Punishments they have not spared to inflict upon fuch notorious Offenders.

Thirdly, So hainous a thing was it efteem'd of old, to endeavour an Enervation or Subverfion of these antient Rights and Privileges, that Acts of Parliaments themselves (otherwife the molt facred with the People) have not been of force enough to fecure or defend fuch perfons from condign Punishment, who, in pursuance of them, have acted inconfiftent with our Great Charter. Therefore it is that great Lawyer, the Lord Cook, doth once more aggravate the Example of Empfon and Dudley (with perfons of the fame Rauk) into a juft Caution, as well to Parliaments as Judges, Juftices and inferior Magiftrates, to decline making or executing any Act that may in the leaft feem to reftringe or confirm this fo often avowed and confirmed Great Charter of the Liberties of England, fince Parliaments are faid to err when they cross it; the Obeyers of their Acts punifh'd as Time-ferving Tranfgreffors; and that Kings themfelves (tho enrich'd by thofe courfes) have, with great Compunction and Repentance, left among their dying Words their Recantations.

Therefore moft notable and true it was, with which we fhall conclude this prefent Subject, what the King pleased to obferve in a Speech to the Parliament, about 1662. (viz.) The good old Rules of Law are our best Security.

The manner of the Court's Behaviour towards the Prisoners and Jury, with their many extravagant Expreffions, muft not altogether flip our Obfervation.

Firft, Their Carriage to the Jury out-do's all Precedents; they entertain'd them more like a Pack of Felons, than a Jury of boneft Men; as being fitter to be try'd themfelves, than to acquit others. In fhort; no Fury, for many Ages, receiv'd fo many Inftances of Difpleafure and Affront; because they prefer'd not the bumour of the Court, before the quiet of their own Confciences, even to be esteem'd as perjur'd; tho they had really been fo, had they not done what they did.

Secondly, Their Treatment of the Prisoners was not more unchriftian than inhumane. Hiftory can scarce tell us of one Heathen Roman that ever was fo ignoble to his Captive: What! to accufe, and not hear them; to threaten to Bore their Tongues, Gag and Stop their Mouths, Fetter their Legs, merely for defending themfelves, and that by the antient Fundamental Laws of England too. O Barbarous! had they been Turks and Infidels, that Carriage would have ill become a Chriftian Court; fuch Allions proving much stronger Diffuafives, than Arguments to convince them, how much the Chriftian Religion inclines Men to Justice and Moderation above their dark Idolatry. It is truly lamentable that fuch occafion should

be

be given for Intelligence to Foreign Parts, where England hath had the Reputation of a Chriftian Country, by the ill treating of its fober and religious Inhabitants for their confcientious Meetings to worship God. But above all, Diffenters had little reason to have expected this boarish fiercenefs from the Mayor of London, when they confider his eager profecution of the King's Party under Cromwell's Government, as thinking he could never give too great a Teftimony of his Loyalty to that new Inftrument; which makes the old Saying true, That one Runagade is worse than three Turks.

Alderman Bludworth, being confcious to himself of his par tial kindness to the Popish Firers, hopes to make amends by his zealous Profecution of the poor Diffenters; for at the fame Seffions he moved to have an Evidence (of no small quality) against Harrifon the Friar, fent to Bridewell and Whipt; That he was earnest to have the Jury fined and imprifoned, becaufe they brought not the Prifoners guilty for only worshipping their God. Whence it may be eafy to obferve, That Popie Friars, and Prelatical Perfecutors, are mere Confederates.

But what others have only adventured to ftammer at, the Recorder of London has been fo ingenuous as to speak moft plainly; or elfe what mean thofe two fatal Expreffions, which are become the talk and terror both of City and Country? ·

Firft, In affuring the Jury, That there would be a Law next Seffim of Parliament, That no Man fhould have the protection of the Law, but fuch as conformed to the Church? Which, fhould it be as true, as we hope it is falfe (and a dishonourable Prophecy of that great Affembly) the Papifts may live to fee their Marian days outdone by profess'd Proteftants.

But furely no English-man can be fo fottifh, as to conceive that his Right to Liberty and Property came in with his Profelf on of the Proteftant Religion; or that his natural and humane Rights are dependant on certain religious Apprehenfions; and confe quently he muft efteem it a Cruelty in the Abftract, that Perfons fhould be deny'd the benefit of thofe Laws which relate to civil Concerns, who by their deportment in civil Affairs have no ways tranfgrefs'd them, but merely upon an Opinion of Faith, and Matter of Conscience.

