than be saved by Falshoood.

It was a noble and brave Expression if it were really true.

My Lords, He hath likewise put on the Vizard of Goodness on his Actions, when he desires to recite his Services in a great many particulars, as if they were Beneficial to the Common-wealth and State, whereas we shall prove them Mischievous and Dangerous.

It is left upon me, My Lords, to take off these Vizards and Appearances of Truth and Goodness, in that part of his Answer which is the Preamble. And that I shall do with as much Faithfulness and Brevity as I can.

1. The First thing (My Lords) that I shall observe in the Preamble is this, That having recited all those great and honourable Offices which he hath done under His Majesty, he is bold to affirm, That he hath been care­ful and faithful in the Execution of them all.

My Lords, If he might be his own Witness, and his own Judge, I doubt not but he would be Acquitted.

It is said in the Proverbs of the Adulterous Woman, That she wipes her mouth, and says, she had done no Evil. Here is a wiping of the mouth, here is a verbal expression of Honesty. But (My Lords) the foulness and unjustness will never be wiped off, neither from his Heart, nor from his [Page 104] Actions; I mean for the time past, God may change him for the time to come: That is the first thing I observe.

2. My Lords, In the second place, out of his Apologetical Preamble, I shall observe this, He doth magnifie his own Endeavours in five particulars: 1. That he hath Endeavoured the maintenance of Religion. (I may miss in words, I shall not miss in sense.) 2. That he hath Endeavoured the Honour of the King. 3. The Encrease of His Revenue. 4. The Peace and Honour, and Safety of the Kingdom. 5. The Quiet and Peace of the People. These are his five particulars; and I shall give a short Answer to every one of them.

1. For Religion, (My Lords) we say, and we shall prove, that he hath been diligent indeed to favour Innovations, to favour Superstitions, to fa­vour the Incroachments and Usurpations of the Clergy: But for Religi­on it never received any advantage by him, nay, a great deal of hurt.

2. For the Honour of the King: (My Lords) We say it is the Honour of the King that He is the Father of His People, that He is the Fountain of Justice; and it cannot stand with His Honour and Justice to have His Government Stain'd and Polluted with Tyranny and Oppression.

3. For the Increase of His Revenue: It is true, there may be some Ad­dition of Sums; but we say, There is no Addition of Strength nor Wealth, because in those parts where it hath been increased, this Earl hath taken the greatest share himself: And when he hath spoiled and ravined on the People, he hath been content to yield up some part to the King, that he might with more security enjoy the rest.

4. For the Strength and Honour, and Safety of the Kingdom: (My Lords) In a time of Peace he hath let in upon us the Calamities of War, Weakness, Shame and Confusion.

5. And for the Quiet of the Subjects, He hath been an Incendiary, he hath Armed us amongst our selves, and made us weak and naked to all the World besides. This is that I shall answer to the second Head of his Apology.

3. The Third is this, (My Lords) That by his means many good and wholesome Laws have been made since his Government in Ireland.

Truly, (My Lords) if we should consider the particulars of these Laws, some of them will not be found without great Exception. But I shall make another Answer, good Laws, nay, the best Laws are no advantage when Will is set above Law, when the Laws have force to bind and restrain the Subject, but no force to Relieve and Comfort him.

4. He says in the Fourth place, He was a means of calling a Parliament not long after he came to his Government. My Lords, Parliaments with­out Parliamentary Liberties, are but a fair and plausible way into Bondage; That Parliament had not the Liberties of a Parliament; Sir Pierce Crosby for speaking against a Bill in the Commons House, was sequestred from the Council-Table, and Committed to Prison.

Sir Iohn Clotworthy, for the same Cause, was threatned that he should lose a Lease that he had. Mr. Barnewell, and two other Gentlemen, were threatned they should have Troops of Horse put upon them for speaking in the House. Proxies by dozens, were given by some of his Favourites: And (My Lords) Parliaments coming in with these Circumstances, they be Grievances, Mischiefs, and Miseries; no works of Thanks or Honour.

[Page 105] 5. The Fifth is, That he hath been a means to put off Monopolies, and other Projects that would have been Grievous and Burdensome to the Sub­ject; if he had hated the Injustice of a Monopoly, or the Mischief of a Monopoly, he would have hated it in himself; he himself would have been no Monopolist. Certainly, My Lords, It was not the love of Justice, nor the Common good, that moved him: And if he were moved by any thing else, he had his Reward. It may be it was because he would have no man gripe them in the Kingdom but himself; his own Harvest-crop would have been less, if he had had sharers. It may be it was because Mo­nopolies hinder Trade, he had the Customs, and the benefit of the Customs would have been less; when we know the particulars, we shall make a fit and proper Answer to them: But in the mean time, we are sure whatsoever was the reason, it was not Justice, nor love of Truth, that was the reason.

6. He saith in the sixth place, He had no other Commission but what his Predecessors had: And that he hath Executed that Commission with all Moderation. For the Commission, it was no Virtue of his if it were a good Commission, I shall say nothing of that. But for the second part, his Moderation; when you find so many Imprisoned of the Nobility; so many men, some adjudged to Death, some Executed without Law; when you find so many publick Rapines on the State, Soldiers sent to make good his Decrees; so many whippings in defence of Monopolies; so many Gen­tlemen that were Jurors, because they would not apply themselves to give Verdicts on his side, to be fined in the Star-Chamber.

Men of Quality to be disgraced, set on the Pillory, and wearing Pa­pers, and such things, (as it will appear through our Evidence) can you think there was any Moderation. And yet truly, (My Lords) I can be­lieve, That if you compare his Courses with other parts of the World ungoverned, he will be found beyond all in Tyranny and Harshness; but if you compare them with his mind and disposition, perhaps there was Moderation; Habits we say, are more perfect than Acts, because they be nearest the principle of Actions. The Habit of Cruelty in himself (no doubt) is more perfect than any Act of Cruelty he hath Committed; but if this be his Moderation, I think all men will pray to be delivered from it: And I may truly say that is verified in him, The Mercies of the Wicked are Cruel.

7. I come to the seventh, and that is concerning the Kings Revenue: That he hath improved it from 57000 l. to 120000 l. and that he hath done it by Honourable and Just ways. That he hath made the Kingdom able to Support it self. That he hath improved the Kings Revenue by many rich and great Purchases. That he hath saved the Charge of the Navy, by bearing 7000 l. a year in Ireland, which was born here before. And then he says for a Conclusion, That he never took Money out of the Kings Exchequer. My Lords, I must run over all these.

For the Enlargement or Increase of the Revenue of that Kingdom, I think there is a little fault in his Arithmetick, but I will not charge him with that now.

But for his Honourable ways of Increasing it; if Monopolies, if Vexa­tion of the Subject, be Honourable ways, we shall leave that to your Lordships to judge. But most of his increases are made upon Monopolies. It is true, there is another way of bargaining, but it hath been mixed [Page 106] with Rigour and Rapine, and Injustice. Men have been driven out of their Estates; Offices have been found by force. Men have been driven to resign their Estates: And is this a Just way of improving a Kings Re­venue? that I shall submit to your Lordships.

Then he says, He hath made the Kingdom able to Support it self: My Lords, He that hath no Harvest of his own, must Glean after another mans Reapers. Truly, this was none of his work: The Kingdom was able to subsist of it self before he came thither. For that we shall Appeal to the Records of the Exchequer, betwixt the year 1622. and the time of his Government, which was nine years at least, during which, nothing went out of this Kingdom to the support of that Island. The 7000 l. for the Navy, was born in Ireland before his time a year or two; so he comes near the truth of that, yet misses a year of the truth.

But if it were true; hath it been only by the ordinary Revenue that it hath supported it self? He hath had six Subsidies; a year, or two of Contribution, which the Irish gave towards the supporting of the Charge of Ireland. It was not his Husbanding, nor his managing of the Revenue; And truly if the Kingdom were able to support it self, (as it was before he came thither) by the Revenue of the Kingdom, and by the help of that Contribution, it would be very fit, (since there may be many In­creases since) to know what is become of 300000 l. for six Subsidies, and of the Contribution money; and indeed there is a great suspicion, that that went another way But that you may the better observe his Hus­bandry, I shall speak of his last years Accompt; the 20th of March, (now something more than a year since) the Under-Treasurer delivered an Ac­count, on which there was 101000 l. remaining in the Kings Coffers. Since that time there hath been received 112000 l. for the King. (I speak of round Sums, (My Lords) I leave out pounds and pence, and such things: This is 213000 l. He hath received out of the Exchequer in England 50000 l. There are Debts in Ireland, 60000 l. and what other Debts we know not: Here is above 320000 l. consumed in a year; which is almost as much as Queen Elizabeth consumed in any year when Tyrone was in Rebellion, and an Army of Spaniards was there.

My Lords, He saith he never took Money out of the Exchequer; if he rests in that Affirmation, it will be very near truth, yet serves but to shadow a falshood, which is worse, to cover and to glaze, under such a Colour of Truth as that is, a notable Falshood.

My Lords, It is true, he hath taken no Money out of the Exchequer; but he could be content to take from the Under-Treasurer of the Exche­quer, 24000 l. about two years since, and to keep it for his own occasions; when the Kings Army was in want: And he paid it in but lately.

And before I pass from this matter of the Revenue, give me leave to speak something of the increase that comes in by the Customs.

It is true, there is a great increase; but if your Lordships look to the beginning of that bargain, you shall find the notablest cozenage that ever was offered to a Prince, in one that was a sworn Servant, and intrusted with so great a Charge.

It will be more fully opened in the Article that concerns the Customs; but I shall speak of it a little: He made a bargain, and under pretence of getting of 1350 l. gain to the King, he gave cause of Allowances and De­falcations; whereby he took forth of the Kings Purse 6000 l. a year, or very near, which the King had before. He laid new Additions of charge on the Customs, which came to 12000 l. So that on a bargain of [Page 107] giving 1350 l. more than was reserved on the former Lease, He was sure, that when he made the bargain, of gaining 18 or 20000 l.

8. But I shall pass from the Revenue of the Crown, to the Revenue of the Church, (which is in the 8th place) He saith he hath been a great Husband for the Church, and truly hath brought in many Lands to the Church; but he hath brought them in by ways without Law, without Rules of Justice: He hath taken away mens Inheritances. And here (My Lords) is an offering of Rapine, an offering of Injustice and Vio­lence: And will God accept such an Offering. Must the Revenues of the Church be raised that way. It is true, it was the more in the way of his own Preferment. He knew who sat at the Helme here, the Archbishop of Canterbury; and such services might win more credit with him. It was not an Eye to God and Religion; but an Eye to his own Preferment. I shall speak no more of that.

9. I come to the 9th head; and that is the building of Churches. Many Churches have been built since his Government. Truly, My Lords, why he should have any Credit or Honour, if other men builded Churches, I know not: I am sure we hear of no Churches he hath built himself: If he would have been careful to have set up good Preachers, that would have stirred up Devotion in men, and made them desirous of the knowledge of God, and by that means made more Churches, it had been something; But I hear nothing of Spiritual Edification, nothing of the knowledge of God that by his means hath been dispersed in that Kingdom. And cer­tainly they that strive not to build up mens Souls in a Spiritual way of Edi­fication, let them build all the material Churches that can be, they will do no good; God is not worshipped with Walls, but he is worshipped with Hearts.

10. He saith in the 10th place, That many Orthodox and Learned Preachers have been advanced by his means; and the Doctrine and Disci­pline of the Church of England, by his means Protected and Defended. My Lords, I shall give but two or three Paterns of the Clergy that he hath preferred. If you will take Doctor Atherton, he is not to be found now above Ground; for he was hanged for many foul and unspeakable Offences.

Doctor Bramhill hath been preferred to a great Bishoprick; but he is a man that now stands charged with High Treason: he hath been but few years in Ireland, and yet hath laid out at least 30000 l. in Purchases. I shall name but one Chaplain more, and that is one Arthur Gwyn, who about 1634. was an Under-Groom to the Earl of Corke in his Stable: In the year after, Dr. Bramhill preferred him to be a Clergy-man; and a Par­sonage, and two Vicaridges Impropriate, were taken from my Lord of Corke, and given to this Arthur Gwyn. I shall add no more Patterns of his Clergy.

11. I go to the 11th, and that is concerning the Army: He hath many glorious Expressions of his Service concerning the Army; That they are 1000 Horse and 2000 Foot: And that there hath been very few Papists Soldiers or Officers; and none preferred by himself. Truly, I think he says true, or within one of true in this; for there was but one preferred by himself, and therefore I shall not stand upon that.

[Page 108] But he says this Army was paid out of the Revenue of the Crown, which heretofore it was not wont to be. To that I have spoken before, and shewed, that many years before his time all the Charges of Ireland were born within Ireland.

He says, (and I speak that as to the Army too) That neither the Arms nor Wages have been burdensome to the people of Ireland; but their Lodgings and Billettings have not been easie, and not without discontent, Why (My Lords) in Dublin it self, where they have a Charter that exempts them from Billetting of Soldiers, they have been faign to pay for Billetting of Soldiers. Nay, those Soldiers that were Servants and Dwellers in his own houses, and other places, must have their Billetting moneys. And of this there hath been Petitions and Complaints; nay, it hath been spoken of in Parliament there; and yet he can tell you, that the marching and laying of Soldiers is without burthen and grievance to the People: that was the Eleventh.

12. I go to the 12th, and that is the great increase of Trade: The in­crease of Shipping 100 to one. Truly (My Lords) in a time of Peace, and in a growing Kingdom as that was, being formerly unhusbanded, It is no wonder, that when Land increases in the Manurance, and People increase in Number, both Shipping and Trade increases. But it is the advantage of the time, not the advantage of his Government; for (My Lords) his Government hath been destructive to Trade: And that will manifestly ap­pear by the multitude of Monopolies that he hath exercised in his own person. And that is all I shall speak to the 12th.

13. The 13th is, That Justice hath been administred without bribery, without partiality, without Corruption; these are Glorious things. But there will as much fall upon him of Corruption and Injustice, as of any other Offence; And that (My Lords) will appear to you through the whole course of our Evidence: I shall not now speak of the particulars. And that we may not content our selves with particular witnesses only, I shall humbly desire, That the Remonstrance of the Parliament of Ireland, both of the Lords and of the Commons, may be read: And they will give a sufficient Testimony of the quality of his Justice.

14. The 14th (My Lords) is this, That he hath been a Means to His Majesty for a Parliament in England. It is true he was: And it is as true, that we count that as mischievous a part of his design, as any thing else. Into what a miserable Dilemma (My Lords) did he bring the Kingdom, that we must surrender the Liberties of the Kingdom in Parliament, or see them oppressed with Force and Violence out of Parliament. The parti­culars of this I shall leave for the instant; for there is an Article that con­cerns this.

I have now passed through all the material parts of the Apologetical Preamble.

He concludes with a desire, That he may not be charged with Errors of his understanding or Judgment, being not bred up in the Law, or with weakness, to which humane Nature is subject. Truly, it would be far from us to charge him with any such mistakes; No (My Lords) we shall charge him with nothing but what the Law in every mans breast condemns, the Light of nature, the Light of common reason, the Rules [Page 109] of common Society: And that will appear in all the Articles which my Colleagues will offer to you.

My Lords, I have some few Witnesses which I shall desire may be heard to the points I have opened; and I shall in the first place desire, that Sir Pierce Crosby may be heard concerning the breach of Priviledge in Parlia­ment: Also Sir Iohn Clotworthy, Nich. Barnewell, Nich. Plunket, and Sir Iames Montgomery. I have some Witnesses to the point of Revenue, Sir Robert Pye, Sir Edward Warder, and Sir Adam Loftus.

Gentlemen, You who are of the Committee, I am commanded to let Lord High Steward. you know, That the Lords will allow you all the Testimonies you can produce to make good the Impeachment; but the Witnesses which you do produce, must be deposed before their Lordships.

Mr. Pym replied, My Lords, the Commons agree to it; and in the first Mr. Pym. place we shall call Sir Pierce Crosby, who was sworn accordingly.

My Lords, I humbly crave leave whether I may not make my exception E. of Strafford. to any Witness.

Yes, you may. Lord High Steward.

We desire to be heard upon that point of Exception, That if my Lord Mr. Pym. of Strafford will make any Exception why a Witness should not be heard at all, it may be according to the Rules of Justice.

The Lord High Steward declaring, the Prisoner might except against the Lord High Steward. person of the Witness, if he have just Cause, my Lord of Strafford pro­ceeded in substance as followeth:

My Lords, I humbly conceive, that I have against this Gentleman Sir Pierce Crosby, just occasion of Exception, (as not being a competent Wit­ness) E. of Strafford. for that the said Sir Pierce hath been sentenced in the Star-Chamber, for a very undue practise against me, tending to no less than the taking away of my Life, charging me, (and practising to prove it by Testimony of witness) that I had killed a man in Ireland, whom I protest, I did ne­ver so much as touch.

That ever since (the said Sir Pierce having broke Prison, and made an Escape out of the Fleet) he hath remained abroad, and never came hither till such time as the Parliament sate here; and now is returned to make Complaint in this business against me, or indeed against the Court of Star-Chamber rather: And standing thus, whether the said Sir Pierce shall be allowed a Witness against me, I humbly refer it to Your Lordships Judgments.

My Lords, We expected my Lord of Strafford would have shown on Mr. Maynard. what reason Sir Pierce was censured; for a man Criminous in one kind, may be nevertheless fit to give Testimony in another kind. If it be a par­ticular practice against my Lord of Strafford, when their Lordships have heard what that practice was, and have heard likewise the Witness, they will believe him according to the weight of the Testimony, compared with the fault, or whatsoever else is in the Sentence. But in the mean time, they conceive it is no Exception, but that the Witness should be [Page 110] heard, This that is charged on my Lord of Strafford, being a Crime of High Treason, it concerns the Common-wealth, the King being party, and not the Witness that is produced.

And whereas it is informed that Sir Pierce Crosby brake Prison: The Gentleman tells us it is not so; he paid the Kings Fine, and so was dis­charged. But though he had, it will not take away his Testimony when he is present; which he said, he spake only to give satisfaction to that aspersion.

I must desire their Lordships directions, whether Sir Pierce Crosby be Lord High Steward. allowed, notwithstanding my Lord of Straffords exceptions against him, and Mr. Maynards allegations why his Testimony should be given in this case, or no: And divers of their Lordships called to have the House Ad­journed to the House above, that they might there debate and deter­mine it.

Mr. Pym did thereupon offer, that they will at present lay him aside till Mr. Pym. their Lordships have had opportunity to consider, and bring him again to morrow; whereunto Mr. Maynard added this further: We desire Mr. Maynard. rightly to express our selves to Your Lordships, We will lay him aside till Your Lordships have heard others, not that they wave him wholly: And we pray it may be so entred, The Lord Steward declaring it so to be.

It is so understood. Lord Fligh Steward.

In the next place, we desire that Sir Iohn Clotworthy may be called, whom we produce to this point, That during the Parliament in Ireland, Mr. Pym. for speaking against a Bill in the Commons House, he was threatned by Sir George Ratcliffe, (whom we take to be bound up in one Cause with my Lord of Strafford, and to be moved by my Lord of Straffords spirit) and that Parliaments are not Priviledges, when Parliament Liberties are not observed.

Sir Iohn Clotworthy was sworn:

My Lords, We desire he may be asked, whether for having delivered Sir Io. Clotwor­thy, a Witness. his Opinion against a Bill preferred to the Parliament in Ireland by the Earl of Strafford, about the 10th year of this King, he was not asked by The Question. Sir George Ratcliffe, concerning a Lease that he had; the question intima­ting a Threat, that he should suffer for speaking so freely?

To which he answered, My Lords, In the 10th year of the King, I Sir Io. Clotwor­thy. serving in Ireland in Parliament, did Vote against a Bill; as soon as I had Voted against it, Sir George Ratcliffe, being one of the Tellers, on his counting the numbers, how many Yea's, and how many No's, He came to me, and said thus, Have not you a Lease in such a place? I told him yea; remember that, saith he: This is all I can remember. And this (he added) was in the Commons House.

2. He being interrogated whether he knew any thing of Sir Pierce Crosbies Commitment, or no?

He answered, I know it only by hear-say, he was a Member of the House when I had the Honour to serve; I heard the expression of Sir George Ratcliffe at that time: And the common voice was, that he was under re­straint; but I saw him not.

[Page 111] Being asked whether there was any other occasion of these words but his said Vote:

He answered, Truly (My Lords) I can apprehend none.

4. Being asked whether he heard Sir George Ratcliffe threaten Sir Pierce Crosby in Parliament:

He answered, I heard Sir Pierce Crosby speaking against a Bill in Parlia­ment; and as soon as he had sate down from speaking against the Bill, Sir George Ratcliffe said to him, That is not Privy-Councellor like, or to that purpose, I heard him.

To the point of Sir Pierce Crosbies being sequestred from the Coun­cil upon his speaking in Parliament.

The Lord Ranulagh being sworn, was interrogated whether about the Lord Ranulagh a Witness. 10th year of the King, he knew Exception to be taken against Sir Pierce Crosby, for delivering his Opinion in Parliament; and what proceedings were against him thereupon:

He answered, (My Lords) to the best of my remembrance, Sir Pierce Crosby being a Privy-Councellor in Ireland, was charged at the Council-Board for Voting against a Bill that was transmitted by the Lord Deputy and Council; and hereupon the Opinion of the Board was asked; and by the advice of that Board Sir Pierce Crosby was sequestred from the Council. This is as much as I can remember.

2. Being asked by whom he was sequestred: He answered, By the Deputy and the Council.

3. Being asked who began the Question: He answered, My Lord Deputy charged him.

My Lords, I humbly desire that my Lord Ranulagh may be asked, whe­ther E. of Strafford. when things are handled at the Council-Table, the Deputy be not the man that propounds them to the Council or no; not as a party complain­ing, but as belonging to the duty of his place: And how he behaved him­self in that business.

To which the Lord Ranulagh being interrogated,

Answered, It is the constant course for the Deputy to propose the Lo. Ranulagh. things that be brought to the Board; and seldom doth any of the Council propound any thing; but the Proposition comes from the Deputy.

But being further asked on the Committees motion, whether this of Sir Pierce Crosbies came to the Board by motion of my Lord alone, or that any other moved him in it, or conveyed it to him:

He answered, I cannot charge my memory where it had beginning; but as I remember, My Lord Deputy Wandesford that died last, and Mr. Wands­ford, and Sir George Ratcliffe, were movers of it; but whether it moved originally from them, or from my Lord himself, I know not, I rather be­lieve it proceeded from my Lord Deputy, as being proper for him.

The Lord Mountnorris sworn and interrogated, whether he was present L. Mountnorris a Witness. at Council-Table when Sir Pierce Crosby was sequestred from Council-Table; and for what Reasons he was sequestred:

He answers, I was then present at Board, and he was removed on Com­plaint made by Sir George Ratcliffe at the Board, touching his Voting of a [Page 112] Bill in Parliament: And when he said it was not spoken like a Councellor, he said, he would answer it to him that made him a Councellor. That was the effect, as I can remember, of his Accusation; and there were se­veral others that testified the same words that Sir George Ratcliffe accused him of, and that was the reason he was sequestred by most Voices at Coun­cil-Table, though he had many Votes with him.

And being further asked, what my Lord of Straffords Vote was:

He answered, It was for his Sequestration.

Mr. Nicholas Barnewell sworn; Being asked, whether for his delivering his Opinion in Parliament, Sir George Ratcliffe did ask whether the said Nicholas Barne­well a Witness. Mr. Barnewell's house was capacious to receive 500 men, to be laid upon him; intimating thereby, that he must look for Soldiers to be laid upon him for that reason:

He answered, There was a Debate in the House concerning certain Boroughs sequestred from the House by reason of a Judgment in the Ex­chequer, which the House conceived an Erronious Judgment, and were of Opinion that the old Boroughs should be called in; I was of that Opinion, Sir George Ratcliffe was of another Opinion; and would have another question debated: And coming out of the House, he asked me, Will not your House hold Five hundred men? I answered, you know what my house will hold as well as my self; and I smiling at it, he an­swered, But it is no laughing matter, you shall have 500 men laid on you.

I desire it may be asked, when this was spoken: E. of Strafford.

He answered, It was in November last; and that my Lord of Strafford was not then in the Kingdom.

Mr. Pym observed, That the Spirit of my Lord of Strafford could move in Sir George Ratcliffe, wheresoever it was spoken; And Mr. Barnewell ad­ded, Mr. Pym. it was done in November then last.

In the next place, We shall shew the untruth of that part of my Lord of Straffords Preamble, that says, The Soldiers in Ireland are disposed with so much contentment to the People, that they are no burden to them.

Mr. Egor was called for a Witness, and Sworn. Mr. Egor a Witness.

Being interrogated whether he knew of any Soldiers Billetted in Dublin? whether they were not a Grievance? whether that City hath not a special Charter of Exemption?

He answered, May it please Your Lordships, the City of Dublin doth bear the Charge of 40 Horse, and pays to them 45 l. a month for Billet­ting; which is conceived they should not bear, in regard they have a Charter that says, Nullus Mareschallus Capiat hospitium intra Civitatem; and therefore they conceive it a heavy burden, and it is as much as a Subsidy: And another part of the City standing in another County, pays 10 l. a month; so they pay in all 55 l. a month.

I humbly desire he may be asked, whether before my Lord of Straffords time, and as long as he can remember, The Lord-Deputies Foot-guard, and E. of Strafford. Horse-Companies, were not Billetted in Dublin?

He answered, To the Foot-guard, when my Lord of Faulkland was there, they gave Lodging continually; but it was never drawn to matter [Page 113] of money: And till now we had never Horse upon us, except it were for a month, or so.

In the next place, We humbly desire the Remonstrance of the Nobility, Mr. Glyn. and the House of Commons in Ireland, might be read as Testimonies of my Lord of Straffords Justice.

I desire to know whether questions are to be asked of matters not con­tained E. of Strafford. in the Charge, as the Remonstrance is not.

My Lords, The Subverting of the Laws, and Corruption in Govern­ment Mr. Glyn. and Justice, is generally laid in the Charge; and he hath answered, that he hath administred Justice with Integrity: And this we produce to shew, That the frontespiece of his Answer, is in that part untrue.

To prove the Truth of the Copy of the Lords Remonstrance now produced, the Lord Digby of Ireland was Sworn; and he on his Oath said, That the Copy was delivered him at his coming over, by the Clerk of the Lords House in Ireland, to be brought over hither by Order of the Lords there.

And the Lord Baltinglasse Deposed, That he knew it to be the Clerks hand; and they were both present at the Voting of it.

The same was read, bearing date February 22. 1640. The Protestation Remonstrance. and Declaration of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Assem­bled; We desire to apply it to disprove part of the Preamble of my Lord of Straffords Answer.

I desire my Lord Digby may be asked whether he gave his Vote to this E. of Strafford. Protestation;

We produce it not as the Act of any particular man, but of the Manager. Lords.

Your Lordships may observe, that this is fallen out since my Impeach­ment of High Treason here: And that it is followed by Faction and Corre­spondence, E. of Strafford. as in time might be made appear, if I could undertake it; and a strong Conspiracy against me.

My Lords, These words are not to be suffered; Charging the House of Mr. Glyn. Commons with Faction, Correspondency, and Conspiracy, We desire Your Lordships Justice in this.

