The Lord Russel's innocency further defended, by way of reply to an ansvver, entituled, The magistracy and government of England vindicated by Sir Robert Atkyns ...
         Atkyns, Robert, Sir, 1621-1709.
      
       
         
           1689
        
      
       Approx. 34 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 9 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
       
         Text Creation Partnership,
         Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :
         2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).
         A26143
         Wing A4140
         ESTC R861
         13170341
         ocm 13170341
         98276
         
           
            This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of
             Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal
            . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
          
        
      
       
         Early English books online.
      
       
         (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A26143)
         Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 98276)
         Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 445:2 or 2469:12)
      
       
         
           
             The Lord Russel's innocency further defended, by way of reply to an ansvver, entituled, The magistracy and government of England vindicated by Sir Robert Atkyns ...
             Atkyns, Robert, Sir, 1621-1709.
          
           [4], 15 p.
           
             Printed for Timothy Goodwin ...,
             London :
             1689.
          
           
             Copy filmed at reel 2469 bound and filmed following Wing A4139B, A4141 and preceding Wing A4136.
             Reproduction of original in Huntington Library.
          
        
      
    
     
       
         Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
         Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors.
      
       
         EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
         EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
         The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
         Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
         Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
         Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
         The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
         Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
         
          Keying and markup guidelines are available at the
           Text Creation Partnership web site
          .
        
      
       
         
         
      
    
     
       
         eng
      
       
         
           Russell, William, -- Lord, 1639-1683.
           Shower, Bartholomew, -- Sir, 1658-1701. -- Magistracy and government of England vindicated.
           Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1642-1649 -- Sources.
        
      
    
     
        2003-03 TCP
        Assigned for keying and markup
      
        2003-04 Aptara
        Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images
      
        2005-02 Rachel Losh
        Sampled and proofread
      
        2005-02 Rachel Losh
        Text and markup reviewed and edited
      
        2005-04 pfs
        Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
      
    
  
   
     
       
         
         
           Advertisement
           .
        
         
           THere
           are
           lately
           Printed
           for
           
             Timothy
             Goodwin
          
           ,
           at
           the
           Maidenhead
           against
           St.
           
           Dunstan's
           Church
           in
           Fleet-street
           ,
           these
           Three
           Books
           following
           .
        
         
           I.
           An
           Enquiry
           into
           the
           Power
           of
           Dispensing
           with
           Penal
           Statutes
           .
           
             Together
             with
             some
          
           Animadversions
           
             upon
             a
             Book
             writ
             by
             Sir
          
           Edward
           Herbert
           ,
           
             Lord
             Chief
             Justice
             of
             the
             Court
             of
          
           Common-Pleas
           ,
           Entituled
           ,
           A
           short
           Account
           of
           the
           Authorities
           in
           Law
           ,
           upon
           which
           Judgment
           was
           given
           in
           Sir
           Edward
           Hales's
           Case
           .
        
         
           II.
           The
           Power
           ,
           Jurisdiction
           ,
           and
           Priviledge
           of
           Parliament
           ;
           
             And
             the
             Antiquity
             of
             the
          
           House
           of
           Commons
           
             Asserted
             :
             Occasioned
             by
             an
             Information
             in
             the
          
           King's-Bench
           ,
           
             by
             the
             Attorney-General
             ,
             against
             the
             Speaker
             of
             the
          
           House
           of
           Commons
           .
        
         
           As
           also
           a
           Discourse
           concerning
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Jurisdiction
           in
           the
           Realm
           of
           England
           ;
           occasioned
           by
           the
           late
           Commission
           in
           Ecclesiastical
           Causes
           .
        
         
           
             III.
             A
             Defence
             of
             the
             Late
             Lord
          
           RVSSEL
           '
           
             s
             Innocency
          
           ,
           By
           way
           of
           Answer
           or
           Confutation
           of
           a
           Libellous
           Pamphlet
           ,
           Intituled
           ,
           
             An
             Antidote
             against
             Poyson
          
           ;
           With
           Two
           Letters
           of
           the
           Author
           of
           this
           Book
           ,
           upon
           the
           Subject
           of
           his
           
             Lordship's
             Tryal
          
           .
        
