for the prisoner maintained, (1.) That all treasons were to be reduced to the particulars specified in the 25th Edw. III. cap. 2. (2.) That nothing else was or could be treason; and that it was so enacted by the 1st Henry IV. cap. 10. (3.) That there had been no precedent to the contrary since that time. And (4.) That by 1 Mary, cap. 12, an endeavour to subvert the fundamental laws of the land is declared to be no more than felony.

The commons felt the weight of these arguments; and not being willing to enter into debate with a private barrister, changed their impeachment into a bill of attainder, which they had a right to do by virtue of a clause in the 25th Edw. III. cap. 2*, which refers the decision of what is treason in all doubtful cases to the king and parliament +. The attainder passed the commons April 19, yeas two hundred and four, noes fifty-nine; but it is thought would have been lost in the house of lords had it not been for the following accident, which put it out of the power of the earl's friends to save him.

The king, being weary of his parliament and desirous to protect his servant, consented to a project of some persons in the greatest trust about the court, to bring the army that was raised against the Scots up to London, in order to awe the two houses, to rescue the earl, and to take possession of the city of London. Lord Clarendon says, the last motion was rejected with abhorrence, and that the gentleman who made it was the person that discovered the whole plot. The conspirators met in the queen's lodgings at Whitehall, where a petition was drawn up for the officers of the army to sign, and to present to his majesty; with a tender of their readiness to wait upon him in defence of his prerogative against the turbulent spirits of the house of commons; the draught was shewn to the king, and signed, " in testimony of his majesty's approbation, C. R." but the plot being discovered to

The words of the statute are,

"And because that many other like cases of treason may happen in time to come, which a man cannot think or declare at this present time, it is accorded that if any other case, supposed treason, which is not above specified, doth happen before any justice, the justices shall tarry without any going to judgment of the treason till the cause be shewed and declared before the king and his parliament, whether it ought to be judged treason or felony."

The bill of attainder against the earl of Strafford being formed on this principle and authority, there was a great propriety in the following clause of it: viz. "That no judge or judges, justice or justices whatsoever, shall adjudge or interpret any act or thing to be treason, nor hear or determine treason, in any other manner than he or they should or ought to have done before the passing of this act." This clause has been considered as a reflection on the bill itself, and as an acknowledgment, that the case was too hard and the proceedings too irregular to be drawn into a precedent. But this is a misconstruction of the clause, which did not intimate any consciousness of wrong in those who passed it; but was meant to preserve to parliament the right, in future, which is exercised in this instance, of determining what is treason in all doubtful cases; and was intended to restrain the operation of the bill to this single case. It shewed, observes Mrs. Macaulay, a very laudable attention to the preservation of public liberty. Macaulay's History, vol. 2. 8vo, p. 444, note (†), and Dr. Harris's Life of Charles I. p. 324, 325.-ED.

Clarendon, vol. 1. p. 248.

the earl of Bedford, to the lords Say and Kimbolton, and to Mr. Pym, with the names of the conspirators; all of them absconded, and some fled immediately into France.

Mr. Pym opened the conspiracy to the house of commons May 2, 1641 *, and acquainted them, that among other branches of the plot, one was to seize the Tower, to put the earl of Strafford at the head of the Irish army of Papists who were to be transported into England, and to secure the important town of Portsmouth, in order to receive succours from France; sir William Balfour, lieutenant of the Tower, confessed that the king had sent him express orders to receive a hundred men into that garrison under the command of captain Billingsly, to favour the earl's escape; and that the earl himself offered him 20,000l. in money, and to advance his son in marriage to one of the best fortunes in the kingdom. Lord Clarendon has used all his rhetoric to cover over this conspiracy, and to make posterity believe it was little more than the idle chat of some officers at a tavern; but they who will compare the depositions in Rushworth, with his lordship's account of that matter, says bishop Burnet, will find, that there is a great deal more in the one, than the other is willing to believe +. Mr. Echard confesses that the plot was not wholly without foundation. The court would have disowned it, but their keeping the conspirators in their places, made the parliament believe that there was a great deal more in it than was yet discovered; they therefore sent orders immediately to secure the town and haven of Portsmouth, and to disband the Irish army; they voted that all Papists should be removed from about the court; and directed letters to sir Jacob Ashley, to induce the army to a dutiful behaviour, and to assure them of their full pay.

