I HAVE in my Remonstrance formerly made a Profession to fixe my selfe upon that truth which should be avowed upon The Faith of a Christian, and Honour of a Gentleman, and I can with much confidence affirme, that I have not been wanting in the least point to that profession; And I engage my selfe again, to fol­low the same course in the ensuing Narrative, wherein, when I shall have demonstrated by clear proofes, and arguments, the wicked, and malicious Practises which Mr. Iohn Ash hath used against me, thereby, involving me in those great Cala­mities, and miseries which I have undergone for many years, vio­lating that private tye of Freindship which he pretends, and duty of a person publickly entrusted by the Parliament, I doubt not but the Reader will beleive, I had more cause to have expected that Mr. Ash, would rather have acknowledged by his thankful­ness the moderation I used in the relating of those passages, wher­in he was concerned in my Remonstrance, then have endeavou­red (as he hath lately done) by a scurrilous Pamphlet published in his name, to asperse me with the Writing of many fashoods in severall Pages of it, and by a faigned discourse, as Void of Truth, as of Civility, perswade the Reader. First, That I never had any intention to compound upon my Articles. And Secondly, That he had alwayes studiously performed the Office of a Faithfull Freind unto me.

Now these two points have been already cleered by solemne Judgments in two great and honourable Courts, constituted by Authority of Parliament; who having both of them declared, that I submitted to a Composition according to my Articles, and performed al things which were on my part requisite towards my obtaining the benefit of them, have therein also by a necessary consequence resolved, that Mr. Ash (by whom I was refused to be admitted to my Composition when I first tendred it) had not performed either the Office of a Freind, or duty of a publick per­son towards me, so that it may appear superfluous to give a fur­ther Answer to it, which was the cause I had at first some thought [Page 2] to let it passe, as being a thing which deserved not the trouble of an answer; yet afterwards having more seriously weighed what ill impressions so many Shamelesse and notorious Falshoods might make in those, who are but strangers unto the former proceedings in my Cause, if they perceived them passe in silence without an Answer; to the great prejudice of Truth, and of the Justice of those two honourable Courts who have already cleared them by their Judgments, I have thought fit upon these grounds, and for my own vindication from those scandalls, wherewith the Au­thor of that Pamphlet hath therin Falsely and maliciously aspersed me, to publish an exact Narrative of all his Actings in relation to my business, from the 15th. of Iuly 1646. (which was the day of my first coming to London upon the Articles of Exeter) untill this time, that so it may appear how shamelesly he hath endea­voured to abuse the Reader by that most false and scandalous Pamphlet.

And therefore I shall in the first place represent clearly the con­dition wherein I stood at my first coming hither after the granting of those Articles, being breifly thus.

Upon the rendring of Exeter to the Lord Generall Fairfax, there were some Articles agreed upon between his Lordship, and the Governour, dated the 8th. of Aprill, 1646. which were upon the 6th. of May following, read and approved of by the House of Commons, and afterwards by both the Houses on the 4th. of No­vember 1647. the 12. 13. and 21. of which Articles, together with the Votes and Orders made in confirmation of them, do follow in these words.

THe Reader may observe that a distinction is made upon the granting of these Articles between such as were then Ex­cepted by Parliament from Pardon and Composition, and all other per­sons comprised in them, Those of the first sort ( being the excepted persons) were to enjoy no other benefit by the Articles, but liber­ty to go unto any of the Kings Garrisons, and safe conduct for them to repair unto the Parliament, there to apply themselves for their admission to Composition and Indemnity, and if they [Page 4] failed therin, were however to have four months after the date of them, to endeavour their peace, or go beyond Sea, to which purpose, Passes were to be granted to them; All the rest were not to be accountable or questioned for any Act done by them, or their procurement: Relating to the War, they submitting to Composition, which his Lordship engaged himself, should not exceed two years value; and that being once made, they were to have Indemnity for their persons, and enjoy their Estates, and all other Immunities, so as all these were absolutely admitted to their Compositions without any limitation, or circumscription of time wherin they should submit unto it.

The Articles further providing that no Oath, Covenant Protestation, or Subscription relating therunto should be imposed on them, but only such as should oblige them not to bear Armes against the Parliament, nor wilfully do any thing prejudicial to their Affairs whilst they remained in their Quarters.

I was comprised within these Articles, and accordingly the Lord General on the fourth day of April, 1646. gave a Certificate under his hand and Seal, therby signifying, that I was in the said City at the surrender therof, and was to have the benefit of those Articles which were then agreed upon, which Certificate I for­beare to insert here, because it is recited in my Remonstrance, and hath been proved upon my several Tryals in the High-Court of Justice, and the Court of Articles. And consequently (not being excepted from Pardon or Composition by the Parliament) was absolutely admitted to compound without any limitation of time, wherin to make a tender of it.

But having upon due consideration resolved to submit unto the Parliament, accept the benefit intended to me by those Ar­ticles, and spend the residue of my daies in peaceable obedience unto the Government established, I thought it best to put this speedily in execution, and after some time spent in the Country, to fit my selve for such a Journey, I came to London on the 15th. day of Iuly, 1646.

I was no sooner come, but Mr. Ash (taking it seems notice of my arrival) came the next day being the 16th. day of Iuly 1646. early in the morning, whilst I was a bed to welcom me to the Town, and to bestow a Visit on his good Master (for by that name he pleased to call me.)

And here begin the Series of those Untruths, which he hath fra­med and published as an Answer to my Remonstrance in the said fi­ctitious Pamphlet, wherin he doth (by way of Introduction) assure the Reader, that he hath written an exact Narrative of all proceed­ings and passages in my Cause, from the time of my first coming to London, unto the time I was arraigned at the High-Court of Ju­stice, and this, he saith, he wrot upon the first sight of my Remon­strance, [Page 5] but then forboreto publish it upon some reasons which he pretends did hinder him from setting out that large discourse.

First, in regard that he had answered all the particulars which did concern him before the High Court of Justice to their satis­faction and my confusion.

Secondly, because the scandalls he pretends, were mentioned in my Remonstrance, were so apparantly false, that every one might easily perceive therin a confutation of those things were charged upon him.

And thirdly, Because in his respect unto my family he was willing to be silent, least otherwise in giving answer unto the scandalls, wherewith he doth pretend himself to be aspersed (by saying he did clandestinely obstruct my composition) he might doe that w ^ch he doth now conceive himself obliged unto; viz. Prove that I never intended to compound, but resolved the contrary, flattering my self with hopes of seeing the late King restored unto his power and greatness, from whom I might receive not only my whole Estate, but also a great reward for my suffering, in owning and defend­ing his cause beyond any of his party.

But notwithstanding these reasons, since he hath heard that a Committee was appointed to examine the matter of Fact in my Petition, he is so set upon the working of my ruine, that he is now resolved to add falsehood and impudence unto his malice, by publishing this Fiction of his own, in answer to the Scandals which he pretends were fixed on him by my Remonstrance, least o­therwise his testimony against me might be impeached, and he should be mis-represented to those who were strangers to his Actions.

Now in regard I have resolved in this Discourse to render an exact Narrative of Mr. Ashe his carriage and actings in relation to my business, wherby the many falsehoods contained in that his Pamphlet will be made evident, I hold my self obliged before ex­amination of them, to shew the falsehood, frivilousness, and vanity of those his Reasons.

Now as to the first of them, The An­swer unto the reasons I cannot but admire the boldness of this affirmation, which is not only contrary to truth, but also to the very Judgment of the High-Court of Justice, in the sole point examined by them: For being brought to tryall for my life before that Court, I had no other matter to alledge for preser­vation of it, but that I was comprised within the Articles of Exe­ter, and had performed all that on my part was required for In­tituling my self unto the benefit of them; That all my troubles had their rise from Mr. Ashe, who contrary to justice and his duty refused my Petition to compound, when I first tendred it accor­ding to my Articles, and afterwards caused me to fall into the Parliaments displeasure, by the undue practises hereafter menti­oned (which are the Subject of the ensuing Narrative) To prove the contrary wherof Mr. Ashe was produced a Witness on the [Page 6] Common-wealths behalf, and did with great malice and virulen­cy, endeavour to have justified his own proceedings, by proving that I had forfeited the benefit of my Articles: But the Court ha­ving upon full hearing declared the contrary, did consequently and by implication adjudge his Answer no way satisfactory as to the clearing of himself from those hardships towards me, wher­with I charged him upon my defence, and this point also hath been since decreed by solemn Iudgment of the Court of Articles; So as this first reason is a notorious untruth, declared to be so by two ho­nourable Courts, and is besides injurious to them, since they could not in justice have acquitted me, without censuring the proceed­ings of Mr. Ashe against me, as unjust, and tending to the violation of the said Articles.

As for his second Reason, it is, besides the falsehood of it, so vain and frivolous, that I can see nothing of reason in it, but the name, for if those things wherwith I charged him be true (as I shall e­vidently shew they are) then the improbability of them is a Chy­mera only of his own brain, which can no where have a subsi­stance, except it be in his fictitious Pamphlet, the worthy Issue of such a Parent.

And for his third Reason, who sees not the absurdity therof, for if he truly had any respect unto my Family (which he hath rui­ned) and had for that consideration forborn to publish that, wherby it might appear I never had intention to have com­pounded (as he surmiseth:) This motive of respect unto them would have been much more powerfull with him, when upon my Petition to the late Parliament, he saw that a Committee was appointed for the re-examining of my Cause (on the suc­cess wherof depended their fairest hopes) then whilst they could not be prejudiced by that discovery: (The High-Court of Iustice and the Court of Articles having resolved in my Case, that I had really submitted unto a Composition according to the Articles of Exeter.) Therfore sor this man to do this unasked or called for, meerly to preserve himself in a capacity to be a Witness against me, and therby the better to be enabled to ruine and destroy them, is a kindness so suitable unto the truth of all his other Allegations, that I must leave it to the Reader to determine, whether he hath in these three Reasons given a larger testimony of his Ingenuity, or of his respects unto my family.

His three reasons being thus answered, I shall now proceed in my relation which upon that occasion was interrupted, and shall inform the reader of what passed between us upon our first meet­ing.

Mr. Ashe his first vi­sit.This first visit from Mr. Ashe (who was in those dayes a man of power and usually Chair-man of the Comittee at Goldsmiths Hall, (with whom I was to make my Composition) gave me an appre­hension that I might by his favour reap some considerable ad­vantage [Page 7] in the perfecting of it, and therfore after words of ci­vility and congratulation had passed between us (such as are u­suall amongst friends upon their meeting after a long absence) I failed not to acquaint him with my business, letting him know that I was come to London, with an intention to compound for my Estate upon the Articles of Exeter, and did desire his furthe­rance in the doing of it, which he did very freely promise, assu­ring me that he would imploy his best interest to serve me in all things.

And now having thus happily (as I thought) gotten a friend, The Obje­ction an­swered, made by Mr. Ashe, touching Dean and Chapters Lands. who could better then any other assist me in the prosecution of my business, I did then upon further discourse, acquaint him with a difficulty, I apprehended, in being able to raise money for payment of my Composition, telling him, I had heard in the Country, that Deans and Chapters Lands were by the Parliament appointed to be sold at ten years purchase, and therfore it was probable the price of other Lands would fall on that occasion; wherby the two years value, which by my Articles I was to pay for my Composition, would be intruth the same to me as four years value, because I should for raising of it, be forced to sell Fee-simple Lands at ten years purchase, which at another time would sell for twenty.

This was in truth a Report mistaken in the Country, for al­though Bishops Lands were about that time appointed to be sold (which was the occasion therof) yet Deans and Chapters Lands were not exposed to sale till some years after: But it is certain, that I had heard so in the Country, and did accordingly upon this ground relate the same to Mr. Ashe, who (though he could have rectified my error in this particular) forbore to do it, be­cause having (as since appeared) some covetous design on my Estate, he thought whilst I continued in that Error, I might be drawn to sell my Land a better penny worth then otherwise I should have done.

And that his thoughts were then projecting some such thing, appears clearly by his after actings and discourse to me, when being sent for by the House of Commons, I was (as I have mentioned formerly in my Remonstrance) put into the little dark corner upon the left hand of the entring in of the outermost door of the House, wherof I shall hereafter have occasion to speak more largely.

But whatsoever Mr. Ashes thoughts then were, My sub­scription as Guild-Hall. I (who had then a thought on nothing more then the perfecting of my Com­position) having upon inquiry heard, that all persons comprised within Articles, who should repair unto the Cities of London and Westminster, should within four daies after their coming, repair to Guild-Hall London, and there produce their Passes, and ac­cording to their Articles engage themselves not to bear Armes [Page 8] against the Parliament; or wilfully do any Act prejudiciall to their Affairs, whilst they remained in their Quarters) I did ac­cording to the said Order make such subscription and promise on the 17th. of Iuly, 1646. (being within the time therin li­mited) as appears by the said Order of Parliament) which to­gether with the said Certificate touching my subscription, here­after follow.

Having thus performed what by the Order of Parliament I was directed to do, The visit I gave Mr. Ash. I did a day or two before I presented my Pe­tition to the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall (where Mr. Ashe was Chair-man) wait upon him at his Brothers house in Fanchurch Street, and acquainted him with my purpose to petition, desiring his furtherance therin, which he promised, and then informed me of the day that the Committee sate, at which time he would not sail to be there himself, and would in all friendly manner further my business, and upon my return from him that night, I drew up my Petition, which Mr. Stonehouse my Kinsman, who was then with me, and wrote a better hand then my self, did me the favour to transcribe for me, which Petition followeth in these words.

For the Honourable the Committee for Compositions sitting at Goldsmiths Hall.

