titled by this order to his habeas corpus, he made a regular application for it to the King’s-Bench both that term and the next, and being put off by the Judges, he printed firſt, an epiſtle dated April 8th 1648, to Mr Lenthal, intitled, The Priſoner’s Plea for a Habeas Corpus[sidenote 1], which was followed by another dated the 19th of that month to Mr Juſtice Rolle, in 1648, intitled, The Priſoner’s mournful Cry againſt the Judges of the King’s Bench[sidenote 2], and was ſuffered to plead his cauſe himſelf at that bar, on the 8th of May[sidenote 3]. However, no rule being made there in his favour, he petitioned the Houſe of Commons, whereby he obtained, Auguſt 1ſt, both his diſcharge from impriſonment, and an order to make him ſatisfaction for his ſufferings[footnote 1]. The next day after he had got his li-berty
Sidenotes
- ↑ (x x) In this epiſtle he accuſes Cromwell of wilful murder, and deſires Lenthal to bring the accuſation into the Houſe, for killing Arnel, at Ware in Hertfordſhire, Nov. 15, 1647, in a time of peace, and declared ſo to be by Parliament’s declaration, in anſwer to the Scotch Commiſſioners, March 4, 1647.
- ↑ (y y) The ſeveral proceedings for obtaining the habeas corpus are ſet forth in this piece, wherein he ſpares not amply to beſpatter that Judge, as well as the reſt, for delaying it.
- ↑ (z z) Legal and Fundamental Liberties, p. 8.
Footnotes
- ↑ [O O] He petitioned and obtained his diſcharge, and an order for ſatisfaction.] Beſides his own, there was a petition alſo ſigned by ſeven or eight thouſand of his friends, and delivered to the Houſe; which was afterwards printed, together with the Speech of Sir John Maynard, to whom he attributes this final diſcharge[citation 5]; the order for which is mentioned in Ruſhworth[citation 6]. Thus, 1648, Aug. 1, a petition was read in behalf of Lieutenant-colonel John Lilburne, and upon long debate thereupon, it was ordered that he ſhould be diſcharged his impriſonment, and a conference to be had with the Lords for the ſame. Referred alſo to a Committee how Lieutenant⟨-⟩colonel John Lilburne may have ſatisfacton, and allowance for his ſufferings, as was formerly voted. Our author has alſo given us the names of the perſons who were appointed of this Committee, which are Sir John Maynard, Sir Peter Wentworth, Lord Carre, who was the chairman, Colonel Boſwell, Colonel Ludlow, Mr Holland, and Mr Copley[citation 7]. The Lieutenant-colonel immediately preſented a petition to this Committee, praying for ſome conſiderable augmentation of the ſum of 2000l. allotted to him by the Houſe of Lords in 1646, the rather, becauſe his fellow ſufferer, Dr Baſtwick, had 4000l. reparations allotted him, whoſe ſufferings he conceived, were nothing ſo great as his in torment, pain, and ſhame; and in regard that the eſtates of Lord Cottington and Sir Francis Windebank, by ſubſequent orders of both Houſes upon urgent occaſions are much intangled and altered from the condition they were in 1646, when the Lords ordered him 2000 marks out of them[citation 8]; and for that the eſtate of James Ingram cannot be found, nor at preſent come by, he prays that all, or the greateſt part of his reparations, may be fixed upon the Lord Coventry’s eſlate[citation 9]. The Committee having made a report, an ordinance was read the firſt time, and paſſed in the Houſe. Agreeable to this petition, Aug. 22d, for the raiſing of 3000l. out of the real eſtate of the late Lord Coventry, ſometime Keeper of the Great-Seal of England, towards his reparations for the two ſentences againſt him in the Star⟨-⟩chamber[citation 10]. But the late Lord Coventry’s ſon and heir hearing thereof in France, came immediately home, and by his intereſt put a ſtop to the ſecond reading. And our author was informed, that the Houſe had a deſign of aſſigning him the ſame ſum out of the public money. This change in his ſecurity he did not at all reliſh; and therefore in order to prevent it, he drew up a large petition, and printed it on the 4th of September; a copy of which he preſented at the door of the Houſe to every member at his entrance the day following, when the ſecond reading was appointed[citation 11], and the reſult, as we learn from Ruſhworth, was, That the Houſe having conſidered his petition, ‘an ordinance for ſettling 3000l. upon him, to be ad-
cording to law for treaſonable and ſeditious practices alſo, againſt the State. That Mr Sollicitor, and all the Lawyers of the Houſe ſhould take care for preparing the charge againſt them, and bringing of them to trial the next term; and that Mr Becke of Lincoln’s-Inn ſhould be employed in this buſineſs for the better expediting, and carrying it on. January 20th, the Houſe was informed that Lilburne and Wildman were not carried to their ſeveral priſons, according to the orders yeſterday made; and that many of their party gave out high language, that they ſhould not be committed, unleſs their deſires were granted before their commitment. The Houſe hereupon ordered Lilburne and Wildman ſhould be committed to the ſeveral priſons, according to the order of yeſterday; and that the officers of the guard attending the Houſe, ſhould draw out a ſufficient guard to aſſiſt the Serjeant at Arms, or his Deputy, in the execution of the ſaid orders; and the guard being drawn forth, they were conveyed to their ſeveral priſons.