Wednesday, May 5.
The abovementioned Salter, was, by order, brought to the
Bar, and being interrogated by the Speaker, denied "The proffer of 4000l. from any member, and that he said any such words,
nor did any person apply to him to give any testimony against the
Lord Treasurer, nor give him any promises to do so."
Then Nead, the Quaker, at the Bar said, "Some members came
to his shop, and asked him if he knew Thomas Salter, and enquiring concerning the words of the Lord Treasurer, about the proclamation which Salter should report, Salter told him, "He said
no such words." The members did desire to speak with Salter,
who told them, "He had nothing to say against the Treasurer, but was troubled he had set his hand to a paper, and desired to
see it," but could not—Thomas Otto was banished, he thought
it a hard case, and his Counsel said "it was against law"—The
members that came to his shop were Thomas Papillon and Josiah
Child." Then he produced a letter from Thomas Salter, "He believes it is his hand as well as his own—He has paid him a great
deal of money."—Then he directed his speech to the House,
"To consider in the fear of the Lord, those that suffer for conscience-sake," but was silenced presently—Then the letter was
produced, wherein Salter says, "That Sir Thomas Littleton, and
Mr Powle, discoursed with him about the Treasurer, and about
the banishment of Otto, who urged him to set his hand to a paper, upon which Littleton wrote, and upon Littleton's importunity,
he set his hand to he knew not what, which he was sorry for."—Salter then owned the letter. (fn. 1)
Mr Powle.] He sees his name mentioned amongst others, therefore he thinks it his duty to acquaint you
with all he knows in the matter. The first time he saw
Salter was in Westminster-Hall, where he discoursed about the Lord Treasurer's proceedings against Otto. Salter then said, "There were some words spoken by another great officer, but was not sure whether by the Lord
Treasurer or no, and if he were at home, he could speak
more particularly by his notes." They went afterwards
with him to Heaven
(fn. 2) , and then he perfectly remembered
it was the Treasurer—said in the Treasury chamber, and
reported by the Treasurer to the Council, who, over the
table told him, "I told you what it would come to,"
Magna Charta nisi public prohibit, &c.—Littleton said,
If this be put into execution, Otto may be called again."
In the serjeant's lobby Salter repeated the words again, and
Otto and Salter set their hands to the paper freely and
voluntarily, and, upon this, he thought it a thing fit to
bring before the House.
Sir Thomas Littleton.] Salter said "he remembered the
words, but thought them said by another great officer,"
but, upon recollecting himself, remembered them said by
the Treasurer, and in the Treasury chamber, on rectification of his error, upon recollection. Mr Papillon took
his words from him in the presence of five Members, and
with the German, Otto, along with him, present at the
words, and from them he wrote the words and read them
to them, and never saw men more willing to do it.
Sir Edward Dering.] Has seen that here which he never saw before. The Lords have sent us three Bills, and
we have sent them never a one yet. Would have the
Bill of Popery read.
Sir Eliab Harvey.] Yesterday we had the fleet under
consideration. We have likewise had an Address to the
King for recall of the King's subjects in the service of the
French—Moves that we may again address the King
for an answer.
Mr Sacheverell.] We are not safe in religion whilst
we have so many English in that nation—Moves that
they may be recalled by Proclamation, and hopes we
may have something else with a sting in the tail.
Sir Thomas Meres.] We moved it at the first, with
hopes that, by this time, the King would have done it
by Proclamation—And now moves for an Address that
they may be recalled from that King's service by Proclamation.
Sir Thomas Lee.] Has been told, that the Duke of
Monmouth has lately sealed several commissions to officers for raising men for the French service; therefore it
is high time to address the King for a Proclamation.
Mr Love reads a letter from Dieppe, which informs him, "that
many English are gone into France, in a fly-boat, which a French
man of war convoyed."
Colonel Birch.] We swallow down the French customs
with their debaucheries—Would give reasons for this
vote, were we in a condition at present to do it.
Mr Garroway.] There is nothing in the league to forbid men going into Holland, but expressly there is against
going into France—Therefore there is no danger of their
going into Holland.
[Resolved, That an Address be presented to his Majesty that he
would be pleased to issue forth his Proclamation for the speedy recalling those his subjects that are now in the service of the French
King, and for the preventing any more from going over into that
Resolved, That a farther Address be presented to his Majesty
concerning the Duke of Lauderdale; (the question for adjourning
being carried in the negative,) 119 to 99.
A Message was this day sent to the Lords, concerning a petition of appeal depending before them, at the suit of Tho. Slirley,
Esq; against Sir John Fagg, a Member of this House, to which petition he was, by order of the House of Lords, directed to answer on
Friday, 'desiring them to have regard to the privilege of this House.']
Thursday, May 6.
[An ingrossed Bill to prevent illegal imprisonment of the subject, was read.]
Mr Secretary Coventry.] Would have the Long Robe
declare their opinion, Whether the Lord Chief Justice
may send a Habeas Corpus without hearing the cause?
Mr Sacbeverell.] By law, no man can be sent out of
England, but for a fact he cannot be tried for in England
—And if he cannot be sent away without an offence, it
ought to be clear there is an offence. It leaves the subject in the same state he was before, not to be transported
without an offence committed.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] Is there any law whereby a
man may be tried twice for one offence?
Serjeant Crook.] Treason committed in Scotland is
not try able here—But treason committed in Ireland may
be tried here—Robberies cannot. 'Tis a rule in law,
that laws are made for things which most frequently happen—The King's writs extend to Calais, Guernsey,
and Jersey—But persons, 'tis said, may be sent to remoter parts. An information of treason, by Habeas
Corpus, may be sent into Scotland and Ireland—This bill
may be done without prejudice to the King's evidence
and prerogative, and with great safety to the subject.
Serjeant Hardres ] Matters of treason, committed
here, will be tryable here. Lord Sanquire's case (fn. 3) .