It is well known, that Liberty and Property, Trade and Com merce, were in the World long before the Points in difference betwixt Proteftants and Diffenters, as the common Privileges of Mankind; and therefore not to be measured out by a conforming to this, or the other religious Perfuafion, but purely as English-men,

Secondly,

Secondly, But we fhould rather chule to efteem this an Expreffion of Heat in the Recorder, than that we could believe a London's Recorder fhould fay, an English Parliament fhould impofe fo much Slavery on the prefent Age, and entail it upon their own Pofterity (who, for ought they know, may be reckond among the Diffenters of the next Age) did he not encourage us to believe, it was both his Defire and his Judg ment, from that deliberate Elogy he made on the Spanish Inquifition, expreffing himself much to this purpose: Viz Till now I never understood the Reafon of the Policy and "Prudence of the Spaniards, in fuffering the Inquifition amongst "them: And certainly it will never be well with us, till fomething like unto the Spanish Inquifition be in England The grofs Malignity of which Saying, is almoft inexpreffable. What does this but juftify that hellith Defign of the Papifts, to have prevented the firft Reformation? If this be good Doctrine, then Hoggefirant, the grand Inquifitor, was a more venerable Perfon than Luther the Reformer. It was an expreffion that had better become Cajetan, the Pope's Legate, than Howel, a Proteftant City's Recorder. This is fo far from helping to convert the Spaniard, that it is the way to harden him in his Idolatry, when his abominable Cruelty fhall be efteem'd Prudence, and his moft barbarous and exquifite torturing of Truth, an excellent way to prevent Faction.

If the Recorder has fpoke for no more than himself, it is well; but certainly he little deferves to be thought a Proteftant, and a Lawyer, that put both Reformation and Law into the Inquifition: There being nothing more deftru&tive of the Fundamental Laws and Liberties of England, and that noble Defign of Primitive Reformation, than the Arbitrary Power and Terrifying Racks of the Spanish Inquifition. And doubtless the fupreme Governors of the Land are highly oblig'd in Honour and Confcience (in difcharge of their Truft to God and the People) to take these things into their ferious Confideration, as what is expected from them by thofe who earneftly wifh Theirs and the Kingdom's Safety and Profperity.

A Poft

A Postscript.

The Copy of Fudg Keeling's Cafe, taken out of the Parliament-Journal.

THE

Die Mercurii, 11. Decembris, 1667.

HE Houfe refumed the Hearing of the rest of the Report touching the Matter of Restraints upon Juries; and that upon the Exami nation of divers Witneffes, in feveral Claufes of Reftraints put upon Juries, by the Lord Chief Justice Keeling: Whereupon the Committee made their Refolutions, which are as followeth.

Firft, That the Proceedings of the Lord Chief Justice, in the Cafes now reported, are Innovations, in the Tryal of Men for their Lives and Liberties; and that he hath used an Arbitrary and Illegal Power, which is of dangerous Confequence to the Lives and Liberties of the People of England, and tends to the introducing of an Arbitrary Government.

Secondly, That in the place of Judicature, the Lord Chief Justice hath undervalued, vilified and contemned Magna Charta, the great Preferver of our Lives, Freedom and Property.

Thirdly, That he be brought to Tryal, in order to condign Punif ment, in fuch manner as the Houfe fhould judg moft fit and requifite.

Die Veneris, 13. Decembris, 1667.

Refolved, &c.

That the Precedents and Practice of Fining or Imprisoning Jurors for Verdicts, is Illegal.

Now whether the Juftices of this Court, in their Proceedings (both towards the Prisoners and Jury) have acted according to Law, to their Oaths and Duty, and to do Juftice with out partiality; whereby Right might be preferv'd, the Peace of the Land fecur'd, and our antient Laws eftablish'd: Or, whether fuch Actions tend not to deprive us of our Lives and Liberties, to rob us of our Birth-right, the Fundamental Laws of England: And finally, to bring in an Arbitrary and Illegal Power to ufurp the Benches of all our Courts of Juftice, we leave the English Reader to judg.

Certainly there can be no higher Affront offer'd to King and Parliament, than the bringing their Reputations into fufpi

cion

cion with their People, by the irregular Actions of fubordinate Judges: And no Age can parallel the Carriage of this Recorder, Mayor, &c. Nor can we think fo ignobly of the Parliament, as that they fhould do less than call thefe Perfons to account, who fail'd not to do it to one lefs guilty, and of more repute, (to wit) Judg Keeling: For if his Behaviour gave juft ground of Jealoufy, that he intended an Innovation, and the introducing an Arbitrary Government, This Recorder much more. Did Chief Juftice Keeling fay, Magna Charta was Magna farta? fo did this Recorder too. And did Juftice Keeling Fine and Imprifon Juries contrary to all Law? fo did this Recorder alfo. In short, there is no difference, unless it be, that the one was question'd, and the other deferves it: But we defire in this, they may be faid to differ; That tho the former efcap'd Punishment, the latter may not; who having a Precedent before, did notwithftanding notoriously tranfgrefs.

To conclude: The Law fuppofes the King can't err, because it is willing to fuppofe he always acts by Law (Et Voluntas Legis eft Voluntas Regis, or the King's Will is regulated by the Law) but it fays no fuch thing of his Judges. And fince they are oblig'd by Oath to difregard the King's Letters (tho under the Broad and Privy-Seal) if they any wife oppugn or contradict the Laws of the Land; and confidering that every fingular Action of an inferior Minifter, has an ugly Reference to the Supreme Magiftrate, where not rebuked; we can't but conclude, that both Judges are anfwerable for their Irregularities, especially where they had not a Limitation of a King's Letter, or Command; and that the Supreme Magiftrate is oblig'd, as in Honour and Safety to himself, Alfred-like, to bring fuch to condign Punishment, left every Seffions produce the like Tragical Scenes of Ufurpation over the Confciences of Juries, to the vilifying and contemning of Juftice, and great Detriment and Prejudice of the good and honeft Men of this Famous and Free City.

FIAT JUSTITIA.

Phenir