Sir Edw. Cecill. We the sinews of the commonwealth. To regard our loyalty, and the honour of this House. Not to go to the Lords, to move them to patch up our faults. Sir Tho. Row. The liberties of this House much shaken now. Thinketh our judgment rightly given and may stand upon record here, as our claim. That this cannot now come to the Lords, either with us, or without us: Not with us, without our disgrace; nor without us, because cannot take notice of any public grievance (as this) without complaint thereof from hence. Mr. Treasurer. Not moved, or intended, we should not carry this to the Lords, or consent to it; but leave the course thereof to the king, and speak no more of it. Mr. Secretary, accordant. Sir H. Withrington. Thinketh not, but we have power to give an oath; And, for precedents; every precedent had a beginning. Sir H. Poole. To proceed in this by way of bill. Sir Edw. Gyles. Not to wave our right. | Thinketh in his concience, we have done well, and judicially. Not to go to the Lords in this course. To leave it to the king, and with the king. Master of the Wards. Sorry, we driven to this strait; not much election; Cannot go back from our judgment. We have appealed to the king: Can go no higher. To go no lower. To go once again to the king, and to let him know, what we have done, hath been out of our zeal and love to him, and his children. To desire him, once again, to do with us, as a father; and not to put us over to the Lords, but himself to end. Sir Edw. Coke. Judgment not to be stayed, for Great Seal, &c. yet where felony or treason, the king may stay the proceeding. This judgment given for the king: For his blood. Any man may stay his own suit. Not to question the judgment. Every man, though absent, involved in the judgment; yea the judgment his, though he of a contrary opinion. Concors discordia. The judgment already entered. The king may stay the execution, where he only party. In appeal, not to stay; in indictment, otherwise. Sir Tho. Warton. First to read the judgment. Mr. Sollicitor. Will not go about to dissuade them from this. Not to do fit things unseasonably. That this question grew by a message from the king. Sir Edw. Coke, Sir Ro. Phillippes, Mr. Noy, Mr. Alford, sir Sam. Sands, Master of the Wards, sir Nath. Rich, sir Edw. Cecill, presently to retire into the committee chamber, and to set down in writing, the judgment. Sir Edw. Sackoyle. That all our proceedings may be entered here, and kept as Records. The Report in Grey's Debates of the speeches made in the House of Commons in the progress of the Proceedings against Thompson is as follows: Upon reading the Report of the Committee appointed to examine the complaint against him (See p. 3. sup.) Sir Robert Markham. I would not send him to Rome, for fear that he is their chaplain already, but I would banish him to Geneva; for he says, "They are worse than the devil that are Presbyterians." Put him into the bill of banishment of the papists. Sir Sum. Sands. No member of this House ought after a question, to question the power of this House. That the judgment given out of a great zeal and love to his majesty. To let the world know no pique between the king and his people. Not erroneous, nor coram non judice. A court of record: Therefore may give an oath. Disuse loseth no privilege. Sir Francis Winnington. I take this buHow long have the Lords disused to give judg-siness to be of great concernment. When I ments in parliament? The king, as head, pre- speak against such men as these, I speak for sent here, and in all his courts. We punish the church. Three things this report runs here abuses to the members of our House, upon. First, bold and impudent reflections on yea, to their servants; much more to the the king; and it is our duty to take notice of king's blood. To enter the judgment. Let such men. Next, I never heard any man so conhim bring his Writ of Error. No corruption fidently and rantingly assert popery; and next, in us, but by our love to the king. We judge asserting of arbitrary power. He is a most many things, without oath. Sheriffs, &c. pass admirable preacher, and takes upon him to asbills. That we were a court before ever swear- sert those things! There were many witnesses ing upon a book introduced. These did swear, heard-He is restless in and out of the pulpit and protest, as deeply, and credibly, here, as in imposing these doctrines, and this magnifies could be by swearing upon a book. his offence, that it was done in interval of parSir Francis Seymor, and sir Francis Fane. liament, in the boldness of the papists. It is To put it to the question, whether the judg-worthy your consideration what to do with this man. I have heard of a precedent of sentencing such a person to ride through the city with his face to the horse's tail. If you banish him, it is the way to make him a cardinal; such company as you intend in your bill is preferment to him: Some men we see will struggle hard to keep the protestants from being united, and I must believe that, at the bottom, they love popery better than the protestant religion. We may