THe next day being the 24th. of Iuly, Mr. Stonehouse did me the favour to accompany me to Goldsmiths Hall, The time I preferred my Petition to com­pound. and coming to the door where the Committee sate, I desired the Door-keeper to acquaint Mr. Ashe that I was without, and had a Petition to present, who brought me word that as soon as Sir Henry Berkleyes business was over, I should be next, and accordingly about half an hour after I was called for, and none of those who were without admit­ted to come in with me.

Being come in, I tendred my Petition to the Committee, and delivered it into Mr. Ashes hands, who having read it, threw it down upon the Table, saying, it was a Remonstrance and not a Pe­tition, [Page 10] and put it from him towards me as far as he could reach for me to receive again, wherupon I told him, I had brought that for him, and had a Copy of it for my self, and so left it upon the Table.

He told me, I must confess my Delinquency, before I could be ad­mitted to Composition, and I replyed that I came thither to com­pound for my Estate according to my Articles which did not re­quire me to confess my Delinquency, and withall told him that I had born Armes for the King, and that I did so by his command; and I said ( by his command) not that I stood upon my justi­fication) but to entitle my self to the Articles of Exeter) which did excuse me for Acts done relating unto the unhappy diffe­rences.

He then asked me if I had taken the Negative Oath and Cove­nant, and I answering that I had not, he told me that before I could be admitted to Composition I must take them both.

J replyed, that by my Articles, J was freed from taking any Oathes; And J do well remember, that (as J have set it down formerly in my Remonstrance) he pressing me to take those Oathes, and to acknowledge my Delinquency, J did at last make him this answer; Mr. Ash, J have known you long, and my good friend, and do desire to preserve you so, and for these Gentlemen that are of the Parliament (for J did not then know but that they had been so) there was very great reason that my Judgment and Opinion should subscribe to theirs; but as for my Estate it was my Servant, and J had a power to command it, but my Conscience was my Master, and had power to command me, and therfore J must yeild obedience to it; And since these Oathes you offer me are contrary to my Articles, and repugnant to those J have alrea­dy taken, J desire you will excuse me, if J refuse them.

Hereupon Mr. Ash willed me to withdraw, and being called for in again, Mr. Ash told me J was but lately come to Town, and therfore they would allow me some time to consider of the Nega­tive Oath and Covenant, of which, it might be, I had not yet taken notice.

But unto this my Answer was, that I did not desire any time to consider of what was a right which did belong unto me by my Articles, and of which if I should accept, and make them the same Answer as now, they might conceive that by the acceptation of time, I had abused their expectations w ^ch I was unwilling to do.

Hereupon I was again willed to withdraw, and attended with­out, till the Committee rose, not knowing whether they might have any thing more to say unto me; but having not then heard any more from them, after they were risen I departed home unto my lodging.

I have set down this conference at large though I have formerly related it in my Remonstrance because the Reader may observe by it, that I did never in the least kind declare that I had no intention [Page 11] to compound, as Mr. Ash hath with great Impudence and false hood suggested; but on the contrary did apply my self to the Com­mitte, and desire to be admitted to my Composition upon the termes prescribed by my Articles; unto which if Mr. Ash and the Committee had given way without inforcing Oaths, and Covenants upon me, from which I was to be exempted by my Ar­ticles, I had then perfected the same, & therby had been free from all those Miseries & Calamities, which I have for many years suf­fered: for he having (as I formerly related) understood from me at my first coming that I intended to compound, did therupon preferre a Petition to the house therby desiring that my Com­position money together with the Compositions of Mr. Coventry and Sir. Edward Moseley might be granted to him, Mr: Ash procures by his Petition the benefit of my Composi­tion. for the discharge of some disbursements of his own wherein he stood bound with Collonel Allexander Popham, Col. Nathaniel Fines, Col. Hollis and and other Gentlemen of the County of Somerset for the ser­vice of the Parliament amounting in all with the Interest unto 10920 l. and that the overplus of our Compositions might be allowed unto him for the Losse, and Damages which he pretended to have suffered by the War, if the Parliament should so think fit, and this accordingly was granted unto him by order of the House upon his Petition the 17th. day of Iuly 1646. which was the day after he had been with me at my lodging; which Petition and the Order therupon do follow in these words.

NOw Mr. Ash having thus begged my Composition, together with that of those other gentlemen, which were set some­time before, This ap­pears by Mr. Bay­lies certi­ficate. and amounted unto the summe of 8000 l. and being to receive the overplus that should arise upon the whole in respect of his pretended Losses, being willing (as it seemes) to improue this grant of theirs unto the best advantage he could possibly make of it, and therfore knowing, that if I were admitted to my Composition upon the Articles of Exeter, my fine was not to ex­ceed 2. years value (w ^ch holding not a proportion with his cove­tous desires) takes a resolution, contrary unto his former pro­fessions of freindship towards me, and duty to the Parliament who had intrusted him with making Compositions upon Ar­ticles, to obstruct mine when I should tender it, and (being Chairman of the Committee at Goldsmiths-Hall) cause me to be so represented to the Parliament, that if I were returned by them to make a Composition with the said Committee, I should be order­ed to make it, for some crime which he resolved to fasten on me, as well as in relation to my Articles at two years value, and if this project took not, then to bring me to a tryall for my life, either as a spy by martiall Law, or otherwise for Acts by me done, relating to the unhappy differences between the late King and the Parliament; and for which, by my Articles I was no wayes ac­countable, that so upon the losse of my life, and confiscation of my Estate upon which my Composition would rest) he might in liew therof be his own carver.

In pursuance of this designe, Mr. Ash having notice by me of the time, when I intended to prefer my Petition to be admitted to my Composition, notwithstanding his professions of befreinding me therin, takes occasion to misinforme the Committee, (before he caused me to be called before them) that I was a great enemy, had [Page 14] rais'd Armes against the Parlaim ^t & drawn the first bloud in the West of England, that my Petition was not valid, that I acknowledged no delin­quency, and had not taken the negative Oath, & Covenant, wherby in stead of furthering my busines (as he had undertaken, and I expected) he so exasperated the Committee against me, before I had Presented my self before them, that they were resolved to show me no favour but give me time untill my Articles were out, that so they might deale with me the better: all which appears by the examinations of Sir Anthony Irby, and Sir David Watkins, both of them persons of Honor, and quality, who were then members of the said Committee, which Ex­aminations were taken before a Committee of the late Parliament and follow in these words:

My Composition being thus foyled when I first tendered it, and the Committee disaffected to me by the misinformation, and covert practices of Mr. Ash, I who was ignorant of his designs, (and took him for my freind, as he professed himself to me in pub­lique) expected that the Committee, after they had considered that I was by my Articles excused from taking the Negative Oath and Covenant (which was the only cause for which they had refused me:) when they had better considered of the Articles, would again have called for m [...] and given me leave to prosecute the same; and I was herein the more confirmed, because I saw that by the Articles I was not limited to any time wherin I was to make my Composition, but was to be admitted therunto when I should tender it, and therefore I did hold my self assured, that the Committee who had perceived my readines to Compound by the early tender of my Petition, would not have looked upon me as a refractory person, or have made use of any power to inforce me therunto.

And that I did not herein go upon mistaken grounds, will ap­pear plainly by a solemn Judgment and decree in the Court of Ar­ticles given in Mr. Newcourts Case, wherin, the Court, upon conside­ration of a Certificate made unto them by the Commissioners for Compounding, and of the Articles of Exeter, resolved, that he was to be suffered to make his Composition upon those Articles, though he had not tendered the same till neer 3. years after the date of them, and that the limitation of four moneths did concern only the excepted persons, wherof I was none: The Copy of which Certificate, together with the Judgment and Decree of the said Court, follow in these words.

[Page 19]But whilst (upon the consideration of the right which belon­ged unto me) I spent some dayes in London, Mr Ash upon the 30th. of Iuly following, acquaints the Committee at Goldsmiths-Hall with the Order which (as I formerly related) was given by the House for his receipt of my fine together with that of Sir Edward Mosely's, and Mr. Coventry's and procures from them an Order unto the Treasurers to pay the same accordingly, in pursuance wherof he received 10434 l. in satisfaction of those Disbursments and Engagements mentioned in his afore-recited Petition, and in his Pamphlet declared not to be fully satisfied, but that himself, to­gether with the other Gentlemen before mentioned, have and will suffer very much, in case the Parliament do not discharge those Obligations still in force. The particular of which Receipts is evidenced by the Order of that Committee, and the account of the then Treasurers of Goldsmiths-Hall hereafter following.

Now Mr. Ash having, as it appears, received so great a summ of money upon these Orders of the Parliament and the Committee, I shall here make a short digression, and pray the Reader to ob­serve.

Monies de­manded by Mr. Ash, which he never paid. First, the falseness of his demands made of the moneys preten­ded by him to be lent and paid towards the Service of the Com­mon-wealth, which was the ground of his Receipt therof, which thus appears.

The charge brought in by him doth rest on severall particu­lars, some of which are to be taken only on his own Credit, being of moneys he pretends to have expended in the Service of the Parliament, and others which he alledgeth were by him lent and paid in at the Guild-Hall and Goldsmiths-Hall.

The truth of those which depend upon his own word, cannot be here examined by me; in regard they are put down generally [Page 21] ⁱn a grosse sum, not descending to particulars, and it is a maxime, Dolosus versatur in generalibus.

But we may guesse how justly he hath dealt in that part of his Charge, by what appears touching the summs pretended, to have been lent, and paid in by him unto the Treasurers of Guild-hall, and Gold-Smiths-Hall, which are, First, To the Guild-hall by ten pounds per week, for twenty weeks 200 l. and by money bor­rowed of his father 200 l. in all 400 l. and into Goldsmiths-Hall, up­on the coming in of the Scots, 1100 l. these sums being 1500 l. prin­cipal debt, together with the use of them, are cast up in the totall of the debt demanded by him; whereas in truth, he never lent or paid in of these, more than 70 l. for seven weeks of the 200 l. for twenty weeks demanded, and 50 l. of the 2 [...]0 l. more demanded, as money borrowed from his father, amounting unto 120. l. and 500 l. uopn the Scots coming in, for which he demands 1100 l. princi­pall, as appears by these two Certificates, from the several Offi­cers there, which follow in these words.

By these it is most manifest, that Mr. Ash hath brought in an Overcharge more then he disbursed for the Common-wealths use the sum of 820 l. principall, besides the interest which was allow­ed for these debts, since the time he pretends they were first lent; and certainly, if Mr. Ash hath had the boldness to cheat the Parli­ament so grosly in the sums which rested of Record upon the Treasurers Accompts; we may conclude, he hath in probability abused them much more shamefully in those wherein hee was his own Carver, and could not be disproved by any, because he gave not in the Particulars, or Vouchers for them.

And Secondly, how dishonestly, unjustly, and injuriously hee hath dealt with the Parliament, these Gentlemen, and my self in [Page 22] the receiving and disposing of it; and First, as for the Parliament, he was authorised by their warrant, to receive the summes arising by our Compositions, when they should be ascertained and paid in, but Mr. Ash hath by the colour of that Order received not onely 8000 l. which was the summe to which the Compositions of Mr. Coventry, and Sir Edward Moseley did amount unto, but also 2434 l. more towards my Composition, whereas hee hindred mee himselfe from making of it, and by this mean [...] he did unwar­rantably possess himself, and very unhandsomly borrow so much mony belonging to the publique, contrary to their intention and his Duty.

Thirdly, The Parliament was moved to grant our Compositions to Mr. Ash, principally for the discharge of those Engagements, wherein he was entred into, together with Colonell Nathaniel Fines, Colonell Alexander Popham, Colonell Hollis, and others. These Gentlemen were then Members of the House, and expe­cting to be freed by the assigning of these monies to him, did sure­ly very much assist him in the procuring of that Order, by them­selves and by their freinds, when his Petition was read, and these Engagements were by the Order appointed to be paid out of the First monies that should come unto his hands, but Mr. Ash took so little Care to observe common Honesty and Justice towards the Parliament, or those Gentlemen, that notwithstanding those Engagements, as appears by his Petition, amounted but unto 4700 l. and that he hath received (as I have shewed already) a­bove 10000 l. upon this account; being much more then was due unto him for the discharge, not only of those Engagements, but also of all other summs, which he had really lent and paid in un­to the publick use, yet he hath not discharged those Obligations, but they remain still in force against those Gentlemen, as it ap­pears both by his own Confession, in his Pamphlet, and a late Pe­tition preferred against him by Colonel Popham, which followes in these words.

So that herein he hath very much falsified the Trust the Par­liament reposed in him, in relation to their honour, in not dis­charging those Obligations, having received money to perform it with a great overplus; and much abused and prejudiced those Honourable persons, whose Indempnity and discharge, the Par­liament did principally respect, and made his request for so much as concerned himself much the easier.

And Fourthly, He hath been very injurious to me, denying to admit me to my Composition, notwithstanding, that upon his own Petition, the Parliament had ordered me to make it. And that he hath received no lesse than 2434 l. upon the account of my Composition, his Order not extending unto the same.

Having made this Observation by the way, I shall now pro­ceed, and let the Reader know Mr. Ashes further progresse in the wrongs wherewith I charge him.

Having thus settled his interest in my Composition, Here be­gins the relation of the false Record entred the 4th. of August. he took no­tice of an Ordinance of Parliament, of the 13th of November 1645. whereby all persons, who should come out of the enemies Quar­ters, were required to make their appearance before a Committee appointed to enter their names, and take an account of their a­bode, and condition, upon pain of being proceeded against, as spies by martiall Law (which Committee did also sit at Gold­Smiths-Hall, but were a distinct Committee, from those who were appointed to Compound with Delinquents) Mr. Ash (not consi­dering that this Ordinance extended not to such, as came in up­on the Articles of Exeter, who were onely to appeare and make their subscriptions before the Committee at the Guild-Hall, who were by the Ordinance of the second of Iuly, 1646 before recited particularly appointed to receive them, but finding I had not ap­peared [Page 24] before the Committee at Gold smiths-Hall, according to the Ordinance of the 13 th of November 1645. an Order or warrant was entred, and made a Record by Mr. Leech then Clark to the Committee for compounding, This is cer­tified by Mr. Bayly. Mr. Ash being then present, without the knowledge or consent of divers Members of that Committee, thereby suggesting that I had not appeared either before the said Committee, or any other Committee of Parliament, notwithstand­ing the time appointed by the Articles of Exeter, to which I pre­tended, was expired, commanding me on Thursday following to ap­pear before them to answer my contempt, which warrant or Or­der followeth in these words.

