The Levelers Leveled, Text

The Levelers Leveled · Text

THE LEVELLERS Levelled to the very GROUND. WHEREIN This dangerous Seditious Opinion and deſign of ſome of them; That it is neceſſary, decent, and expedient, now to reduce the Houſe of Peeres, and bring down the Lords into the Commons Houſe, to ſit and Vote together with them, as one Houſe. And the falſe abſurd, grounds whereon they build this Paradox, are briefly examined, refuted, and laid in the duſt.

By William Prynne, Eſquire.

PROV. 19. 10.

Delight is not ſeemly for a Foole; much leſſe for a Servant to rule over Princes.

ECCLES. 10. 5, 7.

There is an evill I have ſeen under the Sun, as an errour which proceedeth from the Ruler; I have ſeene Servants upon Horſes, and Princes walking as Servants upon the earth.

LONDON: Printed by T. B. for Michael Spark. 1647.

p. 1THE LEVELLERS LEVELLED.

IT was the Apoſtle Pauls Doctrine; and that he likewiſe gave in ſpeciall charge to Titus c. 3. 1. Put them in minde to be ſubject to principalities and Powers, to obey Magiſtrates, to bee ready to every good work: But this Doctrine now is little leſſe then Hereſie, and meere Arbitrary Tyranny, in the opinion of a New Generation of Levellers, and ſeditious Sectaries, ſprung up among us ſince the Warres; the very perſons of whom Peter prophecyed in the latter times;aa2 Pet. 2. 11.2 Pet 2:11 Who deſpiſe Dominion; preſumptuous, ſelfe-willed, they are not afraid to ſpeake evill of Dignities, and the things that they underſtand not, and ſhall periſh in their owne corruption. How active and induſtrious theſe Fire-brands of Sedition have been by writing and petitioning to extirpate Monarchy and Magiſtracy, Nobility and Gentry; and how they move every ſtone to pull downe the Houſe of Peeres, and levell the Lords to the Commoners, by bringing them downe into the Commons-Houſe to ſit and vote together with them as one, or elſe not to ſit or vote at all, is viſible to moſt; and how many thouſands of ignorant ſimple people they have ingaged to confederate with them in this pernicious deſigne, hath been already diſcovered in part to the Houſes; the falſe ſuggeſtions and dangerous conſequencies whereupon it is grounded, I ſhall ſuccinctly diſcover, to undeceive the ſeduced p. 2people, and take them off from ſuch a deſperate attempt, which will prove deſtructive both to the Parliament, and themſelves too in concluſion.

Theſe Lilburniſts and Levellers pretend, that it is not fit the Lords ſhould fit and vote in a diſtinct Houſe by themſelves, as they have done of latter times, but that they and the Commons ſhould now ſit all together in one Houſe, (to wit, the Houſe of Commons, thebbLilburns and Overtons Petitions, and late Letters. The agreement of the people. The remonſtrance of many 1000 to their owne Houſe of Comons, and others. ONELYONLY SOVERAIGNE POWER OF THIS KINGDOME, as they ſtile it) as they did of**Methinkes theſe New Lights ſhould not cry up and and revive old Preſidents & Patterns, no more then old clothes, faſhions or Ceremonies. old at firſt, and be new moulded into a ſingle Houſe; that ſo Bills, Ordinances, Votes, and buſineſſes of Parliament might paſſe with more expedition upon one Debate and Vote, and not ſtay the Debates and Votes of two diſtinct Houſes ere they be conſummate. And becauſe the Lords are but few in number, the ſonnes of Conqueſt, not of election, repreſenting onelyonly themſelvs, but not the Commons of England, repreſented onelyonly by the Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes choſen and intruſted by them; therefore it is juſt and reaſonable the Lords ſhould be levelled and brought down to the Commons Houſe to ſit and Vote with them; and not enjoy any diſtinct or negative Votes among themſelves, as now they doe.

To anſwer theſe pretences, I ſhall not inſiſt upon the ccSee Mr. Seldens Tit▪ of Hon. par. 2. c 5 Spelm. Concil. Tom. 1. Mr. Lamb. Archa. Modus tenendi Parliamen orum, Truth triumphing over falſh…od, p. 56. to 76. Cooks 9. Report, The Preface, & 4. Inſt c. 1.Lords ancient and undoubted Right to ſit and Vote in Parliaments long before the Conqueſt, from the firſt beginning of Parliaments to this preſent: Nor on their activity and readineſſe in all ages, to oppoſe with the loſſe and hazzard of their eſtates, heads, lives, the encroachments of our Kings upon the Subjects Liberties, and vindicate the peoples freedomes, in the ddSee Mat. Pa. Mat. Weſtm. Walſingham, H…linſhed, Speed, Graf. on Truſſel, Daniel & The. 1▪ 2. 3. Par. of the Soveraign power of Parliaments.Reigns of King John, Henry the 3. Edward 2. Richard 2. and other oppreſſive Princes, againſt whoſe invaſions of the Kingdomes Lawes and Rights they have ever beene the principall Bulwarkes; and of late the chiefe procurers of this preſent Parliament, and undertakers of our defenſive warre againſt the King, wherein the Earle of Eſſex, Lord Brook, Lord Willoughby, and others of them firſt appeared; Nor yet to debate their ancient and undoubted power and right of Judicature in civill and criminall caſes of Commoners as well as Peers, in all times and Ages ſince there were Parliaments, of which there are infinite preſidents in Hiſtories, Parliament Rols and Journalls, and ſundry diſclaimers of the whole Houſe of Commons of being Judges in Parliament, as in 1. R. 2. Rot. Parl. p. 3n. 38, 39, 40. 1 H. 7. Rot. Parl. n. 79. and Plac. Coronae. nu. 11. to 17. and other Rolls: I ſhall wholly addreſſe my ſelfe to anſwer ſuch Allegations as are moſt pertinent, touching the point of reducing both Houſes into one, in ſuch manner as is projected.

Firſt then I anſwer, what though it be probable by Modus tenendi Parliamentum, that the King, Lords and Commons anciently ſat in one roome, and went in at one common doore in King Edwards the Confeſſors time; yet it follows not, they all ſat and voted together, as one intire houſe: no more then it follows; all the Judges and Officers of the Kings Courts of Chancery, Kings Bench and Common Pleas ſit in one common Room, and go in at one doore, at Weſtminſter Hall: therefore they all ſit, judge and heare cauſes together, and are or ought to be reduced to one Court; and do not judge, and heare cauſes ſeverally, nor ought to do it: there being no one Author or record of credit extant, which proves directly, that the Lords and Commons did ever ſit, vote, or act together as one intire houſe, and paſſe Billes, Judgements, Ordinances, Orders, by one undivided and united Vote; the thing which ſhould be proved.