—And the Houſe, being informed that a meeting would be at Deptford in Kent, on Sunday next, by ſome diſcontented perſons, upon this petition to the Houſe, ordered the Committee ſhould take care to ſuppreſs all meetings upon the ſaid petition. And in reſpect many of theſe petitions were printed and given out to ſeveral perſons to be diſperſed; and alſo that there might be other meetings in London upon the ſame, the Houſe ordered, that the Militia of London and Weſtminſter Hamlets, &c. ſhould take eſpecial care for ſuppreſſing of all meetings, and preventing any inconveniencies that might ariſe by reaſon of the ſaid petition, intitled, The Petition of many thouſands of the free-born people of England, &c. So much we learn of the ſeveral ſteps taken in this affair by the Parliament. And our author himſelf, ſpeaking on another occaſion of this anſwer to the information on the 19th of January, he declares, that upon that day he openly delivered at the bar of the Houſe of Commons a formal charge or impeachment of high-treaſon (according to their own ordinances) againſt Mr Oliver Cromwell and his ſubtle Machiavilian ſon-in-law, Mr Henry Ireton, for their notorious doing that in reference to the King, for but the petty acting of which, in compariſon to theirs, they impeached Mr Denzil Holles, Sir Philip Stapleton, &c. of high-treaſon (as appeareth in their own book of declarations, p. 81, 82. art. 2, 3.) and forcibly expunged them their Houſe as traytors[citation 1] therefore. In the ſame piece our author falls upon this rival friend, with the following imputation of baſeneſs and treachery to him at this time, ‘Mr Oliver (ſays he) by the help of the army, at their firſt rebellion againſt the Parliament, their Lords and Maſters, was no ſooner up, but, like a moſt perfidious baſe unworthy man, he turned my enemy and jaylor, and was as great with Mancheſter in particular as ever. Yea the Houſe of Peers were his only white boyes; being more than his drudges, and more conformable to his will than the Houſe of Commons itſelf; and who but Oliver (that before to me had called them both tyrants and uſurpers), became their proctor wherever he came? yea, and ſet his ſon Ireton at work for them alſo, inſomuch, as at ſome meetings with ſome of my friends at the Lord Wharton’s lodgings, he clapt his hand upon his breaſt, and to this purpoſe, profeſſed as in the ſight of God, upon his conſcience, that the Lords had as true a right to their legiſlative and juriſdictive power over the Commons, as he had to the coat upon his back; and he would procure a friend, Mr Nathaniel Fiennes[citation 2], ſhould argue and plead their ſaid right with any friend I had in England; and not only ſo, but did he not oblige the General and Council of War at Windſor, about the time when the other votes of no more addreſſes were to paſs[citation 3] to make a declaration to the whole kingdom, declaring the legall rights of the Lords Houſe, and their fixed reſolutions to maintain and uphold it; which, as I remember, was ſent to the General, &c. to the Lords by Sir Hardreſſe Waller.’ He afterwards obſerves, that Cromwell ſet his agents at work to get him to acknowledge the Lords juriſdiction, and that he and Ireton, after a little under-hand working begun to appear above-board, in rendering all the means gone about in the army for his liberty, not only ineffectual, but even a ſnare to him; and that their baſe dealing with him had put him upon writing theſe ſeveral pieces to diſcover their depth of knavery. (1.) The Jugglers diſcovered. (2.) Jonah’s Cry out of the Whale’s Belly. (3.) The People’s Prerogative. (4.) His additional Plea before Mr John Maynard. (5.) A Whip for the Houſe of Lords. (6.) Raſh Oaths unwarrantable[citation 4].
Citations
- ↑ (94) Legal and Fundamental Liberties, in the introduction.
- ↑ † Afterwards Lord-Chancellor to the Protector.
- ↑ (95) Theſe votes paſſed the Houſe of Commons February 15, 1647. Salmon’s Chronological Hiſtorian, p. 96. col. b. edit. 1723, 8vo.
- ↑ (96) Legal and Fundamental Liberties, p. 27.
- ↑ (97) Legal and Fundamental Liberties, p. 19. Where he alſo obſerves, that this great number of ſigners to the petition was procured in 7 or 8 days time, the juncture being critically favourable to him, on account of the Parliament’s apprehenſions from the Cava⟨l⟩iers; and it is remarkable, that, the day after this petition, Prince CHarles being with his fleet in the Downs, ſent a declaration to London, that he was come to releaſe his father, &c.
- ↑ (98) Where laſt cited, p. 1212.
- ↑ (99) Preparative to a Hue and Cry, &c. p. 18.
- ↑ (100) All that part of Lord Cottington’s eſtate, which he ſhould have had, was diſpoſed of to Lord Say, and they had compounded with Windebank’s Heir. Ibid. p. 18.
- ↑ (101) Ibid. p. 21.
- ↑ (102) Ruſhworth, ubi ſupra, p. 1236.
- ↑ (103) Preparative to a Hue and Cry, p. 19. If we may believe himſelf, his reaſono was a concern for the public welfare, which muſt ſuffer ſo far by this change; but it is evident, that the conſideration of ſome rumours and deductions, which might be inſiſted on by Mr Prynne to adjuſt the ballance of his army accounts, was ſufficient to put his mouth out of taſte with the method of paying him out of the public money.
vanced