THis Record being entred (Mr. Ash before whom, as he very well knows I had formerly appeared, and to whom I had de­livered my Petition to compound as aforesaid, and who was be­sides informed, that I had made my Subscription as appeares by the Examination of Sir David Watkins) was never ser­ved upon me, but kept to lye as a convincing proofe a­gainst me, when I should be after called to question, either for my life, as a spy, or otherwise that I had never tendred my Petition to be admitted unto Composition before the Committee at Gold-Smiths Hall, nor performed any thing required of me in pursuance of my Articles, and accordingly this use was made of it upon my Tryall at the High Court of Justice, where I had been Infallibly condemned upon it, had not God blessed me with the presence and Testimony of Sir Henry Berkley, whose business was the next before mine, and who (contrary to the usuall course) was by accident permitted (whilst his Mittimus was making) to remaine in the roome where the Committee sate when I presented my Petition, to prove the falshood of that Record, whereof I shall hereafter take occasion to write more largely.

I was not then acquainted with the entring of that Record, but [Page 25] on the twelfth of Aug. following, I received a Ticket sent unto me by a Messenger, wherby I was required to appear at Goldsmiths Hal the next day, being the thirteenth, at two of the Clock in the af­ternoon, at which time I appeared accordingly: My second appearance upon Sum­mons. And well re­member, that when I came into the Room where the Committee sate, Mr. Ash had left the Chair to Mr. Iohn Stephens, and then told Mr. Stephens that I had been formerly before them, and preferred a Petition, desiring to be admitted unto my Composition, but that I refused both to confess my Delinquency by my Petition, and to take the Negative Oath and Covenant; And that the Committee had given me time till then to consider of it: Wherupon Mr. Ste­phens asked me what I did say to it; I made him this answer, That there was nothing in what Mr. Ash had deliverd, which had the nature of a Question to me, but was spoken to inform him who was not there the day before: Wherunto Mr. Stephens replyed, Say you so, then, Sir, by your leave I will put you a short Que­stion; Will you take the Negative Oath and Covenant, or no? To which I answered, That usually, Sir, to a short Question I do return a short Answer, but, Sir, I shall not do so unto you, but make you the same answer which I made unto the Committee the last time I was here: That I have the benefit of the Articles of Exeter, which do exempt me from taking of Oathes, and in regard they are not agreeable to such Oathes as I have formerly taken, I desire to be excused. And this was all that did at that time pass betwixt us: And hereupon they willed me to withdraw; and a­bout half an hour after, two of their Messengers came to me, as I was sitting without the door, and shewed me a Mittimus directed to the Serjeant at Armes, which followeth in these words.

So certifi­ed by Mr. Bayley.This being the truth of all that passed in Fact, or that is en­tred upon Record with the Committee touching my Cause: Yet Mr. Stephens, who (as himself confesseth) was not present when I first appeared before the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall, in short time after makes his report, and therin (without ground of truth or Warrant from the Committee) informs the House that I had sleighted and contemned the Authority of the Parliament, and forfeited their mercy contained in the Articles of Exeter: And this it is most probable he did according to the Instructions of Mr. Ash, as may be easily inferred by Mr. Ashes words to me, when I first tendred my Petition in Mr. Stephens his absence; And the words of his report as they are expressed in Mr. Ashes testimony given to the High Court of Justice under his hand, and is, for so much as con­cerneth this point, as followeth.

So as it is most cleer, that all my wrongs have had their rise from hence: That Mr. Ash by a wilfull mistake interpreted my Petition to be admitted unto a Composition, to be a Remon­strance, contrary uuto the sence and title of it. And Mr. Stephens (by his Instructions) re-ported to the House, that my desiring to be excused from the Negative Oath and Covenant, according to my Articles (which at that very time were approved by the House of Commons) was a refusing of the Parliaments Mercy contained in those Articles, a contempt of their Authority, and a forfeiture of the benefit of the said Articles.

I have here given a true relation of what was acted in my Busi­ness until my first Commitment to Ely House by that Committee; And therfore shall desire the Reader to observe how far from truth or probability those particulars are, which Mr. Ash alledgeth to the contrary, and doth premise as fully cleared in a large dis­course, which he pretends was written by him, Videlicet,

That although I appeared at Goldsmiths Hall, The things premised by Mr. Ash yet I never inten­ded to compound, and did often declare my resolution to the con­trary.

That I did wholly depend upon the late Kings being restored to his power, and upon this confidence neglected my Compositi­on, and refused the benefit of Exeter Articles.

That himself did never hinder my Composition, but did with all reality and faithfulness endeavour to perswade me unto it; yet I refused to follow his advice.

And that all those things I have mentioned in my Remon­strance, touching him, are meer fictions and never heard of, till the Parliament had ordered I should be tryed at the High Court of Justice, and that he should attend there as a witness against me.

For can it fall into the heart of any reasonable man to think, The answer therunto. that I who (notwithstanding all his uncivill censures) had (by his own confession) studiously endeavored to gaine the reputation of a stout and prudent man, after a resolution taken not to com­pound, but to depend upon the late Kings being restored unto his power, for the re-gaining of my Estate, and after the avowing of this Resolution to Mr. Ash, would on the next day after (not being forced unto it by any necessity, because my tendring of a Com­position was not limited (as I have shewed before) to four moneths time, and without any ground or motive which might induce me unto the alteration of that design) qnit the party for whom I professed so highly, and engage my self by a Subscription not to act any thing which might be prejudiciall to the Parliament, and within seven daies after would tender my Petition at Goldsmiths [Page 28] Hall, to be admitted to a Composition for my Estate, according to the Articles in a voluntary way? Must not the levity and incon­stancy of these Actions have made me necessarily forfeit that Re­putation, which Mr. Ash acknowledgeth I had with so much stu­dy laboured to acquire in all my Actions? And what opinion so­ever was had of me, can it be thought that Mr. Ash, who conceives himself much injured, if we imagine he should do any thing but what befits a wise judicious man, would on the very next day after his conference with me, have become a Suitor unto the Parlia­ment, to grant him my Composition towards the satisfaction of the Debts wherin he stood engaged, and reparation of his losses by the War; if I had then assured him that I intended not at all to make it, wherby those Debts, Disbursements and Ingagements, must rest unsatisfied, and he for his particular should loose 5000 l. as he affirmeth he hath done by my not compounding?

Is it not certain that he would by making such a suit, have just­ly merited the censure of a wilfull madness, wherewith he doth endeavour to asperse me by his Pamphlet, which is an Errour, whereof he doth desire the Reader to esteem hee is no way capa­ble? And therefore since I have demonstrated that all those things were really performed by both of us in pursuance of the discourse he had with me at that first visit he was pleased to make me, the Reader must conclude, if he conceive us to be reasonable men, that all the goodly things which he pretends to be fully proved, are meer Fables contrived by Mr. Ash himself, who hath imploy­ed the Height of Malice to invent them, and an Excess of Impudence to publish them. Whereas it is in Truth most evident, that Mr. Ash having understood from me the resolution I had to compound for my Estate, & finding that I conceived the price of Lands were like to fal, by reason of the sale of Dean & Chapters Lands, which I had in the Country heard, were to be sold at ten yeares purchase; Did thereupon put my name into his Petition, and desired the Grant of my Composition, together with that of those other Gentlemen whom I have formerly named for satisfaction of his Engagements and Losses. And this being granted unto him by the Parliament, he took a Resolution to put me off from the right of Compositi­on for his greater benefit, as I have formerly related, and by wic­ked and foul practises, expose me unto the eminent danger of loosing both my life and my Estate together; For can it be ima­gined, that Mr. Ash who had made me a visit, and received one from me, and had at both those times engaged himself to befreind me what he could in making my Composition, who had acquain­ted me when the Committee sate, and promised me his presence to that purpose, would (notwithstanding his Professions of freindship to me, if he had intended to assist me in it, as he pre­tends he did with all reality) before I had appeared or presented my Petition to the Committee, have spoken to my Disadvantage, and given such a Character of me, that the Committee were all of [Page 29] them inflamed against me before they saw me? and after when I had admittance, could any man have taken the Petition which I delivered into his hands, the Copy wherof you have already read, to be a Remon­strance, and not a Petition, when there was nothing in it but a Request that I might be admitted to compound according to my Articles w ^ch is the only Formall and Essentiall thing of a Petition, unless he had resol­ved to obstruct my Composition upon the Articles? And is it not most evident that he was much in liking with this design, when, for the car­rying on of it, he took the boldness to cause the Order, or Warrant of the 4. of August to be entred upon Record as an Act of the Committee, without the knowledge or privity of all, or the most part of those of the Committee who were then present, as will be testified by Sir An­thony Irby, and Sir David Watkins, persons of honour and quality, who were both of them Members of the Committee, and are suggested to have been present at the granting of that Order? Especially since the matter of it was, to the knowledge of the Committee, an apparant fals­hood: And howsoever, could not by possibility have judicially appear­ed before them, because the Committee appointed to take Subscrip­tions, was a distinct Committee from them particularly appointed for that purpose, as appears by the examination of Sir Anthony Irby. And since in making of it, they took upon themselves, and did exercise a Jurisdiction no way belonging unto them, they being intrusted by the Parliament to compound with all Delinquents, and were not to en­quire who did neglect to make their appearance before them, or any other Committee of Parliament, with whose actions they had no pow­er to intermeddle. And lastly, Since there was no present use made of it, the same not being then, nor at any time after served upon me, but only entred to remain there upon Record, that it might serve as evi­dence against me, if I were questioned upon the Ordinance of the 13. of Novem: (which that relates to) as a Spy by Martiall Law, or else in any other manner, and therby either fright me out of part of my Estate for preservation of my life, or deprive me of the whole, whensoever he should please to question me; And if he had (as he pretends) given me time to consider whether I would take the Negative Oath and Co­venant; in favour of me, would he have signed the Warrant for my Commitment the 12 of August (as Mr. Leech in his examination before the High Court of Justice hath sworn) when my appearance before the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall upon their Summons, Mr. Lee­ches testi­mony taken in short hand by or­der of the High Court of Iustice. was not to be untill the next day after: And when at last I was committed only for refusing to take the Negative Oath and Covenant, which the Com­mittee would have enforced upon me, and I desired to be excused from taking, as a benefit allowed unto me by my Articles: Is it not som [...] thing more then probable, that a desire of compliance with Mr. Ash his private Interest, caused Mr. Stephens in his report unto the House to represent, that my insisting to have the benefit of my Articles allow­ed unto me (which at that very time the House of Commons had by Vote approved) was a forfeiture of those very Articles wherof I craved the benefit, and a contempt of that Authority which gave a confirmation to them? [Page 30] And to conclude, is it not plain, that Mr. Ash declared sufficiently what his drift was, in these his covert practises against me; When be­ing brought to the Lobby about nine of the Clock in the morning, I was put into a dark corner by the outermost door, where my two Keepers attending, permitted none to come unto me, but Mr. Ash, who during my stay there, which was betwixt nine, and three in the after­noon, was with me four or five severall times, expecting that the appre­hension I should have of my approaching danger, would have made me propose the parting with my Land unto him, to free my self from further trouble. And at his last coming, perceiving that I did not mention it to him, he did himself propose it, and offered to help me to a Chapman who should give 4000 l. for Aubury, being not half the money it had cost me, as I have formerly related in my Remonstrance: To which if I would then have condescended, it is most probable, ac­cording to the manner of my close keeping: that I had not been brought un­to the Bar, as may be necessarily inferred by what he spake unto Sir Anthony Irby, to whom he came severall times after his coming from me, and told him, that he could not bring me to conformity, and ther­fore must be brought unto the Bar, which notwithstanding Mr. Ashes confident avowing of the contrary in his Pamphlet, will be testified by Sir Anthony against him.

Who sees not, that all this machination against me is a Chain of A­ctions, wherin Self-interest, Malice, and breach of Trust are by their complication raised to so high a pitch of wickedness, that they can scarce be matched by any thing; But the dissimulation and craft he used to cheat me out of my Petition at Newgate, when I had nothing else re­maining to save either my life, or my Estate from utter ruine and de­struction.

But in regard this discourse which passed in private between our selves, being one of those two things which Mr. Ash hath undertaken to answer in his Pamphlet, is denyed by him, and therfore only rests for proof upon our single disagreeing testimonies, I shall desire the Rea­der to suspend his Judgment touching the truth of our two severall Allegations, untill he hath read my answer unto the other, and then I doubt not but he will perceive how little credit is to be given to Mr. Ashes affirmations, upon which terms I quit the further dis­cussion of this point, observing only these three things to the judici­ous Reader.

Observa­tions in answer to Mr. Ashes particu­ars menti­oned in his Pamphlet, page 4. and 5. First, That the generall answer he pretends to give in this particu­lar, for proof wherof he doth affirm so boldly, that he hath more then one hundred witnesses, is altogether false. As I shall evidence, when I have given you the substance of that Romance which he so formally delivers, being this.