[The Bill passed.]
On a motion to adjourn the Debate of Dr Burnet's information, a petition was presented by Sir John Morton, from one
Robert Murray, who, by the illegal procurement of the Duke of
Lauderdale, lay in irons six months, in the Gatehouse, but got
his Habeas Corpus, and then was turned out of prison. (fn. 4)
Earl of Ancram.] The petition tells you "of irons,"
but were he in Scotland, he would have a piece of iron
through his head. He is the greatest Sectary in all
Scotland, though he is here in another habit—The same
of him is not to be mentioned in this assembly.
Mr Dalmaboy.] He dispersed seditious books in Scotland, and is very turbulent.
Sir Thomas Lee.] This Murray seems to be a very
young man, and he begins very early to be a covenanter. The offence, it seems, was done in Scotland,
and he was imprisoned here in irons, and turned out of
prison, no man knows why. Let him be committed according to the law of England, and not put in irons
here for keeping conventicles in Scotland.
[The petition was referred to the Committee of Grievances.]
Complaint was also made of one Browne, committed to the
(fn. 5) .
Mr Secretary Coventry.] If you will grant that one
of that country may be tried here, he may be to-morrow. If going into the enemy's army, and corresponding
with the King's enemies, be not a crime, he leaves it to
Sir Henry Ford.] If spreading seditious papers out of
Scotland be not a cause for his commitment, he knows
not what is.
Mr Vaughan.] If spreading seditious pamphlets was a
cause of turning him out, it was as great an offence as
the committing him.
[The question being put, Whether the House will proceed
in the farther consideration of the business touching the Duke of
Lauderdale; it passed in the negative, 146 to 132.]
Friday, May 7.
A Message from the Lords: "Mr Speaker, The Lords
have considered of the Message [received] from the House of
Commons, concerning privilege, in the case of Sir John Fagg,
and do return this answer: That the House of Commons need
not doubt, but [that] the Lords will have a regard to the privileged of the House of Commons, as they have of their own."
Mr Secretary Williamson.] Was commanded to attend
the King by you (fn. 6) ; and he has sent you this Answer:
"His Majesty has considered [of] the Address against the Duke
of Lauderdale, and the reasons accompanying it. As to the
Acts of Parliament mentioned to have been passed in Scotland,
his Majesty observes, that the first of those Acts was in the year
1663, which was long before the Duke of Lauderdale was
[his Majesty's] Commissioner in that Kingdom: The latter was in
pursuance of the former. As to the [words, by the] time of
[Mr] Penystone Whaley's case, his Majesty perceives, that, if
they had been spoken, they must have been spoken before the
last Act of general pardon; and his Majesty, being sensible how
great a satisfaction and security the inviolable preservation of the
former Act of indemnity and oblivion has been to all his subjects,
cannot but apprehend the dangerous consequences of enquiring
into any thing that has been pardoned by an Act of general pardon, lest the example of that might give men cause to fear their
security under the first Act of Oblivion." Given at the Court
at Whitehall, the 7th day of May 1675. C. R.
[Debate on his Majesty's Answer.]
Mr Vaughan.] Many persons have been pardoned,
that yet are of so ill morals, as not fit to be either Justices of the Peace, or in any other office; and a man of
so ill principles as the Duke of Lauderdale, no Act of
pardon can purge, so as to be capable of any office of
Sir Charles Wheeler.] If we come to examine principles, it will go a great way in the Act of Indemnity.—Would join issue upon that, whether, since that Act,
persons have so changed their principles as to be capable of offices of trust; and therefore there is great danger in enquiring into the principles of persons.
Mr Vaughan.] Why made we the laws against fanatics, if a suspicion upon non-conformists had been wholly
wiped away by the Act of Indemnity?
Sir Robert Holt.] In this would begin with your own
House in principles—There was an order of the House,
that persons should be suspended sitting here, that received not the Sacrament, according to the church of
England; and they have not.—(Some cried, Name them
then.)—He said, He must do it by order of the House,
and then can.
Mr Powle.] We only declared an opinion of the unfitness of this Duke's serving the King. The thing has
been done in all times, and may be now. Suppose a
gentleman gives a pardon to all his servants, and afterwards his steward is found faulty in his accounts; would
he not sue him at law, if he gave him no satisfaction?
You intend no prosecution of the Duke, but only removal out of employment, as a man so principled, as not
fit to be trusted with the Government. When the Act of
Oblivion passed (this is but a pardon) yet the Act of
regulating Corporations gave power to look back into
misdemeanors. Persons, upon enquiry, were not fit to
be trusted in Corporations; much less in the Government, as the Duke of Lauderdale is. He fears some
heaviness upon the hearts of the King's subjects for
not granting this request. He wishes the King faithfully served; and he may express his fears, that subjects will not go on so chearfully in the promotion of his
service, without removal of the Duke of Lauderdale.
'Tis true, the Scotch law about the Militia was made under Lord Rothes, but'twas when the Duke of Lauderdale
was Secretary, who managed all affairs in Scotland—That Act is a breach of those hostile Jaws made in the
4th of King James, and a repeal of those laws. Would
have the King moved, that these laws about the Militia
of Scotland, may be repealed in Scotland, occasioning
the jealousies that may arise thereupon.
Mr Sacbeverell.] He finds no motion made yet. Will
just make you one.—He knows not why this House
should proceed any further, you having no answer yet
from the King, for removal of such a person. 'Tis but
in vain to make any laws. Would address the King for
a farther Answer; and would adjourn the House till we
Sir Lionel Jenkins.] The King says, "Those laws
were not passed in Scotland in the Duke of Lauderdale's
time;" and therefore suggests him not to blame. This
Address differs from the very words of Magna Charta—"To be removed from the King, without legal proceedings against him."—'Tis not only a punishment, but
destruction to him, Neque destruatur nisi per judicium parium suorum, &c. Any man divested of his place, without
course of law, 'tis a destruction to. Any man accused of
felony, and his land begged in case of conviction, Lord
Coke says, is contrary to Magna Charta—Neque destruatur
aliquo modo, whilst not convicted. A man to be impeached regularly, is no destruction; but to have a man's
honour and dignity thus arbitrarily taken away, he appeals
whether 'tis not against law.—And is of opinion, that
the King has given a satisfactory Answer to the Address.