Secondly, when, by whom, and upon what occaſion the Houſes firſt came to be divided, is altogether uncertain, for ought appeares by hiſtory or records.ee4. Inſtit. p. 2. &. …n. Sir Edward Cook conceives, that both houſes ſat together in 5. & 6. Ed. 3. and that about that ime, or a little after, they were firſt divided, when the Commons firſt choſe a Speaker. But the Records of theſe Parliaments do not neceſſarily warrant his conjecture herein; ſince they ſpeak only of the meeting together of the three Eſtates in Parliament, (as now they oft times do, on the firſt and laſt day of the Parliament, at conferences, paſſing Bills, and upon other occaſions) not of their ſitting and voting together. For my part, I conceive the diviſion of the Houſes farre more ancient, for this reaſon, becauſe our hiſtorians writing of our ancienteſt Parliaments, as well before as after the Conqueſt, do many times make mention only of ourffSee Spelman Concil. T…m. 1. Seldens titles of honour. par… 2 c. 5. Kings, Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Earles and Barons preſent in them, not of any Elders of the people, Senators, Knights or Commons to repreſent the people, (which at other times they ſpeak of) as preſent in our Parliaments,Truth triumphing over falſhood. p. 56. &c. and Councells: occaſioned only as I conceive, by the diſtinction of their ſitting places and debates. unleſſe it be p. 4granted, that many of our ancient Parliaments were held without Commons, Knights, and Burgeſſes, (as ſome affirm) but never without Peers & Lords; which would much invalid the Commons authority, and that ſupream juriſdiction of theirs which the Levellers now plead for. But admit they ſat together in one roome in Edward the third his reigne, yet it is cleart o me, their debates, votes, judgement, were long before diſtinct as now they are, by that memorable paſſage in Stephanides (tranſcribed out of him byggTitles of Honour, part 2. Chap. 5. p. 705. 706 Maſter Selden; concerning the jugdment given in Parliament at Northampton againſt Thomas Becket Archbiſhop of Canterbury, in the eleventh yeare of King Henry the ſecond, Anno Domini 1165. Where the Biſhops, Earles, and all the Barons of England, reſolving upon the Kings motion there, that Becket refuſing to appeare in Parliament, upon ſummons to anſwer the complaint againſt him, being neither hindered by ſickneſſe, nor ſending any reaſonable excuſe for his not appearing, ſhould forſeit all his moveable goods, and be at the Kings mercy: thereupon there aroſe a difference between the Biſhops, and Barons, which of them ſhould pronounce the judgement: the Barons alleadged, that the Biſhops ought to pronounce it, becauſe he was a Biſhop, and they but Laymen; the Biſhops Eccleſiaſticall perſons, and his fellow Priests, and Biſhops. To which one of the Biſhops anſwered; it belonged to the Barons and not to them, becauſe it was no Eccleſiaſticall but Secular judgement; that they ſat there as **See Petrus Bleſenſis.▪ De Inſt…t Epiſcopi B…bl. Patrum Tom. 12. pors 2. p. 447.Barons, not as Biſhops: you are Barons, and we are Barons: here we are Peeres. But you inſiſt in vain upon the reaſon of our Order: for if you regard in us our Ordination, you ought likewiſe to conſider the ſame in him: Now in this that we are Biſhops, we cannot judge our Archbiſhop and Lord. The King hearing this controverſie about pronouncing the judgement, was moved, & thereupon this controverſie ceaſed: and the Biſhop of Winchester, (then Henry de Bloys) being at laſt enjoyned to give the judgement, pronounced it againſt his will. There being no mention, ſpeech, or inter locution of the Commons in this whole Parliamentary debate or cenſure, but onelyonly of the King, Biſhops and Barons; it makes it more then probable to me, that even then the Houſes were divided; at leaſt, that they ſat and voted not together but diſtinctly: and if the Commons were preſent, yet it is moſt cleare, the Barons only were the Judges, and gave and pronounced the ſentence in Parliament, even without the Commons. Of which more in ſome other Treatiſe.

p. 5Thirdly; admit, the diviſion of the Houſes no ancienter then King Edw. the third, yet their diviſion being made at firſt upon good grounds, to prevent confuſion and delayes, and to paſſe things with more mature adviſe and deliberation upon double debates, and ſecond cogitations, and continued conſtantly ever ſince upon good grounds, without any alteration oroppoſition. And this diviſion of them being ratified and approved by the Law and cuſtome of Parliament, The Parl. Rolls, and Journalls, yea confirmed by ſundry**And the Act for Trienniall Parliament, made this Parliament. Acts of Parliament, and among others by 31. H. 8. c. 10. 33. H. 8. c. 21. 3. Jac. c. 1. it can be no way juſt, nor ſafe, nor convenient, nor honourable, to confound them both together now, in the manner propounded, yea a cleare diſſolving of the Parliament being contrary to the Act for its continuance, & a breach of the ſolemn League, Covenant, and all engagements, to obey and defend BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT; and a great diſhonour to to the Lords, who cannot without apparent perjury and ignominy ſubmit thereto: without whoſe full and free conſents, and the Kings too by ſpeciall act of Parliament, it is no wayes feaſible, if by it,

Fourthly, it will introduce a world of contradictions, confuſions, abſurdities, and inconveniences, as theſe particulars evidēce. Firſt, both theſe houſes, as they are now divided, have, (and alwayes ſince their diviſions have had) their ſeverall diſtinct Speakers, and one chief cauſe of the diviſion (ashhInſtit. 4. p▪ 2. Sir Edward Cook conceives) was the Commons chuſing of a continuall Speaker. If then you will unite both Houſes into one; you muſt have either theſe two Speakers in that one houſe (which would breed confuſion and diſturbance, and be like two heads upon one mans neck;) Or but one, both for Lords & Cōmons, who then cannot debate nor Vote diſtinctly, but joyntly with the Commons. If but one, then which of the two ſhall be the man? Not the Commons Speaker, becauſe they had no Speaker at all before the Houſes were divided, & ſo can claim none when reunited. And the Lords Speaker being of greateſt antiquity, Dignity, and Superiour to the Cōmons in place and degree, ought of right to be preferred, and enjoy the Speakers place upon the reducement. And how a Peere; who is not**Cook 4. In…ſtit. p. 8. 46. 47 elected either a Member or Speaker by the Commons, can by the Law of the Land, or cuſtome of Parliament be Speaker of, p. 6and for the Commons, as their mouth and repreſentative; or a meere Commoner, a Speaker to the Lords to repreſent them, tranſcends my Law and skill; and wil require 7 yeares time to ſettle and reſolve. Secondly, if the Houſes be united, then how and where ſhall the Lords, and their aſſiſtants ſit, and how and where the Cōmons? If all promiſcuouſly, this would unlord, unpeere them, and make the meaneſt Commoner their equall: If diſtinct, then why not in diſtinct Houſes ſtill, as well as Claſſes and Seats? Or ſhall the Lords ſit covered and the Commons ſit bare, as now they doat meetings and conferences of both Houſes? This would be but ill Phyſick for the Commons this winter ſeaſon, and too great a penance to ſuch of them who have crazy heads, and weak legges, to ſtand bare ſo long, and ſome of their ſpirits (eſpecially thoſe who are the Levellers beſt friends) I doubt are ſo high, they would hardly brook ſuch a pennance and daily obſervance. Thirdly, If the Houſes be reduced into one, then theiriiCook 4. Inſtit. p. 34. 35. manner of voting and dividing being diſtinct and different, as all know: the one by a generall Ay, and No; the other by a particular Content and not content, beginning at the puny Lord: the one determined by dividing the Houſe, to take the Poll; the other without dividing: the one having no power to enter a Proteſtation of diſſent, the other enjoying it: the one power to vote by Proxy, the other onelyonly in perſon without proxy: then whether ſhall both retain theſe their differences ſtill in voting, which will bring abſolute confuſion, and much delay: or elſe the Lords vote as the Commons do, or the Commons as the Lords? If the Lords only as Cōmoners, that were a diſparagement and diſadvantage to them, and a meanes to deprive them of their priviledges and votes as Peers, the Commons now having above twenty to one for number. If the Cōmons ſhall vote as Lords, that would make them Peers; and make each Vote if given particularly by the poll, & the entring of proteſtations, ſp…nd above half their time. Fourthly, if both houſes ſhould be mingled together, then the Lords alone muſt be judges, and give Oathes and judgement as now they do, in writs of Error and other cauſes, with which the Commons are not to intermddle; or the Lords and Commons joyntly. If the Lords alone, then why ſhould both Houſes be united, or they the p. 9onelyonly Judges in the Commons Houſe, or preſence, which their greatneſſe doubtleſſe would not well digeſt? If Lords and Commons joyntly, this would ſubvert and alter the ancient proceedings and judgements of Parliament, and give the Commons a new power of Judicature and giving Oathes, and reverſing errours, they never claimed nor enjoyed.