The consequences of this plot were infinitely prejudicial to the king's affairs; the court lost its reputation; the reverence due to the king and queen was lessened; and the house of commons began to be esteemed the only barrier of the people's liberties; for which purpose they entered into a solemn protestation to stand by each other with their lives and fortunes; the Scots army was continued for their security; a bill for the continuance of the present parliament was brought in and urged with great advantage; and last of all, by the discovery of this plot the fate of the earl of Strafford was determined; great numbers of people crowded in a tumultuous manner to Westminster, crying, Justice! justice! and threatening violence to those members of the house of commons who had voted against his attainder. In this situation of affairs, and in the absence of the bench of bishops (as being a case of blood), the bill passed with the dissent only of eleven peers. The king had some scruples about giving it the royal assent, because, though he was convinced the earl had been guilty of "high crimes and

Rapin, vol. 2. p. 369. folio.

+ May's Hist. p. 97-99. Rushworth, part 3. vol. 1. p. 291.

misdemeanours," he did not apprehend that an "endeavour to subvert the fundamental form of government, and to introduce an arbitrary power, was high treason:" his majesty consulted his bishops and judges, but was not satisfied till he received a letter from the earl himself, beseeching his majesty to sign the bill, in order to make way for a happy agreement between him and his subjects. Mr. Whitelocke insinuates*, that this letter was but a feint of the earl's; for when secretary Carlton acquainted him with what the king had done, and with the motive, which was his own consent, he rose up in a great surprise, and lifting up his eyes to heaven, said, "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men, for in them there is no salvation." Two days after this [May 12,] he was executed upon Tower-hill, and submitted to the axe with a Roman bravery and courage; but at the restoration of king Charles II. his attainder was reversed, and the articles of accumulative treason declared null, because what is not treason in the several parts cannot amount to treason in the wholet.

This was the unhappy fate of Thomas Wentworth, earl of Strafford, once an eminent patriot and assertor of the liberties of his country, but after he was called to court one of the most arbitrary ministers that this nation ever produced. He was certainly a gentleman of distinguished abilities, as appears by the incomparable defence he made on his trial, which gained him more reputation and esteem with the people, than all the latter actions of his life put together; but still he was a public enemy of his country, and had as great a share in those fatal counsels that brought on the civil war as any man then living. "The earl (says Mr. Echard) was of a severe countenance, insufferably proud and haughty, having a sovereign contempt of the people, whom he never studied to gratify in any thing; the ancient nobility looked upon his sudden rise, and universal influence in public affairs, with envy; so that he had but few friends, and a great many enemies."

Lord Digby, in his famous speech against the bill of attainder, wherein he washes his hands of the blood of the earl of Strafford, has nevertheless these expressions; "I confidently believe him the most dangerous minister, and the most insupportable to free subjects, that can be charactered. I believe his practices in themselves have been as high and tyrannical as any subject ever ventured upon; and the malignity of them is greatly aggravated by those abilities of his, whereof God has given him the use, but the devil the application. In a word, I believe him still that grand apostate to the commonwealth, who must not expect to be pardoned in this world, till he be dispatched to the other."

Lord Falkland says, "that he committed so many mighty and so manifest enormities and oppressions in the kingdom of Ireland,

* Memorials, p. 44.

+ Nalson's Collections, vol. 2. p. 203.

that the like have not been committed by any governor in any government since Verres left Sicily; and after his lordship was called over from being deputy of Ireland, to be in a manner deputy of England, he and the junctillo gave such counsels and pursued such courses as it is hard to say, whether they were more unwise, more unjust, or more unfortunate."

Lord Clarendon says, " that he had been compelled, for reasons of state, to exercise many acts of power, and had indulged some to his own appetite and passion, as in the case of the lord-chancellor of Ireland, and the lord Mount Norris, the former of which was satis pro imperio, but the latter, the most extravagant piece of sovereignty that in a time of peace had been executed by any subject." From whence the reader may conclude, that whatever encomiums the earl might deserve as a gentleman and a soldier, yet as a statesman he deserved the fate he underwent.