Sir Henry Ford.] Is against leaving off old ways, and
taking new ones. By impeachment, there is no need of
an Address; for that now seems to press the prerogative.
He fears this is not the way to get a good understanding betwixt the King and us.—It looks like jealousy. He
is a good and gracious King; and would not be multiplying one Address upon the head of another. It seems
like making provision under the best Prince, as if we
had the worst. How many hundreds have been pardoned, and are in great places, by the Indemnity!—
Would rest satisfied with the King's Answer.
Sir Robert Thomas.] The King's Answer is, "The
Duke of Lauderdale is pardoned by the Act."—But 'tis
not the crime we go upon, but his dangerous principles.
—Would have another Address upon that account.
Sir William Hickman.] Hears nothing of taking away
a man's freehold in the case.—What other way have you
to reach a man of such principles?—Desires you would
declare the answer not satisfactory.
Sir Lionel Jenkins.] Sending Judges into Ireland, to
serve the King there, is against that paragraph of Magna
Sir Eliab Harvey.] Would not have a pension of 3000l;
a year out of the Customs, to the Duke of Lauderdale,
be a freehold, to maintain a man of such principles.
Sir Robert Howard.] That branch of Magna Charta is
the most mistaken that can be, and Jenkins's argument
wholly against the King.—That branch of Magna Charta
is wholly on freehold, which no-body here contends for.
—Only removal.—This will make all things during
pleasure under Magna Charta.—There is no proper tryal
for grants taken away, during pleasure, because there is
no freehold in the case. But, in this case, to come to
so harsh a vote, as, "that the King's Answer is not satisfactory," 'tis too sudden; and would take another
day to consider of Reasons, the King having given your
some. He will not argue about the putting away a servant; will not argue against the sense of the House; but
would return an Answer to the King with Reasons.
Mr Garroway.] Would proceed in all things tenderly
with the King, and would in this. You have no satisfactory Answer from the King, but one chopped in—Would vote, "That this Answer gives us no satisfaction;" and would take another day to consider farther
Sir Edmund Wyndham, Knight Marshal.] Took exceptions at the words, "chopped in;" to which
Mr Garroway said] He uses no set speeches; and a
word may suddenly slip a man.
Mr Harwood.] If we can remove this Lord, we do
great service to the King. If these reasons, for his removal, were not satisfactory to all here, why did you
send them? He fears you can give no better. He is always circumspect what to say, when the King comes
into his mouth. We are not to be guided by those that
are about the King, that tell him these are not reasons,
which he is sure will justify you in what you say.
Col. Titus.] He shall say nothing of the merits of this
Lord; he knows his own opinion of him, and believes
a great many else do. But to the vote proposed, would
not pass it, "not satisfactory;" could he divine what
Answer the King would give, he would be for the Vote.
Possibly your second Address may have a prevalency that
the first had not, and would stay for it.
Mr Stockdale.] He cannot expect a more satisfactory
Answer from the second Address, we having given all
the reasons we can. You said you were not satisfied in
the Answer to the Address concerning Ireland; and you
may as well say so in this now.
Mr Sawyer.] In this case, let us use the King as he
has used us. 'Tis agreeable to the temper of this House,
to consider of the King's reasons, and to take some time
Mr Sacheverell.] Hears nothing now in the King's
Answer, but what reasons you knew before; the King
neither grants your requests, nor answers your reasons,
by the paper.
Col. Birch.] The former Address was without reasons.
The Address itself spoke your desires. You thought fit
to lay aside reasons in your Address about France.. He
confesses himself one of those who was sorely gotten on
the wrong side; and the King has given him, or graciously confirmed him in his place (fn. 7) . He is pleased to
see persons stick so close to the Act of Indemnity, and
he hopes they will not forget it when on another occasion—The King's temper so good, how close he has
stuck to it you know. The Act of purging the Corporations made a breach upon the Indemnity.—The King,
out of his accustomed goodness, says so still, "That 'tis
against the Act of Grace."—Would have the Reasons
read, to see if that be the main Reason.—Whether a person, so in the ill opinion of the Commons, should have
a pension out of your devoted money, the Customs. It
was once debated, whether the House should have
the nomination of the King's Council. 'Twas then
said, "No, by no means; 'tis a high point. But if
the King have any person there against the good-will
of the people, he may be removed by Address."—Would
not now put the question "satisfactory, or not satis
factory"—Hopes, that by adjourning the present Debate,
you may attain your end.
Mr Sacbeverell.] One thing occurs to him in the King's
Answer—Williamson says, "This Message was delivered
THEM last night," and the Message bears date this day—
Would know who of the Council draws this Answer besides the Secretaries? You thought not sit a man of his
principles, so declared, should be longer continued in office, but of that we have no Answer.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] The King signed the Answer
this morning, but it was sent to him in writing the last
night, and put in the third person to draw this Message by.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] General pardon excuses particular punishments, and whether being turned out of all
offices and employments be not a punishment? The case
of a master that has pardoned his servant, and for the
same offence to turn him away a month after.
[The Debate was adjourned till Tuesday.]
Mr Secretary Coventry.] The King has appointed the
House to attend him this day in the Banquetting-house,
at three o'clock in the afternoon, with their Address for
recalling his subjects out of the French King's service.
[The Address was accordingly presented in the afternoon.]
Saturday, May 8.