Fifthly, if the Houſes be thus confounded, then what will become of their diſtinct Servants, Officers, Clerkes, Doorekeepers, &c? Shall both continue? that were a ſuperfluity and needleſſe charge: Shall one of them be diſcharged? then whether the Lords on Commons? and whether the black Rod will not be quite caſheered with the Lords houſe? will be a greate queſtion, and require much time to reſolve. Sixtly, if both Houſes be new-modelled into one, then what will become of all the Aſſiſtants of the Lords houſe? they certainly muſt be caſhiered, eſpecially ſuch who are onelyonly employed as Meſſengers to the Commons Houſe, of which there will be no uſe at all when they ſit together. Eighthly, what will become of the forme of endorſing all Bils ſent from the Commons to the Lords: Soit bayle al Seignieurs: les Seigneurs ont aſſentus: and the old forme of reading Bils thrice in both Houſes ere they can paſſe them; and ſo of our Acts of Parliament? In reſpect therefore of all theſe ſeverall contradictions and inconveniencies which can hardly be reconciled, and no wayes altered, but by ſpeciall Act of Parliament (if by it) without diſſolving the preſent Parliament, to pleaſe a company of ſeditious ignorant Lovellers and Sehiſmaticks, who never pondered all theſe particulars; it can neither be convenient nor ſafe to confound both Houſes together into one, as is endeavoured and deſired.

Fiftly, the Act of 16. Caroli Regis, entituled▪ An Act for the preventing of incōveniences, happening by the long intermiſſions of Parliaments; (made with abundance of care and pains this Parliament, before the King's departure) diſtingueſheth the houſe of Commons from the houſe of Lords; preſcribes an oath in haec verba, to the Lord Chancell our, Lord Keeper, and Commiſſioners of the great Seal of England, You ſhall ſwear, that you ſhall truly and faithfully iſſue out, and ſend abroad all Writs p. 10of Summons to Parliament FOR BOTH HOUSES. And in default thereof, enacts, That THE PEERS of this Realm ſhall be enabled and ENJOYNED to meet in the old Pallace of Weſtminſter, AT THE ƲSƲALL PLACE THERE, on the third Monday on November: and that they, or any twelve or more of them THEN AND THERE ASSEMBLED ſhall iſſue out Writs in uſuall form, under the hands and ſeals of twelve or more of them, to the reſpective Sheriffs, and other Officers, for the electing of Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes of Parliament. That on the third Monday in January, and ſecond Tueſday in March, ALL AND EVERY THE PEERS OF THE REALM ſhall make their appearance and aſſembly at THE PALLACE aforeſaid; and ſhall EACH OF THEM be liable unto ſuch pains and cenſures for his and their NOT APPEARING AND SERVING then and THERE in Parliament, as if be or they had been ſummoned by Writ under the great Seal of England, and had not appeared and ſerved, and to ſuch further pains and cenſures as BY THE REST OF THE PEERS in Parliament aſſembled THEY SHALL BE JUDGED UNTO: And that the Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes aſſembled IN THE COMMONS HOUSE of Parliament, ſhall be liable to ſuch pains and cenſures as he or they ſhall be adjudged unto.

After w^ch it enacts, That neither the HOUSE OF PEERS nor THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ſhall be adjourned within fifty dayes at leaſt, after the meeting thereof, unleſſe it be by the free conſent OF EVERY THE SAID HOUSES RESPECTIVELY: And that the PEERS aſſembled in Parliament, may FROM TIME TO TIME chooſe and declare ſuch perſon TO BE SPEAKER FOR THE SAID PEERS as they ſhall think fit: And that the ſaid Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes, ſhall and may FROM TIME TO TIME DURING THEIR ASSEMBLY IN PARLIAMENT, chooſe and declare one of themſelves to be SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, as they ſhall think fit: VVhichWhich ſaid SPEAKERS, as well for the ſaid PEERS as HOUSE OF COMMONS RESPECTIVELY, ſhall be p. 11perfect and conpleat Speakers FOR THE SAID HOVSES RESPECTIVELY, and ſhall have as full and large power, juriſdiction and priviledges, to all intents and purpoſes, as any SPEAKER OR SPEAKERS OF EITHER OF THE SAID HOUSES RESPECTIVELY heretofore have had and enjoyed. Therefore the levelling and reducing of both Houſes into one, or aboliſhing the Lords Houſe and Peerage, will utterly null and repeal this Act, (the beſt that was ever yet made for the Kingdomes ſafety, and Parliaments advantage) and deprive both Parliament, Kingdome and people of all future benefit by it, (which I wiſh our Levellers and Lilburniſts ſeriouſly to conſider) and likewiſe null and repeal the Act to prevent Inconveniences which may happen by the untimely adjourning, proroguing or diſſolving of this preſent Parliam. An. 17. Car. which enacts, That THE HOUSE OF PEERS ſhal not at any time or times be adjourned during the preſent Parliament, unleſſe it be BY THEMSELVES OR THEIR OWN ORDER: And in like manner, that THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ſhall not at any time or times during this Parliament, be adjourned, unleſſe it be BY THEMSELVES, OR BY THEIR OWN ORDER. Which I hope both Houſes, as they deſire their own continuance, and being of the Parliament, will well adviſe of; and all thoſe whom Lilburn or his Emiſſaries have ſeduced to engage againſt the Houſe of Lords, or levell them to the Commons.

Sixthly, admit the Houſes might without any inevitable miſchiefes and contradictions, be modeled, and united into one, yet to bring downe the Lords into the Commons Houſe, to ſit and Vote like Commons with them, is no wayes tollerable, or to be thought on but with indignation, for theſe reaſons. Firſt, becauſe the whole Commons Houſe it ſelfe▪ when they preſent their Speaker to the King and Lords (which will be aboliſhed by this union) or when any Bills are to be paſſed by the Royall Aſſent, upon thekkCook 4▪ Inſt. p. 28. 33 H. 8. c. 21. 3 Jac. c. 1.Jas 1 beginning and ending of every Parliament, and upon ſome other ſpeciall occaſions have alwayes uſed to goe up and wait upon the Houſe of Lords in perſon, yea to ſtand bare at their Barre, and to ſend their Members in perſon**See 5. R. 2. n. 16. up to the Lords upon any Meſſage, Cōference, or other occaſion; but never did the whole Houſe of p. 10duplicate page p. 11duplicate page p. 12Peeres in any age come downe in perſon to the Commons Houſe, or any Peeres of late bring Meſſages to them, but onelyonly ſend them by ſome Aſſiſtants, as Judges, Maſters of Chancery, &c. Therefore now to talk of bringing down the Houſe of Peeres to ſit with the Commons in their Houſe, (all one, as to reduce a Noble mans Dining-roome to his Hall or Kitchin, and levell the roofe and upper roomes of a houſe with the lowermoſt floore) is ſuch a diſhonour and affront to the Lords, that none but degenerate and ignoble ſpirits can ſo much as heare or think of it with patience, nor no Peere reſent it but with juſt ſcorne and contempt, and rather dye then conſent unto it, without whoſe conſents it cannot be done without both Houſes ruine: And to bring up the Houſe of Commons to ſit and Vote joyntly with the Peeres, would be to advance the Cōmons▪ above their degree, not level the Lords; to make ſome men Lords before they are Gentlemen, & every Commoner no leſſe then a Lord, which would too much puffe and bladder them with pride, and make them ſlight thoſe whom they repreſent▪ who being but Commoners, cannot be repreſented by Peeres, or any ſitting and Voting in the Houſe of Peeres, by the true fundamental Law and Cuſtome of Parliaments, as SirllInſtit. 4. p. 8, 46, 47. Edward Cooke reſolves. Secondly, if the Lords ſhould bee brought downe into the Commons Houſe, (which is much like the reducing of the head and ſhoulders of the naturall body, into the belly or legges, which would make a Monſter and deſtroy the man) there would be no roome for them, their Officers and Aſſiſtants, unleſſe enlarged and metamorphoſed into another forme. Thirdly, If the Lords muſt bee brought downe into the Commons Houſe, then the**See Cook▪ 4. Inſt. p. 14, 15. King and Prince as well as they, or elſe they muſt be totally excluded the Parliament, or ſit alone by themſelves in the Houſe of Lords, without any Lords to attend them▪ An indignity which no King or Prince can brooke, and no modeſt Commoner ſeriouſly thinke of but with deteſtation; nor Lord, nor King conſent to, but by force and violence; and without their voluntary conſents it will not be valid, but deſtructive.