         
           Together
           with
           an
           Argument
           in
           the
           Great
           Case
           concerning
           Elections
           of
           Members
           to
           Parliament
           ,
           between
           Sir
           
             Samuel
             Barnardiston
             Plaintiff
          
           ,
           and
           Sir
           
             William
             Soames
          
           Sheriff
           of
           Suffolk
           ,
           Defendant
           ,
           In
           the
           Court
           of
           King's-Bench
           ,
           in
           an
           Action
           upon
           the
           Case
           ,
           and
           afterwards
           by
           Error
           sued
           in
           the
           Exchequer-Chamber
           .
        
         
           All
           Three
           Writ
           by
           Sir
           
             Robert
             Atkyns
          
           ,
           Knight
           of
           the
           Honourable
           Order
           of
           the
           Bath
           ,
           and
           late
           one
           of
           the
           Judges
           of
           the
           Court
           of
           Common-Pleas
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           THE
           Lord
           Russel's
           INNOCENCY
           Further
           DEFENDED
           ;
           By
           way
           of
           REPLY
           TO
           AN
           ANSWER
           ,
           ENTITULED
           ,
           
             The
             Magistracy
             and
             Government
             of
          
           ENGLAND
           Vindicated
           .
        
         
           By
           Sir
           
             ROBERT
             ATKYNS
          
           ,
           Knight
           of
           the
           Honourable
           Order
           of
           the
           Bath
           ,
           And
           late
           one
           of
           the
           Judges
           of
           the
           Court
           of
           Common-Pleas
           .
        
         
           
             
               
                 
                   LICENS'D
                   ,
                
                 
                   
                     
                       April
                       .
                       9.
                       1689.
                       
                    
                  
                   
                     James
                     Fraser
                     .
                  
                
              
            
          
        
         
           LONDON
           :
           Printed
           for
           
             Timothy
             Goodwin
          
           ,
           at
           the
           Maiden-head
           against
           St.
           
           Dunstan's
           Church
           in
           Fleet-street
           .
           1689.
           
        
      
    
     
       
         
         
         
           THE
           Lord
           Russel's
           INNOCENCY
           Further
           DEFENDED
           ,
           &c.
           
        
         
           THere
           is
           a
           Pamphlet
           very
           lately
           published
           ,
           which
           stiles
           it self
           ,
           
             The
             Magistracy
             and
             Government
             of
          
           England
           Vindicated
           .
        
         
           It
           appears
           by
           the
           following
           part
           of
           the
           Title
           ,
           to
           be
           no
           less
           than
           
             A
             Justification
             of
             the
             Proceedings
             against
             Criminals
          
           ;
           impudently
           declaring
           in
           plain
           and
           express
           words
           ,
           as
           also
           by
           all
           his
           subsequent
           Discourse
           ,
           That
           by
           the
           Criminal
           he
           means
           the
           late
           Lord
           
             Russel
             .
             Page
             2.
             
             Column
          
           2.
           in
           the
           middle
           of
           it
           .
        
         
           And
           the
           Author
           does
           professedly
           own
           ,
           that
           the
           Book
           is
           written
           by
           way
           of
           Answer
           to
           a
           small
           Discourse
           or
           Argument
           lately
           printed
           ,
           which
           bears
           the
           Title
           of
           
             A
             Defence
             of
             the
             late
             Lord
          
           Russel
           '
           
             s
             Innocency
          
           .
        
         
           It
           argues
           a
           transcendent
           boldness
           in
           this
           Answerer
           ,
           to
           call
           this
           Noble
           Lord
           a
           Criminal
           ,
           and
           to
           justifie
           those
           Proceedings
           against
           him
           ,
           which
           all
           honest
           men
           ever
           accounted
           no
           less
           than
           Murther
           ,
           under
           a
           pretence
           and
           colour
           of
           a
           legal
           Proceeding
           ,
           and
           to
           presume
           to
           publish
           such
           a
           Discourse
           as
           this
           ,
           after
           the
           King
           and
           the
           two
           Houses
           of
           Parliament
           have
           ,
           by
           the
           most
           solemn
           Judgment
           that
           can
           be
           given
           ,
           pronounced
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           to
           have
           been
           Innocent
           ;
           and
           thereby
           have
           done
           so
           great
           Right
           to
           his
           Memory
           ,
           and
           that
           with
           so
           high
           a
           Zeal
           ,
           and
           so
           mighty
           a
           Concernment
           for
           him
           ,
           as
           the
           like
           cannot
           be
           shewn
           in
           former
           Precedents
           .
        