Sir Thomas Littleton.] Moves to enquire into the
Lords proceedings in the appeal brought against Sir John
Fagg, by Dr Thomas Shirley, and that some Members
be ordered to search the Lords Journal for your better information.
Mr Gerroway.] The Lords Message, you may remember, was "they would be as careful of your privileges
as their own," and at the same time they enter into their
Journal, "that you have no privilege in this case of
appeals." This is a glorious pretence to give freedom
of appeals against their own Members as well as yours—Would have some Members search their Journal, and an
order made, that your Member, Sir John Fagg, shall
make no answer to the appeal, and to reprove him if he
has already done it.
Sir Thomas Clarges.] Before there be any determination here of the thing, would have a conference with the
Lords about their order for Fagg to appear. Their court
is dernier resort, and there can be no appeals brought, but
in time of Parliament, and their orders remain to be executed out of Parliament—Would have the Lords books
viewed by some Members.
Sir Samuel Barnardiston.] Before you make any reflection on your Member (Fagg) let your own books be
inspected, and enquire if an appeal cannot be brought
against any of your Members.
Mr Vaughan.] The reason of the privilege of a Member is, That he should not be withdrawn from the service of the House. Any man, by such a stratagem as
this, may be brought to the House of Lords—Therefore
would assert our privileges.
Sir Charles Wheeler.] If it be so entered in the Lords
Journal, "That the Lords shall have no more privilege
than we," they having their places in their House for life,
and we not, we have great disadvantage—Would have the
Lords books inspected.
Sir John Fagg.] Would rather suffer by it, than deal
disingenuously with the House—Will rather subject his
cause to judgment, than give you the least disturbance.
He was served with an order by an officer of the House
of Peers, (could not tell whether it was an order or not)
"to appear to an appeal, if he thought sit." If he has erred any where, it may be charged upon his troubling the
House with it—He has waved his privilege all along in
Chancery, (the Parliament sitting), also in the Exchequer,
and now an appeal brought against him was so great a surprize, and the summons so short, that he could not advise with
his Counsel in time—You send a Message to the Lords "to
be tender of your privileges," and the Lords answer the
same as in Mr Hale's case—But there was no order of yours
in it of restraining your Member from appearance to it—And the cause was withdrawn. His case is this; he must
appear to the appeal, or judgment will pass against him for
default, to morrow at ten of the clock. Just at that
time they send you a Message. He leaves it to you, whether to insist upon his privilege, or not, to the loss of his
cause—He wholly subjects the thing to you—He confesses he did submit the hearing of his cause before the
Lords on Tuesday next—Had you laid any restraint upon
him to the contrary, he would have obeyed it.
From the Lords Journal. "Upon the Commons Message, in
Fagg's case, "to have a care of their Privileges." Resolved, That
the House of Commons need not doubt but the Lords will have
a care of the Privilege of the House of Commons, as they will of
N. B. The answer is verbatin, as in the case of Mr Hale.
Sir Robert Howard.] Point of privilege remains as
full in a Member's being summoned thither, as in a
summons to any other court.
Mr Vaughan] We know not as yet what order is entered in the Lords books—We have challenged privilege,
and the Lords have answered it. A fault there is somewhere, and ought to be rebuked; and the person faulty
lies at your mercy.
Mr Garroway.] It seems, the Lords have not determined your privileges, but your Member, Fagg, has determined them, and the Lords will quote this as a precedent against you. Desires that the proceedings may be no
rather in the Lords House by your Member, and is for
a Message to the Lords not to proceed.
Col. Tïtns.] Conceives it lawful for a Member to wave
his privilege, but where himself is concerned only, and
not the whole House. The main matter before you is
not, whether this be a breach of privilege, but whether
the Lords are judges of your privileges. They tell you
"they will take the same care of your privileges as their
own," and, at the same time, declare, "they never knew
of such privileges of yours"—If neither they nor you
have such privilege from appeals, as they say, they make
themselves judges of your privileges.
Mr Garroway.] Where can Birkenhead shew you our
right of eternity of sitting, as the Lords have? They
cannot make out the point of failure of justice, if a Member of ours may not be appealed against.
Sir Henry Ford.] In the case of Lord Roberts, and
Captain Cresset, Lord Roberts was the appellant—Is it
the privilege of the Lords to appeal, and not to be appealed against in the Lords House?
Mr Secretary Coventry.] To tell Members of yours,
"You shall view the Lords Journal," and the Lords say
"You shall not," and to know every thing there in verbis, under favour, you cannot. You can only desire copies of orders where persons are concerned.
Mr Sacheverell.] Suppose the Lords Journal be not a
record. 'Tis more hard if they can, in the end of a
Parliament, (as is said) make what part of it they please,
record. If the case be so, that they have entered such
an order, before the Message, you must look to it, or
they will vote you out of all your privileges.
Mr Vaughan.] Secretary Coventry distinguishes not
the Lords jurisdiction legislative from judicial. As the
Lords is a Parliament Journal, we cannot inspect theirs
any more than they can ours. If you have a right to
the means of doing it, you have a right to see their
Journals as well as any decree in Chancery.
Ordered, That a Committee be appointed to inspect the Lords
Journal, [and to see what entries are made therein, in the case of
Sir John Fagg, and to report the matter to the House.]
[An ingrossed Bill, from the Lords, for explanation of the late
Act of Popery, was read a first, and ordered to be read a second
Then was read the King's Answer to the Address about recalling the English forces out of France
(fn. 8) .
"His Majesty having received an Address from the House of
Commons, concerning the recalling such of his subjects as are
soldiers in the French King's service, hath thought sit to return
this Answer: That such [troops] of his subjects as were in the
Most Christian King's service, before the last treaty [made] with the
States General of the United Provinces, and were not, by that, to
be recalled, as they are at present become inconsiderable in their
numbers, so his Majesty conceiveth that they cannot be recalled
without derogation to his honour and dignity, and prejudice to
the peace he now enjoyeth, and hath publickly professed to maintain with all his neighbours. But as to the prohibiting the going
over of any more, his Majesty will renew his Proclamation, and
use all other effectual means both to forbid and hinder it. Given
at our Court at Whiteball, the 8th of May, 1675."