raise a dispute amongst the Lords; though the man seem too little to impeach, yet his crimes are great enough for the Commons of England to charge him upon; and let the bishops see what kind of cattle these are that scandalize the church. Therefore I would resolve upon some questions, viz. "That he has impudently scandalized his majesty and the protestant religion ;" and when you have put these to the vote upon him, the best way is to make him exemplary. I was thinking of a short bill, to put a character of disability upon him, for really there are such a multitude of people in the plot (and that borders upon it) that you cannot well impeach him. Such sort of people as these absolutely endeavour to destroy the doctrine of the church, and to bring in popery, and such as those that foment dissentions amongst protestants. one of the most capital cities of the kingdom? His punishment cannot be too great. He has not only defamed the king, but spoken reproachfully of the protestant religion, and of queen Elizabeth. No one protestant would do it, and he has cast the plot upon the protestants. Should you pass but a light censure upon this man, he would laugh at you. Therefore be sure that in your vote you hit upon every thing he is guilty of. Two or three gentlemen may withdraw, and word the question. Upon proposing the Vote against him, (see P. 7. sup.) Sir William Jones. You have made a just Vote, but if you do no more, he will come off too lightly. You may trust him now with this Vote in any judicature; but I would stop the mouths of his fellows, and in the face of all the world, I would publish the evidence against him, and let the church-men see what sort of sons they have. They who think him too little for impeachment, think him too big for a bill; but, to prepare the Lords and all men for his sentence, I would impeach him. Colonel Titus. No man thinks that this Thompson deserves punishment, and a severe one, more than I do, but I am at a stand what Serjeant Maynard. This Thompson is as that shall be. You are moved for "Banishnaughty a man as can be; he has scandalized ment with the most considerable papists." I religion, fallen upon the dead, that most excel- do think him a papist, and much more because lent princess queen Elizabeth, and scandalized he calls himself a Protestant. I do remember the protestants in the pulpit, besides prosecuting several persons you have impeached, an earl men for not coming to church when the church into a duke [Lauderdale,] and an earl, almost doors were shut. I wish you could punish him into a marquis [Halifax. He was soon after as he deserves. I think he that scandalized so created. And some into being public mi the queen of Bohemia had sentence, by im- nisters. The effects have been like thunder peachment, to ride with his face to the horse's upon mushrooms; it does but make them grow, tail. But I would not send him beyond sea, not blast them.* Dr. Mainwaring was impeachfor there he will be favoured. I would fained by the Commons, and was brought to the see how the fathers of our church will look upon this man, I wonder that he has been suffered in the church so long. I would impeach him to the Lords, and then see whether you may mend their judgment against him, in a bill, which will be much more terrible. Sir Tho. Lee. It is necessary that you take notice of this matter. This spiritual sword, which they all complain of, does the mischief. If the bishop of the proper diocese had done his duty, he had saved you this labour. Therefore I would pass a vote, "That he is a scandal to his own function, and that he has dishonoured the king;” and add what you will else to it. Col. Birch. The great tendency of the evidence was, "That he defamed and cried down the reformation." Pray put that in its proper place. Col. Titus. When one considers what monstrous conspiracies are against our liberties, and to change the government both of church and state! There are a sort of protestants, who make use of the profession of the protestant religion, to injure the protestant religion. And where did this Mr. Thompson do this, but in * See Floyde's Case. bar on his knees in the Lords House, and he there recanted what he had written and preached. He was Dr. Mainwaring before you impeached him, and was lord bishop of *The like happened here. See the note at the beginning of this case, p. 1. † See his Case, vol. 3, p. 335, of this Collection, where it may be noticed that one part of the judgment pronounced against him was, "That he should be for ever disabled to have any ecclesiastical dignity, or secular office." On the 18th of April, 1640, in the next parliament that met after this transaction, the Lords took up this business again; and, having read the declaration of the Commons against the now bishop of St. David's, and the sentence of the Lords, they refer the whole to their Committee of Privileges, with leave to the bishop to allege any thing before the said Committee, on his part, either by pardon, licence, or otherwise. On the 21st of April, they order the records to be brought, that the House may