Plot a ridicule, but when a jesting business could not do, they took all the ways they could to suppress it. Under a popish prince, I expected much more than from Omers, I dare not call it St. Omers; and now that any body should be so bold as to pin this at our breeches, let them answer it. The house was dissolved, or else I had made a warm Report on the Monday. But as the commons are made black by this Judgment, so I would have a Bill to make somebody black too, and if we are denied it, to go home with honour, and they with shame. As they made us black, so the Bill will wash us, and lay the black where it should be. Mr. Howe. I am sorry we are under sufferings; still the same hands are upon us. If we have a Bill to vindicate ourselves, we are sure the people will vindicate us against them. I would vote this Judgment illegal, cruel, and a Grievance.' Mr. Boscawen. The affirming this Judgment is not for Oates's sake, but for the sake of the Popish Plot. I think there was so much art used to get that Judgment, that, for that reason, I would lay it to heart. I wish the same spirits have not the influence to do the same things again. I think it not amiss to add to the question, That it is your opinion that this Judgment against Oates was a design to stifle the Popish Plot, and by such arts as 3,000l. spent upon the Trial.' I would have something of that in the question. Sir Henry Capel. This Judgment has a bottom deeper than I can well express it; it cost dissolving three parliaments. I remember when the crown and robes were carried in haste in a chair at Oxford, to dissolve that parliament, when we were upon the point of discovering Fitzharris's Plot.* If we pass this Judgment by, we approve all this. If you add to your Vote, upon suppressing the Popish Plot," the world will then see the reason of your vote, and the occasion of this man's Trial, and the world will know it was upon the Popish Plot. Mr. Foley. We have the Judgment before us, and what it cost, but, besides that, many have had continnal pensions since. Sir Tho. Whitgrave of Staffordshire has had one, and no waiter. Therefore I move as before. The con Sir Tho. Lee. Every body has agreed in the end; we differ only in the micans. sequence of this Judgment afirmed will affect every body, and, perhaps, if to do again, would not be done; the consequences were not foreseen as observed. 'Tis to establish a rule of punishment hereafter. But consider, Oates was not the sole evidence that convicted lord Stafford; therefore restrain your Vote to that question. Sir Wm. Williams. One record of Oates's conviction relates to Ireland, the Jesuit; we have all that trial, and Whitebread, all founded on popery; do but deem the Judgment to be cruel and illegal,' it will do the business. Mr. Hawles. I like the question relating to Sce vol. iv. p. 1339. Sir Tho. Lee. The Judgment against Johnson was but a bare misdemeanor for a libel; therefore take that within your Bill. Sir Wm. Williams. Pass a Vote upon that Judgment only, for in that you may go in the ordinary way, and I believe the lords will reverse it. The Speaker. That against Johnson is but barely Information for Misdemeanor. As for the degrading, that is no part of the record. Sir Tho. Lee. I observe one thing, in the reversal by the lords. I would have the business of the Ship-Money looked into. They did not leave that Judgment; and to that particular judgment the thing was at an end; but they did it by a Bili. It is not your part, as the commous of England, to bring a writ of error; pray let one Bill serve for all. Sir Im. Williams.. I would not have recourse to the last remedy, but in the last case: I would not do it by Bill. In the case of lord Hollis and Valentine, the Judgment was against the Privilege of the house. The Record was read in the house, and voted an illegal and a pernicious Judgment,' given in 5 Charles. It was voted 1667. It was a long time before that Judgment was taken notice of; and, at a conference, the commons brought the Vote to the lords, and they agreed the Judgment illegal and pernicious;' and voided the Judg ment. Sir Tho. Lee. I am not willing to run into controversy with the lords unnecessarily. I remember that Judgment in lord Hollis's case delivered at a conference. I have observed, that, in several things, the Long Parliament made Votes, and no more, and did not know the consequence. At the conference, the commons carried up the Vote; and when the lords agreed it, they began to reflect, We have let the commons into judicature;' therefore they put lord Hollis upon reversing it, by writ of error, thereby never to let the commons into judicature. Resolved, "That Bills be brought in to reverse the Judgments against Mr. Oates and Mr. Johnson, as cruel and illegal." Farther Debate on the Heads for the Bill of Indemnity.] June 12. Col. Birch. I did most heartily bless God, that the parliaments did what they did, in the last parliament; if they had done no more than what they did in relation to the Test, and Popish Plot, we should honour them. As to the Popish Plot, do what you will, but pray meddle not with parlia-that inents: if any ill things were said in that parliament, let them go, and thank God things were no worse. Sir Tho. Clarges. I