God forbid I should think there was, or could be any thing in that E. of Strafford. House, or any Member of it, but that which agrees with Truth and Ju­stice, and Equity. I must profess to Your Lordships, I had no Reflection or Intention, either upon the Lords House there, or upon the Honourable House of Commons here; but upon certain Persons that are not Members of the House here, that have Correspondency with them in Ireland, that are not Members of the House there.

We must consult with the House of Commons concerning the prosecu­tion Mr. Glyn. of this Exception to his words; and in the mean time we will reserve it to our selves; and so we shall proceed.

[Page 114] We desire the Remonstrance made by the House of Commons in Ireland, (being deposed unto by Patrick Gough, That about February 25. it was delivered him, sealed up in a box, with other things, before his face; being called on by the House to be brought to the Committee for Irish affairs in England) may be read.

Which Remonstrance was read accordingly. Remonstrance.

Your Lordships may observe, That my Lord of Straffords glorious De­claration Manager. of his own Merits, was confuted by the whole Parliament; and that the whole sum of the Charge, is confirmed by the Testimony of all Ireland.

To the point of Revenue of Ireland; for the contradicting of my Lord of Straffords Affirmation, That Ireland supporteth its own Charge;

Sir Edward Warder produced, and Sworn, was interrogated when the last money was sent out of this Kingdom for support of His Majesties Affairs of Ireland:

He answered, The last money sent over for payment of the Army there, Witness. was in the Term of Easter, 1621. and it was 10000 l. in full of 20000 l. for one whole years charge, beginning the first of April, 1619. and ending the last of March following; which was 17 Iac.

Being interrogated, whether since that time the State here hath been actually charged with the Affairs of Ireland.

He answered, Nothing hath been issued out of the Receipt of His Ma­jesties Exchequer for the Maintenance of Ireland since this time, only such moneys as have been lately issued for the Army, and what hath been issued to the Treasurer of the Navy, and the Officers of it, for the maintaining of Ships on the Coast; but otherwise, no money hath been issued as a constant setled thing out of the Receipt of His Majesties Exchequer, for any thing arising since the last of March, 1620.

I desire he may be asked what was since issued for the Navy. E. of Strafford.

We admit that the Charge of the Navy continued divers years after, yet a few years before my Lord of Straffords Government it was taken Manager. off too.

The Manager did so open it, and Sir Edward Warder did in effect set it Lord High Steward. forth so: Therefore that question was waved.

Sir Robert Pye produced, and Sworn to that point of Revenue; and being interrogated to the same purpose,

Answered, No money hath issued out of the Receipt, but as Sir Edward Witness. Warder delivered it; and I know of no other money, but only for the Maritime parts, something hath been paid to the Treasurer of the Navy: And besides the 50000 l. of late, I know not any.

The Lord Mountnorris was called upon; and being asked whether the Charge of 7000 l. a year for the Navy of Ireland, was not taken off a year before my Lord of Straffords Government:

He answered, I cannot say the sum was 7000 l. But two of the Whelps Witness. [Page 115] employed there before my Lord of Strafford came to the Government, were defrayed; whether wholly, or in part, I cannot tell, but they had good large sums of money, and were paid in the Kingdom.

I desire my Lord Mountnorris may be asked, whether when I came to the Government, the constant Charge did not exceed the constant Reve­nue; E. of Strafford. and how much?

It is true, the Irish gave sixscore Thousand pounds towards the Charge; Manager. so that the Supply came out of Ireland, though not out of the constant Revenue of Ireland: but it came not out of this Kingdom.

He further answered, the Constant Revenue did not do it, There was Witness. a Contribution by Loan from the Country, to supply it; but before my Lord of Faulkland went over, I heard my Lord of Middlesex tell him, They must look for no more money, England had nourished Ireland long enough, she must now live upon her own Milk.

The reason why money did not go out, was because 120000 l. was sup­plyed E of Strafford. by a Contribution; notwithstanding which, when he came to serve the King in that Kingdom, the Crown was indebted very near 100000 l. Sterling.

He hath received 300000 l. for Subsidies. Manager.

It will Appear on Accompts, to be bestowed faithfully and justly every E. of Strafford. penny, for the King.

To the point of my Lord of Straffords taking of 24000 l. of the Kings money, and disposing it for a year and a half, notwithstanding His Maje­sties Wants, and the Necessities of the Army.

Sir Adam Loftus Vice-Treasurer, produced and Sworn, was interroga­ted, whether my Lord of Strafford had not 24000 l. out of the Kings Re­venue? and how long time? and when was it paid in?

He answered, My Lord of Strafford and Sir George Ratcliffe, had never Witness. a penny out of the Exchequer, but on such Warrants as I durst not deny them, for their due Entertainment, and other things importing His Maje­sties Service. But I must confess, that they being Partners in the Customs, some moneys were to be paid for the profits of the Customs which were in arrear; and Sir George Ratcliffe moved me to give discharges for it, and he would give me my Lord Lieutenants Bond, and his own, for paying of it upon demand; which I accepted of, and accordingly did give those discharges.

Whence observe, discharges are money; for so much money should have Manager. been paid in, and if it be intercepted, the King wants His money.

Being asked what was the sum; and how long was it kept:

He answered, The sum, as I take it, was 19000 l. on one Bond, and Witness. 5000 l. on another; and as I take it, it was in the year, 1638.

Being asked again, how long it was kept:

He answered, It was paid lately; within these three months.

Whence observe, it was since the questioning of him in Parliament. The Manager. Parliament proves a good Officer for the King there.

[Page 116] I shall reserve my self to give full satisfaction to this in its proper time, E. of Strafford. it being part of my Charge; But at present I desire Sir Adam Loftus may be ask'd the question, Whether when I came into that Kingdom, the con­stant Revenue fell not short of the constant Charge, at least 20000 l. a year.

We except against Interlocutory discourses; and having now concluded this part of the Charge, we desire, that if my Lord of Strafford would Manager. say any thing in answer to what hath been now said, he might say it pre­sently, else we should be on great disadvantages.

My Lords, I conceive the Proposition to be fair; and it is that which I desire, my memory being weak, and not versed in these kinds of Pro­ceedings: E. of Strafford. I intended to have made it my humble suit for longer time to Answer to this days Proceedings, but shall readily Answer every particular Article in order as they go along; and shall obey and observe the Order pro­posed. But as to these things which I did not expect, as the Remon­strances, and other Matters opened, being not in this particular Charge, I humbly crave Your Lordships leave and liberty, to recollect my self, and then I will give them the best Answer I can. For to Answer them suddenly I confess I am not so well fitted, as I trust I shall be.

And I desire leave to say in the presence of Almighty God, That I shall desire to be delivered from the Afflictions that God Almighty hath laid on me for my sins, no other way than as in the Intention of my heart, and En­deavour of my mind, I have been most faithful and true to His Majesty and the Common-wealth; and I well trust and hope, that by the time all these things come to conclusion, and have been fully heard, I shall recover in great measure, the favour and good Opinion of the Honourable House of Commons; in which House, I have spent a great part of my time: And I doubt not but it is known to divers that sit here, what my Carriage and Behaviour hath been there. And I desire no more, (and I am sure it will be granted, they are so just and good) but that they will reserve towards me, an Opinion of Charity, that I give such an Account, as may preserve me to be the same in their Opinion, that I was formerly. I was never yet Impeached in my private Conversation, of untruth, and hope they will think of me charitably, till they have heard the whole business; and I doubt not but I shall take off, in great part, their hard Opinion, and procure to my self, their Compassion and Favour; and that I shall go in peace and quietness to my Grave, leaving all publick Employments whatsoever. And I humbly beseech the House of Commons, to incline a gracious Opinion to me, so far forth, that I am the same man in Opinion, that I was when I was one of them; and I doubt not but this, out of their Nobleness and Goodness, they will afford me.

But for these particulars, I humbly crave, that with Your Lordships good leave, I may have a little time with my self to consider them, be­cause they be new; and for the rest, I shall obey Your Lordships Order, and give them thanks.

No Exception is taken, but to what is affirmed in his own Answer; and the Commons will think it another mans Answer, and not his own, if he Manager. be not ready to make good the Truth of it. These things should not be new; for every man should be ready to maintain his own Assertions.

[Page 117] I am (My Lords) in an unknown way, being not versed in these things; E. of Strafford. if I might have had the Assistance of Council, it would have been a great ease to me: but it is not possible for me to recollect all which the Worthy Gentleman hath said so materially, and with so much weight. Matters of Fact I could answer to, Article by Article; but to answer presently so great and tedious a discourse, so well delivered, and so weighty, I profess I am not able; my Memory being not able to carry it. But if Your Lordships would please, out of Your Nobleness and Goodness, to give me Respite to recollect my self to these things that be Generalities, I should be able to give a good Accompt thereof, protesting seriously, That I think every part of the Preamble to be very Just and True; and I hope, under fa­vour, to make it appear so, when I shall shew those things which have not yet been so fully informed and known, as I trust they may be here­after.

My Lords, We humbly desire, that since my Lord of Strafford is not Manager. ready to give Satisfaction to what hath been disproved in his Answer, we may proceed to that which he is ready to give Answer and Satisfaction to; and that my Lord of Strafford might understand, That if he Answers not now what hath been said concerning the Preamble, he must have no time to Answer it hereafter.

I Appeal to Your Lordships; and I renew my Request, That I may for E. of Strafford. these, have time to recollect my Thoughts till next day: If it may not be granted, I beseech Your Lordships to bear with many of my Infirmities, being very great, both in Body and Mind; and to consider, That my sad Condition doth some way plead for a little Compassion and Favour, I being in a way I was never in before, and having not the great Parts that others have. Yet rather than I should be thought to Abuse Your Lord­ships with Untruths, I will do the best I can to maintain my Answer pre­sently; being confident, through the Blessing of Almighty God, that though the particulars thereof are delivered with a great deal of Weakness and Disadvantage, yet Your Lordships shall find them Truths, my own Heart (I protest before God) telling me so; and hope that God will give me Help and Assistance to make it appear so: And other than that I desire not to be; for if I were the man I am represented, I were not worthy to live: I confess, the Honourable House of Commons have pro­ceeded against me with all Reason and Justice that can be; being informed as they were, they could do no less; if they had done less, they had not performed their Trust with that fulness they should; and therefore I find no fault with them. But I beg leave to express a Truth as well as God shall enable me; hoping it will appear, that all I have said is true, as all is true to my knowledge. And I know it is in the Heart of every man that hears me, That I should have time to clear a Truth; no man can deny it: And therefore I humbly pray, I may not be suddenly taken, pro­testing seriously, I have said nothing but what I knew, or verily believed to be true.

We pray Your Lordships Resolution in this point, before we proceed Manager. any further.

Their Lordships thereupon Adjourned to the Upper-House; and about half an hour after, returned.

[Page 118] I am commanded to impart their Lordships Resolution, That since the Lord High Steward. Commons do not press these things as matters of Crime, but rather upon the matter of Truth, they conceive my Lord of Strafford need not fur­ther time for these particulars. And that if his Lordship will make any Answer to these particulars, he is to do it now.

I shall never do other than readily obey whatsoever Your Lordships E. of Straffords Speech. should please to command me, my heart paying you Obedience; and so in truth shall every thing that proceeds from me. The question (I ob­serve) is matter of Truth, or not Truth, in the Preamble (as they call it) of this my Answer; and to that, with all the Humility and Modesty in the World, I will apply my self, as not conceiving it any way becoming me to speak any thing of Sharpness in any kind, but with all Humility and Reverence to bear all these Afflictions, with acknowledgment unto Al­mighty God, and to lay them so to my heart, that they may provide for me in another World, where we are to expect the Consummation of all Blessedness and Happiness. And therefore to lay aside all these Aggrava­tions by words, wherewith I have been set forth to Your Lordships (only with this) that I trust I shall make my self appear a person otherwise in my Dispositions and Actions, than I have been rendred; and shortly and briefly, I shall fall upon the very points, as near as I can, that were men­tioned by that Noble Gentleman; and if I should forget any, I desire to be remembred of them, that I may give the best Answer I can on a sud­dain; with this Protestation, That if I had had time, I should have given a far clearer Answer, than on the sudden I shall be able to do.

I will take them as they lye in Order: And the first thing in this Answer is, That in Ireland, by my means, many good Laws were made for increase of the Kings Revenue, and for good of the Church and Common-wealth; and this I humbly conceive, was not denied directly, only it was inferr'd, That Laws were of no use where Will was put above Law.

That these Laws were made, the Acts of Parliament that are extant, and visible things, do make appear; For (though I might express it darkly, by reason I understood not matters of Law) the truth of it is, before such time as I came there, the Statutes of Wills and Uses, and Fraudulent Con­veyances, were not of force in Ireland; by which there was a very great mischief that fell many ways, both on the King, and specially on the English Planters: For by want of these Statutes, no man knew when he had a good title; and old Entayles would be set on foot, and by that means the later Purchaser avoided; by which means there was a great loss and pre­judice to the King in his Wards; which by these Laws are setled, and the Laws of Ireland brought much nearer the Laws of England than before. And in this point I conceive I am not absolutely gainsayed, but only con­ditionally, that is, that notwithstanding this, I have set up another Go­vernment, Arbitrary, and Tyrannical. To which, I shall not now trouble Your Lordships with an Answer, that being in the particulars of my Charge. And thus I think the first to be fairly and clearly An­swered.

Then, that there were more Parliaments in the time of my Government, than in 50 years before. There were two in my time; and if I might call Witnesses, it would appear, that there were not so many within that time [Page 119] before; but being not material to my Defence or Condemnation, I will not trouble Your Lordships with proof, unless you will require it; I ha­ving them here, that I think can make it good. And whereas in my Answer I deny that I ever had hand in any Project or Monopoly; and that I did prevent divers, that otherwise would have passed: I said that, under favour, with all duty and confidence; I must still affirm it, That I never had hand or share in any manner of Monopoly or Project whatsoever, unless the Tobacco-business were a Monopoly, which, under favour, I shall clear not to be; but that being part of my Charge, I think it impertinent now to give Answer unto it; but will satisfie Your Lordships in that behalf, in proper time and place: But more than that of Tobacco, I say absolutely and directly, I never had my hand or share in any Monopoly or Project; nay, I did, as murh as I could, Oppose all of them, particularly the Mo­nopoly of Iron-Pots; for which, I reserve my self to Answer as part of my Charge: And a new Book of Rates, whereby it was proposed, That the Rates of the Kings Customs might be increased. And this I did Oppose and Disavow, albeit I was a sharer in the Farm, and consequently should have had the Benefit and Advantage of it for my proportion; and by the Kings gracious Goodness (when His Majesty came to be more fully and clearly informed of it) it was stopped, and never went on: And this I will make appear in that point of the Articles that concern the Customs.

The Fourth is, That I have not had any greater Power, or larger Com­mission, than my Predecessors in that Government have had; which I conceive, under favour, is not controverted, but granted, and therefore stands good to me; or if it were controverted, I am able to make it ap­pear, that I have brought in nothing more than was formerly accustomed in the point of the Deputies-Commission.

The next thing in my Answer is, That the Revenue of Ireland was ne­ver able to Support it self before my coming thither; and that I say still, with all Humility and Duty, is most true: And I trust to make it appa­rently true presently, if Your Lordships will give me leave to call for, and examine my Witnesses. It being the Proofs Your Lordships will look to, and not to what was only alledged by that Worthy Gentleman: And fur­ther than Your Lordships shall find proved, I desire not to be believed.

The proof offered against me, is by Sir Edward Warder, and Sir Robert Pye, who testified, That from the year 1621. nothing went out of the Kings Exchequer to supply the Irish Affairs, saving only for the Maritime occasions. And this I believe to be true; for they be Gentlemen of Cre­dit that speak it: and I will believe them on their Words, much more on their Oathes.

But (under favour) there was for eight years together before my coming, a Contribution of 20000 l. a year paid by the Country; which was no part of the Kings Revenue, nor as I conceive, ever came into Ac­compt, nor was paid into the Exchequer, as will appear on the Fifteenth Article; but was a Gift of the Country, and applyed to the Kings Occa­sions: and that determined, the Revenue fell short 20000 l. of the Charge.

Besides, when I came into Ireland, the Crown was extreamly indebted, above (as I think (not to stand on particular sums and pence) 100000 l. Sterling. And by the Gentlemans own saying, when I came out of Ireland, [Page 120] I left 100000 l. in the Kings Coffers: And if any ask where the Accompt for the Subsidies is, There is 100000 l. Debt paid, 100000 l. left in the Kings Coffers; (For it appears by Sir Adam Loftus, that there was 100000 l. in the Exchequer when I came from thence) There was 15000 l. employed for buying Land, that yields the King 2000 l. a year. And so much of my Lord of Ormond, as yields 2500 l. a year: So that the Ac­compts will shew the bestowing of the Subsidies, with as much Advantage as might be, for the Kings Service. That the Revenue was short, I could make appear clearly. The occasion that no money came out of the Ex­chequer, was accidental, by a Contribution of the Country, no Revenue of the Kings. And if that had not been supplyed, there had been no possibility of defraying the Ordinary Charges of the Crown out of the Revenue; and that is the point wherein I differ from the Gentleman, his meaning being, That the ordinary Revenue of the Kingdom could not bear the ordinary Charge of the Kingdom. And I desire that Sir Adam Loftus and Sir Robert Dillom, may be examined upon such questions as shall be propounded in this point.

Your Lordship may examine them, but not upon Oath. Lord High Steward.

I will not displease, but perfectly obey in every thing. E. of Strafford.

It will not be denied, but the Revenue is increased by such means as my Manager. Lord of Strafford hath increased it by; yet it was not the natural Reve­nue, but the additional part, that came in by the Bounty of the Country, that supported the Charge many years before my Lord of Strafford came: So that if it be said Ireland supported not it self before he came thither, in the general sense it is untrue; if it be said in a special sense, that the Kings proper Revenue did not support it, that his Lordship says is true.

Whence I infer, that it was not much material to insist on this, for I meant E. of Strafford. it so; and it is plain and clear, that the Kings Revenue there was not able to bear the Charge of that Kingdom, by very near 23000 l. or 24000 l. a year: And it is now able to bear its own Charges, and yet there is an increase of Charge by 600 Horse; by which, the Army is stronger than it was.

And whereas it is said, I was short in the Shipping; I affirm, that under favour, I was not. It is true, that in the time of the late Justices, my Lord of Corke, and my Lord Loftus, the last years Charge of the Shipping was paid forth of Ireland: But it is as true, that when the Kingdom under­went the Charge, they lessened the Charge of the Kings Army, by striking 500 off from the Army; and transferred the Charge of their pay, to the easing of the Kings Revenue on the Navy. But that Charge being now increased again, and brought to the former certainty, I conceive I might truly say, There was in my time an ease to the Crown of England, (all things considered) which formerly it had not: It being not with the pre­judice of the Kings Service elsewhere, or lessening the standing Army, which in all times hath been the strongest support of the Kings Justice, and Ministers there; and which it deeply concerns the Crown of England, to keep in such a Condition, that they may be responsible to the King for the Services he shall Command: So that though the Shipping Charge was paid the last year, yet so paid, that the Kings Army was weakened 500 [Page 121] Foot; whereas now it is paid, and the Kings Army raised to a certainty again; and a Change is made to the better; for instead of 500 Foot, there is 600 Horse. And that I say, my Lord of Corke remembers very well, there being Letters of his, That Sir Pierce Crosby his Regiment, should be put off, and the money for maintenance thereof, should go to defray the Charge of the Kings Ships, for guard of the Coast.

And yet the Charge is much more now than it was; for the Charge was then only two Whelpes, as my Lord Mountnorris said: And now there be three Ships, The Swallow, a Ship of the Third Rank, and two lesser Ves­sels; so that I conceive my Answer, in my sense, was true.

For the matter of having money out of the Exchequer, I conceive my Answer to contain no matter of Untruth; for I had out of the Exchequer only 15000 l. and for that the King will be answered 2000 l. a year good Fee-farm Rent, in lieu of it; which he thought was no ill bargain. It is true, (I say) the money spoken of by Sir Adam Loftus, was borrowed on my own, and Sir George Ratcliffes Bond, to be paid upon sight. At that time (I praise God) I had Credit for 20000 l. and at this time (I thank God for that too) I have not Credit for 20 d. Gods Will be done, I obey it. But this money is honestly and justly paid; Where is the Crime then? might not I borrow of a Gentleman that would trust me with money, but it must be an Offence? It is true, it was of the Kings money; but the King had no use for it at that time. Had not I made use of it, it must other­wise have lain in the Exchequer, and yielded no profit; and besides, I borrowed it of one that was Accomptable for it.

But since I am put to it, I will shew that which will clear it from being a Crime indeed; which according to the Duty I owe unto His Majesty, my Master, his Command hitherto have I kept private to my self: And that is the Kings Warrant, being all of His own Hand writing.

Sir Adam Loftus, being then Vice-Treasurer, and now demanded the question, Whether that Warrant was produced to him at the borrowing of the money, confessed, that my Lord of Strafford never told him of the Witness. Warrant.

The Warrant was read, containing a Licence to make use of 40000 l. Kings Warrant read. of His Majesties Treasure, now in the hands of His Majesties Vice-Trea­surer, for three years; Provided, that for Security, there be always left in the hands of the Comptrollers, a Stock of Tobacco, amounting to 40000 l. at the least; with a direction to conceal this particular favour to him, that it might not be brought into precedent.

There was accordingly so much Tobacco left. But, by what Law E. of Strafford. I know not, The Magazines are seized on by Order from the Commons House of Parliament, my Goods possessed, and given over to others, to sell at their own prices; my people imprisoned, as if they had been Tray­tors Goods, and as if an Inquisition had been found upon me as a Traytor. And this is my Misfortune, to be very hardly dealt withall by the Com­mons House there, to say no more.

And whereas by the Kings Goodness I had liberty to take 40000 l. I took but 24000 l. And where I had liberty to take it for three years, (which expires not till Michaelmas next) I paid it in long before the time. [Page 122] And by this one particular I hope it will appear to Your Lordships, and the Gentlemen of the House of Commons, how Noble it will be to believe Charitably of me, till they hear all can be said; for I trust, in the whole course of this Trial, to appear an honest man.

And whereas I said, I never had but 15000 l. out of the Exchequer, and yet had 24000 l. borrowed as aforesaid. The King Commanded me I should not take notice of His gracious Favour; and therefore I conceive, that in Duty to my Master I ought not to have taken notice of it, other­wise my Answer should have clearly and plainly exprest it: I never having Disobeyed His Majesty, nor, by the Grace of God, never will.

For the 7000 l. for the Guard of the Irish Coast, that was mentioned already; and I shall not need to Answer it further.

To the point of restoring the Possessions of the Church in a great mea­sure; I say, there was not only a Restitution, but a Preservation by an Act of Parliament, for preserving the Possessions of the Church from being mis-used by the present Incumbent, to the prejudice of the Succes­sors; which Act, I wish were in England: But that I conceive not to be Controverted, but granted me.

But it is said, The Possessions of the Church were restored in an Illegal way, to please my Lord of Canterbury: To which I Answer, The Gentle­man indeed spake it, but there is no proof of it, neither hath he offered any proof; and till it be proved, I conceive it not fit to trouble Your Lordships with Answering it: I have done nothing in Church or Com­mon-wealth, but Justly and Uprightly.

Albeit I conceive it a hard case, that having the Honour to be the Kings Deputy sitting in Council, where there be Twenty who Voted as well as my self, That I should be noted to Answer for them all, though I did con­stantly submit my self to the Major part.

And as to my Lord of Canterbury, I beseech Your Lordships to think, That what I have done for the Church of Ireland, was out of a faithful Conscience to God Almighty, out of a desire to increase the Religion I Profess, and which I will witness with my Blood, by the Blessing of Al­mighty God, if there should be occasion. And when I have done it with respect to that Piety of His Gracious Majesty, which I would faithfully pay Him. I desire it may not be put upon me, as done in an respect only to my Lord of Canterbury, where no such thing is proved: No, I did it out of Conscience, my Duty to God, to the King, and to the People, that they might be instructed in the way to Eternal Life. And I beseech Your Lordships to believe, I have a Heart a little greater than to do any such thing to please any man living, with Modesty be it spoken.

For the Building of Churches, I confess, I built not any; and in my Answer I said no more, but that Churches were built; which the Worthy Gentleman acknowledged in some part. I confess they were not Built by me, or at my particular Charge; nor do I say otherwise in my Answer: And it had been a vain thing to have said it, though I had done it my self.

But it is said, the Answer is not right, in saying there be divers Worthy Church-men preferred; and three are instanced in, Bishop Atherton, [Page 123] the Bishop of D. and one Gwyn: To this I beseech Your Lordships, that I may be bold to let the Gentlemen know, That Bishopricks are not in the gift of the Deputy, but of the King; and that he is not Responsi­ble for what the King doth.

But not desiring to deny any thing that is true, I confess, I think Bishop Atherton was unknown to His Majesty; and that I my self recommended him to the Bishoprick; and at that time I thought the Bishop a Person fit for that Charge: But suppose he had a secret fault of his own, (God knows it was unknown to me) may not a man be deceived in his Judge­ment of a man, but this shall be turned against him? It is a very easie thing for a man to cover his faults from the eye of the world; I thought him not a vicious man, he proved so, and he had his merit, he suffered for it: And unless I had the Inspection of Almighty God, I suppose, this cannot be laid to my Charge; if any private End or Respect should appear in the doing of it, I desire no more of Your Lordships Favour; and I profess, I had rather be out of the World, than not have the Favour of Your Lordships, and the Honourable House of Commons; of whom I desire, that they would hear me with that Equity that they hear every thing.

For the Bishop of D. all that is mentioned against him is, That he is Impeached of High Treason by the Commons House of Parliament in Ireland: And how the Bishop will acquit himself I know not; but for that the Bishop must Answer for himself, not I.

This Bishop hath lived in my House a long time, as my Chaplain; and I humbly recommended him to that Bishoprick, taking him (and I hope he will so approve himself) to be a very Learned man, and that I think no body will deny: certainly he hath the Elements to make him a very Wor­thy Church-man as most I know.

For that Gwyn, I profess I never heard of him before, nor do I know him; But recollecting my thoughts, I think he was recommended to me by my Lord of D. for in matters of the Church I did use that Gentle­man; and if I were to begin the World again, I would use him still, holding him a very honest Worthy man: And I think there was some Rectory or Impropriation that the Earl of Corke had possession of, which was restored to the Church; and it was of so small and trivial a value, that they knew not who to get to serve the Cure; and on that occasion this man was recommended to it: And I think, that if it shall come to be examined, Thirty pounds a year will go far in his preferment. And if such a thing should happen, and miscarry in his hands, it is no such hainous Crime as is objected.

