DIE Veneris, 29 die Novembris.
Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes
Epus. St. David's.
Epus. Litch. et Cov.
Sir Orlando Bridgman, Miles et Bar. Ds. Custos Magni Sigilli.
Johannes Ds. Robertes, Custos Privati Sigilli.
Robertus Comes Lyndsey, Magnus Camerarius Angliæ.
Edwardus Comes Manchester, Camerarius Hospitii.
Vicecomes Say et Seale.
|Ds. Arlington, One of the Principal Secretaries of State.
Ds. Berkley de Berkley.
Ds. Arundell de Warder.
Ds. Howard de Charlt.
Ds. Howard de Esc.
Ds. Gerard de Brand.
Ds. Berkley de Strat.
Ds. Arundell de Trerice.
Bp. of Durham's Lead Mines Bill.
vice lecta est Billa, "An Act for enabling
John Lord Bishop of Durham and his Successors to
make Leases, for Three Lives, of certain Lead Mines."
The Question being put, "Whether this Bill,
with the Alterations and Amendments, shall
It was Resolved in the Affirmative.
Message to H. C. with it.
A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by
Sir William Childe and Sir Justinian Lewyn:
To return the Bill concerning the Lead Mines; to
which the Lords do concur, with some Amendments and
Alterations, to which the Concurrence of the House of
Commons is desired.
Sir C. Stanley's Bill.
vice lecta est Billa, "An Act for enabling
Trustees to make Leases, for Payment of the Debts,
and providing for the Children, of Sir Charles Stanley."
The Question being put, "Whether this Bill shall
It was Resolved in the Affirmative.
Committee to prevent the Importation of Irish Cattle.
ORDERED, That the Committee appointed to examine the Complaints of Abuses to defeat the Act against
Importation of Irish Cattle, and also the Committees to
consider of the Deceit in making Woollen Draperies, do
meet on Tuesday next in the Afternoon.
Mangy, D. of Bucks Servant, to be brought again by Hab. Corp.
Whereas, by His Majesty's Writ of Habeas Corpus
cum Causa, directed to the Marshal of the King's Bench
Prison, commanding him to bring the Body of George
Mangy, a Prisoner in the said Prison, before the Lords
in Parliament this Day, he was accordingly brought to
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the Marshal of the
King's Bench Prison shall return the said George Mangy
to the King's Bench Prison, and bring him again to the
Bar of this House on Monday the Second Day of December next, together with the Writ abovementioned,
and the Return thereof: And this shall be a sufficient
Warrant on that Behalf.
Bill for taxing Adventurers in the Fens.
vice lecta est Billa, "An Act for the taxing
and assessing the Lands of the Adventurers within the
Great Level of the Fens."
Petitioners against it to be heard.
Upon the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled,
"An Act for the taxing and assessing the Lands of the
Adventurers within the Great Level of the Fens;"
as also upon receiving the several Petitions of the Governor, Bailiffs, and Commonalty of the Company
and Conservators of the Great Level of the Fens, of
John Bridgman and Edward (fn. *) Gent. George Under
wood of The Spittle without Bishopsgate, in the County
of Midd. Gentleman, George Underwood of Kensington
Gentleman, John Childe Esquire, Thomas Batson of
London Merchant, Thomas Osborne Gentleman, Jonathan
Wade, David Offley of London Gentleman, and Michaell Holman Esquire, and Richard Holman Gentleman,
relating to the said Bill:
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That Counsel shall be
heard, at the Bar of this House, on both Parts, concerning the Matters contained in the said Bill and Petitions, on Friday the 6th Day of December next, at Ten
of the Clock in the Morning, whereof the Prosecutors
of the said Bill and the said Petitioners are to take
Notice, to the End they may be prepared accordingly.
Report of the Conference about committing the E. of Clarendon on a general Charge.
Next, the Lord Chamberlain and the other Lords
appointed to manage the Free Conference with the
House of Commons Yesterday reported the Substance
and Effect of the said Free Conference, as followeth:
"This Conference was managed, on the House of
Commons Part, by Sir Robert Howard, Mr. Vaughan,
Mr. Swinfin, and Mr. Waller.
"The Introduction was made by my Lord Chamberlain; who told the Commons, That this Free Conference was desired by them; and though that House
had lately declined giving the Lords a Conference
when desired, yet the House of Peers upon this
Occasion had dispensed with some Forms, to keep a
good Correspondency with the House of Commons,
and were willing to confer freely with them, and
ready to hear what they had to say.