am sorry you are diverted from the business of this day, upon account of that parliament. There was a great deal done there for the Protestant Religion; but the great fault of that parliament was, that it was filled with people depending upon the court. I cannot say there were Pensions then; that was the great fault of the Long Parliament: I hope we shall see no more such. There was an Address to the king, in that Parliament, about the Test; a worthy gentleman (Mr. Finch) was thrown out of his place about it: but if the question be, what things were spoken in that parliament (though there were things ill enough), parliaments may have great discouragements for the future. I hope those who did amiss then, have repented; and pray put no discouragements upon people for what they have said in parliament. Serj. Maynard. No account is to be given out of the house, for what is done there; the account is only to be given here, else you shut up all our mouths; and I move you to put this off from your hands. Sir Rob. Howard. It is not at all the question, what was said in king James's parliament, but what was done worth taking notice of against the Protestant Religion. One thought it worth their pains to turn over the Journals of the Exclusion-Parliaments; another, spirited with claret, seconds the motion. I shall never forget a worthy member (Clarges)* holding two Speeches of king James in his hand, and declaring them contradictory to one another. I shall ever honour him for it. We are ordering a committee to inspect the Journals relating to the Plot, in order to the matter yesterday relating to Oates; which I think very fit to be done. Mr. Sacheverell. As for the proceedings of that parliament of king James, nobody will justify it in many respects. I would have a retrospect, in the Indemnity, of raising Money against the law; but if this should rake into a great number of persons, I am against it: but if there be one or two of them now about the king, I have no such kindness for my brother, if he stands before me in this matter; but persons that may be of use, I would be tender of; but if he give a jealousy to the nation, I would part with him, though he was my brother. Pray let nothing put an insecurity upon England's interest. Mr. Howe. To explain my motion about inspection into the last parliament, they who thought the word Protestant' not fit to be in * Sce vol. iv. p. 1372. Sir John Trevor. I desire the Journals of parliament may be inspected. Care was taken both at the committee, and in the house, then; and you will find the Report was never then made relating to the Popish Plot; but, in relation to the inspection, the direction was only for that part of the Journal relating to the Bill of Exclusion, to be expunged.' Mr. Godolphin. I had the honour to be of that parliament so reflected upon. I was out of England when I was chosen. I cannot justify all that parliament did; but as for what is said, of their giving what was asked, it did neither give land-tax, poll, nor subsidy; but, that parliament was for the Protestant Religion, and suppressed two rebellions in England and Scotland: I wish other parliaments may do as well, I would not have enquiry made into mens actions in parliament, lest after-parliaments may do the same by you. Sir Wm. Williams. For that very reason, I would look into what they did amiss. One parliament may question another; but to offer it as an argument, because others are questioned, we may be,' it is an argument of our sincerity. Let this, and all parliaments, be questioned. Mr. Howe. As to what Godolphin reproaches us of taxes and poll,' I hope we shall never attaint men, and seize their estates, without evidence. The Debate went off, and the King's Letter was read relating to the Indemnity, dated Jan. 22, 1688. Sir Robert Cotton, of Cambridgeshire. The advice the king has given in his Letter may contribute to the forwarding the business of the Indemnity, and satisfaction of the nation. Nothing will more settle the nation, than a quiet peaceable spirit amongst ourselves; and as the king has expressed great kindness to his subjects, so I hope we shall proceed with that temper as may quiet the nation, by as much moderation and unity, in naming the persons to be excepted, as possibly the nature of the thing may hear. Mr. Howe. Pray lay a foundation : no man that has a falling house will live in it with props. For want of a foundation, a new building can never be strong. As to the king's Letter about the Indemnity, I wish it may be so for ever; but, as I wish to God we may forget what is past, so likewise that we may punish those who endeavoured to destroy our liberty and religion. Some, in the worst of times, did die martyrs for it. As I would forget, so I would not confirm, all the ill things in time past. I would have as few excepted out of the Indemnity, as may be pardoned, as any man; but I would not give encouragement to exercise the same thing on to posterity. The guilty are in haste to be forgiven, and the innocent fear a return of the same ill things. I hope we shall have a temper in what | criminals, and then except whom you please. we do. I move for a committee to bring in the names of them all. The Record of sir Edward Hales's Case