The execution of this great personage struck terror into all the king's late ministers; some of them resigned their places, and others retired into France; among the latter was the lord-keeper Finch and secretary Windebank. Six of the judges were impeached of high crimes and misdemeanours, for "interpreting away the laws of their country;" but the parliament had too much business upon their hands to attend to their prosecution at present. Thus this unhappy prince was deprived of those counsellors who were in his own arbitrary sentiments, and left as in a manner to himself, and the powerful influence of his bigoted queen and her cabal of Papists; for the new ministers who succeeded, were such in whom the king would place no confidence. So that most men expected that these vigorous proceedings would induce him to put a speedy end to the session.

But that which prevented it, was the want of money to pay off the armies in the north; his majesty pressed the houses to dispatch this affair, and relieve the country from the burden of contribution; on the other hand, the commons looked upon the Scots as their security, and that if they were sent home, they should again be at the mercy of the prerogative, supported by a standing army. However, they had begun to borrow money of the city of London towards the expense; but when the plot to dissolve the parliament broke out, the citizens declared they would lend nothing upon parliamentary security, because their sitting was so very precarious. This gave rise to a motion for the continuance of the present parliament, till they should dissolve themselves, which was presently turned into a short bill, and passed both houses with very little opposition, as the only expedient that could be thought of to support the public credit: it enacts, "that this present parliament shall not be adjourned, prorogued, or dissolved, without their own consent:" and was signed by commission with the bill of attainder against the earl of Strafford.

* Vol. 1. p. 250.

All men stood amazed at the king's weakness on this occasion; for by this hasty and unadvised measure he concurred in a change of the whole constitution, giving the two houses a co-ordinate power in the legislature with himself, for as long time as they pleased: if his majesty had fixed their continuance to a limited time, it might have satisfied the people, and saved the prerogative; but by making them perpetual, he parted with the sceptre out of his own hands, and put it into the hands of his parliament. "This (says Mr. Echard) has made some writers doubt, whether those who afterward took up arms against the king could be legally termed rebels. For by passing this act his majesty made the two houses so far independent upon himself, that they immediately acquired an uncommon authority, and a sort of natural right to inspect and censure his actions, and to provide for the safety of the kingdom."

While the commons were alarmed with the discovery of the plot, and the flight of the conspirators, Mr. Pym moved that both houses might join in some band of defence for the security of their liberties, and of the Protestant religion; accordingly the following protestation was drawn up, and subscribed the very next day by the whole house [May 3].

"I, A. B., do in the presence of Almighty God vow and protest, to maintain and defend, as far as lawfully I may, with my life, power, and estate, the true reformed Protestant religion, expressed in the doctrine of the church of England, against all Popery and Popish innovations in this realm, contrary to the said doctrine; and according to the duty of my allegiance, I will maintain and defend his majesty's royal person, honour, and estate; also the power and privilege of parliament, the lawful rights and liberties of the subject, and of every person who shall make this protestation in whatsoever he shall do, in the lawful pursuance of the same. And to my power, as far as lawfully I may, I will oppose, and by all good ways and means endeavour to bring to condign punishment, all such who shall by force, practice, counsel, plot, conspiracy, or otherwise, do any thing to the contrary in this protestation contained. And farther, that I shall in all just and honourable ways endeavour to preserve the union and peace between the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland; and neither for hope, fear, or any other respect, shall relinquish this promise, vow, and protestation*."

May 4, this protestation was made by all the peers present in parliament, except the earl of Southampton and lord Roberts † ; even by the bishops themselves, though (as lord Clarendon + observes) it comes little short of the Scots covenant. Their lord

Clarendon, vol. 1. p. 251, &c.

+"Alleging, that there was no law that enjoined it: and that the consequence of such voluntary engagements might produce effects, that were not intended." Lord Clarendon as quoted by Dr. Grey.-ED.

Vol. 1. p. 253.