"Sir Robert Howard was the First that opened the
Business. He said, This Conference was not upon
particular Account of any Person, but in relation to
"The Lords closed in the same, and were very glad
it was so understood; for they had no particular
Regard to the Earl of Clarendon in what they had
resolved, but to the Justice of the Kingdom; in the
Administration whereof in this Particular, nothing
was ordered in the Case of the Peer now impeached,
which they should not have insisted upon in the Case
of any Commoner.
"Then Sir Robert Howard and the rest of the Commons proceeded; and made the Subject-matter of
this Free Conference to be some of the Reasons
formerly given by the House of Commons, which
they enforced what they could; and the Proceedings
of the Earl of Strafford's Case, the Archbishop of
Canterbury, Lord Keeper Finch, and Sir George Ratcliff's. But the Precedent chiefly pressed, was the
Earl of Strafford's; on which by large Discourse
(which intimated their insisting mainly on that) they
urged that Precedents did shew best the Course of
Parliaments, which was the Law of Parliaments;
and that the Precedents they had vouched, especially
that of the Earl of Strafford's, were clear in the
Point; that the End of the Act of Repeal was to
repeal the Act of Attainder, and the Proceedings
relating thereunto; that the Manner of Impeachment
and Commitment, and other Proceedings thereupon,
were still in Force; and that the latest and newest
Precedents were the best. They descanted long
upon the Words of the Act of Repeal, to evince
what they had said; and distinguished the First
Year of the Long Parliament, for Gravity and
Wisdom, from the rest, which was disorderly and
unquiet; and said, That their Precedents were made
in the First Year; and that Proceedings in Times of
Peace, when the Courts of Westminster were open,
were always allowed for good; and concluded, that
the Lords ought to commit upon every general Impeachment of the Commons for Treason: And this
grew to be the Question stated at this Conference;
which the Commons affirmed, and the Lords denied.
Some Things were also said by the Commons, of the
Credit that was to be given to all the Commons of
England, which they represented; and that they
could not be supposed to intend any Thing herein but
Public Justice and Safety, &c.
"The Lords answered, and argued from the very
same Act for reversing the Earl of Strafford's Attainder, as followeth: That this Precedent was not allowable, being in an ill Time, and branded by an Act
of Repeal, by which, it was clear, this very Parliament intended it should never be made Use of; for,
besides that the Act of Attainder recites the very
Impeachment particularly, and other Proceedings
thereupon, and stands absolutely and totally repealed,
which is enough to condemn the Whole, yet they were
so careful that this Precedent which led on the other
Three should never rise in Judgement again, that they
further enacted in express Words, That all Records
and Proceedings of Parliament relating to the said
Attainder be wholly canceled and taken off the File,
or otherwise defaced and obliterated, to the Intent
the same may not be visible in After-ages, or brought
into Example to the Prejudice of any Person whatsoever; in which general Words, every Circumstance
and Passage of that Precedent must needs be included,
none being excepted, so that this left the Course of
Parliament for Accusations and Trials for Treasons as
it was before. And there were no other Proceedings
previous to the said Attainder, but the said Impeachment upon Trial, and Proceedings thereupon.
"The Lords said, They could not allow all for Good
that was done in Parliament whilst the Courts of
Westminster fat; nor would the Commons, if they reviewed the Transactions of the Long Parliament.
They absolutely denied the newest Precedent to be
the best. Antiquity was always venerable; Laws,
and old Precedents, with a constant Course of them,
were most to be esteemed. They had both for them
in this Controversy.
"The Lords gave these further Reasons in Answer
to the Commons, and to shew why they ought not
upon every general Accusation of Treason by the
Commons to commit to Custody the Person or Persons
"That there could be no Precedent of Commitment
produced upon a general Accusation of Treason,
before the Earl of Strafford's Case; which must necessarily have been, to make it the Course of Parliament. The last Drops of a River make not a Stream
or Course, but the constant Current. So a new Precedent, but of Yesterday as it were, and within the
sad Memory of us all, could not be called the Course
"It seems contrary to natural Justice and Reason,
that a Person accused should be punished before he
knows his Crime; and though the Imprisonment may
be said to be for Custody, yet there is no Person that
knows not his Fault, but takes it for a Punishment;
and it is really so, if he come after to be acquitted.
"It is not suitable to the Dignity or Trust of Judges
in Inferior Courts, much less in Parliament, the
Highest Court, that they should be kept ignorant of
the Crimes, whilst they are pressed to commit to
Prison upon a general Mention of them, or that the
Prosecutors should conceal what they know from the
Judges, or have Ground to ask what they will, and
not let the Judges have Ground to proceed upon.