[The farther consideration of his Majesty's Answer was adjourned till Monday.]
Monday, May 10.
Debate on his Majesty's Answer.
Sir Thomas Littleton.] Here is an Answer from the
King—Desires that what is said upon it may not be
thought to reflect upon the King, but on the authors
of this Answer. He thinks it a very ill one; so highly
prejudicial to the people, and destructive to the King!—Would clear the matter of fact: The Answer is, "Such
of his subjects in the Most Christian King's service."—'Tis no unusual thing to call him "the French King"
in Parliament; but he rests not upon that.—Would be
informed, whether by the late peace we made with Holland, the King is left free, and at full liberty, to keep
these men actually in that King's service. How contrary would it be to his honour, if against no Treaty, nor
Article (settered) to recall them? Under that Proclamation mentioned, all this mischief is grown. The number
of English forces there is now great; 8000 men at least.
The Duke of Monmouth's regiment, and the Irish, go a
great way in the number, besides the Scotch. Great
numbers going into France is no breach of the Treaty;
but into Holland, is a breach.—Would have that cleared.
If we thank the King for this Message, we do it for sending men over into France.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] That Treaty does not command the forces to stay; but 'tis enough to tell you,
that by that Treaty the King is not obliged to recall those
troops. 'Tis no error to call the King of France "the
Most Christian King," as all the world besides call him.
He tells you, on his reputation, by all he knows, there
are not above 2000 of these forces in all. The King,
besides, tells you of his Proclamation, and "will use all
other effectual means to prevent more going over." Is
this such an abuse to the nation, and such a horrid thing?
This is an advice to the King, in a thing he is entrusted
with. This is not to be murmured at, but thanked for,
to give you such an Answer, against his prerogative. Do
you believe that the King, in making peace with Holland, did write no respectful letter to the King of France?
And just at that hour of the King's mediation of peace,
and ambassadors for it, to do such a partial act as to recall these men! Shall he be considerable neither on one
side, nor the other, nor in mediatorship? Suppose the
King was resolved to do it; 'tis not proper now. Cannot he keep a word, or a promise? What, if the King
make a promise, and the House of Commons break it,
of what value will it be for the future? If you desire a
farther explanation of this Answer, you may. But he
thinks it a great condescension in the King, as it is already.
Mr Garroway.] Observes many things to be debated,
peace and war. The thing is lodged, and he will not break
into it, nor meddle with it. We are not ready yet for
a conclusion of our opinions to this Answer. If we open
the matter of fact, see how we contribute to France's
greatness. The King's honour, crown, and dignity are concerned in it. If the Low Countries and Flanders should
be conquered, knows not what our condition will be.
We know of no obligation to the numbers of men in
France, and so can say nothing to the recall of them.
—Moves to have the King's Answer debated in a Grand
Sir Thomas Littleton.] Seconds the motion for a Grand
Committee, to come the better to the right understanding of the matter. Coventry has yielded the matter, that
no treaty does impose the staying of these forces on the
King. If any thing falls from him, out of zeal to his
country, desires pardon; but if we let those things go,
we give the greatest blow both to our Country and the
Mr Sec. Coventry.] What he said was, "the Treaty
of Holland obliged it not."
Sir Thoma, Clarges.] Conceives, that where the King
is dishonoured, and there is a contempt of his Proclamation, and a violation of his honour, we are concerned.
The Message tells you, that "the King has sent out
his Proclamation to forbid all;" but, by letters from the
ports, we are informed that recruits go frequently over
into France, 3 James, ch. 31. "No officer can go into
any foreign service without taking the oaths of allegiance." At Dover that has not been done; they go
over as if they were to be instructed in the Popish Reli
gion, to our destruction; and by that law mentioned,
"Bonds are to be entered into, and oaths (and all returned into the Exchequer) to practise nothing against
that oath." This going over is to the dishonour of the
King, and danger of Religion.
Sir Lionel Jenkins.] The Question is, Whether the
House should go into a Grand Committee? The execution of that Statute mentioned is lest to the officers of
the ports, and their crimes and omissions are not to be
imputed to the King. One cause assigned for the ill execution of that Statute, is, "that they are tryable for felony,
before Judges of Oyer and Terminer, and yet the fault done
beyond the seas." Lord Coke makes a difficulty upon
it, and never knew any man tried upon it. The first
point is, whether we, having a treaty with Holland,
break that treaty by having forces in the French service.
Sir Thomas Littleton.] Took him down to rectify him.
These men, before the Treaty with Holland, no breach
of Holland peace not to recall them.
Sir Lionel Jenkins.] The words of the treaty, "Neither party shall give commission, directly or indirectly,
to aid, &c." The Dutch insisted on this, that the Duke
of Monmouth went with a great body of men into France,
which they thought so much the harder, because there was
a restraint upon going into Holland. They quarrelled not
at secret going over, but avowed. When the French
saw Sir Walter Vane in Holland, who said he had leave
to go from the King,—to show such a diploma from the
King, was to show the supineness of the Government.
He had not licence; and it was no breach with France—No more are these men stealing into France a breach
Col. Birch.] Sees many that speak, crave grains of
allowance; he has most need of any, and hopes he shall
not be denied them—Is for a Grand Committee—If this
thing be well done, hardly any thing else can be ill done.
He agrees that war and peace are in the King's hand;
but he thinks that in this business of the peace with Holland, the King asked the advice of this House. You are
embarked in it, and the miscarriage will be the fault
of this House—Would not quarrel with any of our
neighbours, but especially not with the great Prince on
the other side the water; but better now than at another
time—While the people are under dissatisfactions, he
knows no other way to satisfy them but in this House,
and no way here, but in a Grand Committee.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] A peace there was advised
in this House, but not this peace—The terms the King
made himself, and he would not have Birch tell you what
the articles are, or should be.