determine this cause. But on the 28th of April, the king sends a message by the Lord Keeper, "That his majesty, understanding there was some question concerning Dr. Mainwaring, St. David's after. Some have moved, "That this Thompson should ride with his face to the horse's tail;" but that would be something severe to one of his coat; but seeing he has forgot his coat all his life, the Commons may forget it for one day. I would impeach him, that the bishops may see what their sons have done: Hæc est doctrina filii vestri.' They have so countenanced this doctrine, and have been so now bishop of St. David's, had given command that the said Dr. Mainwaring shall not come and sit in parliament, nor send any proxy to the parliament." Thereupon, it was ordered to be entered so. Lords Journal. "I do not recollect," says Mr. Hatsell, "to have seen this last very extraordinary (and illegal) exercise of the king's authority taken notice of in any history." See further, Commons Journal, the 23d of Feb. 1640.-See, too, Sheridan's Case, A. D. 1680, 1681. far from punishing him, that they have preferred him; and therefore they are thought by ill people, great favourers of this man. Therefore I would impeach him before the Lords. Sir W. Jones. I cannot tell when his impeachment will have an end, whether ever or no; therefore I would publish what is against him, as a warning to other church-men, and in justification of yourselves. Sir Fr. Winnington. I look upon this charge against Thompson as a national business, and to be part of the plot; and such things as these are fit to be known to the world, that they may see what is libelled upon the king. Mr. Harbord. Some of the clergy are so afraid that we should unite, that they are almost papists themselves; and as for the church of England that have endeavoured to asperse us, let the world see what sort of cattle they breed up. 273. Case of JAMES SKENE, for treasonable Opinions and Declarations* 32 CHARLES II. A. D. 1680. [Arnot's Collection and Abridgement of celebrated Criminal Trials in Scotland.] THE prisoner, who was brother to the laird of Skene, was prosecuted at the instance of his majesty's advocate,† for high treason. He was charged in the indictment with being accessary to the rebellion headed by Balfour of Kinloch, and Hackston of Rathillet, at Air's Moss and Bothwellbridge; with having maintained the lawfulness of that rebellion, even in presence of the duke of York, and of the lords of privy council, and those of justiciary; with having Justified the excommunication of the king, and having maintained it was lawful to kill him, &c. The proof adduced against the prisoner was his own confession, emitted before the duke of York and privy council on the 13th November 1680, of which the tenor follows: He said, he did not know who were rebels, but denied that he was present at the battles of Bothwellbridge and of Air's Moss. He thought the persons engaged in those insurrections were not rebels, for they were in defence of God's cause. He was not at the Torwood conventicle when the king was excommunicated, nor did he know who contrived it, but he thought the reasons of the excommunication just. He acknow * Records of Justiciary, Nov. 22, 1680. + Fountainhall merely makes mention of this Case with that of two other persons, thus: *November 22, 1680, James Skeen condemned to be hanged for disowning the king; and on the 29th of November thereafter Potter and Stewart are condemned for the same." Decisions, vol. 1, p. 117. ledged the burning the acts of parliament, because they were against the Covenant; and would not admit the authority of the king or parliament in things that were against the Covenant. He did not know if any new insurrection was plotted; but he believed that God's people were always ready to take arms in defence of themselves and of the gospel; that he was one of God's people, and had resolved to give a testimony for the cause.-He thought the killing of the archbishop of St. Andrews was not murder; That there is a declared war between those who serve the Lord, and those who serve the king against the Covenant; and that it is lawful to kill such in defence of the gospel; That the king being excommunicated, and there being now a lawful declared war against him on account of the breach of the Covenant, it is lawful to kill him, and all those who are in opposition to the Covenant. He renewed his confession before the Court and Jury. He was desired to deliberate before he should sign it: He answered, he had resolved to sign it; he thought it his honour to do so; and he did it accordingly. The Jury unanimously found the prisoner "guilty of the treasonable crimes and expressions mentioned in his dittay, and that by his own confession." The Court sentenced him to be taken to the Cross of Edinburgh on the 24th of November instant, to be hanged on a gibbet till he be dead, his head to be separated from his body, and fixed on the Netherbow, and his whole estate, real and personal, to be forfeited. 