That when I was brought to the High Court of Justice, Mr. Ash be­ing then present as a Witness, Mr. Attorney Generall was pleased to acquaint the Court, that at my first appearance there, I had cast out some words reflecting upon Mr. Ash, and I had filled the Town with talk of the great matters I would charge him withall, if he appeared in [Page 31] the Court, and therfore Mr. Attorney prayed, that since he was there present, I might openly declare what it was wherwith I meaned to charge him; That the Court liked the motion, and willed me to speak that which I had to say against him; That I condescended therunto, & then related some headless Stories, and that when I had done, Mr. At­torney told the Court that I had sure much more to say, in regard that which I had now spoken did not reflect at all on Mr. Ash, nor answer the reports about the Town, and therfore pressed me again and again to speak all that I had to say; & when J replyed that J had spoken all, the Lord President spake, letting me know, the Court had with much patience heard me tell a long story, though no way pertinent to the matter before them; the substance being that Mr. Ash advised me to sel my Farm at Aubury, and with that money to pay my Composition. But the Lord President demanded whether he, or any for him, treated with me for buying of it, or whether he discovered a desire to buy the Farm at Aubury: That J answered his Lordship he did not, and therupon the Lord President demanding how the Story could then reflect upon Mr. Ash? J answered, that J beleived Mr. Ash intended to buy the Farm, because he had advised me to sell it.

This is in short the substance of his relation, if at least that may be said to have a substance, which is nothing, only an invention of his own: But Mr. Ash is very just in this particular, and hath not only perform­ed, but is according to the Proverb, better then his word. For having as­sured me (when I reproached him with his covetousness in the da [...]k corner) that he would deny all that discourse, if I should charge him with it. He hath not only made this good, but hath invented also this formall Story to give a countenance to his denyall; And this J shall most cleerly prove, not by the boldness of an affirmation (as he hath done) but by the undeniable Evidence of the Proceedings in the High Court, where, whatsoever was read or spoken, was taken at first in short-hand by Mr. Pococke, a person authorized therunto, and after­wards written at large for information of that Court; And is by Au­thority of the Court of Articles, and by consent of Mr. Attorney Ge­nerall and my Counsell, admitted as indifferent Evidence.

By this it doth appear, that Mr. Attorney Generall upon the first sitting of the Court, acquainted them that Mr. Ash and Mr. Stephens did both of them appear that day, being the first time that they came to be examined as witnesses in my Cause, and without mentioning any thing in the least kind of what is here affirmed by Mr Ash, desired they might be sworn to give their Evidence, and they were sworn accord­ingly, and did deliver what they had to say before J spoke at all con­cerning Mr. Ash his carriage: But when upon my answer to their E­vidence, J had in part laid open these his practises against me; Mr. At­torney Generall was then so far from taking notice to the Court that what J spake did not at all answer to the reports about the Town, as that he appealed unto the Court, whether that so much as a word con­cerning Mr. Ash was spoken before, that he was then present in the Court and gave his Evidence. For proof wherof J shall insert here what was spo­ken [Page 32] by Mr. Attorney at the first entring into the business of the day, and what he after urged when they had given their Evidence, and I had made an answer to them, which followes as it is in the aforesaid Record Verbatim thus expressed. The Re­cord in the short-hand Book.

And therfore having fully cleered by this Record, how grossely he hath erred in his relation, I leave it to the Readers judgment, what cre­dit is to be given unto him touching discourses passed in private be­twixt us, who hath the Impudence to forge and publish this as a thing that passed in publike in the Court; And that he had for proof ther­of a hundred Witnesses, when as unto a thing that is so evident, there is no doubt but every one of all those Witnesses will upon the reading hereof assent unto the truth of it.

Secondly, That Mr. Ash notwithstanding his impudence to deny the truth, doth yet confess that he did move me to sell Aubury for payment of my Fine, & though he doth deny that he had an intention to buy it, yet it appears by Sir Edward Bayntons discourse unto Sir Anthony Irby mentioned in his Examination aforesaid, that Mr. Ash himself was the person who was to be the Purchaser of that Mannor, which is the substance of that wherewith J charge him.

[Page 33] And thirdly, That he doth not so much as once alledge among his good advises to me, that he perswaded me unto a Composition accor­ding to the Articles of Exeter (that being the thing wherof I was de­sirous) but to acknowledge my miscarriage at Goldsmiths Hall, where I have shewed already, that I had not at all offended, and therfore could not acknowledge this, or crave the pardon of the House (as Mr. Ash advised me) without confessing of a Crime, wherof I was not guilty, and subjecting my self unto the censure of the House, as a per­son who had affronted the Committee imployed under them. So as if I had been remitted to Goldsmiths Hall to make a Composition; they must have needs according unto Justice ordered the Committee to have received a Fine from me, not only in relation to my Articles, but also for that pretended contempt of their Authority, which Mr. Ash had a desire I should confess for his own private benefit, for ha­ving formerly begg'd my Composition, he was in hope that this might have been super-added unto it, so as this being one of the main things wherwith I charge Mr. Ash, is here acknowledged by him.

But two continue the Naration which I have upon this occasion interrupted: Mr. Ash, after the proposition which he made for pur­chase of my Land at Aubury, was not above a quarter of an hour gone from me, but I was brought to the Bar where being commanded to kneel, I desired, that before I received any mark of their displeasure, I might know my Offence, wherupon I was committed to Newgate, and these following Resolves, and Orders passed against me.

Upon which Order a Mittimus was drawn up under the Speakers hand, which followeth in these words.

The man­ner how he cheated me out of my Petition.And now having nothing left me to save either Life or Estate, but by way of Petition to make my case knowne unto the Parlia­ment: And having told Mr. Ash when I came out from the Bar, that I hoped, that in regard they did not admit me to speak, they would not be displeased at my Addresse by Petition: Upon this hint of my purpose, Mr. Ash came unto me three or four daies (as I remember) after my Commitment to Newgate: And after that he had expressed, seemingly, a great deale of sorrow and trouble, that his good Master (for so he called me) was in so sad a Condition, he offered me his service to do what possibly lay in his power; & sithence there was no­thing more seasonable for me then good advice, hee did earnestly desire me to apply my self very humbly to the Parliament by Petiti­on, I told him that his Advice and my own Resolutions, did very well agree, and that I did intend to do so. Whereupon he told me that he had a very earnest request unto me, and prayed me that I would not deny it, which was, that he might have the honour to pre­ferre my Petition for me; and if it were so that I would trust him with it, if he did not give me a very speedy account therof, and that if he did not use his utmost endeavours to accomplish so much as I should therin desire, he would give me leave wheresoevr I saw him, or spake of him, to say, My servant Ash was an arrant Knave, I told him; that although I did intend to deliver a Petition, yet it was not [Page 35] my purpose to have troubled him with it; but since he had so freind­ly invited me therunto, he should have it, he prayed mee speedily to draw it, I told him that I would, he told me then hee would come the next morning to me for it, and accordingly he did so; but not liking the Petition, for that I had expressed therin, that I had the benefit of the Articles of Exeter, and that I had accordingly submitted unto my Composition, and that I was refused only for denying to take the Negative Oath and Covenant, and therfore did pray that I might be referred unto my Composition, and restored to my Liberty, he told me that this Petition did too much expostulate with the Parliament (for so he termed it) that was highly displeased with me; and that I should not Petition in that way but draw up an humble Petition, that should shew that I was very sorry that I had incurred their dis­pleasures in refusing to kneele when they Commanded me, and to ex­cuse that offence in the best manner that I could, and to beg their pardon for the same, and this he told me would be sufficient to take off the prosecution of my Indictments which was the first thing in or­der to be done, the Assizes being so neer at hand in the Country. Wherupon I sent another Petition to him; which by his Letter writ­ten to me he seemed very well to approve of; but yet though I did very often solicite him by my Wife and Freinds, to put him in mind to prefer the same, he never delivered it to this day, nor did ever come neer me after that time, which Petition followeth in these words.

[Page 36]This is verbatim what I have published in my Remonstrance, touching Mr. Ash his receipt, & keeping back of my Petition, & this is the main thing at which he takes exceptions in his Pamphlet, where with a more than ordinary confidence, he doth affirm, that there is not one line of truth in my relation, and that hee hath himself severall Wit­nesses to prove the falshood of it; and therfore I shall here set down the story he hath framed in answer unto this particular, and shall by undeniable proofes and arguments shew it to be a meer falshood of his own contrivance and invention, the same being in effect thus.

Mr. Ash his relation touching the Petiti­on.That about three or foure dayes after my Committall to New­gate, my wife came to the house of Mr: Edward Ash about nine or ten of the clock at night, and desired to speak with him from me, intreating him to come unto me, & that at length not without great importuni­ty and solicitation on her part, shee did prevaile with him to go thi­ther.

That when he came, I desired of him to deliver a Petition or make a motion unto the Parliament in my behalfe, that I might be removed to another Prison, and that he would nominate the Tower for that purpose, that he desired to be excused in that; but councelled me to preferre a petition to the Parliament wherein I should acknowledge my That my Fine which he begged, might be increased above what my Articles required upon my remittall to Gold­smiths Hall. miscarryages (as he is pleased to term them) at Goldsmiths-Hall, and at the Parliament, and crave pardon for the same, & that the prayer of my Pe­on should be, to be remitted to Goldsmiths-Hall, and receive the benefit of Exeter Articles.

That I refused this advice, and only prayed him to present a short Petition to the Parliament for my removall out of Newgate, and that I undertook the danger of this Petition my self, since it would be my fault, not his.

That he at ast undertook the delivery of this short Petition, so as he might have a sight of the foule Copy to correct, which J sent him the next day; but hee disliked it, and was inforc't with his own pen to correct the greatest part of it, but J not liking that, sent him another Petition of my own drawing, which hee likewise disli­ked, but after severall amendments took, and attended severall days to deliver, but being forced to go into the Country about his occasi­ons, some sixteen days after hee had received my Petition, He got his own Peti­tion an­swered the first day it was offe­red. for so long, and no longer, he saies, he had my Petition in his Custody, sent his Letter to me to give me notice of it, and desiring my directions in­to whose hands he should put it, whilst he was absent,

That having sent this Letter to mee in Newgate, I returned my thanks for his care, wishing him a good journey into the Countrey, and directed him to leave it in the hands of Mr. Denzell Hollis, or Sir Phillp Stapleton.

That the next morning he went something early to the House, where he met happily with Mr. Hollis, who was in private discourse with another Gentleman, but Mr. Ash somthing uncivilly interrupted him, told him [Page 33] that I presented my respects to him, and had sent him a Petition, which I desired might by his hand be presented unto the House, which Mr. Hollis took, and put into his pocket, and promised to take care of it; and Mr. Ash saith, That at his coming home, he wrote unto me to inform me of this, and advised mee to imploy some friend to Mr. Hollis to mind him of it, unto which Letter I returned him an answer by one of mine, Pray let this be compared with his Letter that followes. thanking him for having lodged my Petition in so worthy a hand, promising to observe his advice, and wishing him a happy jour­ney into the Country, and a safe Returne.

That he went into the Country, and returned againe about three weeks after, and when he met with Mr. Hollis, asked him what he had done with my Petition, Pray com­pare this with Mr. Hollis his Letter, and my Petiti­on proved by Mr. Basset hereafter mentioned. That Mr. Hollis told him it was such a one, as would, if it had been delivered, have more incensed the House against me, in regard I desired nothing by it, but my removall to a better prison, and Mr. Ash asking where the Petition was, Mr. Hollis told him, he had sent it back to me with this direction, that I should draw another, humbly acknowledg­ing my miscarriages, craving pardon for them, and desiring to be remitted unto Goldsmiths Hall to make my Composition, and to receive the benefit of Exeter Articles, and further letting me know, that if I would send him such a Petition, he would not only deliver it himself, but engage all his freinds, that my desires should be granted: That Mr. Ash demanding of him whe­ther I had taken his advice, He replied no, adding withall, that I was cer­tainly either mad, or had lost my wits, I was so obstinate; upon which Mr. Ash said, that had been also his advice, and of some others of his freinds, but I rejected their Councills, and he concludes with an affirmation that hee never received other Petition from me, then that which hee hath mentioned.

This is the substance of the Narrative, which Mr. Ash hath in his Pamphlet published, as an answer to this passage in my Remonstrance and this he doth affirm, The an­swer to Mr. Ashes Relation touching the Petiti­on. the Witnesses (if called) will make good; so as upon the Truth hereof, he builds the Credit he would have the Reader give unto those other things which passed in private discourse between my self, and Mr. Ash. I shall therefore examine the Truth of all these Allegations, and having shewed the Manifest Vntruth and Falshood of them, I doubt not but the Reader will find great cause to wonder at his confidence, in publishing this story of his own inventi­on, the falshood whereof is not only notoriously known to himselfe, but will be also clearly evidenced unto the Reader by that, which followes.

And first, whereas he doth alledge that he came to me upon the earnest desire, and solicitation of my wife at nine or ten a Clock at night; I shall desire the Reader to observe the want of Ingenuity there is in Mr. Ashes relation, notwithstanding his profession of an exact truth & plainess; For I affirme with confidence, that Mr. Ash did, as I have before alleadged, come of himself unsent for by me, about three a Clock in the afternoon, within three or four dayes after I was committed to Newgate, and did Officiously, ( or debasedly as he would have it by his [Page 36] Pamphlet) Court me to have the honour (as I have said in my Re­monstrance) to preferre my Petition for me: And this passage which he relates with so much Circumstance, as the first time when he came to me, was not till some time after he had been with me, re­ceived my Petition, and pretended to waite an opportunity for the presenting of it; Now the occasion upon which Mr. Ash was by my wife desired, to come into the Prison to me at that late hour, was onely this; My eldest Son Iohn Stawell, lay then sick in Bathe, and being in Arrear for his expences in Dyet and Physick, she had recei­ved a Letter from Mr Boyse at whose house he lay, wherby he let her know, that unless 50. or 60 l. (as I remember) were speedily sent un­to him for discharge of those scores, he would not entertain him lon­ger, but would remove him thence into the Country, where he could not have that conveniency for such remedies to recover him as were then used about him: Now my Wife having received this Let­ter, unwilling to loose time, did with the tender care of a Mother on behalf of her Son, importune Mr. Ash to come unto me, without ac­quainting either me, or Mr. Ash with the occasion, for which she desi­red his coming to confer with me, untill she brought us both toge­ther, and then she did acquaint us with the Letter which Mr. Ash did read as well as my self, and earnestly desired the furtherance and as­sistance of Mr. Ash for the procuring of that Summ from the Parlia­ment by his means, upon this urgent and extream necessity: My E­state being then, and long before totally sequestred, nothing let us, and no allowance at that time set forth either to wife or Children: I joyned with her in this request, and Mr. Ash did promise us to use his best endeavour in it: But whether it were that he did move in it and could not prevail, or that he never stirred in it according to his promise; The success was, that the money being not procured in time, he was removed thence into the Country, to the great preju­dice of his health, considering his weak and languishing condition; And this was the only business, which at that time was treated of be­tween us: So as I cannot but admire his boldness in framing and di­vulging of this Story to mislead the Reader, by making him beleive it was then, that J engaged him to undertake the presenting of my Petition, which, before that time he had received from me, contrary to truth and his own knowledge.