Seventhly, The falſe pretext for it, of expediting Bills, Ordinances, and Votes, is an abſurd and ignorant fancie of overhaſty p. 13ſpirits, who would act all things in a hurry without good deliberation: For firſt, nothing ought to bee done in Parliament but upon full and mature debate and deliberation of all the circumſtances and probable conſequences of it in future time (a thing now ſeldome conſidered:) Diu deliberandum quod ſemel ſtatuendum, &, Feſtina lente, are ſafe rules in Parliament, eſpecially in paſſing publike Acts and Ordinances, in making Warre or Peace, or any Nationall Leagues and Agreements. Secondly, Haſty Dogges bring forth blinde Whelpes: and haſty Votes, over ſudden Councels and Motions, lame, blinde, contradictory, unjuſt, and inconſiderate Orders, Ordinances, Acts, which muſt either be corrected, ſupplyed, or repealed by Additionals, of which we have had too many experiments ſince this Parliament; which in many Votes, Ordinances, Orders, and Impeachments hath made more haſte then good ſpeed; and Voted ſometimes both abſurdities and impoſſibilities (witneſſe the Commons Votes, for the Tryall of Mac-Guire and Mac-Mohun in the Kings-Bench, the very firſt day of the Terme, before any Indictment drawne, found, or any Jury ſummoned to finde it; for the Tryall of Judge Jenkins in the Kings-Bench, by a ſhort day, for Treaſon aleaged to be committed in Wales, before any Indictment found in the Country, or removed into Court, and the like;) which I only mention to ſatisfie and anſwer the Objectors, nor to defame the Houſe or Houſes, whoſe Honours and Reputations have beene much blemiſhed, through the inconſiderate raſhneſſe of ſome ignorant Members, who poaſted on ſuch Votes and Impeachments. Thirdly, this dividng the Houſes will breed infinite diſorder and confuſion,**4. Inſtit. q. 2. not expedition, in their proceedings, as the premiſes manifeſt, and deſtroy their very formes and method; upon which ground Sir**Witneſſe Dr Levtons, Dr. Baſtwicks, Mr Burtons, my own, Mr. Walkers, Mr. Foxleys, the Cheſterwars and many others, about Shipmoney, and other grievances. Edward Cooke writes they were firſt divided. Fourthly, it will be a great retarding and obſtruction to publike Juſtice, eſpecially in Writs of Errour, and all ſuch things which the Lords may diſpatch or judge without the Commons Houſe; where many hundreds of Petitions and buſineſſes heard and Voted above ſeven yeeres ſince, doe yet ſtick without report, or tranſmiſſion to the Lords (to the great diſhonour and ſcandall of their proceedings and ſpeedy juſtice) which had p. 14been diſpatched and ended many years paſt, had they firſt petitioned to the Lords for redreſſe. So as the Lords Houſe is clearly no cauſe of delay, but the Commons rather, through their long debates or want of method, which debates would bee increaſed and lengthned by adding of the Lords unto them, who can now debate and determine things apart, and reſolve two or three things, or more, whiles the Commons are debating one: And therefore, if delay be the onelyonly cauſe of reducing the Lords Houſe to the Commons, the Commons certainly are rather to be reduced then the Lords, and may bee better ſpared of the two (even bykkHis letter to a friend, his letters to Henry Martyn and Cromwel, Innocency and Truth juſtified, Englands Birth-right, the late Petition of many free-born people of England. Lilburnes and his Confederates Libells and Petitions) their delayes being not a quarter to one ſo many, nor one quarter ſo long as the Commons, as themſelves muſt and do acknowledge. Eightly, this whole deſign is a direct breach of the ſolemn League and Covenant, a ſubverſion of the Law and Cuſtome of Parliaments, a device to deſtroy both Houſes, under pretext of reducing them into one; an engine to diſſolve this preſent, and all future Parliaments; to alter the fundamentall Lawes and Government of this Kingdom, to unking the King, unprince the Prince, unlord the Lords, and quite deſtroy their Houſe (almoſt effected by expulſions, and impeachments of moſt of their Members by degrees, who have ſcarce enough left to make up an houſe, which it is high time for them & the Commons to obſerve;) yea, a project to extirpate Monarchy and Nobility, and ſet up a popular Anarchy and Polarchy: And therfore who ever hath plotted and fomented it, is more guilty of high Treaſon then Strafford, Canterbury, or the Gun-powder Traitors, and deſerves a ſeverer puniſhment then they underwent, even by the hands of the Parliament it ſelf, and all that are wel-wiſhers to Parliaments or Kingdom, though no friends to Peers.

Ninthly, this diviſion of the Houſes is; Firſt, a great honour to the Parliament and Houſes, ſavouring of greater Majeſty, State, and Order, then their joyning into one, and giving every eſtate its**31 H. 8. …. 1…. du… place and ranke. Secondly, a great eaſe and benefit to the Subject, who may make his Addreſſes and Petitions to either at his election for reliefe. Thirdly, a great diſpatch and expedition to all publike affaires, one Houſe fitting p. 15and preparing them for the Debat, & concurrence of the other, at one and the ſame time, as Committees of each Houſe prepare and expedite buſineſſes for the whole Houſe. Fourthly, a means of more ſpeedy juſtice, by the Commons preparing of Articles and evidence for complaints and impeachments, preſented by them to the Lords, whiles they are diſpatching other buſineſſes; and their hearing Writs of Errour, and other cauſes, whiles the Commons are upon other debates; which they could not do in one houſe, but joyntly together, and ſucceſſively, not with ſo quick diſpatch, and ſuch good order as now. Fifthly, a thing very neceſſary and advantagious to the Kingdom and people, and ſafeſt for the Parliament, in that the Lords upon their ſecond debates and conferences with the Judges and others, many times amend and rectifie divers errours, imperfections, and miſtakes in the over-haſty Votes, yea & deliberate Orders, Ordinances, Bils and Declarations of the Commons, which the Commons acknowledge by their aſſents unto their amendments; and oft times the Commons ſtay ſome Votes, Orders, Bils, Ordinance, ſent down to them by the Lords; and their ſeveral amendments and diſlikes, with the conferences and debates occaſioned thereupon, and ſecond conſiderations of Buſineſſes, Votes, Ordinances, Orders, Bils, Declarations, and the like, make them more profitable, compleat and valid, and leſſe liable to exceptions and evaſions then elſe they would have been. In all which reſpects, this diviſion of the Houſes, and the Lords and Kings negative voyces rightly conſidered and uſed, are not onelyonly convenient, but expedient and abſolutely neceſſary for the publike good, whatever Lilburn and his ignorant Levellers fancy to the contrary.

I ſhall therefore cloſe up this with that wholeſome and ſeaſonable advice of Solomon, Prov. 24. 21, 22. My ſonne feare thou the Lord and the King, and meddle not with thoſe WHO ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE; For their calamity ſhall riſe ſuddenly, and who knoweth the ruine of them both?