But I desire leave to shew what I have done in this kind instead of this Mr. Gwyn; and Your Lordships may see a List of those I have preferred to the Church of Ireland, and perhaps they may be known to some of Your Lordships, and to many Gentlemen of the House of Commons. And first I say, I preferred Mr. Gray, and have done for him according to the means I had by the Favour and Goodness of the King; perhaps he hath that which is worth 3, or 4, or 500 l. a year by my Gift. And this Mr. Gray (if I be not mistaken) was sometimes Chaplain to a Noble Person that sits on the Earls Bench; and if it were material further to enquire of him, I might give satisfaction what he is. I likewise brought into that Kingdom Mr. Tilson, now Bishop of Elphin, and sometimes Fellow of University Col­ledge of Oxford, a most Worthy, Honest, Religious Person he is; and [Page 124] those that know him, I am sure will give him that Testimony. I likewise preferred Dr. Margetson, Dean of Christs Church; he was of Cam­bridge, and a Worthy man. Mr. Forward, Dean of Drummore, an Oxford man; who if he were known, would appear worthy of that Preferment. Mr. Dean Cressy an Oxford man. Mr. Roade, Dean of Derry, a Cambridge man, of Sydney Colledge. Dr. Wentworth, Dean of Armagh, of Oxford. Dr. Price, Dean of Conaught, of Christs Church in Oxford. Mr. Thorpe, a Cambridge man. I preferred likewise one Mr. Parry, whom I found in Ireland; but all the rest I brought, and sent for out of England: Nay, I sent for them, and did those things for them before they did ask the Que­stion, or knew of it; That being a means, under Gods Blessing, to con­form that Kingdom to the Church of England. And these, and far greater numbers than these, to my best Judgment and Understanding, I made use of as Instruments to Gods Glory, His true Service, and the reducing of the people to the Profession of the same Religion that's here in England; and for no other end. But concerning my Carriage of the Trust reposed in me by the King, touching these Ecclesiastical Preferments, I desire no other Testimony or Witness for me, but the Lord Primate of Ireland, who is sick, and cannot come hither: To whom I will Appeal, whether I have not in my preferring to the Church Preferments, carried my self with all clearness and care I could possibly.

To the point of increasing of Protestants; if Your Lordships please to hear any thing in that kind, I shall call my Lord Dillon, and Sir Adam Loftus, who if they should be asked, Whether there be more Protestants in Dublin now than when I first came thither? I doubt not but they would give an account of a greater number.

We Charge him not upon this point; so it was set aside. Manager.

My preferring of none but Protestant Officers, if I mistook not, the Noble Gentleman did acknowledge. E. of Strafford.

To the disposing of the Army without Grievance to the Subject; I Billetting of Soldiers in Dublin. leave that, (which was spoken with so much Advantage and Ability, above any thing that from such a poor man as my self, could be expected) and proceed to that which was proved; observing, That one only Testi­mony was produced, (viz.) Alderman I. who said, they have a special Charter at Dublin to exempt them from Billetting of Soldiers. But whe­ther it be so or no, it hath ever been denyed by the Deputies: And by his own Confession, the Foot-Companies of my Lord of Faulkland were Billetted in Dublin. And whereas it was said they had Lodgings, not Money, That was altered upon a Composition with the Soldiers, who can expect only Lodging; but if for the Ease of the Town they will allow the Soldier Money, and leave him to provide for himself, it is all one.

For the Horse-Troops, My own is, and ever since I was there, hath been Billetted in Dublin. And it is in the power of the Deputy to Gar­rison part of the King's Army where he pleases, and without controversie, hath been so at all times.

And I desire that my Lord Ranulagh may be asked, Whether the Sol­diers of the Company he hath, be not Billetted in Athlone, at least some part of it. It is true, my Lord of Faulkland's Troop was not Billetted [Page 125] in Dublin; but they were in the Counties round about, which was more chargeable.

And besides, here is produced but one single Witness; and I hope my own Answer may stand equal, and in as much Credit, as a single Testi­mony, that on the matter, confesses the thing in a great part.

For the increase of Shipping, the Gentleman question'd it not; and re­ally Increase of Shipping. there is now 100 Tun for one, that was there before my coming. And if I had time to send into Ireland for the Certificates of the Officer of the Ports, (the Surveyor, I think) who views the Ports once a year, it should appear to Your Lordships, that I have not abused you, nor the Honourable Gentlemen that hear me. And whether that be an Argument that the Trade and Wealth of the Kingdom is improved, (I appeal to all that hear me) when the Shipping doth so much increase: And the Customs, which were not above 13000 l. a year, are come to 40000 l. and that on the same Book of Rates.

Concerning the Sentencing of Jurors, and the questioning of them Jurors Sen­tence in the Star-Chamber. in the Star-Chamber. It is true, divers of their Sentences were past: And to those Sentences I refer my self, till something be proved against the Truth and Justice of them. And I think it will stand with Your Lordships Goodness, to judge the best of the Court of Castle-Chamber, wherein the Deputy hath but one Voice, They being the King's Ministers, and standing upon their Oathes to do their Duties: But I think in my Con­science, there was the greatest reason in the World to sentence those per­sons. And when it comes to be examined, it will prove so. And unless a strict hand be in that kind held upon the Natives, the Priests shall carry them against all things that can be. For either they do not, or will not, understand their Evidence: so that it begets one of the most crying sins in Ireland. And if some Examples have been made, they are upon strict grounds and reasons of State. For if Jurors going directly and manifestly contrary to their Evidence, be not punished, that high and ancient Trial by Jury, will fall. And is it not ordinary in England to have Juries Sentenced for not finding according to the Evidence? But if any one hath not been Just, upon instancing of the particulars, I will An­swer for his Vote as well as I can: For it must stand or fall according to the Merit of the Cause.

But one thing which I observe the Gentleman to say, is very Conside­rable; for he tells what was spent there this last year. This I have little to Answer for: For when I came out of Ireland, there was 100000 l. in the Exchequer; and how it hath been issued, I know not, but it hath not been done by my Warrant or Direction; yet I doubt not but it will appear, when examined, that it hath been faithfully and justly disposed. But I am not to Answer for it, only I can say, That when I came out of that Kingdom, the Kingdom was so far from being 60000 l. in Debt, (as some such thing was spoken) that there was 100000 l. in the Kings Coffers.

And for the 50000 l. received by me in England, Mr. Vice-Treasurer in Ireland, is Accomptable for it, though Mr. Vice-Treasurer never touched the money, and my self as little. And Mr. Vice-Treasurer discharges himself of it by Warrants issued from me, and charged it upon other Accomptants; who when they come to Account, I doubt not but a good Account will be given. Though (under favour of the Gentleman) of [Page 126] the 50000 l. 14000 l. is yet unpaid, only there is an Assignment. But it lies on him and his Credit for discharge of the Kings Service: And it must lye on him, or on some other person, if himself have nothing left him.

And whereas it is said, the money I had as borrowed, was taken out when the Kings Army was in want, I desire Your Lordships to observe, It was two years ago when I had this money; and then there was 100000 l. in Surplusage. And though the King gave me Liberty, of His Goodness, to use it three years, it was not wanting to the Army when it stood in need of it.

The next thing urged, was my Cozenage in the Custom-house; and that I had there Cozened the King notably, 5 or 6000 l. a year deep.

To Answer this, I reserve my self till I come to the particular Article; but desire leave with all Modesty to say, That it shall appear I have not Cozened, nor deceitfully abused His Majesty for a Farthing Token, neither in that, nor in anything else. And that there is no other Allowance, nor Defalcation by the Grant wherein I am Interessed for 15600 l. a year, and 8000 l. Fine, then was allowed to the former Farmers, that had it at the Rent of 13000 l. a year. And that I have made the King a much more profitable bargain than he had, or could have without it.

The next was for the Revenues of the Church, That they were got without Rules of Justice; And were an Offering of Rapine. And that I had an Eye to my own Preferment, in the Person of my Lord of Canter­bury: To that I have already Answered.

And thus having run over all the Preamble, I humbly begg leave to make some Observations upon the Testimonies produced, (viz.) That the Examinations of Sir Iohn Clotworthy, and my Lord Ranulagh, I conceive, do not concern me. Mr. Barnewells was for things spoken when I was out of the Kingdom; and were concerning Sir George Ratcliffe, and not me.

For the Remonstrances shewed, wherein they disclaim the Preamble to the Act for four Subsidies, I beseech Your Lordships to consider, how unlikely it is that I should do any thing in that kinde fraudulently or surreptitiously: For by the Custom of that Kingdom, the Laws must be transmitted hither under the Hand of the Deputy and Council, and so pass the Seal, and be returned to Ireland; when that Law was transmitted, I was here in England, as I take it: And absolutely and directly, I protest I never knew any thing in the World of that Preamble, never saw it, nor heard of it, I think, till I saw it in the Copy of the Remonstrance; I never heard it was excepted against, it having pass'd the Vote, and three times reading, in both Houses: And I would have consented to have it struck out, as in truth I will now, being far from any thing of vanity, and not thinking my self better or worse by being put in or out: And if it were charged upon me as a Crime, or were material for me to prove it, I think I could by Witness in Town prove, That it was the general Vote of the Com­mons House, and passed with as much Applause and Chearfulness, as any thing. And, that if my Lord Dillon, and Sir Adam Loftus, and some other of the Irish Commissioners, were examined upon Oath, I believe they [Page 127] would Swear they never heard any Exceptions against it, till the time I was Impeached with High Treason.

For the Particular concerning Sir Pierce Crosby, it concerned not me; but the reason of his being put from the Board was this: All Laws must first be transmitted from the Deputy and Council; the Bill against which he Voted was transmitted, Sir Pierce Crosby was there, and set his hand to the transmission; and because he did not except against it then, being a Member of the Board, but did except against it afterwards, it was thought fit he should be Sequestred (as I remember) till His Majesties Plea­sure should be known; but Committed he was not: And it was done by the Vote of the whole Board, but no way to infringe the Liberty of the House; and so in Obedience to Your Lordships, as near as I could, with a great deal of Weakness and Infirmity, I have said as much as I can for the present recollect, towards the making good the Truth of my Preamble.

And I conclude with this humble suit, there being some Exception took at some Words that fell from me, Many mens Tongues and Mouthes may offend, where their Hearts do not: And that in truth I may say, my Heart did not offend against that Reverence and Duty I shall always pay, on all occasions, to the Honourable House of Commons, and every Member of it; but to others, that are neither Members of this House, nor of the House in Ireland, I meant what I said: And I do beseech the Gentlemen of the House of Commons to accept my Acknowledgment of this truth: and that my Words may not be any ways raised against me as a Cause of their thinking worse of me; or that I should be peccant or offending, in ha­ving other thoughts of the Members and Proceedings of the House, than with all Submission, and all belief of the Equity of it.

To which Defence, one of the Managers appointed for this days Ser­vice, briefly replyed, in substance as followeth.

What I have said in Answer of the Preamble, was not by way of Manager. Charge, but only for disproof of that whereby my Lord of Strafford would take away, or nullifie the Charge. So that if the Charge remains in force, the Services performed by him, are not effectual to mitigate it.

That what we have proposed still stands unavoided, as we conceive, notwithstanding any thing my Lord of Strafford hath said.

That as concerning Sir Pierce Crosby his agreeing to the Transmission, if that be true: That there is a preparative part of the Law, and there Sir Pierce Crosby might speak as a Councellor; But there is a Legislative part of the Law, and that is done in Parliament; and these being distinct, if Sir Pierce Crosby did do any thing at Council-Table, it deprived him not of his Liberty to speak in Parliament. But we are informed, he gave his denial to consent to the Transmission.

And if my Lord of Strafford were not guilty in his own Person of breach of Priviledge; yet if under his Government, Priviledge of Par­liament be broken, it is no matter of Merit to say, he procured Par­liaments.

It is no Answer to say, things are not proved, when any thing we urged, is contained under an Article; for then he refers the proof when he comes to the Article; as many things concerning the Lands of the Clergy, will be made good in the proofs of the proper Article.

[Page 128] That he hath preferred many Divines; that is no part of his Merit, nor takes away his fault, though it be true.

That for the Value of his living, we never heard of it till on this occa­sion; but be it small or great, it is nothing to justifie my Lord of Strafford, being offered to this purpose; That though his Lordship were careful of the Lands of the Ministers, He was not careful of the Ministers themselves, in suffering a Groom to execute that high Function; Ministers being not to be chosen according to the Quality of the Living, but according to the Quality of the Function.

That for the matter of Monopolies, if his Lordship do stop any, he may stop them for sinister Reasons and Respects; and however, there is no Compensation, doing his Duty in one thing, not satisfying for Neglect in another.

And then concluded, That what we have not now replied unto, shall be made good in the Charge; and ought not in their Lordships Opinion, make my Lord of Strafford more plausible; for the Charge shall be made good against him in the truth of the Fact, and the Aggravation of it.

Hereupon the Court was Adjourned, and the Committee directed to proceed to the Proofs conducing to the particular Charge, the next Morning.

The Third day.
Wednesday, March 24. 1640.

YOU who are of the Committee to manage the Evidence against the Earl of Strafford, I am to acquaint you, Their Lordships have con­sidered Lord High Steward. of that point of Sir Pierce Crosby, his being examined as a Witness, and my Lord of Straffords Exceptions; and have resolved that he shall be Examined; and that the Validity of his Testimony shall be left unto their Lordships Judgments.

Your Lordships have with great Patience attended the Charge that hath been read, and the Answer, and the Exceptions taken to the Preamble, Mr. Maynard Manager. which my Lord of Strafford to ingratiate himself, did make to the main of his Defence.

My Lords, I shall repeat little of that that hath been said, only pardon me if I say this to Your Lordships, That wherein my Lord of Strafford answered to very many particulars, yet to that one main he answered not, which was principally objected against him; which I therefore speak to put him in mind of it, that if he can, he may Answer: And that is, Your Lordships were pleased to hear the Complaint and Protestation of the whole Kingdom of Ireland read before you. The principal of their Aim seems to be, to take off the Extolling of my Lord of Strafford, that himself, or his Agents, had put upon him in a Bill of Subsidies; wherein indeed the [Page 129] Praise and Honour due to His Majesty, was much Attributed to my Lord of Strafford, which grieved the Parliament, who would take it off, and my Lord of Strafford is now willing to lay it down; and he doth well to do so when he can keep it no longer, when those from whom he took it by fraud or force, would wrest it again from him. I desire Your Lord­ships to remember, and I am sure you will, That the main of our Com­plaint is, His alteration of the fundamental Laws against Will; His intro­ducing of new Laws at his Will and Pleasure: This is not only the Cry, but the Testimony of a whole Kingdom before Your Lordships; of all the Lords and Commons of Ireland.

I shall not touch that which concerns breach of Priviledge of Parlia­ment, he would fain put that off on Sir George Ratcliffe, his bosom Friend, and put it off himself. My Lord of Strafford Sequestred Sir Pierce Crosby from the Council, his Vote went with it, others joined with him; but I am sure he moved it, he concurred with it.

But now, My Lords, I humbly Address my self to that we are ready to maintain, The Body of the Charge: And because some time hath been spent between the reading of the Charge, and the main of the Defence, I desire leave to open what is the Nature, what the Height and Quality of the Offence, of which this great Lord stands Accused before you?

My Lords, It is a Charge of the highest Nature that can be against a man; A Charge of High Treason. It is a Treason, not ending and expi­ring in one single Act of a discontented Heart, but a Habit, a Trade, a Mystery of Treason exercised by this Great Lord, ever since the Kings Fa­vour bestowed on him.

My Lords, It hath two Evils to deprive us of that which is good; that is, to subvert and take away the fundamental, the ancient Laws, where­by we are secure of whatsoever we do enjoy; it hath (My Lords) a positive Evil in it, to introduce instead of that an Arbitrary Government, bounded by no Laws, but by the Evil Councels of such Ministers as he hath been.

My Lords, It is the Law that gives that Soveraign tye, which w [...] all Obedience and Chearfulness, the Subject renders to the Soveraign. It is the Law (My Lords) that gives Honours to the Lords and Nobles; Inte­rest, Property, and Liberty to the Subject.

My Lords, The Law, (as it is the Foundation and Ground of all these) hath its distribution in a course of Justice. Justice is derived (as by so many Channels) by the several Courts of Justice; whereby the Kings Justice (for it is His) is brought and conveyed to the Subject.

My Lords, Of all this hath my Lord of Strafford endeavoured, not only to put the Subject out of present Possession, but to make him uncapable of the future Benefit of it.

Other Treasons, yea, a Treason against the Person of a Prince (which is the most Transcendent and High Treason that can be) fall short of this Treason; For a good Prince may be gathered to His Fathers, yet another may succeed Him, that supports the Glory and Justice of His Throne. We have had Experience of it: When blessed King Iames was taken from us to Heaven, Sol occubuit & nox nulla secuta est. But if any one such a de­sign as this should take effect, That the Law and Justice should be taken from the Throne, and Will placed there, we are without hope of ever seeing Remedy.

[Page 130] Power in so great a measure taken, is not easily laid down, unless it be by the exceeding great goodness of so merciful and just a Prince as we have.

My Lords, The Particulars of this Treason are Conveyed to Your Lordships in 28 several Articles. I shall shortly and briefly touch but the Heads of those on which I shall insist, and give some distribution of them. And I think the best way will be this; To consider first what he did, and what he said, before he went into Ireland; then what he did and said there; and what he hath done since. And in all of them, you will find this his main design, which I have opened, That Law might no where stand against his Will; and to settle it, that he might continue so.

My Lord hath declared this in incroaching Jurisdiction where it was not, in exercising an Arbitrary Power under that Jurisdiction; In taking on him a Power to make Laws; In Domineering and Tyrannizing over the Lives, the Liberties, the Goods, the Estates, and whatsoever is the Subjects.

And (My Lords) this hath he done, not only on those of the meaner sort that could not resist him, but on the Peers, on the greatest and most ancient Nobility of Ireland: And what might Your Lordships expect, but the same measure at his hands, had his Will had its passage here, which it had in Ireland.

I shall now come to the particular Articles.

1. And first, Whereas it pleased His Majesty to place him with Power and Honour in his hand in the North as President, he had not been long there; but that Commission which bounded and pleased his Predecessors, he must needs surmount and overgo. There was a Commission in 16 Iac. which the then Lord Deputy had, in which was that Legal phrase Secundum antiquum cursum, his own Commission 4 Car. pursued that, without any alteration; but being in but four years, this would not please his bound­less Ambition, he must needs have the Power that the Lords in the Star-Chamber have, put in in express terms, a Power to proceed according to the course of the Chancery, that his Conscience might limit other mens Estat [...]; That his Injunctions might stay other Proceedings at Law: And which is highest of all, if any thing be done in that Court, within these Instructions, than no Prohibition should be Awarded. He would make himself safe from any supervising of other Courts.

If he Committed any man to Prison, though a Habeas Corpus were granted (then which, the Subject hath no other remedy to vindicate his Liberty) the Officer (for the encouragement of those which be under his Power) must not obey it. And if any Fine be put upon the Officer, then comes a command in this Commission, That the Fine shall be dischar­ged; so he not only takes a Power to himself, but also takes the Scepter of Justice out of the Kings Hands; for by this means there is an impossibility the Subject should have the Justice that my Lord knows is due to him; and he knows it right well: for when he was a Member of the House of Parliament, it was his own motion, who now stands at the Barr, That all the Officers and Ministers of State, should serve the King according to that Law, and he is the first Officer and Minister of State, that breaks it; and in the most transcendent degree that ever it was broken.

My Lords, He doth in this, as much as in him lies, say to the Laws, Do your worst; You can but Fine, and that you can do shall come to nothing; The Fine shall not be paid, The Officer shall not obey you.

[Page 131] If this had been a single Act, we should never have accused him of this Treason, though it comes very High, and very Transcendent. But the Oppressions and Injustice, the Councels and Speeches that we present to Your Lordships, we present them not singly, but as together, designing and noting, what a Treasonable purpose and disposition is in him.

2. My Lords, The next thing he doth when he is in the North among the Justices of the Peace, and the People attending for Justice, you shall see what Encouragement he gives them to look for it; and how foul a thing he dares to fling on the Sacred Majesty that did advance him. He tells the Justices that were to do Justice, and the People that were to receive Justice, That some of the Justices were all for Law, but they should find, The Kings little Finger is heavier than the Loyns of the Law. Your Lord­ships may consider what a transcendent Speech this was, out of whose Mouth it came, what sad Accidents happened upon it; nothing could move this Lord to utter it: but his Will and his Violence must out, though he burst a Kingdom in pieces for it.

3. The next thing is this, When he goes into Ireland you will find his Temper and Spirit not a whit Allayed; but now being further from His Majesties Person, he is higher in his Power and in his Will. It is true, that Kingdom was annexed to this many years ago; but they that now possess the greatest part of it, are Subjects of this Kingdom, descended from them that went from hence thither. Yet he tells them in a solemn Speech, not suddenly but solemnly, That Ireland is a Conquered Nation, and the King might do with them what he would; and that their Charters were nothing worth, and bind the King no longer than he pleases. Surely (My Lords) We might see what he would do if he had Power. But God be blessed, we find not that disposition any where resented by His Majesty; and we hope that such Councels shall never have Access to so good and gracious an Ear.

4. The next thing, he stays not in words, but will be as good as his word if he can; and he begins high. For that we present next, is a Peer of the Kingdom thrust out of his Possession by my Lord of Straffords Order; and when he Sues at Law for recovery of his Right, my Lord Threatens him. Truly Threatnings are not good, in such a case, where a man Sues for Justice, And from him that ought to Administer Justice, and further him in it; yet he Threatens him Imprisonment, to which Peers are not ordinarily liable.

First my Lord tells him, He will not have Law nor Lawyers question his Orders; he might debar the Lawyers in some Cases, but why a man should have a Spleen at the Law, that his Orders should not be examined by, that I know not. And he goes higher; for when there was an oc­casion to speak of an Act of State, he tells him, That he will make him and all Ireland know, that as long as he had the Government there, any Act of State made, or to be made, should be as binding as an Act of Parliament.

My Lords, He cannot go higher in Speeches than this, That an Act of State of his own making, and his own Power, should be as binding as an Act of Parliament.

Nay, he tells them in Parliament, That they were a Conquered Nation, and must expect Laws as from a Conquerour.

[Page 132] 5. Next we shall shew divers Instances wherein he exercises Power over the Lives, Lands, and all that is the Subjects; deduced into several Arti­cles, viz. the 5th, the 6th, the 7th, and the 8th.

In particular, one I shall be bold to open, That is the Case of my Lord Mountnorris, another Peer of that Kingdom, and a great Officer there. Some words fell from that Lord, speaking of one that had trodden on my Lord of Straffords Toe, That he hoped the Party did it not in Revenge; for he had a Brother that would not have sought such a Revenge. For these words, spoke at a private Table, half a year, yea seven months be­fore, my Lord of Strafford calls a Councel of War, and judges his Lord­ship to death.

My Lords, It is no wonder that he would make the Kings little Finger so heavy, that could make his own Toe heavy enough to tread the Life of a Peer under his Feet.

And he did not only give Sentence in that Case, but caused Execution to be done in another Case, upon one D. who was condemned by Martial Law, and hanged at Dublin, where there was no War at all.

Other particulars will follow when I fall upon proof.

9. Then he comes to make Laws; and that is in the 9th Article. By the Laws of England and Ireland too, the Ecclesiastical Power is distinct from the other, it not extending to the Imprisonment of the Person, but is to attend the Kings Courts, and to receive directions from thence; yet he makes a Warrant to the Bishop of Downe, (and he made it to others too) That if any of the poorer sort did not appear upon the Bishops Citation, or not obey when they did appear, they should be Attached and Imprisoned; Here he makes a Law of himself, and subjects the Liber­ties of the Subjects to his own Pleasure; but this was for the poorer sort of People, though Justice sees no difference in matters of Estate, betwixt Poor or Rich: But when he hath brought it on the Poor, he will afterwards bring it on the Rich.

10. The next is a Power of laying Impositions on the Subjects: First he is a Farmer of the Customs, he puts excessive Rates upon the Commodities; that which is worth but 5 s. as the Hydes, he will have valued at 20 s. and the Wool, which is worth 5 s. he will have it valued at 13 s. 4 d. and by this he takes away, in effect, whatsoever the Commodity is worth; for the Customs come very near the Value.

Another particular in this I shall be bold to open, and I hope his Lord­ship will provide to give an Answer, He hath advanced by this the Kings Customs, and a Rent of 1350 l. is increased to the Crown: But it will appear to Your Lordships, that the Crown hath lost, and he only hath gained. And whereas my Lord of Strafford says there was no other De­falcations in his Patent, than in the former, that will fall out to be other­wise; for this is the State of the bargain,

There was a former Rent of 9700 l. which the Duke of Buckingham paid out of this Farm. On the Earl of Straffords Patent that Rent is reserved, and as much as came to 1350 l. more, but in lieu of 1350 l. advanced to the King, my Lord of Strafford hath in his Grant the Surplusage of Wines (which were not in the Dukes Patent) worth 3400 l. a year, besides a Rent paid for the Term of the Wine of 1400 l. And whereas there was no defalcation of the Customs of London, Derry and Colerane in the Dukes Lease, which [Page 133] amounted to 1500 l. a year; my Lord of Strafford must have a defalca­tion for them: And then the Seizures, which were 500 l. a year; and for Knockvergus and Straniford 2500 l. a year, so here is above 5000 l. a year less to the Crown, in lieu of the advance of 1350 l. a year, besides the in­creased Customs, amounting to 12000 l. a year: And yet he again hath far exceeded this proportion. We say further, he doth not only impose on the Subjects, but takes away that which is the Subjects utterly and entire­ly, as in the case of the Flax. It is true, the Employment of it belongs to Women; but it is the greatest Commodity (one of them) of that King­dom, and of greatest profit, the Revenue of the Custom of it being 800 l. a year; and this he hath gotten into his own hands and possession. This he got from the Natives, and took it to himself. He doth for that pur­pose, issue a Proclamation, That they shall use it in such a way wherein the Natives were unskill'd, and if it were not so done, it should be seized; and it was seized accordingly, yea their Houses broke open, and their Goods taken away, and brought to my Lord of Straffords house, where they were employed in his works. The like we shall instance in Tobacco.

15. Next we shall shew to Your Lordships how he hath levied War up­on the Kings Subjects. We opened in the beginning, what an Arbitrary Ju­risdiction he set up; here we shall shew how he used it by a meer course of Enmity and Hostility. For (My Lords) this was the course; If a Decree or Order were made by him, and not obeyed, he issues a Warrant to the Sergeant at Arms, to go to the next Garrison, and take Soldiers, with an Officer, and carry them to the House of the party in question; it is no matter where it was, but to the House of them that were pretended to be disobedient, they were to go: If the Decree had been to raise so much money, or to put parties in possession. In plain terms, the Soldiers were to lye like Free-booters, and Enemies on the King's People, to eat them up. They have killed their Sheep, their Oxen, and they have lain not on the parties only, but on their Tenants, till the party comes in and renders himself. They have burnt their Houses, taken their Wives, and Friends, and carried them away, till Obedience was rendered, and this is a levying of War upon the King; For the King and the People are both so united in Affection and Right of Law, that there cannot be Violence offered to the King, but it redounds to the People; nor can any Oppress the People in this sort, but it redounds to His Majesty. Besides, it is con­trary to a Law of that Kingdom; whereby it is Enacted, That if any per­son shall assess Horse or Foot, on any of the Kings People, without their consent, it is High Treason.

The next thing we shall go to, is the Favour he shewed to the Papists, in their Compositions and Exemptions from all penalties of Law; for they were expresly not to be proceeded against, nor to be Convicted; and so that which hath influence into Religion and Reformation, is quite taken away, and nothing but matter of Profit is left.

The next Article is that that concerns the Kingdom of Scotland. First he begins with them in Ireland; contrives an Oath, which is set forth in the Articles, That they shall obey the Kings Royal Commands with­out exception. This he enforceth, by Fining and Imprisoning them that disobeyed him: And so in all the other particulars when his Procla­mations [Page 134] were broken, his course was by Fine and Imprisonment to enforce an Obedience.