was read. Sir John Guise. If you intend to except any persons out of the Indemnity, you have now an occasion. We hear who the Judges were that gave their opinions in this case. I hear Jones and Wythens were so; pray make them examples. The Speaker. That of sir Edward Hales was a fictitious plea. Mr. Hawles, You will find it was a real plea: send for the clerks of that court, and they will inform you, that Hales was at 601. charge in the suit. Mr. Foley. I cannot see how we can pro are more criminal about the Dispensing Power, than those named. Where a judge's opinion was for dispensing with one man, he is not so great a criminal as those who gave their opi nions for dispensing with all. Till that be reported, you cannot give an opinion. Mr. Howe. You are going upon a Com-ceed, unless by a Committee. Other Judges pany of Judges like the East India Company; they were the instruments, but those who put them upon it, and advised, are rather to be excepted; but if you name a committee to bring in the names of the counsellors, then you may chuse whom you will make examples of, and distinguish them from honest men. Those who built theirs upon our misfortune, go about still in the world, and make speeches in vindidication of what was done. I hope we shall proceed so as no man may have reason to blame us. Sir Wm. Williams. I doubt we are going into a wood. You have received the Record of Hales and Godden; the committee must know the matter by record, or witnesses. It was Easter term, 2 James. Go into the courts, and you will see who were Judges that term. Marquis of Winchester. The Prince's De- If I was a judge, I would confess the thing imclaration turns all upon evil Counsellors: Imediately. Why should things be concealed? hope they are gone away with king James; but if they still remain here, those are the persons you aim at, who sat with king James from the first to the last. I move for a Committee to inspect who those were, and then you will see whom to except. Mr. Hawles. I wish you had gone on in order of time. This is the last, though first read. I think the Judges, and that Attorney and Solicitor (I know not who they were) I think they ought to be under one head, and sir Edward Hales another. Sir Tho. Lee. I have sometimes sat here when mis-carriages have been spoken of, and have heard an ingenious gentleman say, 'Take them not as a whole faggot, but stick by stick, and you may break them.' Take them man by man, and you may come to your end. Mr. Hawles. Let the committee enquire into the proceedings of lord chief justice Herbert, and justice Wythens, and you may know all. Mr. Howe. Before you take out a stick, lay all the faggot before you. Let us know all the It looks as if we were afraid; as if all were infected. All know that Herbert was the first, Wythens the second, Holloway the third, and Wright the fourth. Having said this, pray take my memory as you will take other gentlemens. As for the Common Pleas, (I think Benefield is dead) Streete spoke against it, for his reputation, the only man-(Milton and Alibone are dead)-lord chief baron Montagu left his place upon it; barons Atkins and Jenner were for it: I speak only on my memory. Certainly, when that accursed Judgment was given, those who concurred with the rest are most to blame. Herbert spoke his own judgment, prompted by the rest. No man can alter his judgment without design. A man that had this bias, and found the rest of the Judges inclined, was confirmed in his opinion. I take them to be equally culpable. Herbert is abroad, and not here to excuse himself. The rest are dead, and have answered it in another place. Mr. Hampden. Let a committee be appointed to enquire into those concerned, in every head, and then report it, and you may be then ready to go on with the names of the persons. My chief reason is, I would not have you go upon persons without good proof; not upon general fame; else, instead of doing jus tice in parliament, you will expose their repu tation. "Sir Edward Hales, a gentleman of a noble family in Kent, declared himself a papist, though he had long disguised it. He had an employment, and not taking the Test, his coachman was set up to inform against him, and to claim the 5007, that the law gave to the informer. When this was to be brought to Sir Joseph Tredenham. This enquiry imtrial, the Judges were secretly asked their opi-plies, that the person so excepted out of the nions; and such as were not clear to judge as the court did direct, were turned out; and, upon two or three canvassings, the half of them were dismissed, and others, of more pliable and obedient understandings, were put in their places. Some of these were weak and ignorant to a scandal. The suit went on in a fecble prosecution, and in Trinity term Judgment was given," Burnet, Indemnity shall not have the mercy of this house, nor of the whole kingdom. Every gentleman, before he gives his resolution, will satisfy himself in the matter of fact; and any man is capable of seeing the Record. As to sir Edw. Hales's case of Dispensation, books have been published, and I shall say the less of that; most gentlemen, I presume, being satisfied. Herbert has written his own Justifica tion, and it has with me some weight. As to Sir