Sir Charles Wheeler.] Observes, that great things are
brought into this House, and still prove but matter of
enquiry. For the term of "the French King" spoken of,
when we have wars we say so of him, and what have we
got by it? In all foreign affairs they come up to the
title of "the British King" with us. Of these men in
the French service, he looks upon the Scotch guards as
a thing particular to their nation, who have been in France
sixty years at least in that capacity; the rest are the Duke
of Monmouth's regiment, and Sir George Hamilton's;
Col. Churchill's regiment being reformed into the Duke
of Monmouth's. (Sometimes we are forced to be quit
of the Irish, and now we must recall them.) He cannot inform himself, any way, of above 1000 horse—When
you have made all these means to prevent their going
over, idle fellows will go. He was taken dawn to Order.
The Speaker.] 'Tis disorderly to take a man down,
before you know what he will say.
Sir Charles Wheeler goes on.] You can stop them
no more than you can the exportation of wool—Here
come over German and French gentlemen of the horse,
to buy horses; and there goes over, at least, a man to
three horses; and so, many men under that pretence steal
over. If there be not above 8000, how is the honour
of the nation exposed! He fears the honour of the nation as much as another, but would have a reason for
Lord Cavendish.] 'Tis said "there are not above 2000
English and Irish." 'Tis strange there should be no more.
They won two battles for the French, the last summer,
by their own confession, and are a number to do the like
this summer—Would go into a Grand Committee.
Sir Thomas Lee.] To debate the thing clearly, you
must resolve, whether to go into a Grand Committee—You must first state the matter—You are told of the
King's prerogative, and that when you consider the number, you will be of another mind; therefore would go
into a Grand Committee.
Sir Edmund Jennings.] The King tells you, "He
will use all effectual means for preventing the going over
of more men into France"—If that be so good an Answer, return thanks for that part of the Answer; and,
when that is done, go into a Grand Committee to consider the rest.
Sir Thomas Meres] What part of the King's Answer
will require a farther Address to the King, will be the
subject-matter of the Grand Committee's Debate. It may
be, Thanks to his Majesty will be a part; we know not.
—Sees it contended, "that the forces in France, before
the Treaty, are not obliged to be recalled;" but the objection must be thoroughly understood at the Committee. No man can say that there is any thing in our
Address contrary to any Treaty. The matter requires a Question, and an Answer, and so must be omitted.
Mr Waller.] He has formerly seen how dear our meddling with peace and war has proved to us. We have
no light nor measure at all in such things. All that
comes to the King is from his own and foreign Ambassadors. These enquiries have been very fatal and costly
to us. The House, in the last Treaty with Holland, gave
advice; and the King asked it. Now it falls out properly, to see how that advice has been infringed; followed, or not followed. A knotty business there will
come before you, this advice not followed—'Tis the Nation's glory to have the King the Mediator of peace, and
christian commiseration requires it. The thing is of great
weight, and would go into a Grand Committee.
Sir John Ernly.] Since you have had a Question
firsted, and seconded, "for Thanks for that part of the
King's Speech, of his effectual care to prevent the going
over of more forces," you ought to put it.
Mt Secretary Williamson.] Here are two Questions;
one, the main Question, about Thanks, &c. and the other,
for going into a Grand Committee. If the matter be
opened, doubts not but the whole Answer will require
your Thanks. Supposes the thing may be done in the
House, as well as in the Grand Committee. He is but
young in it, and leaves that Question as you please.
Mr Powle.] To the first part of your Address you
have a denial; to the second you have no Answer at all.
There are several forces gone over since the Address—But men being sent away, and the thing depending,
would therefore have it go to a Grand Committee.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] He has heard the King say,
"Have not the ports a standing order, to stop persons?
Must he send them one every week?"
Mr Hale.] There are few in number, indeed, of these
forces left, because they are most killed—He knows he saw
upon the road eighty in a company—They land at Boulogne,
and will not land at Calais, because in view of the packetboats—The Duke of Monmouth's regiment is recruited
by these men, and Turenne's army had been lost without
them; and 'tis said in France, "they set the crown upon
the King of France's head." He has lately had opportunity to know it in France.
Mr Vaughan.] Your vote cannot make that to be,
which naturally is not, viz. "Thanks for the Answer,
and that it is satisfactory." Possibly there may be a
league in the case, and the King's honour concerned;
and when we come freely to debate it, in a Grand Committee, we lay aside all these considerations.
The House resolved into a Grand Committee.
Sir Charles Harbord in the Chair.
Mr Garroway.] This is one of the seriousest businesses
that ever was in the House—Would do nothing in it,
to involve the nation in a war; but it staggers him to
hear the King's obligation named; but yet what that
obligation is, not spoken of Whether it be a treaty, or
no; for what time, or on what condition, if declared,
we may avoid that rock of a war. All we have told us
is but a pennyworth of news in the Gazette every week.
Sometimes we know things that they do not tell us. Let
them set us up some marks whereby we shall not touch
upon the King's honour, and they will be good guides to
us for our Debate. The King of France is ready to overrun us all, if his conquests go on.
Sir Richard Temple.] If the Proclamation recalls not
these forces, he would go as far in a Bill in it as may be.
Proposes a farther Address to the King, "to recall all
persons gone over since the Holland peace."