274. Case of JOHN NIVEN, Captain of the Ship Fortune of London, for Leasing-making against James Duke of Albany and York: 32 CHARLES II. A. D. 1680. [Arnot's Collection and Abridgement of celebrated Criminal Trials in Scotland.] THE prisoner was served with a criminal in-replied, there was not one of ten thousand in dictment at the instance of his majesty's ad- England who would say so. He added, that vocate, setting forth, that, by the statutory the duke of York was in a plot to take the law, and the practice of this realm, Leasing-king's life, and had combined with the French making, the engendering of discord between the king and his people, and the attering slanderous speeches to the disturbance of government, are crimes of a capital nature, yet the prisoner had been guilty of them, by railing against the duke of Albany and York, the king's brother; by charging him with being in ⚫ a plot to take the king's life; with combining with the French king to invade England; and with coming to Scotland on purpose to make a party to introduce Popery.-Frivolous objec- | tions to the relevancy of the indictment were urged for the prisoner, and repelled by the court +. king to invade England; but the deponent cannot say whether the prisoner expressed these words as his own opinion, or that of the people of England. The prisoner at the same time said, no man had a greater regard than him for the duke; that, under his royal highness's conduct, he had lost part of his blood in his majesty's cause; and that he would be ready to hazard his life in the duke's service. The prisoner objected to William Tarbett, a waiter, being received as a witness; but his objections were repelled. Tarbett deposed, that he was accidentally in Burntisland, in the house of captain Seaton, where he fell in com|pany with the prisoner, and two Englishmen, a shipmaster and his mate, and frequently overheard discourses between them relating to government; and heard the prisoner say, that the duke had come into Scotland to make a party for introducing popery, but our good old English hearts would not suffer that.' William Eecles, writer in Edinburgh, deposed, that, being in Dysart on the day libelled in company with the prisoner, and some others, the prisoner inquired at the deponent, and the rest of the company, what stile of reception the duke of York had met in Scotland? To this the deponent answered, he had been received according to his great quality and merit, and that he was a fine Prince; and the prisonersoner urged objections which were over-ruled, * Records of Justiciary, July 15th, 1680. A very unjust account of this Trial is given by lord Fountainhall, in his Decisions, vol. 1. p. 108. The prisoner indisputably fell within the tyrannical statutes against Leasing-making, and there seems no doubt of his having been guilty of the fact. Fountainhall is deemed a writer of authority. He was upon the side of law and liberty; but any one who is conversant in the affairs of that period, and who compares the result of his knowledge with the cases in Fountainhall, must be sensible of the extreme partiality of that writer; a propensity which, in times such as those, it was very difficult to resist. His partiality is the less surprising, as he appears not to have been untinged with fanaticism; and those who have occasion to compare his Journals with the original records of Justiciary, will see little reason to compli ment him upon his accuracy. Michael Seaton, against whom also the pri lifications; yet he was conveened on the acts of parliament against leasing-makers betwixt the king and his people, though it was objected these acts did not meet this case, he neither having lied to the king of his people, nor to the people of their king; and at the most, it was but scandalum magnatum, and in England such a process would be laughed at. Yet his defences were all repelled and the dittay found relevant, and the libel sustained, and admitted to probation, and he put to an assize, whereof 7 cleansed him, and 7 found him guilty; and the balance thus standing equal, provost Binny, chancellor of the assize found him guilty; albeit the dittay in itself was neither relevant to infer the pain of death, nor was it proven against him; but this was done to fright Eng. land and gratify his royal highness. But the moderation of lex unic. Cod. si quis Imperat. maledix is more commendable, and such practice should not be standing on record.-It Cr. Court. July 16, 1680.