         
         
           It
           is
           most
           evident
           ,
           that
           the
           Author
           was
           composing
           this
           Scandalous
           Libel
           even
           when
           he
           very
           well
           knew
           the
           Bill
           was
           brought
           down
           from
           the
           Lords
           to
           the
           Commons
           ,
           for
           reversing
           this
           Noble
           Lord's
           Attainder
           ;
           and
           the
           Author
           could
           not
           but
           observe
           with
           what
           Zeal
           and
           Affection
           the
           Bill
           was
           entertain'd
           at
           its
           first
           enterance
           into
           that
           House
           .
        
         
           The
           Author
           ,
           by
           endeavouring
           to
           conceal
           himself
           ,
           is
           from
           thence
           ,
           as
           he
           plainly
           professes
           ,
           encouraged
           to
           take
           the
           more
           liberty
           to
           lay
           about
           him
           in
           the
           dark
           (
           as
           he
           fancies
           )
           and
           thinks
           to
           escape
           ●nseen
           ;
           and
           not
           only
           strikes
           at
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defence
           ,
           but
           as
           far
           as
           in
           him
           lies
           ,
           wounds
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           in
           his
           Honour
           ,
           whose
           Justification
           and
           Defence
           was
           so
           undertaken
           ,
           and
           labours
           to
           overthrow
           that
           Right
           and
           Justice
           that
           hath
           been
           done
           by
           the
           Supream
           Authority
           of
           the
           Nation
           .
        
         
           This
           is
           no
           way
           agreeable
           to
           a
           noble
           and
           generous
           soul
           ,
           to
           come
           behind
           a
           man
           and
           strike
           him
           ;
           it
           rather
           follows
           the
           Example
           of
           that
           devilish
           Powder-Plot
           ,
           to
           destroy
           and
           blow
           up
           the
           King
           and
           both
           Houses
           ,
           and
           to
           do
           it
           in
           such
           a
           close
           and
           clandestine
           way
           ,
           
             as
             it
             should
             not
             be
             known
             who
             hurt
             them
             :
          
           for
           he
           was
           too
           much
           a
           Coward
           to
           set
           his
           Name
           to
           it
           .
        
         
           But
           it
           is
           very
           easie
           to
           tell
           you
           what
           are
           the
           first
           Letters
           of
           this
           Author's
           Name
           ,
           without
           casting
           of
           a
           Figure
           .
           His
           Argument
           in
           Law
           plainly
           speaks
           his
           Profession
           ,
           and
           what
           Robe
           he
           wears
           :
           and
           his
           stile
           and
           phrase
           of
           speaking
           ,
           having
           appear'd
           in
           so
           many
           noted
           Tryals
           ,
           as
           do
           in
           so
           many
           visible
           and
           legible
           Characters
           disclose
           the
           Author
           ,
           Sir
           
             R.
             S.
          
           does
           under
           his
           hand
           readily
           and
           utterly
           disclaim
           it
           ;
           and
           is
           heartily
           believ'd
           in
           what
           he
           says
           .
        
         
           This
           slanderous
           Author
           acknowledges
           ,
           that
           upon
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Tryal
           some
           blamed
           the
           Jury
           ,
           most
           censured
           the
           Witnesses
           ,
           but
           very
           few
           arraigned
           the
           Council
           or
           Court.
           Here
           it
           evidently
           appears
           how
           our
           Author
           is
           concerned
           :
           first
           for
           the
           Council
           ,
           and
           then
           the
           Court
           ,
           and
           Self
           hath
           the
           preferrence
           ,
           though
           it
           be
           here
           with
           a
           breach
           of
           good
           manners
           to
           name
           the
           Council
           before
           the
           Court.
           
        
         
           
             Page
             the
             first
          
           ,
           he
           takes
           it
           heinously
           that
           any
           Gentlemen
           of
           the
           Long
           Robe
           should
           appear
           in
           Print
           to
           Riducle
           their
           own
           Profession
           ,
           this
           grosly
           speaks
           our
           Author
           one
           that
           was
           of
           Councel
           in
           the
           Tryal
           .
           
             Et
             tu
             Brute
          
           ?
        