Now, wheras he pretends that the Petition which I sent him, was only for my removall unto a better Prison, and that he did himself amend the first I drew in many places with his Pen, this is so impudent a falsehood, that it is wonderfull with what face he can alledge it. I have the individuall paper in my custody, not corrected or interlined at all by him, or any other, and that was drawn according to my own sense, it being to inform the House, that I was comprised within the Articles of Exeter, and to desire my enlargement, and to be remitted to Goldsmiths Hall to make my Composition there, according to my Articles: The Copy wherof follows in these words.

But Mr. Ashe coming unto me when I had drawn it (as I have said before) disliked with this Petition, and would have had me make one to acknowledg my miscarriages at Goldsmiths-Hall, indeed, because he would by my confession, have justified his own Miscarriage there, in denying me the benefit of my Articles; And unto this I could not condescend, without incurring the just displeasure of the House, in acknowledging a Crime, whereof I was not guilty, con­trary to truth, and the benefit allowed unto me by my Articles. His next advice was, as I have set down before, to desire their excuse for my not kneeling, which I did by the Petition, whereof I have before set down the copy, and that was well approved by Mr. Ashe, as appears by his Letter sent unto me upon the receipt thereof, which Letter followeth in these words,

And that this is a true copy of that Petition he received to pre­fent on my behalf, appears by the Deposition of Mr. Basset, whom I desired, according to the counsel given me in Mr. Ashes Letter, to shew the same unto severall Members of Parliament, praying their favor when it should be presented by him, which Depositi­on is as followeth,

And now having lodged my Petition in Mr. Ashes hands, which, notwithstanding his denial of it, appears to be not a Petition for my removal to a better prison, but such a one as was approved of by Mr. Ashe himself, and is the very same that I have printed formerly in my Remonstrance; I shall desire the Reader to observe what truth there is in that Account he gives of the disposing of it. And here he hath related so many particulars, that it can hardly be imagined but some of them will be made good to prove the story which he so formally delivers; As First, his care in coming early to the House, his earnestness in the uncivil interrupting of Mr. Hollis to deliver the Petition to him, his solicitude in the enquiry after it from Mr. Hollis as soon as he returned, and the affection he expressed in consulting with Mr. Hollis how to do me good, by whom (it seems) all his advices were approved, and I condemned for madness and obstinacy; and yet it is most certain, that this Narration, with all its circumstan­ces, is an invention of his own brain, disavowed by Mr. Hollis, and contradicted by himself, in a Letter which he sent unto me upon his going out of Town, to give me an account of the disposal of my Petition, both which Letters follow in these words.

Reader, I have here given a true and an exact account of all that Mr. Ashe hath acted in my business, from my first coming to London after the surrender of Exeter, until the sentence given for me in the Court of Articles, by which it appears plainly, that my Remonstrance is not only true in all those passages touching Mr. Ashe, which I have there set down, but also that I have there­in, out of a Christian respect, and charity (whereof he hath made me but an ill requital) forborn to publish that foul practice he hath used to take away my life, and my estate, the which I had not now divulged, were I not compelled to do it for my own vindica­tion, against those false and malicious slanders, which he hath sought to fix upon me, by his shameless Pamphlet, which was most maliciously published at the very time when by my Petition ( which made no mention of him) I sued unto the Parliament for my relief.

I have most cleerly proved, not by a feigned Utopian Discourse, but by undoubted evidence, the testimony of witnesses, persons of Ho­nor and integrity, by his own Letters, by Records, and by the solemn [Page 46] Iudgements of two great and Honorable Courts, that Mr. Ashe hath here­in broken all those tyes that are most sacred, as being the founda­tion, Mr. Ashe is here considered in a twofold capacity. wherein doth rest as well the private, as the publick conver­sation of men, not to be violated, without the general confusion of all Laws Divine and Humane; For if you shall consider Mr. Ashe as a private person, you will find him a man pretending friendship, who having promised assistance to his friend in those indearing terms that might beget a mutual confidence, As a private person. and being the sole man who was relied upon for favor, did afterwards, without offence, or provocation, for his own private benefit, inveigh against the person that trusted in him, whom he presented to the Committee (who were his Judges) under so foul a Character, that before they saw him, they began their knowledge of him by the hatred of his pre­tensions, and person; You see him afterwards publickly ob­struct that Composition he had promised to further with his best assistance, and when by breach of that publick trust which was reposed in him by Parliament, he had procured unto me their displeasure, you see him then resume the person of a friend, that he might cheat me of my Petition, when I had nothing else re­maining to preserve either my life, or estate; and having gotten the possession of it, to keep it by him, and neither offer it himself unto the House, or put it into the hands of any other, as he pre­tended to have done, upon his going into the Country, after which time he never more came neer me, as I have formerly said in my Remonstrance. What can be added unto the malice and per­fidiousness of this, being all acted under the colour, and pretence of love and friendship?

As a publick person.But if we look upon him as a publick person, then this miscarriage appears in him much fouler; for we must then consider Mr. Ashe as a man most highly trusted by his Country, when they returned him to serve them as a Member of Parliament, and most particu­larly favoured by that great Assembly, by nominating him a Mem­ber of the Committee, who were intrusted to dispence their Justice granted in the Articles of War made by their Armies, un­to the strict performance whereof, the publick faith and honor of the Armies, the Parliament, and the whole Nation in general, were by the Law of God and Nations, ingaged in a most eminent and particular manner; and upon this depended the lives and fortunes of a considerable number of their fellow-subjects, who were ingaged for the late King in those unhappy differences, whom they were to admit to Compo­sition upon the terms prescribed unto them by their several Ar­ticles, so as they were appointed Iudges over things which are above all other of the highest consequence and most concern­ment, to wit, The publick Faith and Honor, the Estates, the Lives and Liberties of their Country-men and Fellow-subjects; And among all these persons, there was more than ordinary confidence reposed in Mr. Ashe, who was the Chair-man of the said Committee; Where­fore [Page 47] for such a man, thus qualified, advanced, and trusted, first to obtain the Grant of a Fine unto his own particular use, which was to be assessed before himself; For the obtaining whereof he ex­hibited unto the Parliament, a cheating false Account, claiming Sums which he not at all disbursed, as I have formerly expressed; To play the Orator, and falsly to calumniate a person to his fellow Judges, who was a stranger to them, and did appear before them an humble Petitioner to obtain the benefit intended to him by his Articles, having engaged himself to favor his Petition; To ob­trude Oathes and Covenants upon him, from which he was to be exempted by his Articles, and for that reason to deny this Com­position when it was tendered. To be present and assistant unto the entry of a Record, the Contents whereof were false, to his own knowledge, and did no way belong to his Cognizance, or Juris­diction; To give direction for the making of a Report unto the House of Commons, as from the whole Committee (without their Warrant or Directions) That I had contemned the Parliaments au­thority, and forfeited my Articles; And lastly, To appear, and by his Testimony to countenance that false Record when it was ur­ged against me at my Tryal, thereby to take away my Life and Estate together; All these are, in a publick Officer, crimes of so high a nature and concernment, that if we find not presidents touch­ing the punishments due to them, we must conclude, it is because himself was the first man that ever had presumption to commit them.

But although our Histories have not examples of the like mis­carriage in an Officer so immediatly intrusted by the High Court of Parliament, as Mr. Ashe, yet notwithstanding our Laws are very clear and positive in the inflicting of great and exemplary punish­ments on persons trusted with the execution of the Law, and pub­lick Justice of the Land, if they shall violate their trust, in mat­ters of far less concernment, than what was recommended to Mr. Ashe.

If a Judge of Record sworn to decide the private Controver­sies between man and man, L. Cook 3d part of his Instit p. 223. Sir Will. Thorps Case. Cook 3d part of his Instit. p. 22, & 23 Triseilians Case. shall, through corruption or interest, wilfully give a Judgement contrary unto the known Law, and his own Conscience, our Ancestors have thought this crime worthy of death, and have accordingly inflicted it upon the offenders, as is apparent in our Histories.

If a Jury who are the Judges in all matters of fact, which come in issue before the Judges in the Courts of Common Law, give a false Verdict contrary to their evidence, this is a crime so odious in the eye of the Law, that being attainted of it they shall suffer the VIL­LANOUS JUDGEMENT. L. Cook. 3d. part of his Instit. p. 222. And the same Iudgement is also given in a Conspiracy, upon the false conspiring to deprive a man of life, by an Indictment at the Common Law, which Judgement is decla­red by my Lord Cook to consist in five several punishments.

[Page 48] First, That their bodies shall be imprisoned in the common Gaol.

Secondly, Their Wives and Children amoved out of their Houses.

Thirdly, That all their Houses and Lands shall be seized in­to the Kings hands, and their Houses wasted, and their Trees ex­tirpated.

Fourthly, All their Goods and Chattles forfeited to the King.

Fifthly, That they for ever shall loose the Freedom and Fran­chizes of the Law (that is) First, They shall never be of any Juries, or Recognitors of Assizes. Secondly, Nor never be received as Witnesses in any Cause. Thirdly, That they shall never come in­to any of the Kings Courts, but make Attorneys, if they have any thing to do there.

And this is called a VILLANOUS JUDGEMENT, because of the villany and infamy which they deserve against whom it is given. And all is inflicted by the common Law, for that the Offenders by false conspi­racy, under the pretext of Law, Nota. by Indictment of Treason, or Felo­ny, and legal proceedings thereupon, sought to do the greatest Injustice, by false conspiracy to shed his blood, who afterwards is thereof Le­gitimo modo acquietatus.

But if these crimes are singly punished with so much rigor by the Laws in our inferior Magistrates and persons; what shall we say of Mr. Ashes guilt, who hath himself taken the boldness to com­mit them all?

In acting the several parts, First, Of a malicious, unjust Iudge, when I first tendred my Petition to him.

Secondly, Of a corrupt Iuror, in his direction for the report a­gainst me to the House.

And thirdly, Of a false Conspirator, by countenancing the en­try of that pernicious Record, which was produced and sworn against me at my Trial; especially, being in breach of an immediate Trust committed to him by Authority of Parliament (the supreme Court of Law and Justice, whereof the others are but Rivulets) and who have in all ages punished the want of Truth in all those Informa­tions which were brought unto them, with so much rigor, that by the Statute of 37. E. 3. cap. 18. 37 E. 3. cap. 18. It is Enacted, That those who shall make false Suggestions against any one before the King and his Council (who were then the Supreme Power) shall prove their suggestions, or else in our the same pain the other should, in case he were attainted.

And certainly, if they have punished with this great severity those who presumed to mis-inform them by Petition or Suggesti­on, whereby the person against whom complaint is made receives no other prejudice but onely to be brought unto an answer, we cannot well conceive the greatness of that punishment, which they [Page 49] would in their Justice have inflicted on any person that should dare to have abused the power and trust they had committed to him (as Mr. Ashe hath done) by acts of high injustice in his judgement, and extreme falsehood in the informations he hath directed to be made unto them. But I forbear to heighten his offence, because I have in writing this Discourse intended my own Vindication, not his Pu­nishment.

I had here given a conclusion to this Discourse concerning Mr. Ashe, did not the Artifice which he hath in his Pamphlet used, to avoid the Testimonies of Sir Anthony Irby, and Sir David Wat­kins, persons of honor and quality, whose Depositions you have al­ready read, and that great want of Civility and respect he hath shewed to them, inforce me to say some thing in answer to it.

The thing which Mr. Ashe doth first except against, and under­takes to answer, is, Answers to the Objections a­gainst Sir An­thony Irbys, and Sir David Wat­kins Testimo­nies. The relation Sir Anthony Irby hath given of my Deportment, at both those times I appeared before the Com­mittee at Goldsmiths-Hall, which he declares to have been such, as that he for his part took no offence at it, nor doth he think there could be any justly taken. This is confirmed, not onely by Sir An­thony, but also by the concurring Testimony of Sir David Wat­kins.

In answer unto this, it is alleged by Mr. Ashe, that Sir Anthony Irby was the principal man of the Committee that took excepti­ons at my Petition, and moved that it might be rejected, and that it was he principally who pressed the making of the Report against me.

Here is a flat denial of the Testimonies of two concurring Wit­nesses, persons of great integrity and worth; but if wee look for proof of his Assertions, he can produce no other but his own affir­mation; and therefore we must take it as a slander cast upon those worthy Gentlemen, in the inventing whereof he shews great Impu­dence, and in the publishing, much weakness, to think that his bare word should pass as proof against them, being produced as indiffe­rent persons, to testifie their knowledge before a Committee of Parliament, in my case: Especially considering, that Mr. Ashe (among the Questions which he sets down, and which he moved the Committee he might ask Sir Anthony Irby) had a care not to que­stion any thing touching my carriage, because Sir Anthony both could and would have proved the falseness of his Allegations.