My Lords, He doth not only press them in their Estates, but strives to infuse into His Majesty an ill Opinion of them; he provokes and incites Him by all his Arguments, to lay down his Mercy and Goodness, and Ju­stice, and to fall into an offensive War against that Kingdom. He gives out, that the Nation of them (not this or that man) are Rebels and Traytors: And if it please the King to bring him back to the Sword (in­deed he is fit for that, it is a violent weapon) he will root out the Scottish Nation, Branch and Root; some few excepted of those that had taken the Oath.

When he comes into England, he find that His Majesty, with great Wis­dom, had pacified those Storms and Troubles that threatned us there: Yet he doth incense the King still to follow this to an Offensive War, and prevails; He plots to call a Parliament, but with an intention (if it fur­nished not his design) it should be broken, and he would set up other ways of force to raise Moneys of the Kingdom; and this fell out unhap­pily: For thus far his project took, the Parliament was broken; and bro­ken at the very time when the subject was in debate and consideration, how to have yielded Supply to His Majesty.

But that he might break it, he falsly informs the King, That the Par­liament had denied to Supply him; there is his Counsel, that the Parlia­ment had forsaken the King; and now the King having tryed his People, might use all other ways for the procuring and raising of moneys; and the same day wherein that Parliament was unhappily Dissolved, he gives his further Counsel to His Majesty, (which because no man can put such a Spirit of Malice into the words besides himself, I shall take the boldness to read) That having tryed the Affections of his People, he was loose and absolved from all Rules of Government; and he was to do every thing that Power would admit. And that His Majesty had tryed all ways, and was refused, and should be acquitted both of God and man. And that His Majesty had an Army in Ireland, which he might employ to reduce this Kingdom. It is added in the printed Book (to reduce them to Obedi­ence) I know not who Printed it, but the Charge is only (to reduce this Kingdom.)

And (My Lords) you may please to consider, what a sad time this man took to reflect upon these bad Councels, when our Hearts were swoln with Sorrow for that unhappy breach of the last Parliament. And what doth he advise the King? what positions offers he? That he was absolved from all Rules of Government. If there be no Rule of Government, (My Lords) where is the Rule of Obedience? for how shall the People know to obey, when there is no Rule to direct them what to obey? He tells the King he was refused, which was untrue; for he was not refused to the last breath we had in Parliament: but we spake in that point, how to sup­ply the King, and to prefer it at that time, before the Complaints of our just Grievances.

But what doth he fall into? that which in another Article we charge him with, a Plot and Conspiracy betwixt him and Sir George Ratcliffe to bring in the Irish Army for our Confusion, to root out our Laws and Go­vernment; a pernicious Counsel. He says not you shall do it; but he that perswades it, doth as much as if in express terms he had councelled the acting of it. Doth he mean that we should be to his Irish Pattern; (for speaking of the Irish Army, consisting of Papists and his Adherents, [Page 135] he said, that he would make it a Pattern for all the Kingdoms;) did he mean to reduce us to the Pattern that he had placed in Ireland? Surely he meant to reduce us to a Chaos and Confusion. He would have us with­out all Rules of Government; and these be the means, wicked and cruel Councels, and the Cruelty of an Army inspired with his Spirit, and con­sisting of Papists, Enemies of our Religion: And what Mercy could we of this Religion expect from Popish Enemies with Swords in their hands? That cannot but strike all English Hearts with Horrour and Dread, that an Irish Army should be brought into England to reduce the Subjects of England. I hope we never were so far gone in any thing, as that we should need an Army to reduce us. I cannot but say here is the Counsel of Haman, when he would in one day cut off all the Iewish Nation, and have the King intend a Favour to him. The King propounds a question, What shall be done to the man whom the King will Honour? Haman thought in his heart, Whom will the King Honour but my self? And so my Lord of Strafford having raised this Army, it was set up by him; and if such a Counsel as this was entertained, into whose hands should it be put? (here were Hamans thoughts) who should have the Power of it, but he that hath inspired it, and since maintained it.

Truly (My Lords) it was a desperate Counsel; and methinks the Counsel of Achitophel might have been compared to it: for when he had stirred up the Rebellion of Absalom against his Father, he perswades Absa­lom to that which might breed an irreconcilable hatred between them. Yet a Father and a Son might be reconciled. But he that adheres to the Son in this case, might not so easily forgive. Therefore this Lord falls up­on a Counsel which he thought would never be forgiven. A Counsel of irreconcilable difference, to subdue us by Force and Power; and takes away all possibility of Addressing our Complaints to the King, as he had done from those of Ireland; when he not only forestalls their Complaints, but by a Proclamation takes order, that none should come over too, with­out his Licence; which was in effect, that none should complain of his Oppression without his good liking.

Some violent Speeches he uses, suitable to these Counsels, That no good would be done upon the Aldermen, till they were hanged; That the French King employed Commissaries to look into mens Estates; which will be insisted upon in their proper place.

Next, he levied eight pence a day for maintenance of the Trained Sol­diers, against the Will of the Country, which he said was done by the consent of the Lords of the great Councel; which we know is untrue. And we shall prove it untrue in the other part, where he says, it was done freely, by consent of the Gentlemen of the Country: Most of them that did consent, were his own Friends, and Papists. But the Petition of the Country, (as to that part of it that concerns a Parliament) he rejected, because he would have no Parliament. And he prefers another in the name of the Country, and that he calls, The Petition of the Country.

And now I shall apply my self to the proofs; and shall take care to offer nothing, but what will fall out to be proved. And shall first apply my self to the first Article, concerning the Commission for the North parts; where an Arbitrary Power was thereby granted, as is used in the Star-Chamber and Chancery.

[Page 136] In the opening of it, first we shall produce the Commission of 8 Car. and that of 13 differs but little from it. We shall shew that these Clauses were procured by him to be inserted upon occasion of a Gentle­mans, Sir Thomas Gore being Fined in the Court of Star-Chamber there, and his being Arrested by a Warrant from my Lord Wentworth here in London. We do not go about to prove that he solicited for this Com­mission, but that he expressed his desire of it; and upon that it was granted.

We shall prove that it was executed in this high manner, that when Prohibitions have been taken out, he hath punished the parties, some he hath threatned; Nay, Money hath been given to those that were Defen­dants in the Prohibition. And we shall offer this too, The Judge is dead before whom it was; but upon occasion of a Prohibition, he went to a Judge, a Reverend and Just man, Mr. Justice Hutton; what was said privately between them, we cannot tell; but we shall prove, that Mr. Justice Hutton complained with Tears in his Eyes, how that Lord used him about a Prohibition: And so we shall leave this Article with this. We shall not go about to prove Decrees, for which he might have Colour; but for these Clauses he could have no Colour, they never being in any Commission before.

article 1

THE First Article. The Charge.

THat the said Earl of Strafford the 21st day of March, in the Eighth year of His Majesties Raign, was President of the Kings Coun­cil Article 1. in the Northern parts of England.

That the said Earl being President of the said Council, on the 21st of March, a Commission under the Great Seal of England, with certain Schedules of Instructions thereunto annexed, was directed to the said Earl, or others the Commissioners therein named; whereby, among other things, Power and Authority is limited to the said Earl, and others the Commissioners therein named, to hear and determine all Offences and Misdemeanours, Suits, Debates, Controversies and Demands, Causes, Things and Matters whatsoever, therein contained, and within certain Precincts in the said Northern parts therein specified, and in such manner as by the said Schedule is limited and ap­pointed.

That amongst other things in the said Instructions, it is directed, That the said President, and others therein appointed, shall hear and determine, according to the Course of Procéedings in the Court of Star-Chamber, divers Offences, Deceits and Fal [...]ties therein menti­oned, whether the same be provided for by Acts of Parliament, or not, so that the Fines imposed, be not less than by the Act or Acts of Parlia­ment provided against those Offences, is appointed.

That also, amongst other things in the said Instructions, it is directed, That the said President, and others therein appointed, have Power to Examine, Hear and Determine, according to the course of Procéedings in the Court of Chancery, all manner of Complaints for any matter within the said Precincts, as well concerning Lands, Tenements and Hereditaments, either Frée-hold Customary, or Copy-hold, as Leases, and other things therein mentioned; and to stay Procéedings in the Court of Common Law, by Injunction, or otherwise, by all ways and means, as is used in the Court of Chancery.

And although the former Presidents of the said Council had never put in Practice such Instructions, nor had they any such Instructions, yet the said Earl in the Month of May, in the said Eighth year, and di­vers years following, did put in Practice, Exercise and Use, and caused to be used and put in practice, the said Commission and Instructions; and did direct and exercise an exorbitant and unlawful Power and Iurisdiction over the Persons and Estates of His Majesties Subjects in these parts, [Page 138] and did Dis-inherit divers of His Majesties Subjects in those parts of their Inheritances, Sequestred their Possessions, and did Fine, Ran­som, Punish, and Imprison them, and caused them to be Fined, Ran­somed, Punished and Imprisoned, to their Ruine and Destruction; and namely, Sir Coniers Darcy, Sir John Bourcher, and divers others, against the Laws, and in Subversion of the same. And the said Com­mission and Instructions, were procured and issued by Advice of the said Earl.

And he the said Earl, to the intent that such illegal and unjust Power might be exercised with the greater Licence and Will, did Advise, Coun­sel, and Procure further directions, in and by the said Instructions to be given, that no Prohibition be granted at all, but in cases where the said Council shall excéed the limits of the said Instructions. And that if any Writ of Habeas Corpus be granted, the party be not discharged till the party perform the Decrée and Order of the said Council.

And the said Earl in the 13th year of His Majesties Reign, did pro­cure a new Commission to himself, and others therein appointed, with the said Instructions, and other unlawful Additions.

That the said Commission and Instructions, were procured by the So­licitation and Advice of the said Earl of Strafford.

The Fourth day. Thursday, March 25. 1641.
THE Third Article. The Charge.

article 3

THat the Realm of Ireland having béen, time out of mind, annexed Article 3. to the Imperial Crown of this His Majesties Realm of England, and governed by the same Laws: The said Earl being Lord-Deputy of that Realm, to bring His Majesties Liege-Subjects of that Kingdom likewise into dislike of His Majesties Government, and intending the Subversion of the Fundamental Laws, and setled Government of that Realm, and the destruction of His Majesties Liege-people there; did upon the 30th day of September, in the Ninth Year of His now Ma­jesties Reign, in the City of Dublin (the chief City of that Realm, where His Majesties Privy-Council, and Courts of Iustice do ordinarily reside, and whither the Nobility and Gentry of that Realm do usually resort for Iustice,) in a publick Speech, before divers of the Nobility and Gentry of that Kingdom, and before the Mayor, Aldermen, and Re­corder, and many Citizens of Dublin, and other His Majesties Liege­people, declare and publish, That Ireland was a Conquered Nation, and that the King might do with them what he pleased: And speaking of the [Page 156] Charters of former Kings of England made to that City: He further then said, That their Charters were nothing worth, and did bind the King no further than he pleased.

I Humbly move your Lordship, That since diverse things were spoken E. of Strafford. by the Witnesses Yesterday, which I conceiving not material as to the Charge, forbore to answer to them, whereby I understand I have received some prejudice; therefore I desire I may now give satis­faction therein, being well able to do it.

We hope your Lordships remember your own Order. We desire he may not have that allowed him to day, which was not granted him Yester­day. Manager.

The Evidence having been given for His Majesty, my Lord of Strafford having answered, and the Commons Replied: Touching which the Lord Steward declared, that the due Course had been followed; The Evidence being given for the King, my Lord having Answered, and a Reply made.

My Lord, this is a Court of Honour, which is a Rule to it self, and no other Court is a Rule to it; and therefore if any thing were omitted one E. of Strafford. day, through want of memory, your Lordships may in your Nobleness allow another. Your Lordships being your own Judges and Rule, and most fit it should be so. I do therefore beseech your Lordships, that I may have liberty to offer new matter formerly omitted, else I shall be on great disadvantage, being to answer on a suddain, and had no time till Friday last to bring in Witnesses, and many perhaps may come up before my Trial ends.

We desire in the Name of the Commons of England, we may proceed according to the Rule propounded, that his Lordship may not invert the Manager. course on pretence of new matter, for then it will be impossible for us to make good the Charge: (Which was accordingly Resolved) adding further, that there hath been ostentation of more Evidence, We desire it may make no Impression with your Lordships.

We shall open the Third Article, containing very seditious words, spo­ken by my Lord of Strafford, in a publick Assembly, to the Kings Subjects, Manager. That Ireland is a Conquer'd Nation, That the King may do with them what he pleaseth: And speaking of the Charters of Dublin, He said, The Charters are nothing worth, and binding the King no farther than he pleases.

I humbly desire, My Lords, that the Witnesses may stand in another Room from the Committee, it being not usual in other Courts, though I E. of Strafford. dare not offer any Court to be a Rule to this, and that your Lordship will direct the question.

We have been sensible his Lordship hath been large in his Imputations. We shall behave our selves as becomes us in duty; we speak nothing to Manager. the Witnesses, but what any man may hear, and we must tell them what they must speak to, and less we cannot do.

[Page 157] I am the loathest man in the World to speak any thing that may give offence in general or particular; neither did I charge any, only desired E of Strafford. that they might stand clear, and that the question might come immediately to them from your Lordship.

Robert Kennyday produced and sworn.

I humbly offer to your Lordships, That this Witness hath been question­ed E of Strafford. for many Misdemeanors, and extortion in execution of his Place, as Remembrancer of the Exchequer, and for this was sentenced; and that he knew he wished his Lordship no great good; and left it to their Lord­ships, Whether he be a fit Witness, adding it to be his Misfortune, That all that have suffered under the Kings Justice in his Ministry, are ready to be Witnesses against him.

My Lords, if he be guilty of Extortion, it follows not that he is there­fore Manager. guilty of Perjury, neither doth any thing stand proved: But if he hath taken a sum of Money, that makes him not to be believed when he gives Testimony.

Robert Kennyday being examined what words my Lord of Strafford spake Robert Kenny­day a Witness. in Dublin, of Ireland, Whether it was a Conquer'd Nation, and what he said of the Charters of Dublin, and when.

He Answered, That 30. of September, 1633. he was the Kings Remem­brancer in Ireland, and that day the new Mayor of Dublin was presented to my Lord. The Recorder of the City making a Speech, touching the Presentment of the Mayor, cited many of the Favors and Graces of the Kings and Queens of England, and, among the rest, one Charter, wherein he alledged was contained; That no Lieutenant, Deputy, or Governor for the time being, or any Justice or Justices could assess, or lay any Soul­diers on the City of Dublin, without their consent. That after the Re­corder had made an end of Speaking, my Lord Lieutenant was pleased to Answer him in many Particulars: Among the rest, he told them, You are a Conquer'd Nation, and the King may do to you what he pleases, and for your antiquated Charters, they bind nothing farther then pleases Him.

The Witness added some things, to take off the Aspertions cast on him by his Lordship, saying, He was never brought to Censure.

Being asked on my Lord of Strafford's Motion, Whether he said they were not void by misusage, or the like.

He answered, No truly, Not a word that he heard.

Richard Earl of Corke produced and sworn.

I must profess, My Lords, my sorrow and unwillingness to speak my Ex­ceptions to the Earl of Cork, as conceiving him no competent Witness, in E. of Strafford. respect of an Information exhibited against him in the Castle-Chamber, by the King's Attorney there, which I desire may be read, and is, I will not say in all the points of it, but so far acknowledged, that he confesses him­self, under his Hand and Seal, to be in the mercy of the King, and desires he may be made the Object of his Majesties Compassion, not of His Justice. And when your Lordships shall see the nature of it, I Appeal to your Lordships, Whether my Lord of Cork shall be admitted as a Witness against me, especially he being a little displeased, and I am sorry for it; [Page 158] for something done in the Cause, he giving 15000 l. for a Composition which the King had.

There are two grounds of my Lord of Straffords Exception to the Earl Manager. of Corke's Testimony, as I conceive. First, His Censure, or questioning upon the Information against him in the Castle-Chamber, which we have heard, to be much of the nature of the Star-Chamber here: And that part we suppose, was cleared by Your Lordships wisdom yesterday; That not a Censure, much less an Information in the Star-Chamber, should be a fit Exception against a Witness. The other part is, the ill will which my Lord of Corke, may bear my Lord of Strafford on that occasion. Truly, (My Lords) if ill will, and offence against my Lord of Strafford should be an exception and prejudice to a Witness, I am afraid there will be few in the three Kingdoms, whose Testimonials will not be prejudiced. But this I humbly offer to Your Lordships likewise, My Lord of Corke is a Privy Councellor to His Majesty, and made a Privy Councellor since by His Ma­jesty; and certainly it is not seemly, to have that Reproach cast on such a Person, That for a Prosecution in the Star-Chamber, he should be made an uncompetent Witness.

The reading of the Information being hereupon denied, My Lord of Corke was asked, What words he heard my Lord of Strafford speak, touch­ing Ireland being a Conquered Nation, and that the Charters of it were of no value, further then it pleased the King to make them.

His Lordship answered, And first desired leave to speak a word, hoping Lord Corke a Witness. he should do no wrong to any man: That when he had obtained my Lords Licence, under the Great Seal, to come over hither, he came with as great a Resolution, never to complain of any sufferings he had, or to Petition against him, as any man did, and left all his Papers and Writings behind him, that he might have nothing to move him against my Lord of Strafford, but to do him all the service he could.

To the question, his Lordship said, That all he can say, is this, that he was present that day the Mayor of Dublin was presented to my Lord De­puty that then was, and the Recorder set forth the Great Charters they had from the several Kings of England; and fell on that matter of placing Soldiers in Dublin, without their consent; That my Lords Answer was, You must understand, Mr. Recorder, Ireland is a conquered Nation, and the King may give them what Laws he pleases. And then going forward with the Charters, he said, They be old Antiquated Charters, and no fur­ther good, than the King is pleased to make them: To that sense (he said) he is sure.

We desire to observe to Your Lordships, That this time, was not the Manager. only time; he spoke the very words in effect, to the whole Kingdom after­wards, in Parliament.

The Lord Gorminstone produced and Sworn: Being asked whether he Lord Gormin­stone a Witness. heard my Lord of Strafford speak words to the effect as aforesaid, That Ireland was a conquered Nation, &c.

His Lordship Answered, That he remembers, that in the 10th year of the Kings Reign, 1634 on occasion of a Petition presented to my Lord Lieutenant, in behalf of the Country (as far as his remembrance leads him) from the House of Commons, desiring the benefit of some Graces [Page 159] His Majesty had been pleased to confer on them, and he in the open Par­liament, sitting under the Cloth of State, in presence of both Houses, told them, Ireland was a conquered Nation, and they must expect Laws as from a Conquerour: And the Instructions granted from His Majesty for setling the Government of that Kingdom, were procured from a company of narrow-hearted Commissioners.

Being asked on my Lord of Strafford's motion, when these words were spoken, whether the first day of the Parliament, or at any other time:

His Lordship answered, That to his best remembrance, it was not the first day of the Parliament.

My Lord of Strafford saying it was at the opening of the Parliament, and the second day; my Lord Gorminstone being further asked about the time:

His Lordship answered, He knew not whether it were the second day, or another day, but the particular words he took notice of; and it was in presence of both Houses of Parliament, the Speaker standing at the Barr.

The Lord Killmallock produced, and Sworn; and interrogated touch­ing the same words.

His Lordship answered, That he was a Member of the Commons House, Lord Killmal­lock a Witness. the 10th and 11th of the King, and the House of Commons Petitioned the then Lord Deputy, the Earl of Strafford, for the gaining of the Act of Limitations, for the confirming of their Estates, amongst other Graces granted to the Agents for that Kingdom, in the fourth year of the King. These Graces he answered to in writing; and on the second or third day after, came into the House of Lords, and there sent for the Commons; and in his Speech (amongst other things, I well remember, and to my grief, and to the grief of that Kingdom) he uttered these words, That that Kingdom was a conquered Nation, (the words as he remembred) and therefore they must expect Laws as from a Conquerour; adding further, that the Book of Instructions, established in King Iames his Reign, for the orderly Government of the Courts of Justice in that Kingdom, were Instructions contrived, and procured by a Company of narrow-hearted Commissioners, who knew not what belonged to Government.

Sir Pierce Crosby being asked touching the same words,

Answered, That he very well remembred the words, as they had been Sir Pierce Cros­by a Witness. spoken by the Noblemen that had been examined before him; My Lord of Strafford, then Lord Deputy of Ireland, in the hearing of both Houses, said, That Ireland was a conquered Nation, and that the Conquerour should give the Law. He added further, that the Book of Instructions for the Government of that Kingdom, was drawn up, or procured, by the means of some narrow-hearted Commissioners, meaning those Commissio­ners that were employed by Commission from the King out of the House of Commons, being a select Committee, whereof there was one that is now a Noble Member of this House, that sits on the Earls Bench: And that he hath heard many of both Houses, repeat the same words as spoken by him.

And so the Commons concluded the Article, expecting my Lord of Straffords Answer.

[Page 160] After a quarter of an hours respit, my Lord of Strafford began his De­fence as followeth:

First, I desire to open two points set forth in my Answer, which under E. of Strafford. favour, I must stand to, as that by which I must stand or fall. First, That the Kingdom of Ireland, (as I conceive) is governed by Customs and Sta­tutes, and Execution of Martial Law, and Proceedings at Council-Board, in a different manner from the Laws of England. Secondly, That touch­ing the Charters, I said, these Charters were void, and nothing worth, and did not bind the King further than he pleased; both which I hope to make good.

The other business, that comes in De novo, is no part of my Charge, and therefore I hope will not be laid to my Charge.

I observe in the beginning of this part of the Charge that concerns Ire­land, That the Governours for the Crown of England, that have been it Ireland, in all Ages, almost, have had these misfortunes, That the Native Subjects of that Country have not been propitious towards them. I in­stance in the case of Sir Io. Perott, who on Testimonies here, was Attainted of Treason in a Legal ordinary way of proceeding, whereupon he lost his Estate, though not his Life; and afterwards it was confest, there was little truth in all that Accusation.

Next, my Lord of Faulkland, against whom, many of the Witnesses that I think will come against me, informed; as Sir Pierce Crosby for one, my Lord Mountnorris for another, and divers others; who had so prejudicated me when I went into Ireland, in their Opinion, by the generality of their Charge, that I was a little distrustful whether it was not so: And thus much I have spoken once before His Majesty at the Council-Board, on another occasi­on, and now speak it to Your Lordships, to the Honour of that Person, that is now with God, my Lord of Faulkland, notwithstanding all the heavy cries that were against him, and the wrongs and injuries laid to his Charge, I had the fortune to have all the Examinations whereupon they proceeded, and looked over them all; and now I protest, and call God to witness, not any way as making to me, I found the said Lord to have proceeded as Honourably, Justly, and Nobly, to his understanding, as any man could do; and yet was decryed as much as any man could be. And so I beseech Your Lordships to consider me the Kings Servant; and that in the Administration of the Commands and Justice intrusted with me, I had occasion to give offence to many; and that it hath been the ill for­tune of those that have been Governours there, when they have left the Government, not to be so well reported as otherwise they might be.

Besides, There is nothing in this Charge can possibly amount to Trea­son, admit all to be as it is laid, though perhaps to a Misdemeanour.

That if it be no Treason, it will fall to be but Misdemeanour; and then I conceive, it stands with the Justice and Practice of this Court, to allow Councel and Witnesses, which I am debarred from, by the involving me under the general Charge of Treason; and having no further time to prepare, then since Friday last.

That though before, I durst not say Your Lordships were bound by Rules of any Judicature, but stood to Your own Honour and Nobleness, and were a Rule to Your selves, (and herein I take Your Lord­ships to witness) yet since the Gentlemen at the Barr, have prest the rules of other Courts, I desire leave to offer, That in all ordinary Courts of Judicature that ever I heard of, where the Criminal party doth Answer, [Page 161] and that Answer is not replyed to, nor he admitted to make his proof, the Answer of the party is taken and confest; from which universal Rule of Justice, no man can shew him a transgression: And therefore, since I cannot be admitted my proofs, it being impossible to fetch Witnesses out of Ire­land since Friday last, my Answer, I conceive, ought to be admitted, and the Charge taken as I confest it, not as it is on proof.

Saving to my self, that I said I would go on to give the best Answer I could, on a suddain, professing, That if I had had time, I am confident, through the mercy and goodness of God, and the Innocency of my own heart, I should be able to clear my self of Treason (the greatest Crime between man and man) towards His Majesty, and towards his People, (my heart being innocent of it; and never having suggestion or thought, but for the Greatness and Honour of His Majesty, and the Prosperity and blessed Estate of His People, all the days of my life; and ever desiring the best things, and never satisfied I had done enough, but did always desire to do better) but also of all other foul Crimes of Injustice or Oppression: Errours I may have many; perhaps my Tongue hath been too free, my Heart perhaps, hath lain too near my Tongue; but God forbid every word should rise up in Judgment against me. If every word that's spo­ken amiss should be observ'd, who is able to endure it; for words spoken, ten, twelve, eight or nine years ago, to be brought in Judgment of me, is a very heavy Case; and I beseech your Lordships to turn the Case in­ward, and to tell me if it be not a hard Case to be put upon such an Exa­mination.

I shall observe further, that words ought to be charged within a certain time by the Proviso in the Stat. in E. 6. time, they must be brought in questi­on within 30 days as I take it, which Proviso stands good in Law; but I go now into a Learning that God knows I have little skill of; to this I desire my Councel may in due time be heard, to open and Plead. In the mean time I desire to say, that if popular actions must be concluded within a year or two at the most, sure words should be questioned within a less time.

I shall proceed to maintain the truth of my Answer, That Ireland is not governed by the same Laws that England is; and for that I shall read a few words in my Lord Cooks Learning (which God knows I understand not) it is in Calvins Case; where the words are, So as now the Laws of England, became the proper Laws of Ireland. And therefore because they have Parliaments holden there, whereat they have made divers particular Laws, as it appears in the 20 H. 6. 8. and 20. and in Ed. Dyer 360. And for that they retain to this day divers of the ancient Customs, the Book of 20 H. 6. holds, That Ireland is governed by Laws and Customs separate and divers from the Laws of England.

Therefore in all things belonging to my Charge that came out of Ireland, I hope Your Lordships will take along with you the consideration of the Customs and Practices of that Kingdom, and not judge me according to that which hath been the Custom and Practice of the Kingdom of England.

In the second place, I come to the words of Ireland being a conquered Nation; The words laid in the Charge being, that I should say; That Ireland was a conquered Nation, and the King might do with them what he pleased.

And first, I should do extreamly ill to the Honour of the English Na­tion, and to the memory of divers of Your Lordships Noble Ancestors, if [Page 162] I should not both say and think, that Ireland is a conquered Nation; when here's mention made in the Laws, and in the Acts of State, of English Rebels, and Irish Enemies, certainly there is something in that; for till the Kings of England gave them the advantage and benefit of the Laws of England, it is well known, they were held Irish Enemies, and so termed and stiled in all the Records one shall meet withall in these times. And that it was a conquered Nation, I have very good Authority in the Sta­tute made 11 Eliz. at the Attainder of that famous Rebel Shan Oneale.