         
         
           If
           it
           had
           been
           an
           open
           Enemy
           ,
           a
           Doctor
           of
           the
           Commons
           excersing
           his
           Wit
           and
           Raillery
           on
           the
           Common
           Law
           Proceedings
           ,
           then
           (
           as
           he
           expresses
           himself
           )
           this
           Author
           could
           have
           born
           it
           ;
           but
           he
           did
           not
           imagine
           that
           Satyrs
           and
           Invectives
           upon
           past
           Proceedings
           should
           be
           writ
           by
           Lawyers
           .
        
         
           In
           reply
           to
           which
           it
           may
           be
           justly
           said
           ,
           That
           when
           Lawyers
           will
           make
           use
           of
           their
           Wit
           and
           Rhetorick
           ,
           as
           this
           Answerer
           has
           done
           ,
           to
           boulster
           up
           an
           unjust
           and
           revengeful
           Proceeding
           ,
           and
           out
           of
           ambitious
           Designs
           ,
           to
           get
           or
           continue
           in
           Favour
           ,
           and
           to
           gain
           greater
           Preferment
           ,
           or
           shew
           their
           Parts
           ,
           will
           engage
           in
           Causes
           of
           Blood
           ,
           and
           help
           to
           destroy
           the
           Innocent
           ,
           and
           be
           instrumental
           in
           subverting
           the
           Laws
           and
           Government
           ,
           it
           is
           every
           Lawyers
           Duty
           as
           far
           as
           in
           him
           lies
           ,
           to
           vindicate
           the
           Profession
           ,
           by
           utterly
           disclaiming
           and
           abhorring
           all
           such
           Practices
           :
           And
           the
           Defender
           can
           appeal
           to
           all
           that
           have
           known
           his
           Conversation
           for
           above
           this
           forty
           years
           and
           under
           ,
           whether
           ever
           he
           used
           any
           such
           pitiful
           mean
           and
           ungenerous
           Arts
           and
           Methods
           ,
           better
           becoming
           the
           Stage
           than
           a
           Court
           of
           Justice
           ;
           and
           whether
           he
           did
           not
           ,
           when
           it
           was
           in
           his
           power
           ,
           constantly
           restrain
           and
           condemn
           that
           scandalous
           and
           disgraceful
           way
           of
           Practice
           .
           And
           he
           can
           as
           freely
           appeal
           to
           all
           that
           will
           be
           at
           the
           pains
           to
           Read
           his
           Printed
           Argument
           (
           which
           this
           conceal'd
           Author
           so
           unjustly
           Censures
           )
           whether
           any
           such
           bitter
           Reviling
           ,
           and
           revengeful
           Humour
           ,
           appear
           in
           any
           part
           of
           what
           he
           so
           publish'd
           ,
           or
           the
           least
           reflecting
           upon
           any
           particular
           person
           ,
           but
           only
           in
           the
           general
           ,
           and
           no
           further
           than
           the
           meer
           Justice
           of
           the
           Cause
           did
           extort
           from
           him
           ;
           so
           far
           was
           he
           from
           this
           Author
           's
           scurrilous
           and
           rude
           course
           of
           reflecting
           upon
           any
           Persons
           private
           Conversation
           ;
           but
           some
           mens
           faculties
           lie
           this
           way
           ,
           and
           they
           are
           very
           well
           known
           ,
           tho'
           after
           such
           manifest
           and
           gross
           provocations
           that
           have
           been
           given
           by
           this
           Author
           ,
           and
           such
           publick
           and
           scandalous
           Actings
           of
           his
           in
           the
           eye
           of
           the
           World
           ,
           it
           might
           justly
           be
           said
           with
           the
           Poet
           :
           
             Difficile
             est
             Satyr●s
             non
             Scribere
             .
          
        
         
           The
           Author
           of
           this
           Answer
           ,
           in
           his
           first
           Paragraph
           ,
           would
           have
           the
           World
           believe
           that
           he
           writes
           upon
           no
           other
           design
           than
           to
           
             support
             Magistracy
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Government
             ;
             a
             Noble
             Th●m●
          
           
           (
           as
           he
           terms
           it
           )
           .
           Every
           Man
           knows
           what
           sort
           of
           Government
           he
           labour'd
           to
           support
           ,
           but
           the
           other
           day
           ,
           and
           how
           far
           he
           was
           instrumental
           in
           it
           ;
           but
           the
           other
           day
           ,
           and
           how
           far
           he
           was
           instrumental
           in
           it
           ;
           but
           it
           is
           rather
           thought
           fit
           to
           leave
           him
           to
           a
           General
           Act
           of
           Indemnity
           and
           Oblivion
           ,
           then
           take
           any
           Revenge
           upon
           him
           .
        