"If the Lords ought to commit upon the Commons
Impeachment, they seem rather to be Executors of
Process or Orders, than Judges; which ever implies a
Power to consider, and do as they shall be satisfied in
"The Precedents are contrary; as, 14° E. II. M. 7.
Archbishop Arundell's Case, 21 R. II. the Lord
Stanley's Case, 38 H. VI.; and William de la Poole
Duke of Suffolk's Case; as the Commons themselves,
in the Argument at the Free Conference upon the
Petition of Right, by Sir Edward Cooke, acknowledged, and urged strongly, as being in the very
Point: This was 28 H. VI. N°. 16, &c.
"Such a Course of Proceeding would not leave it in
the Power of the House of Peers to preserve Magna
Charta and the Petition of Right (which favour Liberty) from Invasion; and herein the Lords insist not
only for themselves, but for all the Commons.
"Though this be a House of Commons excellently
composed; yet the admitting this Claim of theirs
just or warrantable, if ever there should be a House
of Commons ill disposed or engaged in Faction, as
such have been, they might by Pretence thereof make
dangerous Inroads upon the Justice and ancient Government of the Kingdom, terrify and discompose the
highest Judicature, and invade that Freedom which
ought to be in Parliament, and indeed bring the
House of Lords to as small a Number as they please
to leave unaccused.
"Judges in Inferior Courts may bail for Treason
specified; À majore, may the House of Lords refuse
to commit till Specification, or Bail after.
"There are no real Mischiefs or Inconveniences the
other Way, but many appear by committing before
the Judges be satisfied in the Crimes.
"The Practice of all Judges and Justices, in Favour
of Liberty, and to prevent Oppression, is to examine
upon Oath the particular Crimes before Commitment,
that the Ground may appear to them for Commitment,
or else they are of Duty to bail where the Offence is
bailable, though the Accusation may be laid to be
Treason; much more should the Parliament be careful
herein, who gives Examples and Precedents of Justice
to all other Courts.
"If the King and His Council are not to imprison
without special Crime, as the Commons now argue,
and did so before in the Conference for the Petition of
Right, to which the Lords agreed, and yet the
King is Caput Parliamenti; whence comes this Power
of the House of Commons by Vote to enforce a Commitment? And how dangerous is it to the Subject!
"The Petition of Right having concluded, "That
no Man ought to be imprisoned or detained without
being charged with something to which they might
make Answer according to Law;" how will it stand
with that to commit upon Generals, to which no Man
can make Answer, or defend himself?
"There were no new Reasons offered by the House of
Commons; and therefore the Lords told them, That
having considered of those they had given, and overruled them, after a Rule Twice given by the Highest
Court, it is not to be disputed but the Parties must
submit; or, as they resolved last Session, there could be
no Proceedings or Dispatch in Causes.
"At this Conference, Mr. Vaughan said, The House
of Commons do think the Judicature so well and
safely lodged in the House of Lords, that the Commons do not with any Part of it.
"The Commons would not agree, that the Case of
William de la Poole was upon the Impeachment of
the House of Commons; and said, That the
Case of Archbishop Arundell was repealed 1 H. IV.
But the First the Lords evinced clearly, by the Record which was present; and the Repeal of Arundell's
Case did not weaken, but strengthen it as a Precedent
in this Case, being in the Repeal it was not in the
least impeached in the Point the Lords vouched it for.
And the chief Ground of repealing the Acts of that
Parliament was, for the hard Measure it shewed to the
House of Yorke, for Maintenance of whose Title the
said Archbishop was a chief Instrument.
"Some Members of the House of Commons urged
their former Third Reason before, That if, before
securing the Person, the special Matter of Treason
should be alledged, it would be a ready Course that
all Complices in the Treason might make their Escape,
or quicken the Execution of the Treason intended, to
secure themselves the better thereby.
"To which the Lords made Answer, That it would
be very hard with the Subject, if they should be
committed when neither the Judge nor the Accuser did
know the Crime; and if, in this Case, the House of
Commons, who were the Accuser, did know it, they
might safely impart it to the Lords, for though in Five
Hundred Counsellors, there may be allowed to be
Wisdom, yet there is not to be expected Secresy."
E. of Claredon not to E. committed on a general Charge.
The House took this Report into Consideration; and,
after a long Debate,
The Question being put, "Whether, upon the
Report of the last Free Conference given the
House of Commons, and upon the whole
Matter, their Lordships are satisfied to commit
the Earl of Clarendon, and sequester him
from Parliament, before particular Treason
specified or assigned?"
It was Resolved in the Negative.
Dominus Custos Magni Sigilli declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque in diem Lunæ, secundum diem Decembris, 1667, hora decima Aurora,
Dominis sic decernentibus.