In one part of which it is said,

That all the Clergy of the Realm assembled in Armagh, at the time of the Conquest, &c. See the Statute.

Is it then so much for me to say what's in the Act? and is it not for the Honour of the English Nation to say it? and it must be said to the Worlds end, for 'tis a truth. And therefore there is no cause it should be taken so hainously, or heard with so much displeasure; and if I displease for telling the truth, I cannot help it: He reads another part of it, viz.

And therefore it is to be understood, that King Hen. 2. the first Conqueror of this Realm, &c.

And so it hath been acknowledged in all stories and times, and many an English man hath spent his blood in it, whose Posterity will be ashamed to view it, other than as a conquered Kingdom.

Nay, I believe many Noble Persons are yet living, that have bled for it, and will take it ill, if it be termed less than a Conquest, in them who lived in those famous times, and spent their blood in Obedience to their Sove­raigns Command.

So that by these words candidly and rightly taken, no manner of ill could come, being spoken, not with any sharpness or upbraiding, but meer­ly to let them see, That being in that Condition, they were infinitely bound to the Kings of England, who were pleased to communicate to them the Laws of their own Kingdom: And so far were they from being taken ill, that no man at that time took offence at them.

For the words, The King might do with them what he pleased, let them relate to the Conquest, and there is no offence in them; for the Conque­ror might give them what Laws he pleased, and yet nevertheless, hath been so gracious and good, as to give them the Laws of his own People: Give me that understanding of the words, and then where is the Crime? how can it be brought in Judgment against me in it self, or be aggravated to High Treason.

I acknowledge I did speak to the Recorder of Dublin, yet some things I am put in mind of, which I am forced to deny with a great asseveration, That I do not remember the words, nay, I am sure I never spake them, let all the world, and a cloud of Witnesses, say the contrary, when I know in my own heart I did not speak them; though I offer not this to Your Lord­ships, to convince your Judgments: And on the other side, there is nothing that is true, but I will acknowledge it with all Ingenuity in the world, on the Testimony of any one single Witness.

I desire that Mr. Slingsby, his Servant, might be asked, whether he was not present when I spake these words; and whether then any offence was taken at me, in respect of the high manner of my speaking; or whether they were not rather extreamly well satisfied.

Now if Your Lordships take words in pieces, and not altogether, any man living may be convinced; but taking my words altogether, though something might be thought harsh, yet something gave abundant satisfaction.

[Page 163] I am upon a mighty prejudice, in being denied to have my Witnesses examined upon Oath in these things that are not Treason. But they be persons of good credit, and I trust your Lordships will believe them, as much as if they spake on Oath, since I think none of them would say a word to your Lordships, which they would not swear.

Mr. Slingsby being asked, Whether he was present when my Lord of Mr. Slingsby a Witness. Strafford spake to the Recorder of Dublin, what he said, and what accep­tance it received.

He Answered, He was then present, being on the occasion of presenting Sir Robert Dixton, the Mayor of Dublin; that he cannot remember the particular words, nor deliver them to their Lordships, as they were spo­ken by the Lord-Lieutenant: But he remembers particularly the scope of the Discourse was to ingratiate His Majesties present Government to them; That the words were well accepted by several persons whom he spake with, and took that Effect, that his Lordship was thereupon invited to the Mayors House, where divers of the City Congratulated his coming to them.

I shall now proceed to the second part of the words, That their Charters E. of Strafford. were nothing worth, and they bind the King no farther than he pleases; and I conceive I may say so still. If their Charters be nothing worth, they do not bind the King, but he may do with them what he pleases. In that, I desire your Lordships to call to mind what my Lord of Corke said, That Ireland was a Conquer'd Nation, and the King might give them what Laws he pleased, and that the Charters were Antiquated, and no farther good, than it pleased His Majesty to make them. It is likely (I confess) I might say so, and yet not say amiss; for it is most evident and clear, their Char­ters are void in point of Law, and therefore it is in the King's good will and pleasure, Whether he will make them good or no. And that they were void, the King's Council informed me so; that they were question­ed at Council-Board upon it, for divers unlawful Exactions they took, under colour of Charters, for divers by-Laws that they had made, against Law, by those Charters, for divers neglects of Duties that they ought to do by those Charters; and generally, for not performing the trust reposed in them, by those Charters, with that Integrity and Care they ought to do And for the truth of it, that many Complaints were made against the Mayor and Aldermen at that Board, for neglecting their Duty: I dare Ap­peal to my Lord of Corke. I adding this, That the greatest part of the Aldermen were Recusants, and would never be brought to obey the Order of the Board; but stood on their Charters, and would be Masters; and by that means great Disorders continued.

And to prove that upon Examination, they appeared to be void in Law. I desire Sir George Ratcliffe may be admitted to speak on what Grounds those Charters were called in, and are now (as I think) deposited with the Clerk of the Council.

Sir George Ratcliffe standing charged with High Treason, by the Com­mons Manager. of England, before your Lordships, and of a Conspiracy with my Lord of Strafford; and whether it be fit to hear one charged with High-Treason, to clear another so charged, we Appeal to your Lordships.

[Page 164] That Sir George Ratcliffe is charged to be a Conspirator with me indeed, and, in truth, I must confess Sir George Ratcliffe and my self (under favour) E. of Strafford. are equally guilty of Treason, and I hope we shall both justifie our selves; but I know so much of him, that I am not ashamed to say, That I think that Sir George Ratcliffe is my Friend, and I wish him well, and so I think will all other men (I trust in God) when they hear him. But I conceive Sir George Ratcliffe might be heard in these Points; if he be examined as a Witness against me, I desire he may be examined as a Witness for me.

Sir George Ratcliffe is not examined, nor at all sworn in the Cause on our Motion, and admitted, that if they produced him as a Witness, they Manager. would not deny my Lord of Strafford to cross examine him. The Lord Steward declared the sense of their Lordships, That Sir George Ratcliffe could not be examined.

I shall readily obey; but yet observe, That if it were only matter of Misdemeanor, he might be examined, though charged. But this is my un­happiness, E. of Strafford. to be debarred of my Witnesses, because I am charged with Treason in general, though there be nothing in particular that's near the complexion of Treason.

We desire to observe, that this justifies a part of our Charge, for the Charter of the Subjects Liberties are, as his Lordship confesseth, brought Manager. to the Council Table, and judged there, and not to the proper Courts where they ought to be judged; the Council-Table having no Power to declare the Validity or Invalidity of Charters from the King to the Subject.

I crave Liberty to explain my self, That I said not they were brought to the Council-Table to be judged, but that consideration might be had, E. of Strafford. Whether there was ill usage and extortion practised under colour of them or no; whether any thing were done that hindred the growth of that Town, and the good of the People, and the Protestant Religion, that it might appear how the business stood in point of State; but to give a judg­ment upon them in Law, it was never in my thoughts.

Robert Lord Dillon being then asked, Whether the Charters of Dublin have not been brought before the Council of Ireland, there to be consi­dered concerning the Validity of them, and whether it did not appear that for divers Occasions, Exactions and Tolls, and by-Laws, and other abuses in the exercise of these Charters; they did not appear to the King's Learned Council, and others learned in the Law, to be void.

He Answered, That it was a question he did not expect; and yet being called, he should faithfully and freely tell his knowledge of it, to his best remembrance: That he doth remember very well, that the Charters of Dublin have been brought to the Council-Board, and argued strongly against by the Kings Learned Council. That there was one particular of 3 d. Custom challenged by the City, which endured a very long debate: That it was argued against them, That they exercised by-Laws, contrary to the Common Law of the Land, and that divers other things were urged against them; but he remembers not the particular determination of the Board upon the question.

[Page 165] Being asked severally, what time those Charters were so brought, and how long after my Lord of Strafford's coming into Ireland.

He Answered, That he precisely remembreth not the time, but he takes it to be five or six years ago, something more or less, and he thinks about a year or two after my Lord of Strafford's coming, but he remembers not the time, not expecting to be Interrogated in it.

We desire your Lordships to observe, That the words were spoken be­fore Manager. the Charters were brought to the Council-Board.

It follows not, That because they were questioned at Council-Board E. of Strafford. afterwards, I did not therefore know them to be void, when I spoke of them, for they were complained of in Parliament, as great Grievances, in the exercising of them, and to that purpose I desire my Lord Dillom may be heard.

And being asked what he knew concerning the Charters of Dublin, being questioned in the Commons House for divers Oppressions, unlawful By-Laws, and other ill usage of their Liberties.

He Answered, That he was a Member of the first Parliament after my Lords coming into Ireland, 1634. After this Visitation of the Mayor some half an year, but he knows not the time precisely. That divers Members of that House did object divers Misdemeanors, in mis [...]sing the Priviledges of those Charters. That the particulars were several By-Laws which they did execute, contrary to the Common Law: Another was, that by the Priviledge of those Charters, they excluded divers of the Tradesmen that came out of England to set up Manufactures there, which was con­ceived a great Grievance to that Kingdom. Another was, that having the Government of that Town, being a Navigable Port, they permitted the Soil to be emptied into the River, without care or regard.

That at the time of the Presentment of the Mayor, my Lord took oc­casion to advise and advertise the Mayor of several Defects in that Town, and divers of the Commons House of that Parliament are here that were present.

Hence observe the Reason and Grounds of my Exception to these E. of Strafford. Charters, and the Effects of questioning them, which were two: First, By this means I am perswaded (and thereof I beseech the Honourable House of Commons to take notice, as that which is reputed my greatest Crime in Ireland) there be three Protestants in Dublin, at this hour, for one that was there when I came over; for the Townsmen did keep all the Trade, and ingross all the Manufactures into their own hands; and being Na­tives, and Romish Catholicks, did depress the English, that strangers out of England had little advantage of Trade. And whatsoever any man may say or think on Information from persons that do not love me, who are Mem­bers of neither House (for so I desire to be understood, when I speak of persons unfriendly to me; I complain of nothing that is or shall be done me here, but will leave it all, with thankfulness to God Almighty, and with that Duty and Reverence to this House, that becomes me.) It will be known hereafter, when I perhaps am in my Grave, that my great­est fault in Ireland, hath been my extream Zeal to bring them to conform with the Church of England, which by that means hath provoked a great deal of Displeasure.

[Page 166] And secondly, I observe, That this argues no great malice in my heart, nor desire to oppress the King's People, when I shall tell your Lordships, That to this day those Charters were never legally questioned, but are enjoyed. So far was I from pressing rigorously any thing against them, I desiring nothing but Reformation, and to have them what they ought to be, and to leave them not less, but more happy than I found them.

And if I should serve there again, as I hope I shall serve only God Al­mighty, and my Master with my prayers, they should be freed from all exactions and misusings of them, tending to the prejudice of the Town, the King's Service, and the Service of Almighty God.

And so I hope I have made a clear Answer to so much as was charged, to free my self from guilt of Treason, reserving to my self the advantage of having my Counsel heard, in proper time, to the matter of Treason in point of Law, according to the liberty your Lordships have afforded me.

Next, I shall proceed to that which is proved, and no way charged, which I forbore to speak to the day before, as holding it an impertinent expence of time to your Lordships, and a spending of my own spirits, which, God knows, are weak and infirm indeed. If I were permitted to speak this morning to all the things extrajudicially formerly offered, I should give a free and clear Answer. But suffering by my Ignorance and silence then, I now desire leave to Answer those things that came de Novo, and that by three Witnesses, touching words spoken at another time to both Houses of Parliament.

I confess it to be true, that the second day of the last Parliament, but this that is now sitting, I had the Honour to sit as His Majesties Deputy, and it was the greatest Honour that ever I received; and I should be loath to say any thing, sitting in that Place, that should not fully comply with the Goodness, Clemency, and Justice of His Majesty, or should mis-repre­sent Him in any kind to his People in another sense, or to other purpose than his own Great and Princely Vertues do Merit and Deserve.

And that all I said at that time tended to that purpose, to shew and set forth to them the excellent Goodness of His Majesty, and the Graciousness of His Government. Therefore if I should say any thing to the purpose, as it is offered, I should go much against the purpose for which I intended my Discourse. For me to have said openly there, in the King's Chair, that they were a Conquer'd Nation, and must expect Laws from Him, as from a Conqueror, when I knew it most false; and expected from His Majesty, that He would Govern them by the same righteous Rules of Justice and Honour (as his Predecessors had before him) I had been much too blame, and it had been against the drift of my Discourse. And I must say, and will say, to the death, I never spake such words, That they must expect Laws from Him as from a Conqueror. I know very well how it is proved, and what my own affirmation doth in foro Iudicii; but how it may work in foro Conscientiae, I trust I have so much credit left in the World, as to be known to be a man of truth, and not usually to speak untruths. And I take the heavenly God to Witness, that I never spake them. I remember the words, and the occasion by a good token, without which I should not have re­membred them; my Friends desiring a Copy of my Speech, which Copy is in Ireland; and were it here, would satisfie every man. It was to in­cline them to take into consideration the great Debt that lay on the Crown, being near 100000 l. the shortness of the Revenue, which was then short of the yearly Charge 24000 l. though the first day it was stood [Page 167] upon, and would have been coloured over, as if there had been no such thing. I was to move thereunto a supply to pay the Debt, and to im­prove the Revenue to such a height as might answer the Charge of the Kingdom; that to induce this, I told them the Kingdom of England had expended great and vast Sums of Money, and had issued a great deal of Noble blood for the reducing of them to Obedience, and in that happy State wherein they then lived. That they must not think the Kingdom of England must always bear the Charge of the Crown, but they must so fit the business, that the Kingdom may bear its own Charge; For, said I, and these are the words, (I take God Almighty to Witness) and no other. If the Kingdom of England should still be put to their Charges, and the whole Expence should still rest on the Conqueror, you might very well think you are so dealt withall, as never any other Conquer'd Nation had been. That on these words my Lord of Ormond came to me, and told me, That the words he had spoken were not well taken; For that I had said, The Irish are a Conquer'd Nation, and that is not well. I answered his Lordship, Truly, my Lord, you are a Conquer'd Nation, but you see how I speak it, and no otherwise.

But this I am not charged with, and offer it only to keep and preserve me in a good Opinion, as much as I can of both Houses of Parliament, which I desire of all things under Heaven, next the Favour of Almighty God, and his Gracious Majesty.

He then proceeded to examine Witnesses: And first Robert Lord Dillom being asked, Whether he was present when he spake these words to both Houses of Parliament, and what they were?

We desire to put your Lordships in mind that there were two times when my Lord spake such words; one, when he spake to hoth Houses of Manager. Parliament at the Publick Speeeh now mentioned; the other, upon deli­vering a Petition by the House of Commons: That the words which the Commons Charge, were the last mentioned by me, not the first, and that was desired to be observed.

The Question being repeated.

The Lord Dillom Answered, That he served as a Member of the Com­mons House that Parliament, and in respect of the Honour he had to be of the King's Council, and the Son of a Peer of the Realm, he stood under the Cloath of State, and was present when my Lord made his Speech to both Houses; for that passage of the Conquest, some touch there was of it; and he hath heard my Lord of Ormond speak in particular of it: For the other words, That they should expect Laws as from a Conqueror, he took God to witness, he did not remember them.

Being asked whether he remembers them to be spoken at any other time: He answered, That on his Soul he doth not.

Sir Adam Loftus being asked to the same purpose.

He Answered, That he was the first and the last day at the Parliament, that he doth not well remember the middle day, and he cannot burden his memory with any such words spoken that he heard either then, or at any other time.

Sir Robert King was called, and asked to the same purpose.

He Answered, That he thinks he was present that day, but not within hearing, and he never heard the words at any other time.

[Page 168] Lord Renula being asked, Whether then, or at any time he heard my Lord of Strafford say, They must expect Laws from the King, as from a Conqueror.

He Answered, That he was then in the House, and remembers the words in the first place, That Ireland was a Conquer'd Nation; that for the words in the second place, something was spoken, but how far he cannot witness.

Sir George Wentworth questioned on the same Point.

Answered, That he sate under the Chair of State at that time, and re­members not that my Lord ever spake these words, That the King might do with them as he pleased. That it pleased my Lord-Lieutenant to send him into England at that time, to attend His Majesty, with the Success of that Parliament, and that he brought the Speech with him, and can confidently affirm, There was no such thing in the Speech; and the Speech he did de­liver to some Privy-Counsellor, and added, That he never heard my Lord publickly or privately say those words, They must expect Laws from the King as from a Conqueror.

We desire to know, Whether the Witness was returned out of England when this Remonstrance was delivered. For the Commons Charge it Manager. thus, That the House of Commons delivered a Petition, to have the Laws executed according to the Instructions, upon which the words were spoken, and we believe Sir George Wentworth was not come back, and then it was impossible he should hear him, for it was after the Parliament had sate, and some proceedings had.

I observe, How it is in some of the Witnesses, for my Lord Gorminstone E. of Strafford. fixed it on the first beginning of the Parliament.

He spake it to the occasion of the Petition, but the distinct time he doth not remember. Managers Relpy.

Sir George Wentworth being asked touching the time of his going into England.

He desired to know what time the Petition was delivered; but he went over some few days after the Subsidies were granted.

Lord Robert Digby being asked, Whether at the Parliament at Dablin, or any other time, he ever heard my Lord of Strafford speak those words.

He Answered, That he never did; that he doth not know whether he was present at that time or no; that he did diligently wait, but doth not remember the words, nor occasion, but he thinks he was not present.

Your Lordships have heard my Lord of Strafford's Defence with much Managers Reply. patience, That he hath said nothing that takes off the Charge, but some things that aggravate it.

That he would answer the Particulars, as his Lordship had propounded them. And first he observed, That his Lordship denies not the words Charged, which makes greater way for proof of them.

He informs of the ill Fortune of other Governors, that one was At­tainted, and the Informations afterwards retracted, that my Lord of Faulkland was complained of, yet a Noble and good Governor, against whom, or any Deputy, we can say nothing: But what is this for my Lord Strafford to say, Others were questioned, therefore he is Innocent.

[Page 169] These were complaints of particular men, This against my Lord of Strafford, is the complaint of all the Commons of England.

It is said, here is no Treason in this Article, no Argument of Treason; but the Commons never pressed these words singly and dividedly, to be Treason; but take all together, they discover that Disposition, that Coun­sel, that Resolution that my Lord of Strafford had taken on him, the ruine and subversion of the Common Law, in both Kingdoms.

It is said, an Answer is put in, and no Replication. It is true, in other Courts, if you go on Bill and Answer, the Answer is taken pro Confesso; but the Commons desire not to bind up my Lord of Strafford with For­malities; but by the substance of their Charge, they have averred their Charge, which is as much as a denial of his Answer.

To there being another Government in Ireland than in England, my Lord himself spoke of it by himself; but he thinks it will not be material to this purpose; for whatsoever it is, some Government there is: but the Speech of my Lord tends to take away all Laws; for they must expect Laws as from a Conqueror, in that Limitation.

For his referring it to the time, taking it in the sense, that the then Con­queror might do what he pleased, that's true, and justifiable: But that is to suppose the words otherwise than they are; being spoken, not of the Kings that were before, but of His Majesty that now is.

My Lord would make an Argument, his words were well accepted, be­cause Mr. Slingsby heard nothing to the contrary; the words had much Acrimony and Sharpness, and we dare not believe the Mayor of Dublin durst tell my Lord of Strafford so, or forbear any Complement to him, though he had been displeased with him. But if that be material, the Wit­nesses that have proved the words, will tell Your Lordships, it was resented with a great deal of Grief and Sorrow in all the hearers.

His Lordship justifies what was spoken of the Charters, on these grounds, First, That the Witness said they were Antiquated Charters, and therefore did not bind; whereas it was a scornful Epithite, their Antiquated, and Worm-eaten Charters, did not bind.

It is said, they were void through negligences, questioned at Council-Table, complained of in Parliament. But they must take the words to pieces, not altogether. Had he spoken of the Charters alone, that they were void Charters, it were no crime, no indiscretion. But take it with the occasion and connexion, it admits of no such mitigation, or interpreta­tion. He tells them, they are a conquered Nation, and they must expect Laws as from a Conqueror: And they are a conquered Nation, and their Charters are no further good than the King pleases.

It is said, It is strict to answer presently what may be objected; and the Examinations are extrajudicial; we doubt not but Your Lordships will justifie-our Proceedings, nor is there any strictness in them; for if a man be questioned of a Crime, and several Evidences be brought to make up this Crime, some concurrent, some precedent, they will be allowed of in other Courts; It being never used, to set forth in a Charge all circumstances of Proof, The main is produced, and this is an Evidence to prove that, and it is within the Charge; for there is a Charge, that he corrupts the Laws and Government.

Then my Lord produces divers Witnesses, who speak in a different sense, Sir Robert King heard nothing; another, that he remembers no­thing; and if he remembers nothing, it may as well be said of the rest, That there might be something they did not hear, or remember; for they [Page 170] speak no more, but they did not remember; There may be something they forgot, as well as another forget all.

My Lord Ranulagh says, He remembers the first words, and something as spoken of the second; but he cannot tell how far: So that there is ra­ther a doubt, that something was spoken to that purpose, than otherwise. The Lord Digby was not present, Sir George Wentworth remembers not the words; he hath a Copy of the Speech, and is confident the words were not spoken. But they were not spoken in the first Speech, whereof there was a Copy, when the Petition for the Laws was delivered.

And this is an Aggravation against my Lord of Strafford, that by his own shewing, there was an Exception taken, when he spoke in a milder sense, and to advance His Majesties Government, it had an ill impression, and was taken notice of, and the Exception delivered to himself.

Now if after Exception taken to a Speech delivered in Parliament, cloathed with so much mildness, he in the same Parliament, as soon as Sub­sidies are granted, shall tell them, they are a conquered Nation, and shall not have Graces, but such Laws as the King will give them: This puts the Offence in higher terms than before; so far are they from mitigation of the Offence.

We desire Witnesses may be heard concerning the circumstance of time.

Mr. Fitzgarret produced, and Sworn. Mr. Fitzgarret a Witness.

Was asked whether he knew of a Petition delivered to the Earl of Strafford by the Commons, concerning the Laws; and how in time it fol­lowed the publick Speech at the beginning of the Parliament, and what Answer was given to it.

He Answered, That he was then a Member of the Commons House, and present when the Petition was delivered: But after the House of Com­mons had given the King six Subsidies, the House of Commons entred in­to consideration, of Petitioning for such things as were necessary and ex­pedient for the Common-wealth, as they thought; this Petition was pre­ferred to the Lord Deputy, a good space of time after the Subsidies were granted, and Advertisement sent to England, of the good service done in obtaining those Subsidies from the House of Commons, That he remem­bers not any part of the Answer given; There was an Answer given in Writing, either at Council-Table, or in full Parliament, from the House of Lords; but that he spake only to the point of time.

My Lord of Strafford did here affirm it to be most certainly true, That E. of Strafford. the Petition concerning the things Mr. Fitzgarret mentions, was delivered at Council-Board, and not in Parliament; and desiring Mr. Fitzgarrets further explanation of himself:

He Answered, That he conceives there were two Petitions; one, as he thinks, concerning the performance of the Instructions of 1628. where­unto an Answer might be given at Council-Board; and he believes it was subscribed by many of the Council. There was another Petition of Grievances, seeking redress of them; and to whether of these his Lord­ship gave an Answer in Parliament, he remembers not; but believes there was an Answer made to both, or one of them, in full Parliament.

[Page 171] The Lord Gorminstone being demanded at what time, and on what occa­sion my Lord of Strafford spake the words, he was examined on before, in Lord Gormin­stone a Witness. the Parliament at Dublin:

He Answered, A Petition was delivered to my Lord of Strafford, and he spake to the House, wherein he spake the words that he had formerly related, That they must expect Laws as from a Conqueror; and that the Instructions published for the setling of that Government, were procured by a company of narrow hearted Commissioners; That he did not then remember the certain time; but he is sure it was in Parliament; and so resented, that almost all took notice of it; when most part were English and British Extractions, and very few Irish.

The Lord Killmallock being demanded to the same purpose, Lord Killmal­lock a Witness.

Answered, That he conceived the occasion was, a delivery of a Peti­tion to his Lordship. It is true, it was not delivered in Parliament, nor were the words spoken at the Council-Table where the Petition was deli­vered: But he conceives, it was on occasion of delivering that Petition, that his Lordship speaks: For after the Petition was delivered, three or four days after, his Lordship came to the Parliament House, he called both Houses before him, and there delivered these words, That Ire­land was a Conquered Nation, and therefore must expect Laws as from a Conqueror. Adding further, That the Book of Instructions, meaning the Book Printed in King Iames His Reign, for the orderly Government of the Courts of Justice, was contrived and procured by a company of narrow­hearted Commissioners, who knew not what belonged to Government. The words, he said, he remembers very perfectly, as having great misery on his heart in the speaking: And whereas it is said, none did take notice of them; They did, but they durst not, it wrought inwardly; and had they spoken of it, they expected no redress, but a greater addition of calamity to them.

We shall now proceed, and observe, That this Article touching the Manager. Laws of Ireland, gives the ground-work of what follows in the subsequent Articles concerning Ireland.

And first, We desire Your Lordships to take into remembrance, That though Ireland differ in some particular Statutes from England, yet they enjoy the same Common Law, without any difference.

That by the Statute 28 H. 6. in Ireland, It is Enacted, That every Cause shall be remitted to its proper Court; It is true, the King hath this Prero­gative, not to be tied to sue in the Kings-Bench; but may sue in any Courts of Justice, for matters Triable in the Common-Pleas, or Chancery, or Ex­chequer; all Courts are open to him, wherever he will have his Cause judged; but with the Subject, the proper Cause must go to the proper Court, and according to this, the exercise and use is continued in that Kingdom.

Some Incroachments being made, King Iames, of blessed memory, took consideration of it, he appointed Commissioners, and Instructions were Printed in pursuance of this: A Noble Earl now present, Justice Iones, Sergeant Crew, and divers others, were imployed in that Service. These Instructions, as they remit the Causes to the proper Courts, so they de­clare, that it had crept in at the Council-Table in latter times, to take [Page 172] Oaths; but direct, that it shall be forborn for matters of Interest and Complaint between party and party, and matters of Title.

And it stays not here; but a Proclamation is issued to the same effect.

This Statute, these Instructions, and this Proclamation, we desire may be read.

Accordingly the Statute was read, whereby it was ordained to the Go­vernour of the Land, or other Officer for the time being, He that accuses, shall find sufficient sureties for the damage of him that is accused; and if it shall be adjudged that the Suggestion or Accusation, is not true, &c. And also, that he that is Arrested, may go by Surety or Bail, till the mat­ter be determined.

And if it be matter of Treason or Felony, to be remitted to the Kings-Bench; if Conscience, to the Chancery; if Franchise, to the Seneschal of the Liberty; if for Debt, to the Common-Pleas, &c. saving the Kings Prerogative.

Then part of the Instructions were read, published 1622. wherein it is Ordered, That the Council-Table shall keep it self within its proper bounds.

Amongst which, the Patents of Plantations, and the Offices on which the Grants are founded, are to be handled as matters of State, and to be determined by the Lord Deputy and Council publickly, but Titles between party and party, are to be left to the ordinary course of Law, and nei­ther Lord-Deputy, Governour, nor Council-Table, hereafter to intermed­dle, or trouble themselves with ordinary businesses, within Cognizance of ordinary Courts, nor meddle with possession of Land, nor make or use, private Orders, Hearings, or References concerning such matters, nor grant Injunctions, nor Orders for stay of Suits at Common Law, Causes recommended from the Council of England, and spiritual Causes concern­ing the Church, excepted.