There is onelyonly one Objection to be removed,Object. wherewith I ſhall arme the Levellers, that ſo I may leave nothing unanſwered, p. 16that may be hereafter inſiſted on. And that is, this paſſage in Modus tenendi Parliamentum, We muſt know, that for the granting of ſuch help and ayd (to the King) it hehooveth THAT ALL THE PEERS OF THE PARLIAMENT AGREE: And we muſt understand, that two Knights which come to the Parliament for the Shiers and Countries out of which they come, have a greater voyce in Parliament TO GRANT, then THE GREATEST EARL in England: And after the ſame manner the Procters for the Clergie, or Clerks of the Convocation-houſe for one Biſhoprick, have a greater voyce in Parliament, if they all agree, then the Biſhop himſelf: And this is true in all things which ought to be granted or denyed to the party, or are to be done therein. And this is manifeſt, BECAUSE THE KING MAY HOLD A PARLIAMENT WITH THE COMMOMALTY AND COMMONS OF THE KINGDOM WITHOUT BISHOPS, EARLS AND BARONS; yet ſo, as they be ſummoned to the Parliament, although no Biſhop, Earl or Baron come according to their ſummons: BECAUSE IN TIMES PAST, NEITHER WAS THERE BISHOP, EARL OR BARON; and yet EVEN THEN KINGS KEPT THEIR PARLIAMENT. But it is far otherwiſe on the other ſide; for though the Commonalty, to wit, Laity and Clergie were ſummoned to the Parliament (as of right they ought to be) yet for ſome certain cauſes they would not come; as if they did pretend, that the King did not govern them as he ought, and in ſpeciality point out the Articles in which he miſgoverned them, as he ought; TUNC PARLIAMENTUM NULLUM EST OMNINO; llSo the Latin, the Engliſh being nonſence, and miſtranſlated in many places.then there is no Parliament at all, though all the Archbibiſhops, Biſhops, Earls and Barons, and and all the Peers ſhould be preſent with the King: And therefore it behooveth that all things which ought to be affirmed or informed, granted or done by the Parliament, ſhould be granted by the Commonalty of the Parliament; which conſists of three degrees or kinds aſſembled in Parliament, to wit, of the Practors of the Clergie, the Knights of the Shires, the Citizens and Burgeſſes, who repreſent the whole Commonalty of England, and not of Noble men; becauſe every one of them is for his own proper perſon preſent at the Parliament, and for no other: Which Master mmHolinſhead Chron. of Irel. p. 127, 128.John Vowel in his Order and Ʋ ſage how to keep a Parliament; ſeconds in theſe words:

If the King in due order have ſummoned all his Lords and Barons, and they will not come; or if they come, they will not yet appear; or if they come and appear, and will not doe no… yeeld to any things THEN p. 17THE KING WITH THE CONSENT OF THE COMMONS MAY ORDAIN AND ESTABLISH ANY ACTS OR LAWS WHICH ARE AS GOOD, SƲFFICIENT AND EFFECTƲ ALL, AS IF THE LORDS HAD GIVEN THEIR CONSENTS. But on the contrary, if the Commons be ſummoned, and will not come; or comming will not appear, or appearing will not conſent to do any thing, alledging ſome juſt, weighty or great cauſe, the King in thoſe caſes cannot with the Lords deviſe, make or establiſh any Law. The reaſons are theſe; When Parliaments were firſt began and ordained, there were no Prelates or Barons of the Parliament, and the temporal Lords were very few or none, and then the**In what age was there ever ſuch a Parliament of King and Commons onelyonly? King and his Commons did make a full Parliament; which authority was NEVER YET ABRIDGED. Again, every Baron in Parliament doth repreſent his own perſon, and ſpeaketh in the behalf of himſelf alone; but in the Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes, are repreſented the Commons of the whole Realm; and every of theſe giveth conſent, not onelyonly for himſelf, but for all thoſe alſo for whom he is ſent: And the King with the conſent of the Commons, nnA groſſe miſtake without preſident to warrant it.HAD EVER A SƲFFICIENT AND FƲLL AƲTHORITY TO MAKE, ORDAIN AND ESTABLISH GOOD AND WHOLSOME LAWS FOR THE COMMON-WEALTH OF THE REALM: Wherefore the Lords being lawfully ſummoned, and yet refuſing to come, ſit or conſent in Parliament, CANNOT BY THEIR FOLLY ABRIDGE THE KING OR THE COMMONS OF THEIR LAWFƲLL PROCEEDINGS IN PARLIAMENT. So he.

From which two paſſages it may be probably inferred; firſt, that a Parliament may now be held, and Acts and Laws made by the King and Commons alone, without the Lords; but not by the King and Lords without the Commons; and ſo their ſitting in Parliament is not ſimply neceſſary, ſo as they may quite be taken away and reduced to the Commons houſe. Secondly, that they have no negative voice, but ought to aſſent to whatever the Commons ſhall vote to be good and neceſſary for the Commonwealth.

To which I anſwer;Anſwer. firſt, that the compiler of the firſt Treatiſe, is both unknown, & the time whē it was firſt compiled, not p. 18ſo ancient as is imagined by ſome hundreds of yeers: It is ſaid in the preface, it was firſt compoſed in Edward the Confeſſor's time, and ſhewed to William the Conquerour, & approved and uſed by him: but he that made this Preface to it (addes) That it was uſed IN THE TIMES OF HIS SƲCCESSORS KINGS OF ENGLAND, and therefore lived long after the Conquerours time) and ſo writes but at random, not of his own knowledge, there being no Hiſtory nor Record to warrant any ſuch thing: and by his Diſcourſe touching the Members places and ſitting in Parliament, manner of Marſhalling the Biſhops and others, and by other paſſages, it ſhould ſeem, a great part of this Treatiſe is but of late compoſure: As for its exemplification by King Henry the ſecond, and his ſending it into Ireland, and King Henry the ſecond, and his ſending it into Ireland, and King Henry the fourth his exemplification of it there, I find no warrant for it, but SirooInſtit. 4. p. 12. Edward Cooks aſſertion, and that grounded upon a bare report from another: theſe exemplifications (for ought I can learn) being neither of them extant, nor yet ſo much as once mentioned by Maſter Richard Bolton (a great Antiquary) in his Collection of the Statutes of Ireland: Beſides, the election of**See the Freeholders grand Inqueſt. p. 5, 10 16. two Knights to ſerve for every County, two Citizens for every City, and two Burgeſſes for every Burrough, and the Procurators of the Clergy, cannot be proved by any Hiſtory or Records extant, to be formally choſen by Writ, and ſent to the Parliament, in Edward the Confeſſors reign; nor that all thoſe aſſiſtants w^ch this Treatiſe mentions did then ſit or were preſent in Parliaments, in ſuch manner & form as is expreſſed in this Treatiſe: Yea, the very objected paſſage, & reaſon therin rendered, proves it ſelf to be of pun…er date then the Confeſſors or Conquerours dayes. Secondly, admit it as ancient as the Confeſſor or Conquerour, then it is apparent, that even in thoſe times the Houſes either ſate not, at leaſt voted not both together, as is pretended: For firſt, this Treatiſe distinguiſheth the Biſhops, Earls and Barons, as distinct ranks and degrees of Parliament, both from Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes, throughout the Treatiſe: Secondly, it diſtinguiſheth them in the times and dayes of their calling in the beginning of the Parliament, and in their fines for not appearing: Thirdly, in the charge the King gives to them: Fourthly, in the places and manner of their ſitting, all the p. 19ſeverall orders of Peers, and Aſſistants of the Lords houſe being mentioned, as ſitting together, without any Knights, Citizens or Burgeſſes ſitting among them. And he addes, that between the Biſhops, Earls, Barons, all muſt keep their places, and the Steward of England is to look to this, THAT NONE SIT BƲT AMONG HIS PEERS AND EQƲALS: Fiftly, he ſubjoyns, That the Justices of England are no Justices in Parliament, unleſſe ſo far forth as new power ſhall be aſſigned and given them then by the KING AND THE PEERS of the Parliament: That the Peers of the Parliament are to examine Petitions BY THEMSEVES: That the King ſhall aſſigne five skilfull Clerks of the Parliament: the firſt whereof ſhall be Minister to ſerve the Biſhops; the ſecond, the Procters of the Clergie; the third, the Earls and Barons; the fourth, the Knights of the Shire; the fift, the Citizens and Burgeſſes: who ſhall write and register their ſeverall anſwers and doubts to the King; that all doubtfull caſes are to be put in writing, and delivered to the Clerk of every degree; that ſo every DEGREE BY IT SELF MAY GOE THERE BY IT SELFE AND DEBATE IT, and then bring their ANSWER AND ADVICE IN WRITING; and if any diſcord ariſe, that the buſineſſe be handled and amended by all the Peers of the Kingdom: And that none of all the Peers may depart from Parliament, unleſſe he have obtained leave OF THE KING, and of ALL HIS PEERS. All which proves the deviſion and diſtinction of the Houſes in that Age, in Votes and Debates.