Mr Secretary Williamson.] How difficult is it to meddle, or come to any resolutions, in things where the facts
are not known? He is not to answer for the King of
France's violences and oppressions. 'Tis said he took
Treves for his convenience only, and on intercession of
letters, to break the neutrality of that place, he took
that town himself into his possession. As soon as that spark
sell upon the Palatinate, the King offered a mediation
at Cologne. (fn. 9) Some matters are such in these affairs as
cannot be said open unto you. He thinks that the King will
do more than he says. 'Tis our great interest to balance
the matter with Holland. He is as jealous of the successes of France as any man; and if this alliance be made
with Holland and Denmark, and they strengthened by
sea and land, we ought to think of that balance. When
the peace shall be made, 'tis our interest to have it go
through the King's hands. You were told of an exception, at Vienna, against our mediation; but he hears no
such thing. Give this matter the best end you can, it
will hazard our mediation. France has paid Sweden,
though but a stander-by, and neutral; and whilst we
show such a partiality as this recalling the forces will
be, it will put the French King upon providing for himself,
as not trusting our mediation. He fears that declaring
ourselves so generally as is proposed in the recalling
these forces, and being not obliged to it by the treaty
of Holland, may be a just exception against our mediation, and may encourage France forsaking us in the general treaty of peace; they discovering we are declaring
partialities, and so will reject us.
Sir Thomas Littleton.] The second sort of men are
gone into France, since the Holland peace—The first are
wholly omitted in the Answer—Doubts that the last
part of the King's Answer is intricate. It is a general
prohibition, but that is no part of our Address. The
King tells you, "He will take any farther way to prevent their going over." If taken in a general sense, he
is not satisfied that it is an Answer to our Address. As to
that of the old men there, he says that there was no Article to the contrary, but that the King might recall
them—Easy to know a Secret Article—No man to go
into France or Holland—But the going into France is so
public, the private Article is now as public. How know
we what promises have passed from the King about these
forces? He knows of none, nor is willing to believe
any; being only spoken of by way of supposition—Williamson said, "We, not knowing the intimacy of
things, might be deceived." But 'tis as certain, that
the French King has taken Treves for his convenience,
as that he has made this war for his glory. And farther, he tells you, "That the business of the Palatinate
happened through the neglect of the interposition of the
King of England." Is sorry to hear the authority of the
King of England was employed to hinder the Elector—He might not have been so over-run—'Tis said, "this
recalling, &c. would prejudice our mediation." Is one
of those who understands not how the mediation can
stand to the good of England. He apprehends that the King,
without the assistance of the Parliament, could not carry a
war on against Holland,—And is afraid that the authority
and figure the King has in his neutrality would be made
use of for the French advantage—Therefore desires the
King may now be put out of that capacity of mediation,
to make the King of France a terror to all Christendom.
To continue France in all these acquisitions, and secured
in all, or the greatest part—The Confederates wasted,
and the French army maintained in the bowels of the Confederates country, scarce reparable in this age—If the
Confederacy be dissolved before the French be reduced
back to France again, the most ruinous thing in the
world! When once the Confederates dissolve, and France
in this high posture, fears that the Confederacy is never
to be renewed to the end of the world. He speaks like
an ordinary man; you have his good-will—'Tis a plain
thing; he sees no good we can have when the Confederates are broken, and we strive to put the French [King]
into that formidable condition, that we should be afraid
to anger him now, what will it be to anger him then,
when the Confederates are broken? He must have Dover, because he is angry with us, and over-run us at last,
as he has done others.—Exceptions being taken by Mr
Secretary Coventry at what fell from him, thus explains
himself.—The King not to be in such a mediation as to
leave the King of France a terror to all the world.
Mr Garroway.] If we were off from France, all the
world would put us upon being mediators.
Col. Birch.] Littleton's words were, "Such a mediation as may make the King of France a terror to all
Sir Thomas Lee.] The words are to be written down,
that to eternity the world may know what the opinion of
this House was.
Col. Titus.] It belongs to the Gentleman to explain
himself—"As if the King should be so inconsiderable
as not to be mediator." If any interpret the words so,
the Gentleman must explain himself; and he has done it,
and sees no reason why the words should be set down.
Sir William Coventry.] Begs leave to pass by what has
passed, as a parenthesis, and proceed to the business. It
is good news to him that the balance of France was so
near being made by these forces. When France first
made an inroad into Holland, how long was it before
there was any thing to look her in the face! France
sees, by that, the danger of letting the Confederates come
together—When disunited and peace, no such thing as
balance—That no predominant power be a terror to the
rest, is our true balance between France and Spain. He
wishes that the dust was a little shaken from the balance
in the matter—He has not heard that mediations have
been of such a value as to leave out the aid of a kingdom
for them. He does not think that this withdrawing the
forces would make us improper for being mediator, for
som times mediations may help to obstruct peace as well
as make peace. Many others are admitted for mediators
as well as we. He has heard of the state of Venice, and
the Pope, and respects are seldom refused when offered
as mediation—Fears that the prevalency of France will
spoil our markets more than any thing—When she has got
peace, we are like to have a hard market—We can buy
our wines but of one chapman then, but if France be brought
low, you have choice of chapmen for any wares she can carry
to market—Will offer something to the matter of recalling these forces—Does not conceive it possible to
have these forces back, or prevent others going over,
unless it be before Holland have peace with France. It
was intended by the King and his Ministers, that no
more should go over; yet they do. As long as regiments and officers are there, 'tis his interest to have them
recruited, to keep the troops up to such a degree. The
root will draw nourishment as long as it grows in your
garden, and to destroy it you must pluck it up. When
the thing is rightly considered, hopes the King will have
other thoughts. There appears no treaty between France
and Holland, and is consident that there is none. We have
no treaty yet finished with Holland to establish commerce,
and believes we would not send subjects to assist the King
of France, to make him greater, 'till that be settled.