Then the Proclamation was read, dated November 7. 1625. whereby it is commanded, That the Deputy and Council-Chamber in Ireland then, and from time to come, shall not entertain, or take consideration of any private Cause or Causes, or Controversies between party and party, con­cerning their private and particular Estates, nor any Cause or Controversie of that Board, which are not of that nature that do properly concern matter of State; But that all Causes and Controversies of that nature, moved or depending between party and party, concerning private and particular Interests, be proceeded in in the ordinary Courts of that Kingdom respectively, to whom the Cognizance of these Causes and Controversies doth belong, &c.

For that Objection from the Opinion of my Lord Cooke in Calvins Case, if it were an Opinion to the contrary in an Argument, it is no binding Authority; But that Opinion is nothing at all against what hath been said; for it is express, That Ireland did retain the same Common Law with England. It is true, Ireland hath Statutes and Customs particularly re­tained; and so there be divers particular Customs in England, that differ [Page 173] from the Common Law, yet are approved and allowed in it; as in Wales, and the Custom of Gavel-kind, and the Common Law, which is the ge­neral Government, is the same. If there be any Statute that gives my Lord of Strafford, as Governour alone, power to take Cognizance of meerly private Causes, it is something to the purpose to say, there is a particular Statute; but till that be shewed, he hath in this, erected an Arbitrary Power.

And so he concluded the Reply, and the Third Article.

article 4

THE Fourth Article. The Charge.

THat Richard Earl of Corke, having sued out Process in course of Law, for recovery of his Possessions, from which he was put, by Article 4. colour of an Order made by the said Earl of Strafford, and the Coun­cil-Table of the said Realm of Ireland, upon a Paper Petition, without Legal procéeding, did the 20th day of February, in the 11th year of His now Majesties Reign, threaten the said Earl, (being then a Péer of the said Realm) to Imprison him, unless he would surcease his Suit, and said, That he would have neither Law nor Lawyers, dispute or question his Orders. And the 20th day of March, in the said 11th year, the said Earl of Strafford, speaking of an Order of the said Council-Table of that Realm, made in the time of King James, which concerned a Lease which the said Earl of Corke claimed in certain Rectories or Tythes, which the said Earl of Corke alledged to be of no force, said, that he would make the said Earl, and all Ireland know, that so long as he had the Government there, any Act of State there made, or to be made, should be as binding to the Subjects of that Kingdom, as an Act of Parliament; and did question the said Earl of Corke in the Eastle. Chamber there, upon pretence of breach of the said Order of Council-Table; and did sundry other times, and upon sundry other occasions, by his Words and Spéeches, Arrogate to himself a Power above the Fundamental Laws, and Established Government of that Kingdom; and scorned the said Laws and Established Government.

ONE of the Managers opened the 4th Article, and said, The former Articles shew my Lord of Straffords Words, this his Actions.

This Article concerns my Lord of Corke's being disseized of an Im­propriate [Page 174] Rectory, upon a Paper Petition to my Lord of Strafford, and referred to the Council-Table, the Earl of Strafford saying, upon the questioning of the Proceedings thereupon, That neither Law nor Law­yers, should question or dispute his Orders; an Order of Council-Board in King Iames his time, enjoyning, That no Parson, Patron, or Ordinary, should make a Lease for longer time, than the life of the Incumbent, was made use of as a ground to dispossess the Earl of Corke.

In the first place, We desire to open the Proceedings at Council-Table before my Lord of Straffords time, (viz.) That in no case concerning Manager. Land, no Decree hath been there made, to bind up the party for remedy at Law.

The Lord Ranulagh being interrogated, whether by the course of Pro­ceedings Lord Ranulagh a Witness. at Council-Table, the Deputy and Council have determined Ti­tle of Land and Possession, and interrupted the parties to proceed at Law.

He Answered, That he hath observed the course of the Board for 22 years; and the course was, That if Title of Land, between party and party, were in debate, It was commonly dismissed from the Board, with a leading order, to be tried by course of Common Law.

Being asked, whether a Deputy alone hath determined private Interest.

He Answered, That he cannot positively say, whether it were done pri­vately; but to the best of his remembrance, he knows not that ever any De­puty determined any matter of private Interest, but brought it to the Board, though by reference, or private proceeding, it might have pro­ceeded before it came to the Board.

My Lord of Strafford desired he might be asked, whether he ever E. of Strafford. knew, that any matter of Inheritance was ever by himself and the Coun­cil determined, whilst he was Governour there, that was barely Title of Land, and nothing else.

He Answered, And desired to explain himself concerning the former, That Causes of the Church, and matters of Plantations, were resolved in Witness. former Deputies times, to be dispatched at the Board. And for the latter question, he never knew matter of Title determined at the Board, but in Causes of the Church, and Plantations.

My Lord of Strafford desired he might be asked, whether as President E. of Stafford. of Connaught, he did not familiarly, on Paper Petitions, rule all things in the same nature, as the Deputy on Petitions to him.

The Fifth day.
Friday, March 26. 1641.

AFter consideration of this matter by their Lordships, it was resolved in the Upper-house, That my Lord Ranulagh ought not to be ex­amined on that point, it tending to an Accusation of himself.

The Earl of Corke being Sworn, and questioned touching my Lord of E. of Corke 2 Witness. Straffords words to him, upon his excepting against the Orders made upon the Petition touching the said Rectory.

His Lordship Answered, That he had been in Possession, as Tenant of the Crown thirty five years, of a Rectory and certain Tythes in the County of Tiperany, for which he paid a yearly Rent; and having enjoyed it so long, my Lord presented to it Arthur Gwyn, that had been his Coach-mans Groom. That when he heard of it, he went to my Lord privately, and told his Lordship, that he was His Majesties Farmer of those Tythes, and paid a Rent; and desired he might not be sued for them in the Council-Chamber: but if a Suit must be ommenced, that it might be in the proper Court, the Exchequer. That my Lord told him, he should Answer it there: That he did so, and my Lord ordered it against him; That a Commission went down, and Examinations were taken: And after my Lord had ordered it against him, an Order of course was set down, that Gwyn should have them till I recovered them by course of Law. That there­upon, I brought an Action against him, and his Tenants, who were Ar­rested, and came to Dublin; and then went to my Lord, and Dr. Bram­hill, Bishop of Derry. That thereupon I was sent for before my Lord Lieutenant that then was; and my Lord Lieutenant told me, Sir, You have taken out Writs against Gwyn, to whom I Ordered the Tythes of the Rectory. I confest I had, and desired to know why he aked me so; ad­ding, that I am sure your Lordship will not take away my Possession, by a Paper Bill, without Trial. That my Lord of Strafford answered, call in your Writs, or if you will not, I will clap you in the Castle; For I tell you, I will not have my Orders disputed by Law, nor Lawyers.

Gwyn was a poor man, and if he should get the Rents of the Impropri­ation into his hands, I could not get them again: And therefore I desired security, That if by course of Law I should recover it, I might have it again; That my Lord of Strafford thereupon said, It was very fit and just; but the Order being brought unto me, I said there was no such thing in the Order.

Being desired by the Earl of Strafford to repeat the last over again,

I say, that I told the Lieutenant, that I did hold, the Council-Chamber could not hold Plea of this, and thereupon cited 28 H. 6. the Book of Or­ders, the Proclamation. Then I moved his Lordship, that in regard Gwyn was a poor man, and not answerable, and might get the Rents, being [Page 176] near 100 marks a year, he might give security for the Rents, if I should re­cover them by course of Law; That my Lord of Strafford thought it just it should be so entred in the Order.

And being asked how that came to be left out,

He Answered, That Sir Paul Davis, the Clerk of the Council, told him, my Lord of Strafford found fault with it, and struck it out with his own hand.

Being asked what words he heard from my Lord of Strafford, con­cerning the said Order at Council-Board, in King Iames his time:

He Answered, That there was a Parsonage in the County of Kerry, in his Presentment, and it fell void; the Dean, and some others, commended one Atkinson to be his Vicar, That on their Commendation, not knowing him himself, he presented him, without any consideration. That Atkinson afterwards fell into decay, and was Imprisoned; and the Prison being very loathsome, the Bishop wrote unto him, this Deponent, and sent him a Lease, under the Hand and Seal of him the said Bishop, and the Incum­bent, with a Label for his the Deponents hand, and desired him to seal it for 40 s. a year to another, that Atkinson might pay his Debts, and stock himself with Cattle; That he the Deponent, refused it, though brought 50 miles from his House, fearing it might be prejudicial to the next Clerk. That the Bishop sent Atkinson's Wife back over the Moun­tains with his Letter, and the Lease; and he the Earl of Corke, did sign it then; For, seeing the misery of the poor Woman, and her Children, he thought it a work of Charity; and it continued so till my Lord of Straf­ford came to the Government.

That then he had a Bill preferred against him in the Star-Chamber, for breaking an Act of State, That none should make a Lease for longer than the Incumbents life, and desired that the Bill should be read, in all the Proceedings of it; That thereupon he told the Earl of Strafford, it was a work of Charity, and he never heard of such an Act of State, being not published, and made in King Iames his time, and in the Lord Grandisons Government, who are both dead: And therefore he conceived, there was no cause to charge, or prosecute him for it, being but an Act of State. That my Lord of Strafford Answered, I tell you, my Lord, as Great as you are, I will make you, and all the Subjects of Ireland know, That any Act of State made, or to be made, shall be as binding to you, and the Subjects of Ireland, during my Government, as an Act of Parliament.

Being asked on my Lord of Straffords motion, whether the Order made in the Case of Gwyn, was not made by the major part of the Votes of the Board:

He Answered, That he did say that it was Voted at the Council-Table, but he knows not whether it were done by the major part; and after­wards (with a lower voice) His Lordship added, that he thinks it was never Voted.

Iohn Waldron Sworn; was examined touching the words my Lord of Iohn Waldron a Witness. Strafford was charged to say, touching an Act of State, being equal to an Act of Parliament; and the occasion:

He Answered, It was his chance to be at Council-Table, when a Cause, depending between the Merchants of Galloway, and some others, that prosecuted the business in behalf of the Church, about a Lease made by the Dean of Derry; which was debated at the Council-Board. And there [Page 177] was one Mr. Martin of Council for the Merchants, and he pressing hard for his Clients; It pleased my Lord to think he had over-shot himself, or was too forward; and asked what he had to say, that he prest that Cause so hard; That Mr. Martin Answered him, He had an Act of Parliament, or Statute, or to that purpose.

That my Lord of Strafford Replied again, Sir, I will make you know, That an Act of this Board shall be as good as any Act, or Statute, or words to that effect.

Iohn Kay, after some Exceptions taken by the Earl of Strafford against him, as no fit Witness in respect of his prosecuting a Suit against his Lord­ship, for the Lady Hibbotts, which was Over-ruled by their Lordships, was sworn, and being asked touching the said words to be spoken by the Earl of Strafford, and the occasion and the time.

He Answered, That he was present at Council-Table by chance, when there was a Cause, wherein Mr. Martin pleading for his Clients: My Lord-Deputy then asked him, What made him so earnest for it; He said, He had an Act of Parliament, or Statute, to justifie his Cause. Hereupon my Lord-Deputy Answered, He should know, that as long as Himself sate in that Place, An Act of State should be as strong as an Act of Parliament, or words to that effect.

Being asked of the time.

He Answered, He doth not remember the time, but it was three years and upwards. It was before Iuly 1637. but the Day and Year he remem­bers not; but it was in the Case where Mr. Martin was Council.

My Lord Corke being asked about the time, he said, It was in 1635. about February.

Mr. Waldron being asked, Whether it was in a Church-Cause. Answered, My Lord-Deputy made an Offer, That if they would take a Lease for 21 years, at full value, they should have it. But if they would stand on the Trial of the Lease, they must take the adventure.

And Mr. Hoy being asked, Whether it was a Church-Cause.

He Answered, He conceived the Church was Interested in it.

Lord Kill mallock asked, Whether he heard my Lord Strafford say, An Act of Council should be as Valid as an Act of Parliament, when, on what occasion, and to what scope.

He Answered, That he was at Council-Table some four or five years ago, and there did hear my Lord of Strafford say to one of the Council (he cannot say it was Mr. Martin) He would have him know, as long as himself was Governor, An Act of State should be as binding as an Act of Parliament; on what occasion he cannot say. He further said, That in the 10th Year of the King, in the Parliament held in Ireland, he heard Sir George Ratcliffe (my Lord of Strafford's Eccho) in that House, say, On occasion of a Bill that was cast out in that House, making it Felony for any to have Powder without Licence. It is all one, he would have an Act of State for it, which should be as binding as an Act of Parlia­ment.

Sir Pierce Crosby was asked, Whether he heard my Lord of Strafford at another time say, An Act of Council should be as valid as an Act of Par­liament, when, on what occasion, to what intent.

He Answered, That he doth very well remember the words, the time not precisely; but he was sure it was soon after my Lords coming into Ireland, and before the Parliament, and was the cause of the first Excep­tion against him the said Sir Pierce Crosby, for he reasoned it with his [Page 178] Lordship, being at his own Table at Dinner, there being then present, and sitting next to him, a Member of this Honourable House, my Lord Castlehaven. There were likewise my Lord Osmond, and several others of the Council of Ireland. The words were these, That if he lived, He would make an Act of State to be of equal Power with an Act of Parlia­ment. That he, the Deponent, thought his Lordship spoke it merrily, and answered him in the same kind, saying, My Lord, when you go about to do this, I will believe some body will rise, as an English Gentleman did in England, and desire a Clause of Exception, that it may not reach to himself, his Kindred and Friends. That my Lord of Strafford looked on him very earnestly, and said, He would take him, whosoever he was, and lay him by the heels.

That this was in Parliament time: And he the Deponent would fain have qualified it; but Parliament, or not Parliament (says my Lord) Ireland is a Conquer'd Nation, and the Conqueror should give the Law. That he the said Sir Pierce Crosby Replyed, My Lord, then, I beseech you, give me leave, I am one of those that must uphold an Act of State, by all lawful ways, having the Honour to be a Member of the Government, though unworthy. What will be alledged on the other part? they will say an Act of Parliament attaints and restores Blood, and doth many things an Act of State cannot reach to, for it is confined within the limits of the Government. That my Lord having not to Reply to this, rose in some choller; and told him, the Deponent, of something else he conceived he the Deponent had done amiss at Council-Board on a Statute that was in debate.

And so the Manager concluded the Article with thus much more; The Article, in the conclusion of it, charges him with scorning the Government and Laws. And it was desired their Lorships would take notice of what is proved out of these words, and the concurrent proof Yesterday.

The Earl of Strafford begins his Defence, saying,

First, I must stand upon the truth of my Answer, which must be good, till it be denied, so far as goes to matter of Misdemeanor. E. of Strafford.

I have not had time to examine Witnesses, having not liberty till Friday last, which I urge by way of excuse, if my Answers give not full satis­faction.

Here is an Order of the House of Commons there, whereby your Lordships may perceive how unlikely I am to have any thing from Ire­land that may work to my Justification, which was read, and bears Date 25. February, 1640.

Authorising those undernamed to go aboard any Ships, and seize, search, and break up all Trunks, Chests, and Cabins aboard. To seize on all Silver and Gold, except small Sums; and all Debts, Evidences, and Wri­tings as they shall think fit, of him the said Earl of Strafford.

This his Lordship conceived to be a great Violation of the Peerage of the Kingdom.

For making good of his Answer, his Lordship Alledged:

That the Council-Board of Ireland is a Court of Record, which differs much from the Council-Board of England; and that they proceed there by Bill, Answer, Examination, Publication, and all the formal courses of legal Proceedings.

[Page 179] That my care to preserve the Authority of the Deputy and Council, is not a Subversion of the Laws: Only it directs it, and puts the execution of the Law another way.

That for Reasons of State, it must be preserved, being the place of Resort for Protection and Defence of the English Planters, and Protestant Clergy.

I shall produce and acknowledge the Instructions made 22 Iac. and I shall read part that bounds the Council-Board particulary mentioned in the Reply to the Third Charge.

I desire a Book may be read, a Book in the hands of Mr. Denham, con­taining certain Answers given by the Lord Chichester, to certain Com­plaints made against that State, and written with Mr. Baron Denham's own hand, which on debate, was Resolved not to be read, being written only for a private Remembrance.

I shall refer to my Lord Ranulagh's Deposition the other day, to satisfie your Lordships touching the Proceedings at Council Table.

To prove the Council-Board to be a Court of Record.

Robert Lord Dillom being asked, Whether before my Lord Strafford's time he had not known always, during his memory, the Deputy and Council in all causes of Plantation, and the Church, proceed by Peti­tion, Answer, Examination of Witnesses, Publication, and Hearing, as in other Courts of Equity, and upon Oath.

He Answered, That he remembers in my Lord Chichester's time of Govern­ment, it was the practise of the Board so to do: That he remembers it in my Lord Grandison's time; that he had the Honour to be called to the Council-Board under my Lord Faulkland's Government, and knew it then. And it was in the Justices time that preceded my Lord Strafford's Government, To have Petitions, Examinations of Witnesses, Publication, a day of hearing granted, and all ordinary Proceedings.

Being asked, Whether at that Board they have not been punished, who have disobeyed Proclamations, and Acts of State, before my Lord Strafford's time, and how long.

He Answered, That out of his Observation, at Council-Table Acts of State were made, because of the scarcity of Parliaments, that they might be a Supplement to Acts of Parliament, that he hath known before; and when he sate at the Board on contempts of these Acts of State, or Procla­mations, which, he said, he had heard the Judges say to be a kind of Law of the Land, for the present; the Parties were Attached, brought to the Board, and upon full Examination of the Cause, and Proof of the Con­tempt, sometimes Imprisoned, sometimes Fined, according to the Delin­quency and Degree of the Offence supposed to be committed.

Being asked of Fines in Cases between Party and Party.

He Answered, That he doth not remember any Fine imposed in a special Cause betwixt Party and Party.

Sir Adam Loftus being asked to the same purpose.

He Answered, It hath ever been, since his remembrance, the constant Practise there, in Causes of the Church and Plantation, to proceed on Pe­tition, Answer, &c. and Fines imposed on Breakers of Publick Acts of State and Proclamations. But he remembers not any Fines for Contempts, in case of particular and private Interest.

We shall admit it to have Cognizance of matters of Plantation and Church, and such as are recommended from the King to the Council here. Manager. But not to be a Court of Record.

[Page 180] From these Proofs, I infer, That the Council-Board there hath another Constitution then here, where it is only a Court of State. E. of Strafford.

I shall produce the Order made in my Lord of Corke's Case, which I observe to be in the Case of the Church, and so within the Cognizance of Deputy and Council.

The Order was read, being signed by Sir Paul Davis, and acknowledged by my Lord of Corke to be Sir Paul Davis's hand.

Upon reading whereof, my Lord of Strafford observed, That it appears to be a Church-Cause, That the Order was just, and that the Clause for the Plaintiffs giving of Security to answer the mean Profits, which my Lord of Corke said was struck out of the Order, and for my Lord of Corke's liberty to bring his Action at Law, only he was limited to prosecute it with­in a year.

Mr. Leake was produced by my Lord of Strafford, and being asked what Authority he hath known the Council-Board in Ireland to exercise, both before my Lord of Strafford's coming thither, and since, in Causes of the Church and Plantation, and concerning Contempts to Proclamations, and Acts of State, and what Countryman he is.

He Answered, That his name is Leake of Leake, in the County of Not­tingham, where, he said, his Family hath continued 400 years: That it is 14 years since he went into Ireland, and before this Lords-Deputies time; and before that time he did not observe any restraint from Injunctions on the Council-Board, till the Instructions published, and they did stay them.

That they proceeded by Injunction, Process, Bill, Answer, Examina­tion, and other Courses, as in the Chancery of England. And since the same course hath been held. And my Lord of Strafford hath had in the Castle-Chamber divers Causes of Law argued before him concerning the Church, wherein one Chadwick and divers others were convented thirty times, when he the Examinant was there and heard them twenty he is sure, but he thinks thirty. But my Lord of Strafford did forbear to give Sentence, till he heard these Causes argued: That 14 years he hath been very well versed in that Kingdom, that he hath known Injunctions have gone out from thence to stay Proceedings in Causes, where they have Power of Jurisdiction, that he hath known my Lord Chancellor Loftus that was, to grant an Injunction without Bill, and before any Complaint depended be­fore him, and that he himself had the Injunction granted.

Being asked about the time of his going into Ireland.

He said he went betwixt 1627. and 1628.

Whence observe, that the Witness hath made an Observation of the In­structions five years before he came into Ireland. Manager.

Being asked some other questions touching the occasion of his going into Ireland, and how he came to take notice of the Proceedings there.

He Answered, He hath been there at several times, to pursue some Tenants of his that fled into Ireland; and by reason of the Suits and Petitions he prosecuted in his own Right, he had occasion to enquire after Proceedings there, having been there for the most part of 14 years.

To the Statute of 28 H. 6. which the Commons have pressed as a Rule for the re [...]ing of Causes to their proper Courts, and to annihilate all E. of Strafford. these Proceedings before the Deputy and Council; and before the Deputy [Page 181] alone in his particular Jurisdiction, in the nature of a Court of Requests in England. I reserve my self to have my Council give satisfaction therein: Only desire your Lordships to observe the last Clause, saving the King's Prerogative.

These Proceedings are not against Magna Charta, they being according to the Laws and Customs of the Land; though it be not the Custom of England. And if he hath been an Innovator, it hath been to conform Ireland by all ways he could in Religion and Laws, to the better and more excellent Pattern of England.

To the Objection made against Mr. Gwyn, he is altogether unknown to me, only was recommended to me, and here is a Certificate that Gwyn is Master of Arts; but that was not read, nor insisted on.

To the matter of words Charged upon him.

He Answered, That words without Fact can be no matter of Treason, though of a higher nature then these.

That words are to be charged within a limited time.

1 E. 6. Ca. 12. whereby it is provided, That none shall be Impeached concerning Treason for words only, if the party, being within the Realm, be not accused within thirty days: If out of the Realm, within six months, &c. Which Proviso his Lordship read, and reserved to his Council farther to apply it.

For the words spoken to my Lord of Corke, That neither Law nor Lawyers should dispute my Orders. I conceive I might justifie the speak­ing of them, if the Orders, and Acts of State be justly warrantable, and honourably made.

Yet it is improbable I should speak the words, when the Order refers it self to Law.

If they were spoken, they are at the highest indiscreet and foolish; and it is a heavy thing to punish me for not being wiser than God Almighty hath made me.

For the last words, That I would make the said Earl and all Ireland know, That so long as I had Government there, An Act of State made, or to be made, should be as binding as an Act of Parliament. I observe my Lord of Corke's quick memory, that could swear them roundly, without missing a letter or sillable as they are laid in the Charge.

That these words are only in the Charge, and so only to be answered to. And for Answer, I say, That in case of an Act done, they may be brought collaterally, as an inducement, to prove the intention. But the Act must be proved, before they can touch me as of Treason.

My Lord of Corke is a single Witness, and by a Proviso, 1 E. 6 Ca. 12. no person, after the first of February then following, is to be Ar­raigned, &c. of Treason, &c. for any words to be spoken after the said first of February, unless the Offendor be accused by two sufficient Witnesses, or should, without violence, confess them.

To the words spoken of by the other Witnesses being the same in effect, I am not to answer, being extrajudicially proved, and spoken in other places and times than I am Charged withall.

Yet I think they might be fairly interpreted: For if an Act of State be not made against an Act of Parliament, or a Fundamental Law of the Land, but consistent with it, and made by way of provision for remedy­ing some present Mischief in the Common-wealth, till the Parliament may provide Redress for it. They are as binding during the time they are in force, as an Act of Parliament (though I confess, the Comparison is [Page 182] not good) because they be made according to Law and Justice; accor­ding to the Fundamental Laws of the Land, wherein the Prerogative of the Crown hath a part, as well as the Property of the Subject: For if the Propriety of the Subject, as it is, (and God forbid but it should continue) be the second, undoubtedly the Prerogative of the Crown is the first Table of that Fundamental Law, and hath something more imprinted upon it: For if it hath a divinity imprinted upon it, it is God's Annointed; It is he that gives the Powers. And Kings are as Gods on Earth, higher Pre­rogatives than can be said, or found to be spoken of the Propriety or Li­berty of the Subject; and yet they go on hand in hand, and long may they do so, long may they go in that Agreement and Harmony, which they should have done hitherto, and I trust shall be to the last, not rising one above another in any kind, but kept in their own wonted Channels. For if they rise above these heights, the one or the other, they tear the Banks, and overflow the fair Meads equally on one side and other. And therefore I do, and did allow, and ever shall, for my part, desire they may be kept at that Agreement and perfect Harmony one with another, that they may each watch for, and not any way watch over the other. And therefore this being a Care of the Prerogative, as long as it goes not against the Common Law of the Land, it is the Law of the Land, and binds, as long as it transgresses not the Fundamental Law of the Land, being made provisionally for preventing of a Temporary Mischief, before an Act of Parliament can give a Remedy.

And this Condition must be implyed, That it must be binding, pro­vided it be according to the Law of the Land. I instance in that Exception that King Iames would take, when a man saies he will do a thing as far as he may with Conscience and Honour; because in Persons of Conscience and Honour, those words are always implied.

That the Wisdom of our Ancestors hath prevented this Mischief; That for a mis-word, a Peer of England should lose his Priviledge, being as great as any Subjects that live under a King, that is not a free Prince of the Empire. And the Preamble of a Statute in Queen Elizabeths time, the very bent whereof is to take away the dawning of words, without any further Act; which Preamble was read to their Lordships.

And so I conclude, the words were unwisely spoken, because they may be brought to a hard sense, but not Criminal, for none of them swear any thing done in breach of the Law.

I except against my Lord Kilmallock's swearing Sir George Ratcliffe to be my Eccho, as if he knew my thoughts; and against Mr. Hoy, as a party concerned in Interest, though not in name, in a Suit that is or will be brought against me before your Lordships come to the end of the Charge.

I confess Mr. Waldron's Testimony makes me stagger, being the only person could make me believe I said the words.

I except against Sir Pierce Crosbies Testimony, having been formerly Sentenced in Star-Chamber, and I know what Sir Pierce Crosby swore there, and that I never Communed with him so far, as to have such a Dis­course, as is mentioned, in all my life.

To the Suit in the Castle-Chamber against the Earl of Corke, on pre­tence of breaking an Order of Council-Table. I conceive it had relation to an Order made in King Iames his time, 20. March, 11 Iac. which I desire may be read, (being now produced) as also the Information there exhibited, that so I may justifie my Answer in that point of it; That [Page 183] the Suit was not upon that Act alone, but for other matters also; but that was admitted by the Committee. And so the reading of them was waved.

To that Point of Mr. Waldron's Testimony, touching the offering of a Lease to the Person concerned, rendring the half value: I conceive this Circumstance qualifies the words, it being according to Law.

To demonstrate which, the Statue was read.

That no Lease shall be granted, upon which less is reserved to the Lessor (during 21 years) then the moiety of the Lands value.

And so his Lordship concluded his Defence, and the Manager made Reply in substance as followeth.

That this Article proves my Lord of Strafford's Intention to subvert the Manager. Laws.

That the long time spent in maintaining the Jurisdiction of the Council-Board, is the least part of the Article.