Thirdly, both theſe Writers grant; Firſt, that the Commons can doe or conclude nothing without the Kings prefence and conſent: Secondly, that all the Lords ought to be ſummoned to the Parliament, and if they appear not, that they ſhall be amerced: Thirdly, that ALL PEERS OF THE REALME OƲGHT TO AGREE TO WHAT IS GRANTED OR PASSED IN PARLIAMENT; ſo are their words: Therefore if all the Peers, or the major part of them diſagree, no ayde can be granted nor Act paſſed, by their own confeſſions: and by the ſame reaſon they affirm, that the King and Lords, or either of them alone, without the Commons, can grant or enact nothing that is firme or ſtable; nor yet the Commons themſelves without the Kings aſſent; they muſt of neceſſity grant, that the King and Commons p. 20without the Lords can do nothing, that is binding to the Kingdom, the Lords aſſent being as requiſite as theirs, and they entruſted by the Laws, Statutes and Cuſtome of the Realm, to conſent and diſſent in the granting of aydes, and making Laws as well as the King and Commons, and have a ſhare inboth as well as they.

Fourthly, the holding of a Parliament, granting of aydes and making Laws by the King and Commons, without the Lords, is onelyonly in one ſpeciall caſe of obſtinacy and extremity in the Lords; which never yet fell out, nor is likely to happen: To wit, when the Lords are all ſummoned to Parliament, and yet wilfully refuſe to appear, ſit or agree to any thing propounded by the King and Commons joyntly, without giving a ſufficient reaſon for their ſo doing: To conclude therefore from ſuch a remote poſſibility of a caſe which never yet fell out, nor is likely to do, the neceſſity of the Lords reducement at this preſent, or in future times to the Houſe of Commons, or the abolition of the Houſe of Peers, or their negative voyce, is as great nonſence and frenzy, as to argue; that all the Lords and Commons ought preſently to be ſent to Bedlam, becauſe one of our Parliaments was ſtiled, Inſanum Parliamen…um, The mad Parliament, and they may poſſibly prove now as mad as the Parliamēt was then reputed; as they will do in good earneſt, if they ſhould go about to levell the Lords, and detrude them to the Commons houſe, as theſe mad Sectaries and Levellers would perſwade them.

Fiftly, neither of theſe Writers were good Lawyers, Hiſtorians or Antiquaries verſed in Parliament Records: for firſt, ouroo22 E. 3. 3. b. … H. 7. 14. 11 H 7. 27 B…. Parl. 107. Plowdens Cou…t. 79. Crompton's Juriſdiction, f. 8. Forteſcue, c. 18 f. 20. 4 H. 7. 6. …. Dy 92. Bro. 134, 39 E. 3. 7. Law-books are expreſſe in point, That no Law nor Act of Parliament can be made by the King and Commons without the Lords concurrent aſſent, no more then by the King and Lords without the Commons: And Sir Edward Cook (the greateſt Lawyer in this latter age) is poſitive, in his 4. Inst. c. 1. (where he writes particularly of Parliaments) f. 25. There is NO ACT OF PARLIAMENT BƲT MƲST HAVE CONSENT OF THE LORDS, the Commons, and royall aſſent of the King, as appeareth by RECORDS AND OƲR LAW-BOOKS: Therefore this fancy of theirs, that the King and Commons may make Laws without the Lords, is a cleer miſtake even in point of Law; which the very form and penning p. 21of all our Statutes (Be it enacted by the King, &c. THE LORDS SPIRITƲALL AND TEMPORALL, and Commons in this preſent Parliament aſſemblea; and the like) refutes: Secondly, all our Hiſtorians and Antiquaries concur herein, That there can be no Parliament, nor ever was in any age ſince Parliaments were in England, held by the King and Commons alone without the Lords; there being no ſuch Parliament ever heard or read of, neither do theſe Authors inſtance in any one Preſident; therefore this ground of their opinion, That in times paſt our Kings kept their Parliaments, when & before there were any B…ſhops or temporall Lords, is a meer groundleſſe aſſertion, contradicted by all our Antiquaries and Hiſtorians; which alwayes make mention of Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Abbots, Dukes, Princes, Earls, Lords and Barons in our ancienteſt Parliaments, but**See Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour, part 2. c. 5. Spelmanni Concil. Tom. 1. Truth triumphing over falſhood, p 50, to 70. The grand Inqueſt, p. 8, to 16. no mention at all of any Knights of Shires, Citizens and Burgeſſes: Thirdly, all our Parliament Rolls contradict this fancy, that there can be no Act nor Ordinance of Parliament without the Lords conſent as well as the Commons; as is evident by the penning of all our printed Acts, and by 6 Edw. 3. Rot. Parl. n. 5. 17 E. 3. n. 59, 60. 43 E. 3. n. 3, & 10. 14 R. 2. n. 14, 15. 13 H. 4. n. 25. with many more: yea, the Lords preſence in Parliament hath at all times be…n ſo abſolutely neceſſary and expedient; that our Parliaments from time to time have been adjourned from the day that they were firſt appointed to ſit, till ſome few days after; upon this very reaſon, That ALL THE LORDS (by reaſon of the foul weather, ſhortneſſe of ſummons, or ſome other occaſion) were not yet come up to the Parliament, OR SOME OF THE LORDS NOT COME; and the Declaration of the cauſes of calling the Parliament by the Lord Chancellour, or chief Justice, and all Parliamentary buſineſſe deferred till their comming, (as well as becauſe ſome of the Knights and Burgeſſes were not come, nor all the Writs for their elections returned:) upon which reaſon, and the abſence of ſome Lords, the firſt day of the Parliaments ſitting, hath been oft adjourned, as the Parliament Rolls of 6 E. 3. nu. 1. 6 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 5, 6, 8, 9. 13 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 4. 15 E. 3. n. 5. 17 E. 3. n. 2. 6. 18 E. 3. n. 1, 2, 5. 20 E. 3. n. 5. 21 E. 3. n. 4. 22 E. 3. n. 1. 25 E. 3. n. 1. 29 E. 3. n. 4. 36 E. 3. n. 1. 37 E. 3. n. 1. 42 E. 3. n. 1. 50 E. 3. n. 1. 51 E. 3. n. 3. 1 R. 2. n. 1, 2 R. 2. n. 1. 3 R. 2. n. 1. 4 R. 2. n. 1. 5 R. 2. Parl. 1. n. 1. & Parl. 2. n. 1. 6 R. p. 222. Parl. 1. n. 1. & Parl. 2. n. 1. abundantly**And 8 H. 4. n. 28, 30, 54. … H. 4. n. 1. 1; H. 4. n. 1. manifeſt, it being the cuſtome of all former Parliaments to Debate, Vote and determine nothing but in FƲLL PARLIAMENT, when all, or the moſt part of the Members of both Houſes were preſent, and not in a thin or empty Houſe, when above half or three parts were abſent: an innovation of dangerous conſequence, brought in of later times, and fit to be redreſſed, for which ſome Parliaments and Parliamentary proceedings have been ppSee 31 F. …. n. 16. 1 H 4. Rot. Parl. 22, 25, 66. 39 H. 6. c. 1. Statutes of Ireland, 10 H 7. c. 23. 21 R. 2. c. 12. 31 H 6 c. 1. 17 E. 4. c. 7.repealed and judged voyd by Parliament; eſpecially when accompanied with any armed forces and violence, over-awing the Houſes or their Members: to prevent which in former ages, by theqqCook 4 Inſt. p. 14 & 2 E. 3. c. 3. ancient law and custome of Parliament, a Proclamation uſually was and ought to be made at Weſtminſter in the beginning of every Parliament THAT NO MAN, ƲPON PAIN TO LOSE ALL THAT HE HAD, SHOƲLD DƲRING THE PARLIAMENT, in London or Weſtminſter, or the Suburbs, &c. wear any privy coat of Plate, OR GOE ARMED, or uſe any Games, Playes, Justs, and other paſtimes, or ſhewing Shewes during the Parliament: The reaſon whereof was, That the high Court of Parliament ſhould not thereby be diſturbed, nor the Members thereof (which are TO ATTEND the arduous and urgent buſineſſe of the Church and Common-wealth) be thereby WITHDRAWN OR FORCED AWAY: as is apparent by 5 E. 3. nu. 5. 6 E. 3. nu. 2, 3. 6 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 2. 6 E. 3. Parl. 4. n. 4, 5. 13 E. 3. n. 1. 14 E. 3. n. 1. 14 E. 3. Parl. 21. n. 2. 15 E. 3. n. 2. 17 E. 3. n. 3. 20 E. 3. n. 1. 24 E. 3. n. 1. 25 E. 3. n. 5, 8. & Stat. 2. n. 4. A law and cuſtome now fit to be revived. Fourthly, the very Writs of Summons for the Lords, and of election of Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes, refutes this groſſe miſtake, requiring them all to appear perſonally in Parliament, on ſuch a day, at ſuch a place, and there to treat of the great and urgent affairs of the Realm, not onelyonly with the King himſelf, but cum Praelatis, MAGNATIBUS ET PROCERIBUS dicti Regni noſtri; with the Prelates, Noblemen and Lords of our ſaid Realm: And therefore to dream of holding a Parliament, or making Lawes without the Lords, is a ſign of an intoxicated brain. Fiftly, I find in 21 E. 3. nu. 58. 21 E. 3. n. 60. 37 E. 3. n. 12, 34. 50 E. 3. n. 12, 13. and the yeer-book of 39 E. 3. 7. b. that the King and Lords in Parliament **See the Free holders grand Inqueſt.have made binding laws without the Commons, in ſome caſes, but not p. 23the King and Commons without the Lords: And in the Parliament of 6 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 7. the Commons had licenſe to depart the parliament, but the Lords were commanded to attend the King the next morning, to adviſe him: So that there is far more colour in point of Preſidents to prove, that the King and Lords may make Laws and grants of aydes, (as the Lords did by and for themſelves, 3 E. 3. n. 4, 5. & Parl. 2. 13 E. 3. n. 7.) without the Commons, then the King and Commons without the Lords.