Tho. Lee. I would understand what it is you are about: whether an Act of Indemnity, or pains and penalties? I conceive you are not going by impeachments, and I suppose you are not setting up an enquiry, who was of this opinion, or who that; if so you must go all England over. No man can miss the name of a man, if he please, they have been so notorious. These Heads lead you to every man you will except, and these are obvious. Mr. Brewer. Whoever the judges were, they are great criminals; but I would have the offence certain. I dare say, no Judgment was ever given in the Declaration, but you may know who were judges in the King'sBench then. Mr. Howe. I suppose it is not designed that you should except all those names, and we do it at committees. We have begun this Head, though one of the last of Grievances: but I would have them distinguished from mankind. I would know those who broke the hedges, and let in the cattle; and then see who you will except, and who you will forget. Sir Robt. Cotton, of Cambridgeshire. I am against a committee: I think it will alarm the whole nation. I think the former Indemnity did quiet the nation, and I hope this will. I think there needs no committee to inform you who the judges were, who the lord-lieutenants, and who concerned in corporations; persons so notorious, and so well known, that the whole nation can distinguish them; therefore I am against a committee. or no, to enquire into persons; but you must have a committee to enquire into the courts of justice; and I move, that you will go upon Names; and I think it will be for the content of the people, and not to alarm' them. Mr. Hawles. I know not the custom heretofore, in bills of this nature; but I see no inconvenience in a committee. The officers of the court may give the same information to a committee as to the house. It is the shorter way to examine it before a committee, only to enquire into Officers and Judges. It may tend to expedite the matter. Mr. Ettrick. I desire an end of this as much as any man. The Judges are going the circuits and the jails are full: your Act may come too late into the country. To enquire into the Advisers and Assisters will take up a great deal of time. Those who were notoriously exemplary I would put a mark upon; and let the others go off without any mark, and clear. Mr. Sucheverell. I have not known, but if gentlemen are willing to relinquish a question never put, but that it has been laid aside; and pray put no difficulty upon the house. The Speaker. I moved it; and gentlemen said, No, no.' 6 Col. Birch. If I knew the man, the mark you would shoot at, I could speak better. It is a plain question, Whether you will refer it to a Committee, or no?' If to a committee, then you are to give Instructions. Mr. Coningsby. This Bill of Indemnity has been called a walking ghost; and if you adjourn the debate, it will always be a shadow, and not regarded; therefore I am for going on. The question for a Committee passed in the negative. Sir Tho. Lee. I hope one day more will bring an end to your Resolutions in this matter of Names. Sir Edw. Hales has been named, and if I name a person with king James, I do nobody any harm. I name lord chief justice Herbert to be one excepted. Mr. Howe. I am against naming Herbert; it was his opinion, and he was guilty of no other fault; he has modestly retired and left our company. I would leave him out. Ordered, "That the Officers of the King'sBench bring in who were the Judges in sir Edward Hales's Case, &c." Debate on King James's Declaration.] June "There was a new chief justice found out, very different from Jeffreys, sir Edward HerSir Rob. Howard. I do not apprehend the bert. He was a well-bred and a virtuous man, danger of a Committee. I wonder at this doc- generous and good-natured. He was but an trine, that a committee should alarm the na- indifferent lawyer, and had gone to Ireland to tion.' Is it not an alarm to the nation to have find practice and preferment there. He una Dispensing Power, and Judgments against happily got into a set of very high notions, corporations? I wonder this should go so high with relation to the king's prerogative. His (as is said) toalarm the nation.' No such gravity and virtues gave him great advantages, offences were known before; such powers were chiefly his succeeding such a monster as had never known before: the very roots of parlia-gone before him. So he being found to be ment destroyed. I shall not be zealous in a fit tool, was raised up all at once to this imcontending, whether you will have a committee, portant post," Burnet. 