But in regard it is pretended by Mr. Ashe, that in the Answers made to these three questions, Sir Anthony Irby had some way con­tradicted what he had formerly delivered, I will set down the Questions and the Answers, that so it may appear how truly he infers out of them.

First, Whether Sir Anthony were present the first and second time that I appeared before the Committee at Goldsmiths-Hall? To which he answered, he was present. And Mr. Ashe might well [Page 50] have spared the labour of that Question, because it is one of the first things affirmed by him in his Letter, and in his Examination before the Committee of Parliament.

The second, Whether the Committee (taking offence at my behavior and language) did order Mr. Stephens to report the same to the Parliament; this Sir Anthony acknowledgeth, and this is not the thing Mr. Ashe insists on.

But on the third Whether Sir Anthony himself consented, and gave his Vote in the affirmative, for making of the said Report; And hereunto Sir Anthony answered, he did, after some pause, wherein it is supposed by Mr. Ashe he contradicted what he had for­merly said in the justification of my civil language and fair deport­ment.

What ground or reason Mr. Ashe can have for this his suppositi­on, I shall refer unto the Readers judgement, when I have one­ly stated the matter of Fact, as it appears out of the Letter of Sir Anthony, which he pretends to answer, and his Examinations before the Committee, being this. When I first tendred my Petition to the Committee to be admitted unto my Composition, which was disliked and rejected, as you have heard, Sir Anthony Irby took no exception at my carriage, nor did he think justly there could be any, and then declared his opinion, That I ought to compound, there being want of money, The House of Commons having confirmed the Articles of Exeter, by which I was exempted from the taking of Oathes. At my second appearance before them, he was also of the same opinion; But seeing others were not of his mind, but height­ned my offence, and took exceptions at my carriage and lan­guage, and would have it reported to the House, he gave way to it, and passed his Vote in the affirmative, That the whole matter should be reported to the House.

And now I shall desire the Reader to observe, if any thing herein do contradict in the least kind what hath been formerly said by Sir Anthony Irby in justification of my deportment.

So certified by Mr. Baily.For admit (although in truth no question was put, and consequent­ly no Vote could pass, as appears by Mr. Baylies Certificate, who keeps the Records of that Committee, which makes it more then probable that Mr. Ashe very much mistakes in this Relation) Sir An­thony had given his Vote, That my denial of the Negative Oath and Covenant (which I refused by vertue of my Articles) and my carriage (which he conceived was fair and civil) should be reported to the House, That they might thereupon declare their pleasures, whe­ther I should be continued under restraint for refusing the Nega­tive Oath and Covenant, or be admitted to Composition without taking them (notwithstanding his opinion, That the House had by the granting of these Articles dispensed with the taking of them;) which was the onely thing; then in dispute amongst them, as appears by their Order then entred, and was as much as Mr. Stephens had in direction to report unto the House.

[Page 51]Can any man suppose Sir Anthony Irby, by passing his vote in the affirmative for this end, did give consent, that it should be re­ported to the House, I had rejected, or forfeited the benefit of my Articles, and contemned the Authority of the House, which confirmed them? Or was there any Warrant for Mr. Stephens, by this order, to report as he hath done, by the directions of Mr. Ashe, That I had fleighted and contemned the Authority of the present Parliament, and forfeited their mercy contained in the Articles of Exeter; And in the close of his Report to say, THAT IF THE PARLIA­MENT DID NOT MAKE SIR IOHN STAWELL A TRAYTOR, SIR IOHN STAWELL HAD MADE THEM TRAYTORS, as Mr. Ashe, in the conclusion of his Pamphlet, affirms he did? which was a most false, bold, and malicious infe­rence, and could not be collected from any thing that I had spoken, or he, by the Committees Order, was Authorised to deliver; and this without stating the matter truly unto the House, and desiring their opinion and direction therein, which was the final end, for which that Order was made.

Who sees not, that this same is quite another thing, from what, by Order of the Committee, Mr. Stephens was to have performed? so as if Sir Anthony Irby did make some pause before he gave an An­swer to this Question, it was, for that he made some doubt within himself, whether he should not, before he answered thereunto, in­form the Committee, in the Star-Chamber, of the whole truth, as I have now expressed it, or leave it (as it seems he did) unto their further Examination.

And surely Mr. Ashe was very cautious what questions he pro­posed unto Sir Anthony, for fear his practices might have more cleerly been brought to light, or otherwise (being so much my friend as he pretends) he would have then denied the ill offices he did me, unto the Committee, before I was called in before them, where­with Sir Anthony had charged him, and he would also have sought to cleer himself touching the entry of that false Record of the fourth of August, which is suggested to have been made when that Sir Anthony Irby was present at the Committee, though Sir Anthony was altogether ignorant of the making of it: But Mr. Ashe ha­ving declined the asking of these questions, did plainly shew these charges were so cleerly true against him, that though he sought a colour for the rest, yet he could find out nothing to palliate his guilt in these, and therefore sought to pass them over in silence, without making any mention of them.

The thing which Mr. Ashe did next except at, is the relation given by Sir Anthony Irby touching his intention to buy a Mannor of me, which lay neer him, and this Sir Anthony Irby in his Examination before the Committee of Parliament sets forth was told unto him by Sir Edward Bainton, who did acquaint him, That Mr. Ashe was he that would have bought the Mannor.

[Page 52]Here Mr. Ashe puts in a Note, and would perswade the Reader to beleeve that I had invented this story, and published it at the High Court of Justice, which coming to Sir Edward Baintons hearing, he told it Sir Anthony Irby, who now makes use of it to justifie what he had written, whereas if Mr. Ashe his passion had not deprived him of his judgement, he would have easily observed, that Sir Edward Bainton gave a relation to Sir Anthony Irby, not of a thing which he had heard after my Trial at the High Court of Ju­stice, but of a matter treated with him before I fell into my troubles, for the relation he made was, That a Gentleman ( whom he declared to be Mr. Ashe) would have bought a Mannor of me, wherein he had some interest, and he had offered, That if I would sell my part, he also would sell his, for which Sir Edward Bainton after said that hee was sorry, as conceiving it to be the original of all my troubles; so as you see Sir Edward Bainton declares that Proposition to have been made unto him before I was refused to be admitted to Composi­tion, or else it could not have been the original of all my troubles, and consequently, it could not be a thing which he had heard only after my Trial, as Mr. Ashe would (without any ground but his own impudence) perswade the Reader.

In the last place it is observed by Mr. Ashe, that what Sir An­thony Irby hath called a Mannor, and said, it lay neer him, I call a Farm, and lay in Abury, about sixteen miles (as he allegeth) from his dwelling, and thereupon (according to his breeding and discretion) he blames Sir Anthony Irby's memory, which he conceives must here have failed him.

I shall desire the Reader to observe, that Sir Anthony Irby doth here make a relation of what was told him in discourse, and there­fore wee must judge of it according to the usual way of speaking, and not to the construction of the Law. I have already shewed, that Farm at Abury cost me about 9000 l. and certainly whether it were a Mannor, or a Farm, it was notwithstanding such a proportion of land as is in usual discourse stiled by the appellation of a Mannor, and it is no way considerable, as to the matter, whether it were the one, or the other: And although we shall admit that Land to lye sixteen miles from his dwelling in the Country, yet certainly, accord­ing to the common way of speaking, he must be said to be a neigh­bour to it; so as in these Exceptions, it appears, That Mr. Ashe hath declared only his own want of Civility towards Sir Anthony Irby, and his indiscretion in urging things so weak and senseless, to avoid his testimony.

As for the Certificate of Sir David Watkings, he urgeth no new thing against it, only to shew his wit, without any part of his judgement, he doth suppose, that in regard it was in the heat of Summer, when I first came to Goldsmiths-hall, he being an old Gentleman, might then be nodding, or that his memory through age doth fail him, it being neer eight yeers since these transacti­ons [Page 53] were at Goldsmiths-Hall. This surely is an ending extremely suitable to all the other parts of that his Pamphlet, which being begun through malice unto me, and continued with great impu­dence and falsehood, could not more properly conclude then with a scoff at old age, declared venerable by the opinion of all Na­tions, how fierce and barbarous soever; Promised by God, as a Reward to those that shall observe his Law, in giving due obe­dience to their Parents; Which Sir David Watkins enjoyes, with health, strength convenient, and a perfect sense and memo­ry, as a blessing sent him by God, the plentiful bestower of all good gifts; whilst Mr. Ashe (perhaps for a punishment of this, and of his other crimes) is subject to those pains, sickness, and diseases, now in the vigor of his age, from which Sir David Wat­kins, notwithstanding his great years, is still exempted.

I am now at the end of Mr. Ashe his Pamphlet, The Iustifica­tion of Mr. Stephens his Report, an­swered. where he takes notice, that it might be expected he should give answer to that wherewith I seem to charge him in my Remonstrance, viz. That the Report made by Mr. Stephens unto the Parlia­ment, of my behavior before the Committee at Goldsmiths-Hall, was no other then what he had received from Mr. Ashe; which I col­lect from this, because the Report which Mr Stephens made to the Parliament is the same with Mr. Ashe his Testimony given at the High Court of Justice, and Mr. Ashe by way of answer, doth with his usual confidence deny it, affirming, that Mr. Stephens Reported nothing to the Parliament, touching my ill behavi­or, but what he heard from my own mouth, which was so much as moved him to make that cloze to his Report, I before men­tioned, viz. That if the Parliament did not make Sir John Stawell a Traytor, Sir John Stawell had made them Tray­tors.

Here Mr. Ashe might have informed the Reader truly, and let him have known the reason, why I gathered Mr. Stephens had recei­ved Instructions from Mr. Ashe for making his Report, was not onely by the testimony of Mr. Ashe under his hand, agreeing with the Report, but also more especially by the Deposition of Mr. Ste­phens taken in the High Court of Justice, Mr. Stephens his examination in the High Court of Ju­stice, 18. of Ian. 1650. wherein he doth con­fess, he was not present when I first appeared before the Commit­tee at Goldsmiths-hall, and consequently he could not report a­ny thing which was transacted in his absence, but by order of the Committee, or by the relation of some other, who did inform him, whom I collected to be Mr. Ashe, because his Deposition a­grees in substance with the Report of Mr. Stephens, and is groun­ded upon what Mr. Ashe ( though falsly) affirmes to have been the opinion of the Committee at my first appearance before them, when I tendred my Petition, there being no such thing at all vo­ted or spoken by the Committee at my last coming before them, when Mr. Stephens was in the chair; which appears plainly, if we [Page 54] consider in the first place, What the Report was according unto Mr. Ashe his Testimony, before recited, which saith, that Mr. Stephens, in his Report, informed the House, that the opinion of the Committee was, I had slighted and contemned the Authority of the present Parliament, and forfeited their mercy contained in the Arti­cles of Exeter.

Now it is evident, that Mr. Stephens had no direction from the Committee, at his being there, to report that unto the House, as their opinion, by the Order before recited, which was no more, but that he should report unto the House my refusing the Negative Oath and Covenant, my committal for it, my carriage, and my desire for an allowance of maintenance; But they declared no opinion at all touching my carriage, nor did ever put it to the Question. So as I must now leave it to the Readers judgement, whether of us two speaks truth, and whether this be an idle aspersion (as the worthy Gentleman is pleased to stile it.) Either Mr. Stephens, who was not present the first day of my appearance (as Mr. Ashe and himself ac­knowledge) and consequently could not know what was then spo­ken, but as he was informed, must have his Instructions from the Committee, or from Mr. Ashe the Chair-man: But from the Com­mittee he had no such Instructions to report, That Sir John Stawel had sleighted and contemned the Authority of the present Parliament, and forfeited their mercy contained in the Articles of Exeter, as appears by their Order, and from thence to infer, That if the Parli­ament did not make Sir John Stawel a Traytor, Sir John Stawel had made them Traytors. Therefore this must needs proceed from Mr. Ashe, who (as it seems by what is said before) did put his own words into Mr. Stephens his mouth, or otherwise Mr. Stephens must have spoken what he did, without any ground or authority what­soever; And this I suppose Mr. Ashe will be very unwilling to acknowledge of his good friend, who hath so faithfully served him, to my ruin and destruction.

Reader, Here I conclude this Vindication of my self, and my Remonstrance, against that false and scurrillous Pamphlet, published by Mr. Iohn Ashe, to justifie himself, and asperse me.

I have most clearly proved, that all his actings in my business have proceeded out of malice, self-interest, perfidiousness towards me, and breach of Trust towards the publique. That all his Alle­gations in his Pamphlet, published for his excuse, are full of im­pudence and falsehood.

I will not take much pains to justifie my self, or trouble the Reader with that Quaere which he hath frivolously inserted in the Margent of his Pamphlet, as though I had got Lands from M ^ris. Bas­set by a cheat, but give this short Answer.

Either my Wife had a power to dispose of her Fathers Estate, or she had not.

[Page 55] If she had, What wrong could it be to M ^ris. Basset for her Mother to dispose of what was properly her own?

If not, Then surely, what my Wife hath done, is a great be­nefit to M ^ris. Basset, who hath received 3000 l. above twenty years since, as a portion from me, her Right (if any) being still preserved.

But this is onely the foul mouth of Mr. Ashe, who hath abando­ned all regard of Modesty or Truth, that he might fix some stain upon me; Yet I forbear to follow my just Resentments, in decry­ing his falsehoods, and shall (notwithstanding the high provocati­ons which he hath given me) wish him a due sense of his most wicked practises, and a sincere repentance for them.