Sixtly, to this, that the Knights, Citizens and Burgeſſes in parliament, have a greater voyce then the greateſt Earl in parliament, becauſe they repreſent the Countries, Cities and Burroughs from whence they come, and the Earl but himſelf.

I anſwer, firſt, that the reaſon holds not; for if this were true then every Knight, Citizen and Burgeſſe that ſerves for the greateſt Counties, Cities and Burroughs, ſhould have a greater voyce and power in the Commons houſe, then thoſe that ſerve for leſſer, and the ſmalleſt, becauſe they repreſent, and aſſent, and vote for more Freeholders, Citizens and Burgeſſers then they; and by the ſame reaſon, the leſſer and poorer Peers ſhould have a leſſer voyce in the Peers houſe then the greateſt and richeſt; which we know is falſe and abſurd. Secondly, many Peers are of greater worth, value, eſtate and intereſt in relation to the Kingdom, then many poor Burroughs; and therefore by this reaſon their voices ſhould be greater then both Burgeſſes ſerving for them. Thirdly, every Peer votes not onelyonly for himſelf, but for all the Nobility and whole State and Kingdom whereof he is a member, as well and as much as any Commoner; and therefore his voyce is as great as theirs.

As to the Lords negative voice in Parliament, I anſwer, firſt, the King, common Laws and Statutes of England, have ever allowed and acknowledged it in all Ages: Secondly, to deny them this Priviledge, is to make the whole houſe of Peers meaner then the meaneſt Burgeſſe, who hath a negative voyce in all debates and votes that paſſe the Commons houſe; yea, to deny them to be freemen, and make them worſe then the Philiſtine Lords, who had a negative voyce, 1 Sam. 29. 2, to 12 And to make them give their cōſents to whatever the Cōmons p. 24ſhall carry by their plurality of Votes (though it be but by one or two) is to ſet up Popiſh blind obedience, and implicit faith, yea, to deſtroy that liberty of conſcience and judgement which the Objectors, Levellers and Army do pretend they fight, and ſo earneſtly conteſt for. Thirdly, there are ſundry preſidents in our Parliament Rolls, of the Lords negative voyces in Parliaments; I ſhall inſtance onelyonly in two or three, The firſt in print, in the Statute of Marlbridge, 20 H. 3. c. 3. The Biſhops and Clergie importuned the Lords, that they would conſent, that all ſuch as were born afore Matrimony ſhould be legitimate, as well as thoſe who were born within Matrimony, as to the ſucceſſion of Inheritance, for ſo much as the Church accepteth ſuch for legitimate. And ALL THE EARLS AND BARONS WITH ONE VOICE anſwered, NOLUMUS, &c. WE WILL NOT CHANGE THE LAWS OF THE REALM which hither to have been uſed and approved. Here the Lords negative voyce hindered the alteration of the common Law, againſt the Biſhops and Clergies importunate Vote to change it. So in the Parliament of 28 E. 3. nu. 25. the Commons deſired, that any man attainted upon a writ of Oyer and Terminer, might bring his Attaint hanging the ſuits againſt the other. To this the anſwer on the Roll is, THE LORDS WILL NOT ALTER THE ORDER OF THE LAW. The like negative anſwer you may read in 21 E. 3. n. 12, 29. 1 R. 2. n. 34, 69, 111. 2 R. 2. n. 57, 58. Parl. 1. & Parl. 2. n. 48. and ſundry other Rols. Therefore to inferre any thing from theſe erronious paſſages againſt the Lords Louſe, Votes, Judicature or negative voyce, is but the blind following of the blind, and contradict all Parliament Records, Hiſtory, Antiquity and Law it ſelf, and approve and eſtabliſh their authority, judicature and diſtinction from the Commoners.

Finally, it is evident by the Parliament Rols of 6 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 3. 13 E. 3. Par. 2. n. 7, 8. 15 E. 3. n. 6, 7, 9, 17, 18, 35, 37. 17 E. 3. n. 9, 11, 12, 59. 18 E. 3. n. 10. 21 E. 3. n. 4, 5, 70. 22 E. 3. n. 3, 4, 29. 22 E. 3. Parl. 2. n. 6, 7. 27 E. 3. n. 4. 29 E. 3. n. 10. 36 E. 3. n. 6, 7. 40 E. 3. n. 8. 42 E. 3. n. 7. 47 E. 3. n. 5, 6, 12. 50 E. …. n. 3, 8, 9, 10 14. 51 E. 3. n. 18, 19. 1 R. 2. n. 12, 13. 2 R. 2. n. 10, 23, to 29. 2 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 6. 4 R. 2. n. 9, to 16. 5 R. 2. n. 13, to 31. 6 R. 2. n. 9, 10, 1…. 6 R. 2. parl. 2. n. 14, 15. 6 R. 2. parl. 3. n. 8, 9. 7 R. 2. n. 11. p. 257 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 10, 11. 13 R. 2. n. 6. 15 R. 2 n. 15. 16 R. 2. n. 6. 17 R. 2. n. 6, 17, 18 20 R. 2. 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17. 21 R. 2. n. 8, 9, 16, to 21. That the Lords and Commons in the Parliaments of King Edward the third, and Richard the ſecond, were distinct both in their debates, con…ultations, councels, p…titions, votes, and places of ſitting too, 50 E. 3. n. 3, 8. Sir John Knevet Chancellour of England, having declared the cauſes of calling that Parliament before the King, Lords and Commons, willed them to goe together, THE LORDS BY THEMSELVES, AND THE COMMOS BY THEMSELVES, and ſpeedily to conſult and give anſwer. After which the Commons were willed to d…part TO THEIR ACCUSTOMED PLACE, b…ing the Chapter houſe of the Abbot of Weſtminſter, whither they went. In which place they likewiſe ſate, 2 R. 2. n. 10. & 4 R. 2. n. 9. And in 15 E. 3. n. 17. 47 E. 3. n. 5, 6. 50 E. 3. n. 8. 9. 51 E. 3. n. 18, 19. 1 R. 2. n. 12, 13, 14. 5 R. 2. n. 14. 6 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 15. 7 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 10, 11. The Commons came to THE LORDS HOUSE, and required that certain of the Lords, there named, WOULD VOUCHSAFE TO CONFER WITH THE COMMONS; whereupon they went to the Chamberlains chamber to confer with the Commons: And at other times they were appointed to goe and conſult with the Commons at ſome other place by the Lords order. In 2 R. 2. Parl. 1. n. 23. the Commons required, that ſome five or ſix of the Lords might be appointed to come and diſcourſe with them; THE LORDS DENIED THAT, ſaying, The ſame was the guiſe of two or three Parliaments before. But the uſe was, That the Lords ſhould among themſelves chooſe a certain number, and the Commons the like, and that they ſhould confer together, which they would do: for if the Commons would not diſſever themſelves, neither would they the Lords: To the which order the Commons agreed. And 4 H. 4. n. 10. The Commons deſiring the King that certain ſpeciall Lords might be aſſigned to treat with them about affairs for the common benefit of the Realm: It was condeſcended unto, with this protestation ſpecially entred by the Kings command, that it ought not to be done of right OR CUSTOME, BUT ONELYONLY OUT OF THE KINGS SPECIALL GRACE; which the Commons then acknowledged.