13. The house was informed that sir Adam Blair, captain Vaughan, captain Moyle, Dr. Elliott, Dr. Grey, and several others, had dispersed a seditious and treasonable Paper, printed, and entitled A Declaration of king James the 2nd. Mr. Hampden. Before you read the Declaration, I would not have it pass for doctrine, that there is no treason but what is declared by 25 Edw. 3. If you take not that for granted, we shall never be safe, nor any government, if you cannot declare treason. There are other ways of destroying the government than by raising armies. But it would be strange if you should not call that treason which is tautamount to treason. Read the Declaration, but let not that pass for doctrine. Col. Birch. I did expect this, and ten times more, when a Bill from the lords lies by us about Treason. I desire one of those Declarations may be read, found upon the persons taken. Sir Robert Clayton. I found my lord mayor at his house, examining those persons; and the people that took them took these Declarations upon them. The Declaration was then read, as follows: "JAMES R. Although the many calumnies and dismal stories, by which our enemies have endeavoured to render us and our government odious to the world, do now appear to have been advanced by them, not only without any ground, but against their own certain knowledge; as is evident by their not daring to attempt the proving these Charges to the world, which we cannot but hope hath opened the eyes of our good subjects to see how they have been imposed upon by designing men; who, to promote their own ambitious ends, care not what slavery they reduce our kingdoms to yet we cannot but rejoice that we have had an opportunity to demonstrate the falseness and malice of their pretences, since our arrival in this kingdom of Ireland, by making it our chief concern to satisfy the minds of our Protestant subjects, the defence of their religion, privileges and properties, is equally our care, with the recovery of our rights. To this end, we have preferred such of them, of whose loyalty and affection we are satisfied, to places both of the highest honour and trust about our person, as well as in our army. We have, by granting our royal protection to such whose minds are shaken by the arts of our rebellious subjects, dispelled their apprehensions, and effectually secured them against the attempts of their private enemies. Our ear hath been always open to their just complaints; and so far hath our royal mercy been extended to those who were in arms against us, that we have actually pardoned several hundreds of them; and most notorious criminals are kept in an easy confinement, as they themselves acknowledge. We have taken care that our subjects of the Church of England be not disturbed in the exercise of their religion, the possession of their benefices and other properties; and all Protestant Dissenters enjoy the liberty of their consciences, without any molestation: and out of our royal care for the prosperity of our people, we have recommended to our parliament, as the first thing necessary to be dispatched, to settle such a security and liberty, both in spiritual and temporal matters, as may put an end to these divisions, which have been the source of all our miseries; being resolved, as much as in us lies, to entail liberty and happiness upon our people, so far as to put it out of the power of our successors to invade the one, or infringe the other. And this, we take God to witness, was always our design; of which we see our good subjects here are inore and more convinced, by the great numbers of those who, having been seduced or frightened by the restless importunities of our enemies, are returned to their country and habitations, and who assure us daily, more would follow, if the ports were open: but the usurpers know too well the sincerity of our intentions, to permit a free passage of our said subjects, fearing nothing more than that their experience should undeceive the rest, who are restrained more through ignorance than any ill intention; and therefore deny them that liberty which we afford to all, whose designs, we are satisfied, tend not to the disturbance of the peace.-By this our gracious and royal care of our Protestant subjects here (where the greatest part of our nation is Catholic) and have, as well as we received the highest provocation.from their fellow-subjects of contrary persuasions; so that nothing but our own inclination to justice, and desire to sec our people flourish, could move us to such a proceeding; we hope our subjects in England will make a judgment of what they expected from us: and we do hereby promise and declare, That nothing shall ever alter our resolutions, to pursue such and no other methods, as by our said subjects in parliament should be found proper for our common security, peace and happiness. And that none may be debarred of assisting us in recovering our rights, and redeeming our people from their present slavery, out of any apprehension from past miscarriages, we do hereby assure all our subjects, of what quality soever, let their crimes against us be never so great, that, if, in twenty days after our appearing in person in our kingdom of England, they return to their obedience, by deserting our enemies, and joining with us, we will grant them our full pardon, and all past miscarriages shall be forgot; so little do we delight in the blood or ruin of our people. But if after this our gracious condescension, they shall still continue to assist our enemies and rebels, we do, before God, charge all the blood which shall be afterwards shed, upon them and their adherents. And, we doubt not, by the blessing of God upon our arms, to force the most obstinate to their duty; though, as we have made appear in reducing our rebellious subjects in this kingdom, we desire to use no other methods than lenity and mercy.-Given at our Court in |