[Page 56] Mr. Lawrence's Petition and Reasons exa­mined, and answered.THere is, together with the Pamphlet of Mr. Ashe, in Answer whereunto I have published this Vindicati­on of my Remonstrance, printed a Petition, To the Hono­rable the Referrees of his Highness most Honorable Council, in the cause between me and the Purchasers, by William Lawrence of Edenburgh Esq to which some reasons are annexed, why the Petitioners Purchase ought not to be questioned by me; Wherein, because the Petitioner ( giving full scope to his passion) hath in the Reasons annexed written many things injurious to the Honorable Members of the Court of Articles, who have pro­nounced their Sentence in my behalf, ungratefully scandalous a­gainst me, and prejudicial to the Honor of the Parliament, by whom the Court of Articles was first erected, and impowred; I hold my self obliged to give an Answer, with all brevity and clearness possible, unto such of the Reasons as have not been already Answered in the preceding parts of this Discourse.

The first of these Verbatim, is, Your Petitioner saith, That such Members of the Committee of Articles as have acted for the said Sir John Stawel, against Purchasers, are Parties, and not Iudges, and their Orders and Certificates ought to have no credit or authority; And your Petitioner saith, they have mis-stated the Case; transgressed the Du­ty of an inferior Iurisdiction; and presumed on Acts of sovereign power; they have wrongfully indebted the Commonwealth in vast sums of money to the said Sir John Stawell; they have occasioned false scan­dal on it, of infringing his Articles, and have not been indifferent or equal in their proceedings, either as to publick or private Rights; all which your Petitioner shall be ready to prove.

How precipitatly rash this Gentleman hath been in passing so se­vere a censure upon those Honorable persons who gave the Judge­ment for me in the Court of Articles, will appear fully, when I have laid before his eyes the power committed to them by the Act of Parliament, and that great care, justice, and integrity they have used in the pursuance of it.

The Act of Parliament by which the Court of Articles was con­stituted, The first Act constituting the Court of Ar­ticles. bears date the 18 th. of Iune, 1649. wherein the Parlia­ment takes notice of divers complaints touching the breach of Ar­ticles granted in time of War, and taking into their considera­tion the faith, of their Armies and Forces ingaged for perfor­mance of the same, and how much it concerns themselves in Iu­stice and Honor that the same be made good, and no violation there­of permitted, Do Enact and Ordain, by Authority of Parliament, that the persons therein nominated should be constituted and appoin­ted Commissioners, for the ends and purposes expressed in that Act; They are thereby authorized to hear and determine the complaints of all and every such person or persons as do or shall pretend to [Page 57] be sued, molested, or in any wayes damnified, contrary to any Ar­ticles granted, or made, to or with any such person or persons, in time of War, which have been approved of by Parliament.

They are to determine whether the persons complaining were truly comprized in such Articles, and also to judge, and determine whether the parties so complaining, have by their own default forfeited or lost the benefit of the said Articles.

Where there shall appear any right due to the party com­plaining, by vertue of such Articles, and yet denied and not duly performed, or any violation thereof made against him or them; they are in every such case authorized to award, and give unto the party complaining, relief and redress, so far as in justice they ought to have by the said Articles, by staying proceedings in Law or Equity, discharging Judgements, Executions, or Decrees, or by restitution in specie, or in value, of what hath been taken, recovered, or with­held, but without charging any costs, or further damages against the Commonwealth, or against any person or persons against whom the Complaint is made.

And it is thereby further Enacted, That upon all such Com­plaints, in all such Cases, the Certificates, Orders, and Awards of the said Commissioners, or any nine, or more of them, being pro­duced to any Court of Justice, Committee, Commissioner, Ma­gistrate, Officer, or other person or persons whatsoever, before, or with whom, any Matter, Question, or Thing, which such Com­plaint concerns, doth, or shall any wayes rest, or depend respective­ly, shall in every such Matter, Question, or Thing, be binding and conclusive unto, and obeyed, and observed by all, and every such Courts, Committees, Commissioners, Magistrates, Officers, person and persons, who are by vertue of the said Act enjoyned, and required to take notice of, and observe the same, any Law, Order, or Ordinance to the contrary notwithstanding.

A Proviso is added in the bottome of the said Act, That no­thing therein contained, A Proviso in the first Act. should be construed to controle an Order or Ordinance of the Lords and Commons, bearing date the 9. of December 1643. or any other Order or Ordinance of Parliament concerning the Town of Kings-Linne, and the Articles agreed unto by the Earle of Manchester, upon the rendring up of the said Town, but that the said Order or Ordinance, and all pro­ceedings thereupon had, should be as good and effectual in Law, as if that Act had not been made, any thing therein contained to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding.

This Act of Parliament being made to continue only until the 20. day of Iune 1650. and no longer, ended by expiration; The second Act reviving the former. After which upon the 29. of September 1652. another Act was made for renewing the said former Act for relief of persons upon Articles. The Parliament therein takes notice, that the said former Act is expired, and yet many complaints concerning breach of Articles remain [Page 58] still undetermined. And therefore, by Authority of Parliament, they do Enact, That the said Act, and every clause, Article, and sentence therein contained, shall be in force from the 28. of Septem. 1652. till the 28. of September 1655.

It is thereby further Enacted, That the Commissioners therein nominated, or any seven of them, should be Authorised, and ap­pointed Commissioners, to put in execution all the Powers expressed in the said former Act.

It is also further Enacted, That the Commissioners therein nomi­nated, or any seven of them, shall be thereby Authorised to give relief according to the powers mentioned in the said former Act, to all such persons, who were, or should be arrested, sued, impleaded, im­prisoned or sequestred, contrary to any Articles given, or granted, by any Commission-Officer, not under the degree of a Captain, in­trusted upon the place as Commander in chief, by Land or Sea, in England, Scotland, or Ireland.

Provisoes in­serted in the Act.Unto this Act, four Provisoes are added:

First, That the persons clayming benefit of Articles, have not forfeited the same by breach, or non-performance of what was on their part to be done, since the Articles were granted.

Secondly, That such persons have not been ayding to the late King, or Charles Stuart his Son, in open Hostility, or secret Counsels, since the 30. of Ian. 1648.

Thirdly, That no person shall have benefit of the Act, unless he shall put in his claim to such Articles before the Commissioners, within the times therein limited, viz. For Articles in England be­fore the first of Feb. 1652. and in all other places before the first of Iuly, 1653.

And fourthly, That where any Question shall arise before them, upon Articles, whereof relief is by that Act intended, which have not been confirmed by Parliament, The Commissioners shall re­sort unto the Parliament, for their Resolutions touching the said Articles, before they the Commissioners proceed therein, further than to stay proceedings at Law against any person, or persons, con­cerned in such Articles, or sale of their Estates.

Unto this Act, before the passing of it, two Provisoes were ten­dered. Provisoes offe­red & rejected

The first, on the 28. of Sept. 1652. to this effect, Provided, that this Act, nor any thing therein contained, should not extend, nor be construed to extend, to prejudice, alter, or make void any Resolutions, Votes, or Iudgements, given in Parliament, touching any the Articles aforesaid, or any persons clayming thereby.

The other, on the 29. of Septem. 1652. to this effect, Provided, that no real, or personal estate, which hath been setled, conveyed, or assured, to any person or persons, by vertue of any Act, Ordinance, or Order of this present Parliament, shall be made null, vacated, or other­wise determined or disposed of by the Commissioners named in this Act, [Page 59] or by their Authority, but if they see cause of restitution by vertue of Articles subject to their Cognizance, not in specie against the particu­lar person, or persons, upon whom such estate, or estates be setled, con­veyed, or ass [...]red, but in value, by such other Lands or Revenue, as the Parliament shall direct, any thing in this Act, or the former hereby re­vived, to the contrary notwithstandiinng.

But these Provisoes, which tended to the limitation of the be­nefit most honorably granted by the House, to persons claiming benefit by Articles, were both rejected, and upon the Question, resolved in the Negative.

This power being granted to the said Honorable Commissio­ners without limitation or restriction, gave them Authority to hear and determine my Complaint before them, as being a person impri­soned, sequestred, and indamaged, contrary to Articles given unto mee by the Lord Fairfax, late Lord General, confirmed by Parliament, so as I was a person capable of relief, according to their Judgement and Determination, by the express Letter of both the Acts, and accordingly I exhibited my Petition to the said Court on the 14. of October following (which was within the time limitted by the Proviso in the said latter Act) where, the same, after many proceed­ings, which are at large mentioned in my Remonstrance, coming to be heard the 15. of August 1653. the said Commissioners did so­lemnly give their Judgement as followeth.

[Page 68]NOw that they have in the proceedings of my Cause used all diligence, The Judge­ment proved to have been given by the Court in pur­suance of their Trust and Power. and precaution needful and possible for the dis­covering of the truth, appears by the Decree it self, wherein the same are briefly mentioned, and that in the relief they have there­by been honorably pleased to afford unto me, they have pursued the Power and Trust committed to them, appears by the said Acts of Parliament, before recited, whereby when there shall appear any right due to the party complaining by vertue of such Articles, and yet denied, and not duely performed, or any violation thereof made, they are in every such case authorized to give unto the party complaining, relief and redress, so far as in Iustice they ought to have by the said Articles, by restitution in specie of what hath been taken, recovered, or with-held, but without charging any further costs or dammages a­gainst the Common-wealth, or against any person or persons against whom the Complaint is made: And it is thereby further Enacted, That their Certificates, Orders, and Awards, shall be binding and con­clusive unto, and be obeyed and observed by all Courts, Committees, Commissioners, Magistrates, Officers, person and persons, who are by the said Act injoyned and required to observe the same, any Law, Order, or Ordinance to the contrary in any wise notwithstand­ing,

These are the express words of this Act, whereby the said Commissioners have power, when it appears unto them that the party had right, to give redress so far as in Justice he ought to have by the said Articles; and by them I was to be admitted to my Composition at two years value, and upon making of it, to have Indempnity for my person, and injoy my Estate, and all other Immunities, which is a benefit my Articles allow unto me: It ap­pears plainly they were by the words of the said Act impowred to decree this unto me, by restitution in specie, as they have honora­bly and justly been pleased to do; Which Judgement and Order of theirs is by the Authority of the said Act binding and conclusive un­to, and ought to be obeyed by all Courts, Commissioners, Committees, and persons, any Law, Order or Ordinance (and consequently, the said Act for sale of my Estate, which is a Law) to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding.

You see by this, that the said Commissioners for giving relief up­on Articles, have, in giving their Judgement and Decree before re­cited, strictly pursued the Power and Trust committed to them by the said Acts.

But this will yet appear more plainly, if we consider what was the intention of the House, who where the makers of them, by those Provisoes before-mentioned, which were inserted into, and re­jected out of the said several Acts, according to that general maxim,

[Page 69]And first to begin with the Provisoes inserted into the said Acts; By that which is added in the bottom of the said first Act; It is provided, that nothing therein contained should be con­strued to controle an Order or Ordinance dated the 9. of Decem­ber, 1643. touching Lin Regis, and the Articles agreed to at the rendring thereof; But that the said Order or Ordinance should be as good and effectual in Law, as if that Act had not been made.

Is it not clear by this Proviso, That the House conceived the said Commissioners had power to controle and make void that Ordinance (which had the same vigor as a Law, at least whilst the said Parliament was sitting) and therefore put in this Proviso to restrain their power in this particular? Thereby, according to the said Maxime, confirming it unto them in all other cases. Nay, is it not as clear, that by the latter words of that Proviso, where­by they do provide, That Ordinance, and the proceedings thereupon, should be as good and effectual in the Law, as if the Act had not been made, they did sufficiently declare their Intentions to be, That by the same Act, they did themselves revoke all Acts and Ordinances made to the prejudice of any persons that were comprised in Ar­ticles, and the Commissioners by their Decrees were only to ap­ply that remedy to the particular persons who were capable of the relief which was most honorably granted by the Parliament, unto all persons who had right unto it, by repealing all the Laws, Or­dinances, and Orders made to the contrary? Whereby it will then follow, that the Act made for sale of my Estate, the 16. of Iuly, 1651. is by the said Act of the 29 of September, 1652. repealed and void, as unto me, and in my Case.

Is it not also plain by the last Proviso in the said Act of the 29. of September, which provideth, That where a question riseth be­fore them upon Articles not confirmed by Parliament, the Commis­sioners shall resort to the Parliament, for their Resolution, before they proceed therein, further than to stay proceedings at Law, or stop the sale of their Estates; That in all other cases where the Articles are confirmed by Parliament, the said Commissioners have power, not onely to stop the sale of their Estates, but also to va­cate the sale of them, and award restitution in specie unto the party claiming relief upon the Articles, according to the express words of the Act? Especially considering the House rejected the said two Provisoes tendred to restain them in this particular Case, and did thereby sufficiently declare their intentions to be, that they should put that power in execution where they saw cause.

It being therefore evident, that the Commissioners have in their proceedings and sentence given for me, pursued the Trust and Pow­er committed to them by the Parliament, it must then follow of necessity, That Mr. Lawrence, by saying they are parties, and not Iudges; That their Orders and Certificates ought to have no Au­thority [Page 70] or credit, that they mis-stated the Case, and have not been indifferent or equal in their proceedings, with other scandals therein mentioned, hath been mis-guided by his passion, and hath, in­stead of a Reason, published a false, malicious, and scandalous Libel against those Honorable and worthy persons, who are Magi­strates, trusted and imployed in this and other weighty Affairs, which are of great concernment to the publique, whose just, e­qual, and indifferent proceedings he doth therein traduce, seeking petulantly for his own private interest, to weaken the authority of their proceedings, by the defaming of their persons.

I pass over many of his Reasons, wherein he doth alledge onely those things that were in issue, and have been judged already in the High Court of Justice, and the Court of Articles, where I have proved them to be onely surmises and scandals cast upon me. But I esteem my self obliged to give an answer unto the slanders which he himself hath first invented, and now indeavors with great in­gratitude to fix upon me by those Reasons; Wherein he hath suggested, That I received from his Father more for a Lease of what he purchased, than the inheritance was worth; That he was totally ig­norant of my pretending to the benefit of Articles, though he requested me to give him notice and directions; That I have miserably and to­tally depopulated the whole parish of Cotheleston in Somerset, and by force, fraud, and terror expelled them, their Wives, Children and Families, to swim through their own tears to new plantations; That to restore me, would be to sacrifice unto my rage and revenge all the well-affected people of fifteen or sixteen great Mannors whom I would total­ly extirpate.