'Tis a probability, that after France has made peace, and
ever shall be in a condition to reckon with us, they will
do it, for making peace without them, as well as for
withdrawing men away now. It is not ordinary for
Princes to be bound up thus; the honour of a Prince, at
home, is the maintenance of his subjects; and, abroad,
not mistaking his interest. Did the King intimate he
was to send to more forces? If the French King has
used means to draw men over, he has cancelled all obligations to the contrary; therefore he hopes, that [there is]
nothing in the whole matter but [what] we may have a
gracious Answer [to]; and is for the Address for recall
of the forces.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] All the long discourses here
have been, "Whether we shall go to war with France,
or no." As to the comparison of the "plant in a garden,"
the best answer to Experience is Experience. There is
not one English pair of colours in Holland, and yet more
men gone over into Holland, by thrice the number, than
into France. These are things that cannot be avoided.
A man of honour breaks not his word with any man,
but much less where he is most obliged. If there should
be any such agreement of no more acceptance of our
troops, the cagles will go where the carcass is
(fn. 10) , where
money is. More of our men have come over to Holland from the French army than we have sent into
France. Should the world take notice of any unanimity
betwixt you and the King, let all men lay their hands
upon their hearts, and declare, whether the King can recall these forces with his honour.
Col. Birch.] England is of that spirit, rather to desire
to know the worst of a danger, than stay till to-morrow
for it. You are told of "secret engagements that may
prostrate the honour of the King." In this case here is
an end of your Debate. Either we must debate thus,
or consider how the interest of the nation is. The King
cannot miscarry when he goes into this bottom. There
are ninety in a hundred against France, all England over.
You may make war with France with the money he overbalances you in your trade, which you get, like bees, by industry—Remembers that if you had not only made peace
with the Dutch, but told the King of France why you did
it, you had not now debated this matter here. If you
will not adjourn the Debate, put the Question.
Mr Sawyer.] Whenever you demand right you stick
to it. As on the imprisonment of one of your Members, there is either cause shown for it, or else you deliver him. You have made Address upon Address for
him, and if not released you adjourn, as in Lord Arundel's
case, in the Lords House (fn. 11) . Where an Address for a
thing is matter of advice only, and not of right, you
have always acquiesced in the King's Answer. If it be a
demand of right, he is for adhering; but it being pure
matter of advice, and the King tells you positively, "he
cannot do it with his honour," where will it end if the
King should deny you? And you cannot force the matter upon him, but leave him at his liberty—He appeals
to precedents in this kind.
Mr Vaughan.] Finds now the whole stress of the business to be "the King's honour." "If all national contracts are broken, no nation will trust us." 'Tis so amongst
common men—But after you find leagues have been destructive, it has been the prudence of Princes, (who may
err like other men) to recall such leagues. When a peace
shall be made, you expose these men to be knocked on
the head; and when wounded, they have been knocked
on the head to make room for the French. If you allow them to be there, you may be put to pay them before long—Therefore would recall them.
Mr Secretary Coventry.] Inspect records, and you will
find whenever a King has told you, "he could not concede a thing with his honour," that you never have farther pressed him to it.
Sir Edward Dering.] Would, in this great affair, take
the deliberation of one whole night to consider of it, and
would now adjourn the Debate.
Sir Thomas Mores.] To answer the objection of law—In the case of the Palatinate you will find a Message of
this nature, and lately, in the Duke's Marriage with Modena, a second Address (fn. 12) . He thinks we have a right to
petition pro bono publico—These forces are documentum
publicæ, a nusance; and doubts not but the Address will
be with all humility imaginable.
The Question being put, Whether a farther Address should be
made to the King for recall of his subjects now in the service of
the French King, the Grand Committee thereupon divided; and
the Tellers, viz. Sir Trevor Williams, and Sir John Hanmer, appointed by the Chairman, Sir Charles Harbord, differing in their
account of the Years and Noes, some called, "Tell again," others, "Report;" on which great disorder began; gentlemen rifing from their places and mingling in the pit; hot and provoking discourses and gestures passed on both sides, especially betwixt
Lord Cavendish and Sir John Hanmer. Some said, that Lord Cavendish's sword was half drawn out, but prevented by Mr Russel,
who kept close to him. Others said, that Lord Cavendish spit in
Sir John Hanmer's face, but that was only eagerness of speech, and
so some might accidentally fly from him. But it was visible to all
that Sir James Smith, setting his arms on his side, did, in a rude
manner, make through the crowd, and jostled several, and came
up to the table, where yet more hot discourses passed between
him and Lord Cavendish, Mr Stockdale, Mr Sucheverell, and several others; Mr Stockdale, and some others, setting their scet upon
the mace, which lay below the table, in the usual place at Grand
Committees. This disorder continuing near half an hour, the
standers by, on the upper benches, expecting very fatal consequences, especially when the young gallants, as Mr Thynne, Mr
Newport, and several others, leaped over the seats to join Lord
Cavendish. But the Speaker, very opportunely and prudently, rising from his seat near the Bar, in a resolute and slow pace, made
his three respects through the crowd, and took the Chair. The
mace was still retained by the said gentlemen, but, at last, being
forcibly said upon the table, all the disorder ceased, and the gentlemen went to their places. The Speaker, being sat, spoke to this
purpose, "That to bring the House into order again, he took the
Chair, though not according to Order." Some gentlemen, as Mr
Sacheverell, and others, excepted against his coming into the Chair,
but the doing it was generally approved, as the only expedient to
suppress the disorder (fn. 13) .—Then
Sir Thomas Lee, approving of the Speaker's taking the
Chair, though not according to Order] Moved that there
might be an engagement passed upon the honour of every
Member, standing up in his place, to proceed no farther
in any thing that had happened in the unfortunate disorder
at the Grand Committee, fearing that, as soon as the
House had risen, the thing might be recriminated, and ill
Consequences ensue thereupon.
Which was seconded by several, and agreed to. So every Member, standing up in his place, did consent accordingly; then particularly,
Col. Somerset Fox.] Declared that some warm ex
pressions had passed between him and Sir Robert Thomas,
but, upon command of the House, he would give his honour to proceed no farther thereupon.
Sir John Hanmer did the same, but named nobody.
So the House adjourned to the next day.