A pregnant evidence both of their diſtinct Houſes and conſultations, except onelyonly at private Committees and Conferences; p. 26Yea, the Commons had anciently ſuch an high eſteem of the Lords fidelity, wiſdom, abilities, councel and experience, that in 15 E. 3. n. 17. The Commons pray that unto the Wedneſday then next enſuing, the Articles they then preſented to the King, might be committed to certain Earls, Barons, Biſhops and other WISE MEN there named by them, TO BE AMENDED: which t…e King granted. And in 13 E. 3. Parl. 1. n. 11. 21 E. 3. n. 5. 7 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 19, 20. 17 R. 2. n. 17. and ſundry other Rolls, The Commons profeſſe THEIR INABILITY AND INSUFFICIENCY TO ADVISE THE KING in ſome MATTERS OF PEACE, WARRE, and ſafeguard of the Seas, for that THEY PASSED THEIR CAPACITY, AND UNDERSTOOD NOT THE TERMS OF THE CIVILL LAW, and ſome words in Truces: and therefore WHOLLY REFERRED THEMSELVES in theſe things to THE KING AND THE LORDS, AND THE KINGS COUNSELL, to do therein as they ſhould ſeem meet, being men of greater wiſdom and experience in State-affairs of this nature, then themſelves, in which they had little or no inſight. And in 2 H. 4. n. 11. The whole houſe of Commons claim, and the King grants and confirms; and in 9 H. 4. n. 21. (entituled, The indempnity of the Lords and Commons) The Lords and Commons ſeriouſly claim this as a ſpeciall ancient priviledge belonging to both the Houſes, to ſit and debate upon things in Parliament ſeverally by themſelves in their diſtinct Houſes, in the Kings abſence (whoſe preſence might over-awe them, and hinder their free debates;) which they both claimed, and the king confirmed to them IN ALL TIMES TO COME, and that no report ſhould be made to the King of any debate, vote or ayde granted, till the Lords and Commons be all agreed, and that by THE SPEAKERS MOUTHES. Which ancient priviledge ſo long ſince claimed, granted, confirmed and enjoyed ever ſince, not onelyonly proves the ancient diſtinction of both houſes, but utterly ſubverts the Levellers project, who would ſtrip both Houſes at once of this great priviledge, which the Commons deemed their greateſt immunity (ſeeing they durſt ſpeak their mindes, and vote more freely among themſelves, then in the preſence of the King and Lords, for fear of incurring their diſpleaſures) by reducing both houſes into one. The ſerious conſideration p. 27whereof, and of the premiſes, will I truſt for ever take them off from their dangerous abſurd deſigne of Levelling and reducing the Lords Houſe to the Commons, and lay the ignorant, illiterate proſecutors of it, levell with the duſt: the rather, becauſe the King and Lords in Parliament, have not onelyonly joyntly and ſeverally judged Commoners themſelves in Parliament for ſuch Treaſons, & other miſdemeanours as are properly triable in Parliament, not at the common Law, as is evident byrr4 E. 3. n. 3, to 8. 21 E. 3. n. 65 50 E. 3. n. 15, to 38. 1 R▪ 2. n 35, to 44 4 R▪ 2. n. 17, to 25 7 R. 2. n. 15, to 26. &c. infinite Preſidents; but even Knights of the Shire, and other Members of the Commons Houſe it ſelf, in point of miſdemeanours, undue Elections, and priviledges of Parliament; as is apparēt by 16 R. 2. n. 6, 13, 14. S^r Phillip Courtney's caſe, returned one of the Knights for the County of Devon, 17 R. 2. n. 23. Roger de Swinerton's caſe, 5 …. 4. n. 38. Thomas Thorp. his caſe, elected knight for the County of Rotland, whoſe election was heard, examined and adjudged by the Lords in Parliament to be good, at the Commons requeſt; and 31 H. 6. n. 25, to 30. Baron Thorp's caſe, Speaker of the Commons houſe, whoſe priviledge was ſolemnly debated before, and adjudged againſt him by the Lords in Parliament; who therupon by the King's direction, commanded the Commons to chooſe and preſent a new Speaker; which they accordingly did the next day. Yea, the whole Houſe of Commons in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. Remonſtrated to the King, and voluntarily confeſſed. That THE JUDGMENTS IN PARLIAMENT APPERTAIN ONELYONLY TO THE KING AND TO THE LORDS, and NOT UNTO THE COMMONS; and that THE KING AND LORDS EVER HAD IN ALL TIMES, AND SHALL HAVE OF RIGHT THE JUDGEMENTS IN PARLIAMENT: And the King then declared to the Commons, that this Order ſhall be obſerved and kept IN ALL TIMES TO COME, and that in caſes of Commoners and Members of the Commons houſe it ſelf, as well as of Peers; as is cleer by Thorp's caſe forecited, and by 5 H. 4. n. 71, 78. the printed Statute of 5 H. 4. c. 6. Richard Chedders caſe, and 4 H. 8. c. 8. Richard Strode his caſe, Burgeſſe for Plimton in the County of Devon; where the King and Lords at the Prayer and Petition of the Commons, provide remedies againſt the breaches of the priviledges of the p. 28Commons themſelves and their ſervants, which themſelves alone had no ſufficient power r… right and determine; the power of judicature being not in them, but in the King, Lords and houſes of Peers alone; who long before the Conqueſt had the power of Judicature, as is evident by Brampton, and Maſter**Titles of Honour, part 2. c. 5. ſect. 6. Selden, in the caſe of Earl Goodwin, in a Parliament held in the yeer 1052. wherein Edward the Confeſſor appealed to THE EARLS AND BARONS againſt this Earl, for the murther of his Brother Alfred in theſe words, Domini COMITES & BARONES terrae, &c. Volo quod inter Nos in iſta appellatione RECTUM JUDICIUM DECERNETIS & DEBITAM JUSTITIAM FACIATIS. And therfore it is the very extremity of injuſtice to deny them this their ancient Heredetary right, and priviledge now, and transfer it to the Commons houſe, who never enjoyed it in any former Age, and can make no right, nor lawfull claim unto it at this preſent.

FINIS.

Errata.

Page 3. line 1. H. 7. read H. 4.

End of the text · William Prynne, The Levelers Leveled (1647)