These charges are very high and heinous in themselves, and therefore it would surely have been just and fitting, this Gen­tleman should not have vented his spleen and malice in such a pub­lique way against me, without producing some proof of what he hath so confidently written; But I intend not to return an Answer to him by a bare denial, but I shall desire the Reader to observe how little cause there was for him to publish this false invective, when he hath first perused the Certificate of two substantial, grave, and consciencious Gentlemen, Uncles to Mr. Lawrence, signed by them, and intended to be presented to the Committee of Par­liament, but came a few days too late.

The relation and dependance, which the Grandfather, Father, and Family of Mr. Lawrence have alwayes had upon my Predeces­sors, and my self; And those good offices we have formerly re­ceived from them, in the occasions wherein we have from time to time imployed them, joyned to the just acknowledgement of those advantages received from us, which is according un­to Truth and Justice now publickly declared by his Uncles, are a sufficient motive to me not to reproach the now Petitioner with his ingratitude and falshood towards a Family and person to whom hee ows the Fortune he now possesses; Besides, I have a hope, that the just reprehension of two Uncles, the Elders of his Family, and who may challenge a respect and duty from him, will make him sensible of that foul Error he hath committed, in seeking by indirect means our Ruine and Destruction, as he hath done, which is the cause [Page 74] I leave the further handling of this point, and pass unto the next, wherein, Mr. Lawrence is not more truly informed touching the Condition, Mr. Lawrence his mistake in representing my condition. in which he pretends I am, than in those other slanders, wherein I have already shewed how grosly he is mistaken: For neither hath my Wife purchased my principal place of Residence, or any other part of my Estate for the use of me, or my children, or fifteen hundred pounds per annum mo [...]e, by her Assigns and Friends, as Mr. Lawrence doth suggest: Nor have I since the time that my Estate was first sequestred, received any the least profit, or subsistence, by allowance, out of it. And what opinion soever he hath of my Right and Title; Truly, I would not give consent, that any Friend of mine imployed by me, should put so mean a va­lue upon the Publick Faith and Honor of the Parliament, Armies, and the whole Nation ingaged for the performance of my Articles, as to become Purchasers of any part thereof at ten years Purchase, considering, That I am to be restored unto it upon the payment of two years value by my Articles: The performance whereof Mr. Law­rence hath surely no just reason to oppose, with so much Passion, Fals­hood, and Ingratitude, as he hath done, that he might keep unto himself a part of my Inheritance; Unless he hath some wayes abused the Commonwealth in the said Purchase, and is therefore loath to receive a satisfaction in value from them, which could be no prejudice at all unto him, if he hath given a full consideration for the same.

The objection touching the Act of confir­mation answe­red.The last thing, and which is most insisted on by Mr. Lawrence, is, the Act of the 13. of October, 1653. made by the Little Parlia­ment, for confirming and establishing the sales made of my estate, or goods, in the possession of the Purchasers: And for the better strengthing of it, many reasons are therein offered of profit to the State, and of convenience unto the Purchasers, why the Purchase made by the Petitioner, and others, of my Estate, should not be questioned: Unto all which I give this Answer.

First, That the Act before mentioned is meerly void in it self.

And secondly, The same is Repealed and Declared absolutely void by the Fortieth Article of the present Government: Of both which points, I shall speak briefly as they lye in order.

First, It is a Case adjudged, and reported by the Lord Cook, L. Cook 8. Rep. Dr. Bonhams Case. That where an Act of Parliament is contrary to common Righr and Justice, The Common Law doth in that Case controle an Act, and makes it void; whereof many examples are there mentioned. Now this Act made by the Parliament (a body Po­litick) who by the confirming of my Articles, were parties to them, is contrary to common Right and Iustice, because by confirming the sale of my Estate unto the Purchasers (which according to the Articles of Exeter, the Parliament were in Honor and Justice [Page 75] ingaged to restore unto mee upon a Composition) They over­throw all Articles, whose very Essence and Being consists in this, That they are binding, and conclusive to both parties, which can­not bee avoided, but by a mutual consent, and consequently they have therein opposed Common Right, and Iustice, upon which the mutual bond of Articles is grounded, whereby their Act, according to the said Judgement, reported by my Lord Cook, is meerly void.

And secondly, The same is void, because the right of Articles is a Contract grounded upon the Law of Nations, which being a Law Paramount and Superior to that of any particular Country or Nation, controles all Laws, and Ordinances made in oppo­sition to it.

But if the said Act bee not for these Reasons void in it self (as I do in some cleerness conceive it is) Yet nothwithstanding it is absolutely void by the fortieth Article of the present Govern­ment; Whereby it is Provided and Declared, That the Articles given to, or made with the Enemy, and afterwards confirmed by Par­liament, shall be performed, [...]d made good to the persons concerned therein; Any thing in the said Writing, or otherwise to the contrary nothwithstanding; So as this Act is repealed, and made absolutely void by the express words of the said Instrument; the Basis and Foundation of the present Government, which his Highness hath by his Oath promised to observe without any violation: And unto which, Mr. Lawrence is surely not well advised, to op­pose this Act, being an Officer, who in his present imployment doth act by vertue of, and in obedience unto the form of Govern­ment which hath repealed it; as may appear by a Certificate of the Commissioners for relief upon Articles of War, returned by them in an Answet to a Reference unto them from his Highness of the 25. of Ianuary, 1653. Which Certificate followeth in these words;

This is a true Copy, Exam. Tracy Pauncefote, Regist.

THe right I have to my Estate upon a Composition accord­ing to my Articles, notwithstanding the said Act of confir­mation, appears clearly by this Certificate; and the restoring of it unto me will not be so destructive to Mr. Lawrence, as he pretends, (satisfaction being made unto him of what he hath disbursed) be­cause upon the restoring of my Estate, his Lease also is revived, and the forfeiture by Feoffments, or otherwise (if any were) is purged, neither can he be prejudiced by any penal Covenants, and Bonds to warranty, in regard the disability to perform them, will in this Case proceed from the Law, not his Laeches, or de­fault.

THere now remains nothing for me to answer, but the Reasons therein mentioned for the establishment of publique Sale; Authorities and Reasons why publick sales made contrary to Ar­ticles should be va [...]ted. unto all which I give this general Answer; That they proceed up­on false and mistaken grounds, proposing Profit, Security, Advan­tage, [Page 78] and conveniency unto the State, and private Purchasers, as the chief end, which they prefer before those great and sacred tyes of Ho­nor, Faith, and Iustice, recommended unto us by the Word of God, and most religiously observed in all ages, by the most famous Common-wealths, and renowned Generals, who have upon occasion always preferred the bond of Honesty, and in particular the punctual obser­vance of their Promises unto an Enemy, before those things that were of highest consequence and advantage to them.

Plutarch in the life of Aristides THemistocles did once propose to the Athenians (a famous Common-wealth among the Grecians) that he had a design to render them the Masters of all Greece, the effecting whereof was most infallible and easie, but might not be imparted to the peo­ple, and did therefore desire their consent, and Orders for it; The Athenians, before they would give their consent, commanded him to propose it to Aristides, who was then renowned for his great Valour, as a worthy General, but much more famous for his love to Justice; The design being communicated by him to Aristides, he let the people know, that what Themistocles proposed would be indeed of very great advantage to them, and was in the perfor­mance of it easie, but that withall, it was not honest to be done, being to fire the Spartans Fleet, which lay in all security upon their Coast, trusting unto a Truce between them; The Athenians, upon the hearing of this report, forthwith rejected the Proposi­tions of Themistocles, preferring the considerations of Honesty and Iustice, before all those of Profit and Advantage.

Sir Walter Ra­leighs History of the World 1 part 5 Book. ATtilius Regulus, a Roman Consul, in the first Punick War, chose rather to expose himself unto, and suffer death by an ex­tremity of torments, than violate his Faith given to the Enemy.

Plutarch in the life of Mar [...] Anthonie. SExtus, Son to the great Pompey, refused to consent unto the breach of Articles made with Mark Anthony, and Augustus Cae­sar, although he might thereby have been with ease the Master of the then known world, onely by cutting of a Cable, and carry­ing away with him to Sea those famous Generals, who doubted not to put themselves under his power, relying for their security onely upon the sacred tie of Articles.

There may be multitudes of these Examples found out in Hi­story among the Pagans, who had no other rule to guide them, but the Law of Nature, and the sense of Honor; But among Chri­stians, the practice of it is strictly recommended to us by the Law of God, and our own Country can furnish us with many presi­dents upon this subject.

[Page 79]THe Protestants in France, during those Civil Wars which hap­pened there, Davilae's Histo­ry of the Civil Wars 1 part and 3 Book. about the fifth year of Queen Elizabeth, deli­vered into her hands the strong Town of New-haven in Normandy, into which she put a Garison of 3000 men, commanded by the Earl of Warwick, a person of great Honor and gallantry. All France takes an Alarm at their arrival, as being very sensible of their known valour, and just pretension to that Province, and a great army is pre­sently drawn round about it to the siedge thereof; the English scorn their Attempts, and the great valour of the noble Earl had ren­dered all their expectations frustrate, had not a fatal and sudden Plague fallen among the Souldiers, which in a few daies consu­med the greatest part of the besiedged, and forced him to capitu­late for rendring of the Town unto the French, which he could by no means have longer kept; Scarce were the Articles agreed upon, and fully perfected, but that the English Fleet consisting of sixty sail of ships, well furnished with men, and all provisions need­ful, appeared in sight of the Town; but the noble Earl, who had already passed his Faith for rendering of the Town unto the French, judging it to be dishonorable to break his word (although to continue our possession in France) gave notice to the Admiral, of what had past, and quitted it unto the French, giving there­by a great example of his Faith and Iustice, whereby he me­rited a favorable reception from that noble Princess, and found an honorable place in history,

THe Case of Sir Iohn Scudamore is directly the same with mine, in all its circumstances; Rot, Parl. 1 [...] E. 4. Menbr. 22. Nu. 31. he commanded for King Henry the Sixth, the Castle of Pembrook, when Edward the Fourth having defeated him recovered his Right, and was acknowledged King of England; the Lord Herbert was imployed by the new King to reduce that Castle held by Sir Iohn Scudamore, who surren­dered it to the Lord Herbert, upon Articles to have his life and his estate preserved unto him; notwithstanding which Articles, he was by the malicious practise of some enemies put into the Bill of Attainder past in the Parliament of the first year of that King, for the attaining of the Servants and party of the late King Henry the Sixth, and his Estate was thereby confiscate, with a Proviso, that it should not extend to deprive him of his life, on the posses­sion of his Goods and Chattles. His Lands by vertue of that Act of Parliament were seized into the Kings hands, and divers of them granted over unto others; Sir Iohn Scudamore at the next Parliament preferred his Petition, setting forth his Case, and prayed relief upon his Articles, and upon proof thereof made, and by producing the Certificate of the Lord Herbert (whereby it did appear such Ar­ticles were granted to him) The Bill for his Attainder was reversed, the Grants of the Estate [...]acated, and he restored to the possession of it; [Page 80] Which is my very Case, without any difference at all, save onely this, That he was by that Judgement settled again in his estate, which I am yet in expectation of, by vertue of the sentence given for me in the Court of Articles.

I will conclude this Point with one example drawn from the Word of God, which is the best Authority, and ought to be the guide of all our actions.

Josh chap. 9.WE read in Ioshua, That God himself by his Decree (infi­nitely more just and binding, than any Act of Parliament) had appointed all those Nations who dwelt within the Land of Promise to be destroyed root and branch, and given their Lands unto the Israelites; Ioshua was sent by God, to put this his De­cree in execution, with an Army; The Gibeonites (who were one of those Nations that were to be extirpated) sent their Ambassa­dors, and by a cunning slight (which in the Scripture is expressed at large) deceived Ioshua, and procured Articles by surprize from him, for preservation of their lives, which Saul after some hundreds of years infringed, by killing many of them for the accommodati­on of the Israelites; 2 Sam. 21. God was pleased himself to take in hand their Quarrell, and punished the whole Land with a great Famine for that offence, which did not cease untill that breach was expiated by the execution of seven male persons of his Family.

Here we are taught by a divine example, how strictly hee requires from us the due performance of all Articles, since God himself (who is above all Laws) was well contented to dispense with his immediate command, rather than to permit a violation of them, that we might thereby know by his proceedings, that the breach of Articles is a foul crime, which cannot be advised without impiety, nor put in execution without punishment.

THese great and weighty considerations of Honor, Publique Faith, and Iustice (whereof perhaps the narrow heart of Mr. Lawrence is not capable) induced the Noble Army in their Petition to the late Parliament of August 12. 1652. to make it one of the weighty Clauses of their Request, That the Articles of War made unto the Enemy, might be made good according to the intent of them; Which Petition by order of the Council of War was presented by six Honorable Officers of the Army, and had a very favorable and gracious Answer. And upon these motives it was that the late Parliament was pleased to pass those Acts, whereby the Court of Articles was constituted and impowred to give relief to all that should be damnified, or molested, contrary to Articles, who in pursu­ance thereof, have by their just and honorable sentence adjudged that I should be admitted to Composition, and be restored to my estate, which hath been also since confirmed by the Fortieth Article of the present Government, and promised by his Highness, who hath obliged [Page 81] himself to the observance of the same; The benefit whereof, I do with all humility and confidence expect, notwithstanding the per­fidiousness of Mr. Ash, and the ingratitude and passion of Mr. Lawrence.