That though these words singly, be admitted not to be Treason, yet seve­ral words and actions must prove the general Charge, of his endeavouring to subvert the Laws.

To the several Provisoes in that Act of Parliament, mentioned by my Lord of Strafford, concerning words, we observe, That the words Charged are only matter of Evidence, to his general Intention, of subverting the Laws. And whereas he says they are not charged in time, the Commons bring this as done long ago, and continuing to this day, if he were not prevented; so they take him Flagrante Crimine.

To the Practise of the Council-Table before his time, his Witnesses have proved their proceedings in Cases of the Church and Plantations. But in other Cases we deny it, for it is contrary to Law.

That admitting the extent given by the Instructions to Church-Causes (though the Proclamation hath no such exception.) Yet it comes not to the Case of my Lord of Cork, who claimed the thing in question as a Lay-Impropriation; derived to the Crown, by the Statute of Dissolu­tion.

That my Lord of Strafford makes this Government Arbitrary, in threaten­ing the Earl of Cork, to lay him by the heels, if he went to Law, whereas the Order gave him liberty.

That the Original Order in my Lord of Corke's Cause was drawn, with these words put out, concerning Gwyn's giving Security, and that justifies my Lord of Cork's Testimony.

That notwithstanding my Lord of Strafford's justification of his words, That neither Law nor Lawyers should question his Orders. This is to assume an Arbitrary Power; for if his Orders be legal, the Law must justifie them, if not, question them.

That the words, Of making an Act of State equal to an Act of Parlia­ment, are proved by my Lord of Corke; and those spoken are a confir­mation of those before, and expresly within the Article. The latter point thereof recites, that he spake the words at other times.

This altogether justifie my Lord of Corke's Testimony, though a single Witness, and prove that my Lord of Strafford hath made it a habit to speak such words.

That they have one Witness more, and that is my Lord of Strafford himself, who says, He never spake any thing but truth; and said, That he would make an Act of State equal to an Act of Parliament.

[Page 184] We desire, that for the taking off the Aspersion cast on Sir Pierce Crosby, my Lord of Castlehaven may be examined, touching the words alledged to be spoken in his presence.

The Earl of Castlehaven being sworn and examined touching the said words, E. of Castleha­ven a Witness.

Answered, That it is a business past long ago; and but a Table-dis­course, and he took not much notice of the Circumstances: But as he remembers, there fell a difference between my Lord of Strafford, and Sir Pierce Crosby, within three or four months after my Lords coming over; and that as well as he can remember, my Lord of Strafford did say, That an Act of State was equal to an Act of Parliament; but he remembers not the occasion.

That the Justice of the Order in my Lord of Corke's Cause, is not material, or whether within the Jurisdiction of the Council-Table, the Manager. Charge being, That upon such an Order made, my Lord of Strafford threatned the Earl of Corke for Suing at Law.

That the Justification brought by my Lord of Strafford, is an Aggrava­tion, restraining Liberty to Sue at Law, to a year, else to be concluded for ever.

Whereas my Lord of Strafford says, he hath spoken unwisely, but done nothing; sure he that Threatens doth something; and his Actions will ap­pear in the next Articles.

For the Priviledge of Peerage, It were to be wished he had known, or remembred it sooner, in my Lord Mountnorris his Case.

That though he says, Acts of State are to be allowed for temporary provision, till an Act of Parliament, yet when things are propounded, and rejected in Parliament, shall he supply it by an Act of State.

We desire to examine one Witness more.

The Earl of Strafford excepting against it, as not regular, the Lords Adjourned to their House, to take consideration of it.

And a little after, returning, the Lord Steward declared their Lordships Lord High Steward. Resolution, That the Witness might be examined; The matter in questi­on, arising from what was offered from the Earl of Straffords Defence.

Roger Lotts Sworn, and examined, what words my Lord of Strafford Roger Lotts a Witness. gave out, when an Act for Powder would not pass in the Commons House; and what Act of State was thereupon made.

He Answered, That he had the Honour to be one of the Members of that Parliament that began 1634. and ended April 1635.

That at the Close of that Parliament, my Lord of Strafford then Lord Deputy, told the House of Commons, then sent for up, That they had Voted against some Bills in the lower House, amongst the rest, that of Gun-powder; where it was made Felony for any man to buy, or have any, unless he got a License first for it: That my Lord afterwards told them, That notwithstanding they had Voted against it, yet he would make that, and some other Bills they had Voted against, Acts of State, that should be as good; and said, he heard it was done afterwards, but he doth not know that.

[Page 185] This Witness is something of Justification of my Lord of Corke's Testi­mony; against which, my Lord of Strafford hath made some Exception. Manager.

And the Lord Digby added something for the Justification of my Lord of Killmallocks Testimony; against which, my Lord of Strafford had like­wise excepted.

And so the Reply was concluded.

To the Deposition of Roger Lotts, my Lord of Strafford Answered,

I had received direction concerning Powder; it being not conceived fit, E. of Strafford. for Reasons of State, to buy, and have Powder at pleasure, or that that Commodity should be so frequently brought into the Kingdom, and com­mitted to unsafe hands; so in that point, I did but what I was commanded out of many Reasons; which I desire I may forbear to express, it not con­ducing to my Acquittal or Condemnation.

And so the Lords Adjourned.

The Sixth day.
Saturday, March 27. 1641.
THE Fifth Article. The Charge.

article 5

That according to such his Declarations and Spéeches, the said Earl of Strafford did use and exercise a Power above, and against, and Article 5. to the Subversion of the said Fundamental Laws, and Established Go­vernment of the said Realm of Ireland, extending such his Power, to the Goods, Freé-holds, Inheritances, Liberties, and Lives of his Ma­jesties Subjects of the said Realm; and namely, the said Earl of Strafford, the Twelfth day of December, Anno Domini 1635. in the time of full Peace, did in the said Realm of Ireland, give, and procure to be given, against the Lord Mountnorris (then, and yet a Peér of the said Realm of Ireland, and then Uice-Treasurer, and Receiver-general of the Realm of Ireland, and Treasurer at War, and one of the Principal Secretaries of State, and Kéeper of the Privy Signet of the said Kingdom) a Sen­tence of death by a Council of War, called together by the said Earl of Strafford, without any Warrant, or Authority of Law, or Offence deser­ving any such punishment. And he the said Earl, did also at Dublin, within the said Realm of Ireland, in the month of March, in the Four­téenth year of his Majesties Reign, without any Legal or due Procéed­ings, or Trial, give, and cause to be given, a Sentence of Death against one other of his Majesties Subjects, whose name is yet unknown; and caused him to be put to Death in Execution of the same Sentence.

THe Manager began to open this Article, shewing, That though my Lord of Strafford insisted on it, That whatever his words Manager. were, his Actions were not against Law. This Article comes properly to reply to that Answer, It charging him with exer­cising of a Tyrannical Power over the Person of a Peer of that Realm.

[Page 187] And first, It was desired that the Sentence of Death against my Lord Mountnorris, might be read, which was attested on Oath, to be that which was delivered by Mr. Secretary Windebanck, upon the Commons humble Suit to His Majesty, for His leave, to have a Copy thereof, That the Papers concerning my Lord Mountnorris, might be delivered into the House, occa­sioned upon my Lord Mountnorris his Petition to the House in that behalf.

This Sentence of Death against a Peer, was pronounced by Martial Law, Manager. against the fundamental Rules of Law, without Trial, Answer, or Hearing; That though my Lord of Strafford owns it not, yet he made relation of the Injury to His Majesty: His Majesty did justly direct, that my Lord of Strafford should have just reparation. That my Lord of Strafford pro­duceth the Witnesses, refused to let my Lord Mountnorris Answer, though he demanded the benefit of the Law; owns it in his own Person, for he said, (treading on our Foot) and an Injury done to us.

And whereas some would have mitigated it, and found him guilty of the first Article, He himself pronounceth it, both or none.

The whole proceeding was but half an hour; no notice was given be­fore-hand, and my Lord Mountnorris checked, for desiring to cross­examine.

My Lord Mountnorris produced as a Witness; some Exceptions were taken against him by my Lord of Strafford, but were over-ruled.

His Lordship being Sworn, and being directed to declare the whole Lord Mountnor­ris a Witness. truth in this business, Answered as followeth:

Upon the 11th of December, 1635. I was warned by a Pursevant, late at Evening, to attend my Lord Deputy in the Council-Chamber, at a Council of War next morning, by Eight of the Clock.

Coming thither accordingly, I found many of the Council, and Cap­tains of the Army; and having conferred with several of the chief of them, and with my Lord Valentia Cromwell, and others, they said, they knew not for what that Council of War was summoned; after a whiles stay, my Lord Deputy came into the Room, and sat down at the Boards end, and commanded the rest to sit down; where my self, that had the Honour to be His Majesties Vice-Treasurer, by His Grace and Goodness, sate in my place: After all were set, my Lord Deputy exprest, he had called that Court to do himself Right and Reparation against my Lord Mountnorris. At those words, I rose up from my place, and humbly [Page 189] presented my self at the Boards end, as the manner is, near his Lordship; who making some Speech, about words uttered by me shortly after the preceding Parliament, which was April 18. 1635. and the words spoken within three or four days after, took a Paper in his hand, and out of that, read the words wherewith he charged me; to the effect, I conceive, as they are mentioned in the Sentence. After his Lordship had read them, he demanded of me, whether I would confess them, or deny them. I did humbly desire, I might have the Charge in writing, that I might Answer it by advice of Learned Counsel, the words being charged to be spoken long before, and it was hard to Answer them suddenly. His Lordship Answered, That was not the course of a Martial Court, I must Answer directly. I did several times desire I might have the Charge in writing; and my Lord of Strafford answered in the same kind, That I must An­swer, whether I would confess, or deny them.

Two or Three of the Counsel of War spoke something also to that purpose; as I remember, the Lord Cromwell for one, and Sir Ch. Coote, and Sir Iohn Burlacy; who intimated, that the manner was, I must confess them, or deny them. Standing a while silent, my Lord Deputy said, He thought they must proceed against me as a Mute; for he will not Answer, and therefore they must take them for granted. I said over again what I had said before, and desired I might have my Charge in writing; and that I might have Advice of Counsel, that I might be used as a Peer of the Realm, and an Officer of the Crown; and still his Lordship denied, That must not be, It was not the Order of a Martial Court.

I replyed, and told the Lord Deputy, I had seen it otherwise in a Martial Court in England, between my Lord Reas and Ramzie, where the Cause was debated by the Advocates in writing. The Lord Deputy told me again, That must not be, I must Answer directly; and hereupon, the Lord Deputy caused His Majesties Letter, dated the last of Iuly, to be read; and when that was read, required me to make Answer: I confess, I was amazed at hearing of this Letter, and was much grieved; and with Humility and Grief, expressed on my Knees what Sorrow it had wrought on me; and that I had never willingly Offended His Majesty, or His Laws: And declared, that I had been mis-represented to His Majesty, and those Letters were got by mis-information; and humbly desired a Copy of those Letters, and the Charge, that I might Answer by writing; and that His Majesty might know my Answer before further Proceedings. His Lord­ship upon that, rebuked me with worse Language than was fit to be used to a meaner man, and not a Peer, that desired but Law and Justice. The Lord Deputy told me, I was not mis-represented to His Majesty; for him­self had represented me, and that matter, to His Majesty; and he did not use to mis-represent any thing: And then directly required me, whether I would confess them, or deny them. If not, he would prove them on Oath; and thereupon my Lord Deputy called for my Lord Moore, sit­ting at Board with him, and required him to give his Testimony; who had an Oath given him by the Lord Deputies command, by the Clerk of the Council; and referred himself to what he and Sir Robert Loftus had long before put under their hands: Thereupon the Lord Deputy gave that Paper to the Clerk of the Council to read; which was the Paper the Lord Deputy held in his hand, and out of which he had read the Charge: And that being shewed to my Lord Moore, he said, to his best remembrance those were the words spoken. Sir Robert Loftus was also called in, and he being required to give his Testimony, referred himself [Page 190] to that which he and my Lord Moore had put under their hands; and being shewed him, with his hand to it, he affirmed it. Then my Lord Deputy asked me, what I could now say, since the words were proved to my face: I humbly told his Lordship, and made solemn protestation, and offered to take my Oath, That I did never speak the words, as I was able to prove by several Witnesses; and desired, That the Lord Chancellor (at whose Table they were spoken) and Judge Martial of the Kingdom, then in Town, might be summoned to give his Testimony for truth, and Sir Adam Loftus his Son, and near twenty others; and desired they might be examined in the Cause; and that I was well able to prove, that the words charged to be spoken by me, were not spoken by me, but by others, as to that part that concerns the Affront; but his Lordship refused me to have any examined.

Being asked, whether all the Army was then on the march, as my Lord of Strafford had said in his Answer. He Answered,

There was at that time three, or four, or five Companies, I am not able to say how many.

When my Witnesses were refused, and I had made my protestation, that I had not spoken them, and was ready to prove it, (my Lord Deputy Answered, That he knew my Oathes and Protestations well enough) I took Exception to the Testimony of the Lord Moore, and Sir Robert Loftus, as I might in a Legal way. But my Lord Deputy rebuked me, and spoke in commendation of them; and bid my Lord Moore sit down now, and be one of my Judges: And thereupon commanded me to with­draw, which I did, and went out into a Gallery by, where I stayed about the space of half an hour, I think not more, I am sure not an hour; and was then called in, and at the beginning, was required to Kneel as a De­linquent; which I conceived I was not, having endeavoured always to shew my self a faithful Officer.

Then my Lord Deputy commanded Sir Charles Coote to pronounce the Sentence, as Provost Martial of Connaught; which he did briefly, in effect as in the Sentence: And my Lord Deputy took occasion to make a Speech, and told me invectively enough, (amongst other things) there remained no more now, if he pleased, but to cause the Provost Martial to do Exe­cution. But withall added, That for matter of Life, he would suppli­cate His Majesty. And I think he said, he would rather lose his Hand, than I should lose my Head; which I took to be the highest scorn, to com­pare his the Lord Deputies Hand, with my Head: I said, I never did, and hoped I never should, endanger my Head by Offending His Majesties Laws.

I was hereupon commanded to be taken to Prison, by the Constable of the Castle, who took me thence away; what past in the time of my ab­sence, I knew not; but the Articles I was charged with breach of, were not declared, nor I urged to Answer; if I had, I could have Answered, I knew of no such Articles, nor ever saw them, till Iune 1636. published by his own Authority; and made in time of War: And though made for regulating of the Army, yet were never put in practice; And on a Conference with some of the Council of War, I was informed, they dif­fered in Opinion amongst themselves; and some moved, both the Articles might not be pressed; And his Lordship Answered, he would have both or none.

[Page 191] Being asked on my Lord of Straffords motion, how long after the Sen­tence given, he remained a Prisoner in the Castle:

I was Committed the 12th, and remained until the 18th, and was not Witness. released by any Favour of my Lord Deputy, but on a Certificate of the Physitians; and that not admitted but upon Oath, That I was in peril of my Life; and a Petition drawn by them that had more care of my Health than my self, being so afflicted in body and mind, with the high Injustice and Oppression I had, that I was extreamly ill; and was then remitted on Security, given by the Chief Justice in 2000 l. Bond, to be a Prisoner.

Being asked on the Committees behalf, whether he was not taken to Prison again; and how long he continued in Prison for this Cause.

I continued at my House, and was very ill; and after that several times, was called to the Council-Table by my Lord Deputy; and an Informati­on Witness. exhibited in the Star-Chamber for pretended Crimes, which I shall ever desire to Answer in any publick Legal Judicature, rather than live.

And I was imprisoned again the 11th of April; being sent for to my House, and found with my Counsel about me, preparing my Answer in the best manner I could; and the Advice was, I should demurr to that In­formation, because I stood under the Sentence of death: I was carried by the Constable to the Castle, and brought before my Lord Deputy; and the said 11th of April 1636. was committed close Prisoner; and there continued till the second of May: And I knew no other cause, but that I had (as he said) neglected the Kings Grace; and had sent my Wife into England, and transgressed a Proclamation.

To which I answered, I had not transgressed it; that my Wife was full of Grief at my Calamities: and I had sent her to save my Life.

Then my Lord Deputy told me, that I had refused the Kings Grace offered me, in not accepting his Pardon; which I thought not Legal for me to take: And thereupon Committed me.

Being asked on the Lord Lieutenants motion, whether the Council were not present;

He Answered, Some of the Council were present; but my Lord Com­mitted Witness. me, the Council not speaking a word.

Being asked again about the time of his Commitment;

I was first Committed the 12th of December, let go the 18th to my House; Committed again the 11th of April, put out the second of May: I was then in great Extremity, and admitted to my House again; where I lay in a long continuing sickness, and under the hands of Physitians: And the 30th of Ianuary afterwards, because I sued not out the Pardon, was imprisoned again, and there continued till March 1637.

The Lord Dillom was called, and after some exception taken by my Lord Dillom a Witness. Lord of Strafford, to the examining of him, because he might speak things that amount to an Accusation of himself, the same was over-ruled; the Committee for the Commons declaring, that they would make no use against him, of any thing he should speak concerning himself. His Lord­ship was thereupon Sworn, and asked what my Lord of Straffords carriage was at the said Sentence, not accusing himself:

He Answered, That he was present at the Council, on Summons to be there; and the Council being set, as a Council of War, my Lord of Strafford did shew what they were called for; and did set forth some In­juries he conceived done him by my Lord Mountnorris.

[Page 192] Upon that my Lord Mountnorris was spoken to, and much interlocution there was, before he would say he did speak the words, or deny them; and after much debate to and fro, the Witnesses were called in, my Lord Moore, and Sir Robert Loftus; and they did testifie the words in the Charge, upon Oath; much debate there was; to call every particular to remembrance he cannot at this present, but as near as he can he will, that was before my Lord Mountnorris withdrew; and after his withdrawing, and some Speeches to the Council of War, they came to Voting; and in the Voting, there was never a man, to his remembrance, in giving his Vote on both Articles, but did profess he gave it in a confidence, that there should be Mercy extended to my Lord Mountnorris; and with an Intercession, that he might find Mercy from His Majesty: And when the Votes were all past, my Lord of Strafford stretched forth his right Arm, and protested he had rather have his Arm cut off, or lose his right Arm, than my Lord Mountnorris should lose a hair of his Head, or a drop of his Blood, for that cause; and that he would write to His Majesty, to supplicate Him for Mercy.

Being asked on the Committees motion, whether my Lord of Strafford did not publish, he had acquainted His Majesty with it, and they were called together to give Reparation of some Injuries done to himself.

He Answered, My Lord made a long Speech at that time, setting forth the Charge, and making mention of His Majesties Letter, and His Majesties Letter was read; and he did understand by my Lord Deputy, it was to give Reparation; but the particular words, on his Oath he doth not remember.

Being asked, whether (some of the Council moving they might proceed on the Article that did not extend to Life) my Lord of Strafford did not reply, Nay both.

He Answered, That he remembers very well it was proposed to the Council of War, that they were to judge on both Articles.

And being asked by whom:

He said, he will Ingeniously answer, he believes my Lord of Strafford did; but specially to say, who, or in what manner, he cannot.

Being asked, whether the Evidence given against my Lord Mountnorris, was not written in a Paper, drawn out by my Lord of Strafford; and that the Witnesses referred to that wholly:

He Answered, He did see a piece of Paper in my Lord of Straffords hand; and believes it was some note for his remembrance, what it was, he knows not; and when the Witnesses were brought in, there was a paper to which they had set their hands of the words spoken.

Being asked other questions successively, touching the pressing of the Councels proceedings on the Article only, that touched not death; and whether my Lord of Strafford wished them to proceed on both:

He Answered, He remembers it not so prest on that occasion; nor doth he remember whether such a Provision was made, That the Proceedings should be on the Article that touched not Life.

Being asked, whether any beside my Lord of Strafford moved, they might proceed on both Articles.

He Answered, He remembers in the debate, the manner of proceeding was spoken of; and to his best remembrance, by the Discipline and Rule of the Army, it was said, he was to be proceeded against on both.

Being asked on my Lord of Straffords motion, whether the Earl of Strafford did not in plain and direct terms say, He would not be a Judge in that Cause, nor give a Vote by any means:

[Page 193] He Answered, He remembers he gave no Vote, and being more than five years since, the special words he doth not remember; but in general, after he had set forth the Injuries done to himself, he profest, he would give no Vote, but left it to the Council.

Being asked on the Lord of Straffords motion, whether he did not de­sire the Council of War, but to proceed as to any other Officer in the Army; and what Sentence they should give, he would not take ill.

He Answered, When my Lord Mountnorris was withdrawn he spake not a word, but did when he came in again: He doth not remember the words.

Being asked whether the Army was not a great part of it in Dublin, and in motion, and daily exercised, when the words were spoken by my Lord Mountnorris.

He Answered, He cannot tell precisely whether the most part was there; but there was a part of the Army there, and they did exercise.

Being asked on the motion of the Committee, whether the Sentence he approved so well of, he thanked them for it.

He Answered, That he doth not remember any special words; but he thinks, in Civility he would do it.

Being further asked, whether, after my Lord Mountnorris was with­drawn, my Lord of Strafford did not continue in his place, and sit at the Table end amongst the Council.

He Answered, I do really believe he did so.

The Lord Strafford confessed he did, when the Votes were delivered; but desired the Lord Dillom might be asked, whether he sate only as a party, not as a Judge; and sate bare through the whole proceeding of the Cause.

He Answered, He doth not remember it particularly, whether he sate bare all the while; for it is long ago, and he did not heed it.

The Lord Ranulagh being asked, whether he was present at the Lord Mountnorris his Sentence; and whether my Lord Strafford declared, they Lord Ranulagh a Witness. were called together to give satisfaction for Injuries done him by my Lord Mountnorris.

He Answered, That in this particular my Lord of Strafford was Nobly pleased to mention his tenderness of my Lord Dillom, least he should be his own accuser, He was pleased to mention something the other day, wherein he had tenderness of him; That he shall be as little fearful to speak the truth in this Cause, as in that, having been required by their Lordships; as presuming he hath done nothing but what he may justifie; That for that particular question, he hath been heretofore examined in some particulars of it; and shall now, with the best of his memory re­peat, and offer to their Lordships, according to his weakness, every pas­sage in it.

That he was summoned to appear in the Council-Chamber; and, as he takes it, it was December 12. 1635. That being there, my Lord sate in a Council of War, and he (amongst others) having the Honour to wait on him, my Lord Mountnorris's name being mentioned after he was set at the Board, arose, and stood as near my Lord Deputies Person, as was fit for him, towards the upper end of the Table: And there stood charged with several dis-respectful words spoken by him; and the words mentioned in the Censure that was read, were the words; That he was charged to [Page 194] have spoken those words in breach of certain Articles, by which the Army of Ireland was Governed, the 13th and the 41st, That there was much in­terlocution from my Lord Deputy to my Lord Mountnorris, and returned from my Lord Mountnorris to my Lord; the substance was, That he was ready to give his Charge, That he had violated those Articles, That my Lord Mountnorris desired time to answer by Counsel; and that he might have his Charge in writing. That being not readily granted, he insisted on it, That he might have time to prepare his Answer, but was told, it was con­trary to the form of that proceeding; But whether that Objection of the form, came from my Lord himself, or from some other Member of the Board that I heard before named, I cannot possibly say. But thus stands the state of it, my Lord Mountnorris neither confessing nor denying the Charge, my Lord Deputy replyed, Sir, If you do neither confess nor deny the Charge, how shall we proceed? The Deputy called on the Lord Moore, and said, What shall we say to this business? My Lord, saith the Lord Moore, what I can say, is under my Hand; That a little time after, a Letter was read from the King, whereby His Majesty was pleased to give direction to proceed in a Martial Court, for Reparation and Honour of the Lord Deputy, on the Complaint and Information given to the King. That my Lord Mountnorris instantly fell on his Knees, expressing a great deal of Grief and Sorrow, and in truth Passion, and had not much to say for himself; and soon after, was bid to withdraw; and being with­drawn, my Lord Deputy said, That as he had complained to the King, so he would expect that Honour from the Board, That his Cause should be taken into consideration, and such Redress given as was fit; He deman­ded Justice according to the Articles insisted on: And having declared it, there was a silence amongst us for some time; That he was the first that brake that silence; and in as humble manner and terms as he could light upon, did humbly desire my Lord Deputy to give him leave, to ask whe­ther he would give leave to wave either of those Articles; but my Lord said, he would demand Justice on both.

That this being so, there was some Interlocution of discourse among the Council, and in truth he thinks, that he was one of the first that said, that these Articles, and the words, cannot bear so good a construction, but that there may be some danger of a breach upon these Articles.

Being asked whether the words were not represented to the Council of War in a Paper written, and the Testimony given in pursuance of that Paper.

He Answered, That as he remembers, my Lord Moore having made a return to my Lord Deputy, My Lord, What I can say, your Lordship hath under my hand; he thinks my Lord Deputy said, My Lord, if you deny it, I have it under your hand to shew.

And thereupon (as he remembers) the Clerk of the Council standing by, had direction to draw up some Interrogatories, which my Lord Moore did acknowledge; and Sir Robert Loftus too did affirm, that they were spoken by my Lord Mountnorris, as much as was mentioned in the Paper.

Being asked how many Companies of the Army were then in Town; how many in a Company; and whether they were exercised in a more than ordinary Training; and how many Companies the Army consists of:

He Answered, That he thinks the Horse-Troops were 40, or 50 at the most; some my Lords own. The Foot-Companies were 50. And of [Page 195] those Companies there were (he takes it) two Horse-Troops, besides my Lord's own Troop, and four Foot-Companies; they were called up to guard and attend our Occasions in Parliament, and they did their Duties as Souldiers every day, as indeed my Lord of Strafford was careful of well exercising the Army as any General he ever saw; and there are forty Com­panies of the old standing Army.

Being asked on my Lord of Straffords Motion, Whether my Lord of Strafford did not declare he would not give Judgment in the Cause, but Appeal to them as a Suitor for Reparation.

He Answered, That my Lord of Strafford held them to the Point of the Articles, demanding Justice on the Articles; that he said sometimes, he would depend on our Judgment in it, and yet he would hold us to the Point of the Articles. And further, that if there were not a necessity of his being there, he would have withdrawn too. But my Lord would not give the Council a latitude to proceed according to the King's Letter for Reparation, but he held them to the Point of the Articles.

Being asked on my Lord of Strafford's Motion, Whether he did not tell my Lord Mountnorris, when he went out of the Room, that he would not speak a word till he came into the Room again, and whether he did not do it accordingly; and whether he sate bare all the while as a Party, and not as a Judge.

In answer, he desired leave to offer to their Lordships, that he acquainted their Lordships before; that as soon as my Lord Mountnorris was with­drawn, my Lord did declare what he the Lord Renula had formerly said. But after the Council fell into debate of it, he spake not a word, nor gave any interruption. And he cannot positively say, that he sate bare all the while.

Being asked, Whether this was not in the time of full Peace, and whe­ther any Rebels or Enemies were in the Kingdom.

He Answered, Certainly it was a time of very full and happy Peace.

To prove, that in discourse concerning this Sentence, my Lord said after­wards, Manager. He would not lose the Honour or Share of it.

The Earl of Cork being asked to that purpose. Earl of Cork a Witness.