------Niven, the is tre he deserved a severe punishment, but master of a ship, was pannelled for using some law cannot stretch it to death. The pronounc rash expressions against the duke of York, viz. ing of sentence was delayed till the 4th of AuThat he was on the Popish plot of taking away gust, on which day they ordained him to be the king's life, and overturning our religion hanged on the 18th of August thereafter: But and government; and that he was to consent the judges knew the king, by the duke of York's to the bringing over the French king with an mediation, was sending a remission, at least army into Britain; and that he had come him- a letter converting the sentence to banishment, self to Scotland to make a popish faction there. and confiscating his ship and all his goods, but This was spoken in cups, and with some qua-preferring his creditors therein to the fisk. Fountainhall's account is as follows: deposed, that in his own house in Burntisland, upon a Sunday in April last, he was sent for into the room where the prisoner, two English seamen, and William Tarbett were drinking. He heard Niven and the other Englishman speaking extravagant commonwealth language, and particularly concerning the duke of York. He could not be positive that the words were those charged in the indictment, viz. that he had come to make a party to introduce popery, but thinks they were to that purpose. The Jury, by a plurality of voices, found the prisoner guilty of leasing making against the duke of York. On the 4th of August, the court sentenced the prisoner to be hanged at the cross of Edinburgh on the 18th; but, on the 6th of that month, the court, in consequence of an act of privy council, proceeding upon a letter from the king, suspended the execution till his majesty's further pleasure should be declared; and it does not appear that the Sentence ever was executed. 275. Proceedings in Parliament against EDWARD SEYMOUR, esq.' a Member of the House of Commons and Treasurer of the Navy, upon an Impeachment of High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and Offences: 32 CHARLES II. A. D. 1680. [Journals of both Houses; 8 Grey's Debates, 35; 4 Cobb. Parl. Hist. 1222.] HOUSE OF COMMONS. Nov. 19, 1680. mour has attempted this, or not. I hope you will think that none guilty of such crimes, but Mr. Vernon. "I HAVE Articles of Accusa- fear a parliament. One thing more; with what tion of crimes of a high nature against Mr. Sey-imperiousness did he put the Commons in conmour. I think he is not here. I shall under-tempt, and did talk of "Wind-guns!" I betake to prove them. I move that he may believe you will find matter against him, to send here to-morrow morning to answer, and his him to the Tower. charge will be brought in. To charge him, and not present, I know not the method of parliament, but we have Articles ready. Mr. Pilkington. I desire he may be here tomorrow to answer his charge. Ordered, That Edward Seymour, esq., do attend the service of this House, in his place, to-morrow morning. November 20. Sir Gilbert Gerrard acquaints the House, That he had Articles of Impeachment of High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and Offences, against Edward Seymour esq., one of his majesty's most honourable Privy Council, Treasurer of the Navy, and a member of this House; and then proceeded as follows: Whenever such Articles are brought to my hands, and I am satisfied with the proof of them, I take it to be my duty to exhibit them. I shall only say, I have known this gentleman a long while; his fortune was raised in this House, and how he comes now under suspicion of these Articles, he can best answer. This gentleman (if what fame says is true) has laboured with industry to prorogue or dissolve this parliament, which all think will ruin the king, religion, and all we have. I make this use of it, that the king knows whether Sey This Mr. Seymour, who succeeded to a baronetcy upon the death of his father in 1688, and is perhaps more known by the appellation of Sir Edward Seymour, had been thirteen years before this time very active in the prosecution of lord Clarendon [See the proceedings against the earl of Clarendon, vol. 6, p. 317, of this Collection 4 Cobb. Parl. Hist. 470 et Mr. Seymour. In order to methods of parliament, the reading of the Articles must have the motion seconded, and I do second it, that the Articles may be read. The Articles were then read, and are as follows: ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT of High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and Offences, against EDWARD SEYMOUR, esq., one of his majesty's most honourable Privy Council, Treasurer of his majesty's Navy, and one of the members of the House of Commons now in Parliament assembled. "1. That, whereas the sum of 584,978l. 28. 2d. was raised by an act of parliament, for the speedy building of 30 ships of war, and thereby appropriated to the said use, by which act it was particularly directed, "That the treasurer of the navy should keep all monies paid to him by virtue of the said act, distinct and apart from all other monies, and should issue and pay the same by warrant of the principal officers and commissioners of the navy, or any three or more of them;" and mentioning and expressing, "That it is for the building, the guns, rigging, and other furnishing of the said thirty ships of war, and to no other use, intent, seq. and the Continuation of lord Clarendon's Life]. It is observable that Arlington [See his Case, ante, vol. 6, p. 1053] Seymour and Osborne [See the Cases of the earl of Danby and of the duke of Leeds, infra] who had all been most eager and most bitter in the attack upon Clarendon, all in their turns became the objects of similar attacks. In the Continuation of the |