Answered, That all he can remember is, that the Sentence was publickly read in the Star-Chamber, and my Lord said, He would not lose his Share in the Honour of it, but he cannot remember the day.

Lord Viscount Dillon asked to that purpose.

Answered, That he happened to be in the Star-Chamber that day, by my Lord of Strafford's Command, and carried the Sword that day. That the reading of the Sentence he remembers not, but the words he heard, That the Sentence given against my Lord Mountnorris, by the Council of War, was a noble and just Sentence, and for his part he would not lose his share of the Honour of it.

The Commons proceeded to that part of the Charge, which concerns the execution of another man by Martial Law.

William Castigatt sworn, being asked several questions touching that William Casti­gatt a Witness. part particularly, Whether he knew one executed by Martial Law, and by whom? &c.

[Page 196] He Answered, Yes, his name was Thomas Denewitt, and it was last Sum­mer was two years, that he was on the Green, when he was hanged, and they were born in the same Town: He said, he knew not what Martial Law is, but he was hanged on one of the bows of a growing Tree, and he takes it my Lord of Strafford was present; he added, that all the Soul­diers were there, and the Company; but knows not whether he was con­demned by a Jury or no. And he heard that he was hanged for a quarter of Beef, that he, and some of the Company took away.

Lord Viscount Dillon being asked, If he knew of the Execution of the Lord Dillon a Witness. said Person, whether he was condemned by Martial Law, and whether he was a Suitor to my Lady Strafford, and could not prevail.

He Answered, He did not know that man by name that was hanged, but it was by Martial Law. And he, and another noble Lord that sits here, were Suitors for him to my Lady, and she told them, she did endeavour, but could not prevail for a Pardon.

That it was a little before the 500 men went to Carlisle, out of Ireland.

That he was not present at the Trial, but saw him hanged on the Green at Dublin on a Tree, and knows not his name; and he conceives the Pro­vost-Marshal, or the Provost-Marshal's Son did Execution, for they were there both of them. That the Cause was double, as he heard, for which he was condemned; for flying from his Colours, and for stealing some Beef.

Patrick Gough sworn, and asked to the same purpose as before. Patrick Gough a Witness.

He Answered, That he remembers about the time of the 500 Souldiers sending to Carlisle, and the Army in Dublin, this man was executed by the Provost-Marshal's Son, and on a Tree, and that time two other Souldiers were whipt. The voice of the Report was, He was hanged for a quarter of Beef, and running away from his Colours.

Lord Renula asked what Answer was given, when a motion was made that this man should be tried at Law.

He Answered, That he was warned to come to a Marshalls Court, and the Messenger came so late, that he came not timely enough to give his Vote in the Court. That he came when the matter was fully heard, and ha­ving done his duty to the Lord-Deputy, sate down behind the Chair. That there were some controverted Opinions concerning the condemnation of the man. The Lord-Deputy was pleased to desire his Opinion, and stated the Evidence to him, as it appeared before the Court, which, to his remembrance, stood thus; The party was accused to have stollen some Beef; and charged to have run from his Colours, which was the reason of the parties being called thither, as he conceived. And it was thus, coming to his Lieutenant to demand his Pay (if he be not mistaken, and if he be, he should be glad to be certified by any,) the Officer said, He had it not; then he desired to be Discharged, Then go and be hanged, said the Officer; and thereupon left his Colours, yet left his Musket with his Corporal. That for the Beef, it seems the Fact was clear, that this was when a Regi­ment of Foot was to be transmitted to Carlisle, and were at Dublin at­tending their Transportation hence. That he the said Lord Renula was desired to inform himself of the particular charged upon his going from his Colours. The thing in his excuse was, The Officer's bidding him go [Page 197] and be hanged, and leaving his Musket: That therefore he, the Lord Renula, did the rather advise he should be tried by the Law, than in that Court: That he doth not conceive the Sentence was made certain before he came in, and if he be not mistaken, there is a Noble Peer of this House sate in that Council, and he is sure, that he (the said Peer) offered Reasons why he should not die for that Fact, for he heard him argue it so, and that is my Lord Conway.

Lord Conway was sworn, and asked his knowledge of this. Lord Conway a Witness.

He Answered, That he hath been asked of this heretofore, and there­fore is something more in his memory than otherwise it would have been, for he had almost forgot it, and it is very imperfectly in memory. He remembers that he was at a Council of War in Dublin, that there was a man condemned to be hanged, and that it was for such a matter as their Lordships had heard spoken, more of it he doth not remember.

And being further asked, Whether any Proposition was made to my Lord of Strafford, to have the man referred to a legal Trial, or the Execu­tion deferred.

He Answered, He remembers it not.

And so they closed the Article, observing it to be fully proved in both parts of it, and that it makes good the general Article, of exercising a Tyrannical Government over His Majesties Subjects.

The Earl of Strafford began his Defence.

I humbly conceive my Answer must be allowed me, if I prove clear of E. of Strafford's Defence. Treason, having been debarred of Witnesses.

My Answer saith, That the Deputies have always exercised Martial Law in time of the Armies march, and divers Articles for regulating the Army printed, according to which divers have been put to death in Peace as well as War.

That the Lord Mountnorris, for breach of two of those Articles, was proceeded against by 20 in number, and Sentence of Death pronounced, wherein I was no Judge; and I obtained from His Majesty that no perso­nal hurt befel him, but a few days Imprisonment.

If I had been questioned on my Life for Murder or Felony, I might in extremity have feared (perhaps) but certainly this can by no Law be made Treason, for which only I must answer, being a Crime of another nature.

I trust this will appear no Crime, or such a one as, I hope, His Majesty will grant me a Pardon for, as He hath done to others.

I desire to excuse a Mistake in my Answer, about the whole Armies be­ing at Dublin, and I desire in my Answer to have liberty to rectifie a mistake.

I humbly desire the Commission may be read under the Broad-Seal, whereby I am made General of the Army, and Power derived to exercise Marshal-Law, which was read, and this limitation is in it as to the exercise of Marshal-Law, Si opus fuerit. And this I observe is according to the practise of all the World in Cases of this Nature.

That the Army in Ireland is a standing Army, in the King's pay, and and hath, and always had Marshalls, Serjeants, Majors, Generals, Provost-Marshalls, and other Officers.

[Page 198] We admit that there is an Army in Ireland that is in pay, and distribu­ted in the Country, and hath Officers belonging to it. Manager.

The Generals there have from time to time set forth Orders in Print, for E. of Strafford. the Government of the Army, and the Officers of it, particularly my Lord Wilmott, whose Orders are here to be read.

My Lord Wilmott being examined, confest there were Orders made for regulating the Army, that he had the Honour to be General four years, Lord Willmott a Witness. and that the Articles offered by my Lord of Strafford, and by him viewed, are attested under his Hand, for which he took Pattern from my Lord Faulkland, my Lord Grandison, and my Lord Chichester, and he did it by the Power he had the Honour to hold under His Majesty as General: That yet he used them so sparingly, that neither in that time, nor in the Govern­ment of Munster (in which he had as large Authority as ever any man had) he never did condemn a man to death in peaceable times, and that the Authority hath been good. That Martial-Law is so frequent and ordinary in Ireland, that it is not to be denied, and so little offensive there, that the Common Law takes no exception at it. That he hath lived to see three or four Parliaments there, and they never complained of it. And to Govern an Army without Martial-Law, is impossible, for occasions, in an Army, rise on a suddain, and something must be done on a suddain for ex­ample-sake to others.

That Martial-Law was certainly in Ireland ever since he remembers, and long before; but it hath been used so sparingly, that in the time of Peace, for his part, he did never know any executed in his time.

Being asked on the Lord Strafford's Motion, Whether he hath known Sir Charles Coote as Provost-Martial of Conaught, and Sir Iohn Bower Provost-Marshall of Leimster, in time of Peace, execute divers Persons, Rebels, and others, by Martial-Law.

He Answered, For Sir Charles Coote he can very well answer, though he had Authority, yet it is out of his memory that he ever executed any. And for Sir Iohn Bower, he dwelleth remote from him, that the said Sir Iohn Bower hath Authority, and so have many other Presidents, Marshalls of the Army, Provost-Marshalls of every Province, and upon great Reasons for it; for though they be Inferior men, yet the intent of their Commission is but to prosecute those men that cannot be had into the Law, that is, Rebels and Fugitives, and those men he hath heard have been hanged.

Whence my Lord of Strafford inferred, That he had done nothing de Novo.

That Provost-Marshalls have been always appointed, and executed those Places under the General for the time being.

The Committee admitted that there be four Provost-Marshalls, but deny that they exercise Marshall-Law.

That those Provost-Marshalls have executed divers men to death by E. of Strafford. Marshall-Law, Rebels and Traytors.

I desire to produce an Order of my Lord of Faulkland's, taken from his Book of Entries; but being not proved, nor written with my Lord Faulkland's own hand, the reading of it was not admitted, but left to their Lordships Consideration.

To prove the Practise of the Provost-Marshalls.

Sir Adam Loftus being asked concerning the Provost-Marshalls exe­cuting of Marshall-Law before my Lord of Strafford's time, and on what men.

He Answered, That it is most apparent, in all times, since he can remem­ber, Martial-Law hath been executed, that's undoubted.

But it was on Rebels and Out-Laws, and he hath known no other, but such, executed by Martial-Law.

Lord Robert Dillon being asked to the same purpose.

Answered, He hath heard the Provost-Marshals have taken and hanged men by Martial-Law in time of Peace, since the beginning of King Iames his Reign, that of Rebels and Out-Laws there is no question.

My Lord of Strafford desired to compare his Orders with those of my Lord of Wilmotts.

And they were compared accordingly in divers Articles.

His Lordship produced a Copy of His Majesties Letter, attested to be a true Copy by Charles Gibson.

Which was read, being the Letter recited in the Sentence of my Lord Mountnorris.

I observe, That the Sentence of my Lord Mountnorris takes notice E. of Strafford. that the Army was part of it in motion, and divers Companies daily exer­cised, and that my self was for the most part there present, which shews the truth of my Answer to that Point in part.

To free my self from the said Sentence, I desire a Letter from my self and Council of War to Secretary Cook 13. December, immediately after the Sentence, may be read, to shew that I was a Suitor to the King in my Lord Mountnorris's behalf.

But being after the Sentence, and written by himself and the Council of War, for extenuating of the Fact, the reading of it was over-ruled.

I conceive my Lord Renula and Lord Dillon made it appear, that I de­clined E. of Strafford. giving Judgment in the Sentence.

But for further proof, Sir Robert Farrer was asked, Whether my Lord of Strafford did not declare he would be no Judge, nor give Opinion in that Cause, and whether he sate bare?

He Answered, That he was present at the Sentence, and heard my Lord of Strafford say, that he would give no Judgment, nor have to do with the business concerning my Lord Mountnorris, and he sate a good time with his hat off.

Being asked on one of the Committees motion, touching his pressing of both the Articles.

He said, He acknowledged my Lord did require Judgment on both Articles, and yet sate silent at the time they were upon the Sentence.

Being asked, Whether my Lord of Strafford did not desire them to regard him no more than an ordinary Officer, and do no otherwise than in reason and judgment they should think fit.

[Page 200] He Answered, My Lord of Strafford said these very words, That they should not look upon him, but go to the Cause according to their Opinion directly.

And being asked, Whether my Lord Mountnorris was a Captain of the Army.

He Answered, Yes, and the Council did admit it.

Sir George Wentworth being asked to the same purpose as Sir Robert Farrer.

He Answered, He was present at the Sentence, and heard my Lord of Stafford say publickly, He did not sit there as a Judge, and that he would give no Vote in it.

Being asked, Whether my Lord of Stafford did not tell Sir George Wentworth that he should give no Vote in it, because he was his Lordships Brother.

He Answered, Yes, and he gave no Judgment upon that reason; that my Lord of Strafford did publickly bid them all look on him as a private man, and sate by as a Suitor, not as a Judge, and put off his hat at the beginning to speak, and sate uncovered all the while, till Sentence was pronounced.

To shew that my Lord Mountnorris was enlarged by me presently after, I here produce the Warrant Dated 18. December, though indeed he was released 15. December.

The denial of my Lord Mountnorris, to examine Witnesses, was by my Lord Cromwell, Sir Charles Coote, Sir Iohn Burlacy, not by me, I sitting by as a private party: For this I refer to my Lord Mountnorris's own Depo­sition, and my Lord Renula's.

To prove it further, Sir Robert Farrer was asked touching the denying of further time and Council.

He Answered, He cannot tell who denied him, he remembers my Lord Cromwell spake something, but knows not whether to that effect.

Sir Robert Farrer being asked on one of the Managers Motion, Whether Sir Robert Far­rer a Witness. before their coming together they did know the occasion of their meeting.

He Answered, He did not, he was warned to attend, and did not know the business till he came thither.

I did never Communicate it to any man, till I brought the Letter, E. of Strafford. because I was resolved to speak of it to no man living; and in conclusion, left it wholly to the Council.

For the words, That I would not lose my share in the Honour of that Sentence; if I spake the words, I meant the Justice and satisfaction done me by that Sentence, being by the prime Officers of the Kingdom.

And whereas it was said yesterday, that though I thought it hard to lay words to my Charge, yet I thought it not hard to lay words to the Lord Mountnorris his Charge; there is a difference between laying words to a man's Charge, to Accuse and Condemn him of High-Treason, to loss of Estate, Life, Honour and Posterity, and pressing words to only two days Imprisonment, being only intended to discipline my Lord Mountnorris, and teach him to govern his Speech with more modesty.

His Defence to the business of Denwitt's Execution.

He confesses his Vote concurred, and thinks he had Authority, and may E. of Strafford. justifie it.

He produced the Sentence Dated 13. February, 1638. where his Crimes are set forth to be the fellonious stealing of a quarrer of Beef, and running away from his Colours, in breach of the 9th and 6th Articles, for which he was sentenced to Death, according to the use of Martial-Law.

His Lordship opened the Nature of the Offence, being committed at a time when the 500 men were attending to go to Carlisle; and the Exam­ple might be dangerous, and desired Sir George Mountnorris might be asked, Whether Denwitt was not convicted to be guilty, adding, that he had been burnt in the hand; and running from his Colours is death by the Laws of Ireland.

He produced a Statute of Ireland, 20 H. 6. C. 19. whereby it is Enact­ed, That every man that receives the King's Wages, and departs from his Captain, &c. shall be proceeded against as a Felon.

As also the Statute 7 H. 7. C. 1. The departing of a Souldier from his Colours is Felony, and the Offendor to undergo punishment of Law. And 10 H. 7. all Laws formerly made in England are to be in force in Ireland, and so that of 7 H. 7. For further clearing whereof, he refers himself to the Council.

One of the Managers did make Reply in substance as followeth: Manager.

That if this Fact be not Treason, yet it seems to prove his Intention to subvert the Law, which is Treason.

Whereas he hopes for the King's Mercy, so the Commons do as really trust for the King's Justice.

The Commission he insists on, is limitted with Si opus fuerit; and the King intends Execution according to Law, Magna Charta, and the rest of the Laws of England being of force in Ireland.

There hath been an Army in pay in Ireland since Henry the Eighths time, and so there are some in pay here, in Portsmouth and Plymouth, and yet it follows not England must be Governed by Martial-Law.

The Lord Wilmott was produced by him, to justifie the publishing of Orders, and exercise of Martial Law in Ireland. But we Appeal to your Lordships, Whether he gave Testimony of executing any by Martial-Law.

Sir Adam Loftus says, There are Provost-Marshalls, and they do use to put men to death, but they are Rebels whom they execute, which squares not with this Case, only that of Sir Thomas Wayneman is a full Pre­sident.

For the King's Letter, it is written on his Information, and if the King's Ministers misinform him, He is just before God and men; and the Letter directs Reparation, as it was fit there should be.

My Lord pretends he was no Judge in the Cause, your Lordships may remember who procured the Letter to proceed, and who sate there to manage the business, though he sate with his Hat off; if he would have been indifferent, he should have left the Counsellors to themselves.

[Page 202] And when some moved they might proceed on one Article, he cryed both, and so he was the Procurer of the Sentence, with which he is charged, not with the Voting of it.

He pretends he sate by and said nothing, yet no man talked more at the Sentence than himself.

He proves not the Course of Martial-Law, and there is a Judge-Marshal, to whom, in any proceedings in a Martial way, address should be made, and it was desired he might be called, to testifie how they went about it.

Another of the Managers did add, by way of Reply, That whereas my Lord of Strafford insists much, as if Martial-Law were part of the same Law Manager. of Ireland, but the 25 E. 3. is in force there, and that is recited in the Peti­tion of Right in force here, as the ground why Martial-Law ought not to be in England, and therefore there is the same ground why it should not be in Ireland.

For that Commission he speaks of Opus est, is Martial-Law, when there is bellum flagrans; but what need was there of Martial-Law in my Lord Mountnorris his Case, when he would rather lose his Hand than the Sen­tence be executed.

For the Orders made by my Lord Wilmott and others, there is difference between making an Order in way of terror, for fear of Execution, and putting that thing in execution.

Many Witnesses are produced to prove the practise, but not one speaks in point of Execution, unless upon Rebels and Traytors, and such as would not come into Law, whereas my Lord Mountnorris was had into the Law.

Whereas he takes the Example of those before him; the Commons can­not see the Restrictions put upon his Commission for Martial-Law, but in the preceding Deputies time there was a limitation, that the Provost should leave the Souldiers to trial at Law, except in time of War and Rebellion.

The Statute of 20 H. 6. is against him, for it makes the Souldiers run­ning from his Colours Felony, and certainly meant it should be tried by that Law that makes it Felony, which would have given him the benefit of Clergy, not by Martial-Law.

And though he thinks he may justifie it, he falls at last to a Pardon.

He says, He acquainted no body before hand with the business; but if he may give the Interpretation, he will be sure to put a good end to it; if he would not prepare the Council for Justice, why should not the Delin­quent be prepared?

The words are pretended to be spoken in April, my Lord of Strafford procures the King's Letter in Iuly, and questions it not till December, here is no opus est.

The very words of the Order, the Witnesses were examined by our Com­mand, which make it his own.

One of the Managers desired that two of the Instructions of former De­puties Manager. might be read.

To this my Lord of Strafford excepted, as supplemental and dangerous, and not warranted by any other Judicature.

[Page 203] After some debate touching the admitting of my Lord of Ely to be examined, to the Course of Martial-Laws in Ireland, being new matter, arising out of his Answer; It was Resolved that he should be examined only to that new matter.

The Earl of Ely sworn, was examined what was the proceedings of Earl of Ely a Witness. the Marshalls Court when he was Judge-Marshall, and how long he had been so.

He Answered, He was 40 years since Judge there, and for the manner of proceeding, There was never any Deputy, or Governor of that Kingdom, but they had a Commission of Martial-Law to be exercised in the time of their Government; but the exercise of that Law was two-fold, one was Summary, the other was Plenary: That which was Summary and short, was committed to the Provost-Marshall, that sought after the Rebels and Kernes that kept the Woods.

These, when they were apprehended, the Provost-Marshall hanged them on the next Tree; and this was in poor Cases, where the estate of the party that prosecutes is not worth 40 s. In the second, which is the Ple­nary proceeding, there are three Considerations to be had, of the time, the place, and the person; the time must necessarily be in time of War, the place in the Field, and the persons must be such as are subject to the Rule of Martial-Law. And the proceeding was thus; The parties complained, the other appearing, an Information was drawn in writing, Witnesses produced, and reduced in writing, a Sentence given absolutely or condemna­tory, and the Party punished or acquitted, and the Warrant directed to the Provost-Marshall to put the Judgment in Execution. But when the Army was dissolved, and every one returned to their own home, Soul­diers, Captains, and Commanders; this Power ceased, and was no farther executed; for it had been an extraordinary damage to His Majesty, that by the Martial-Law every one should be tried; for he loses nothing but his life, not his Lands or his Goods, and therefore the proceeding with­out was so slow and seldom, that he had not remembred any man of quality worth 100 l. or 200 l. in thirty years to have been executed by Martial-Law.

Here the Manager did offer the Instructions given in my Lord Faulk­land's Manager. time, which Mr. Fitz-Gerard testified to be by him examined with the Original in the Signet-Office, as to the 33. and 34th Articles. Part of the Instructions were read, viz.

33. Such as are to be brought to Trial at Law, are not to be executed by the Marshal, except in time of War and Rebellion.

One of the Managers observed, That my Lord of Strafford would have Manager. Power of Martial-Law over my Lord Mountnorris, but would not exe­cute him; which shews he desires not blood so much as Power of blood; that the Law of all the Peers might be under his Girdle, and he besought their Lordships to consider it.

Whereas, he said, The blood of their Lordships Ancestors was spent in the Irish Wars; this way, their own blood may be spent in the Peace of Ireland, and Peace of England, &c.

[Page 204] My Lord of Strafford taking notice of some words, charging him that my Lord Mountnorris lost his Offices in that Sentence; In way of Answer said, That they were lost in a Sentence in the Castle-Chamber for Mis­demeanors fully proved, and by himself confessed, and therefore His Majesty disposed of them.

To which one of the Managers Replyed, That there was no sentence in Manager. the Castle-Chamber against him.

And so after some Discourses and Resolution touching the Method of the Proceedings about the next Articles, the House was Ad­journed.

The First day. Monday, March 29. 1641.
THE Sixth Article. The Charge.

article 6

That the said Earl of Strafford, without any Legal Procéedings, and Article 6. upon a Paper-Petition of Richard Rolstone, did cause the said Lord Mountnorris to be disseized and put out of possession of his Freehold, and Inheritance of his Mannor of Tymore in the County of Armagh, in the Kingdom of Ireland, the said Lord Mountnorris having béen 18 years before in quiet Possession thereof.

MR. Glyn opened the Sixth Article, setting forth the Execu­tion Manager. of an Arbitrary Power by the Earl of Strafford, contrary to Law, in point of the Estates of His Majesties Subjects, by disseizing and putting the Lord Mountnorris, a Peer, out of Possession of Lands of 200 l. a year, which he had possessed 18 years before, on a Paper-Petition, without any Rules of Justice, during the said Lord Mountnorris his Imprisonment, contrary to an Act of Parlia­ment read the other day, to King Iames his Instructions, to the directions of His Majesties Proclamation, and the Rules of proceeding in the King­dom of Ireland.

The Decree made in the Cause betwixt Rolstone and my Lord Mount­norris was first offered, the Manager observing, that it was nothing to the matter, whether the Decree were just or unjust, and that it never depended in the Chancery, as is set forth in his Answer.

Thomas Little, the Lord of Strafford's Secretary, being sworn, attested Thomas Little a Witness. that the Copy produced was under his own hand.

[Page 206] And here my Lord of Strafford informed their Lordships, that upon his Defence he would ask Mr. Little some questions, desiring their Lordships E. of Strafford. to remember that he is upon his Oath.

The Decree was read Dated 28. Iuly, 1637. whereby for the Reasons therein set forth, and with the assistance of the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas; It was, among other things, Ordered, That Henry Rolston should be put into quiet Possession of certain Lands therein men­tioned.

Lord Mountnorris being Examined, Whether he was put out of posses­sion by Vertue of that Order, and how long he had Possession of the Lord Mount­norris a Wit­ness. Lands?

He Answered, He was in quiet and peaceable Possession from May 20. till he was put out by my Lord of Strafford's Warrant, August 29. 1637. as was written to him from an Agent that was there from the delivery of the Warrant to the Sheriff. That he was all the while the business was in prosecution, till his coming into England, a little before his putting out of possession, in prison, under restraint, for not suing out his Pardon, upon the Sentence of the Council of War.

Mr. Anslow sworn and interrogated to the same purpose. Mr. Anslow a Witness.

Answered, That to my Lord Mountnorris's possession of the Lands, he can say only by seeing the Accounts passed by former Receivers, and the Patent my Lord Mountnorris had of the Land; but for his being put out of the possession by the Order, he found when he was left in Ireland, about a year and half ago he was put out of possession by an Order of my Lord of Strafford, and that he being there, could have no Rents paid, Henry Rol­sion's Son being in possession, the Father being dead.

Being asked, Whether a Petition was not preferred for liberty to pro­ceed at Law.

He Answered, It was in his own behalf, for the Land was estated on him by his Father: And that he the Deponent being to pass his Land on the Commission of Grace, Rolston Petitioned for it himself; and therefore he the Deponent Petitioned it might be hindred to pass, and that he might have his Right tried legally, but he could get no Answer; the Commissi­oners saying, They sate not there to question any Lords Estate.

The Manager observed this to be the assuming of an Arbitrary Power of Jurisdiction, in a case of Land, without any former President; wherein, Manager. if he be justifiable, he may as well, riding on the High-way, determine any mans Estate; and added, That if my Lord of Strafford insist on this, they shall prove it not only in this, but in twenty more of this condition on the Reply.

My Lord of Strafford desiring they might bring their Proofs at once. E. of Strafford.

The Manager Answered, That they should prove an Act of the same Manager. Nature, but of a higher strain, concerning a Peer of the Realm (for he chased such Lions.)

But my Lord of Strafford desiring they might be kept to that within E. of Strafford. the Charge.

The Fourth day. Thursday, March 26. 1641.
THE Eighth Article. The Charge.

article 8

THat the said Earl of Strafford, upon a Petition of Sir John Gifford Article 8. Knight, the first day of February, in the said Thirteenth Year of his Majesties Reign, without any Legal Process, made a Decrée or Order against Adam Uiscount Loftus of Ely, a Peer of the said Realm of Ireland, and Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and did cause the said Uis­count to be imprisoned, and kept close Prisoner, on pretence of Disobe­dience to the said Decree or Order.

And the said Earl, without any Authority, and contrary to his Com­mission, required and commanded the said Lord. Uiscount to yield up unto him the Great Seal of the Realm of Ireland, which was then in his Custody, by His Majesties Command, and imprisoned the said Chancellor for not obeying such his Command.

And without any Legal Proceeding, did in the same Thirtéenth Year imprison George Earl of Kildare, a Péer of Ireland, against Law, thereby to enforce him to submit his Title to the Mannor and Lordship of Castle­leigh in the Quéens Country, (being of great yearly value) to the said Earl of Strafford's Will and Pleasure, and kept him a year Prisoner for the said cause; two months whereof he kept him close-Prisoner, and refused to enlarge him, notwithstanding His Majesties Letters for his Enlargement to the said Earl of Strafford directed.

And upon a Petition exhibited in October, Anno Domini 1635. by Thomas Hibbots, against Dame Mary Hibbots Widow, to him the said Earl of Strafford; the said Earl of Strafford recommended the said Petition to the Council-Table of Ireland, where the most part of the Council gave their Uote and Opinion for the said Lady; but the said Earl finding fault herewith, caused an Order to be entred against the said Lady, and threatned her, that if she refused to submit thereunto, he would imprison her, and fine her Five hundred pounds; that if she con­tinued obstinate, he would continue her Imprisonment, and double her fine every month; by means whereof she was enforced to relinquish her [Page 222] Estate in the Lands questioned in the said Petition, which shortly after were conveyed to Sir Robert Meredith, to the use of the said Earl of Strafford.

And the said Earl in like manner did imprison divers others of His Majesties Subjects, upon pretence of Disobedience to his Orders, De­crées, and other illegal Command by him made for pretended Debts, Titles of Lands, and other Causes in an Arbitrary and extrajudicial course, upon Paper-Petitions, to him preferred, and no Cause legally depending.