         
           He
           seems
           to
           allow
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           ,
           in
           his
           Fourth
           Paragraph
           ,
           to
           be
           an
           Author
           of
           Age
           ,
           Experience
           ,
           Figure
           ,
           and
           Learning
           ,
           (
           but
           he
           will
           not
           say
           Candour
           or
           Honesty
           )
           .
           Thus
           he
           writes
           .
        
         
           The
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           is
           very
           glad
           he
           hath
           so
           little
           of
           this
           Adversary's
           Commendation
           ,
           for
           it
           would
           gain
           but
           small
           esteem
           amongst
           Men
           of
           true
           worth
           ,
           to
           be
           commended
           by
           him
           .
           It
           might
           be
           said
           to
           him
           with
           the
           Philosopher
           upon
           the
           like
           occasion
           ,
           being
           commended
           by
           an
           infamous
           person
           ,
           
             What
             Ill
             have
             I
             done
             ,
             that
             thou
             shouldst
             thus
             Commend
             me
             ?
          
           Yet
           that
           Candour
           and
           Honesty
           ,
           which
           he
           covertly
           refuses
           to
           allow
           ,
           is
           that
           which
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           prefers
           before
           all
           this
           Answerer's
           mercenary
           Wit
           and
           Rhetorick
           .
        
         
           In
           his
           fifth
           Paragraph
           he
           judges
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           very
           unfortunate
           to
           fall
           under
           the
           Accusation
           of
           Treason
           ,
           and
           says
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           was
           most
           pitied
           ,
           of
           any
           under
           those
           Circumstances
           .
        
         
           That
           Noble
           Lord's
           misfortune
           (
           among
           other
           things
           )
           was
           his
           falling
           under
           the
           lash
           of
           so
           bitter
           and
           sharp
           a
           Tongue
           as
           yours
           ,
           
           who
           however
           you
           seem
           now
           to
           mention
           that
           Lord
           with
           pity
           ,
           had
           then
           no
           pity
           for
           him
           ,
           but
           used
           him
           with
           severity
           ,
           as
           may
           appear
           by
           your
           own
           Printed
           Narrative
           of
           that
           Tryal
           ,
           and
           your
           Rhetorical
           Flourishes
           in
           a
           Case
           of
           innocent
           Bloud
           ,
           which
           contributed
           in
           an
           high
           degree
           to
           enveagle
           the
           Jury
           ,
           and
           bring
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           to
           the
           Scaffold
           .
        
         
           
             He
             confidently
             says
             in
             the
             same
             Paragraph
             ,
             that
          
           in
           truth
           the
           fairness
           and
           indifferency
           of
           that
           Tryal
           was
           such
           ,
           that
           his
           own
           Relations
           were
           pleased
           .
        
         
           How
           untrue
           this
           is
           ,
           
           in
           both
           the
           parts
           of
           it
           ,
           that
           the
           Tryal
           was
           very
           far
           from
           being
           Fair
           and
           Indifferent
           ,
           and
           that
           his
           nearest
           Relations
           were
           highly
           exasperated
           and
           offended
           ,
           shall
           appear
           before
           we
           part
           .
        
         
           
             In
             the
             Sixth
             Paragraph
             of
             his
             sheet
             ,
             he
             complains
             that
          
           the
           memory
           of
           that
           Vnfortunate
           Gentleman
           ,
           was
           revived
           by
           the
           Publication
           of
           the
           Defence
           of
           his
           Innocency
           .
        
         
         
           Why
           what
           hurt
           in
           the
           reviving
           of
           his
           Memory
           ?
           his
           Memory
           is
           precious
           ,
           he
           dyed
           a
           Martyr
           for
           his
           Religion
           ,
           and
           for
           the
           Rights
           and
           Liberties
           of
           his
           Countrey
           ,
           and
           fell
           a
           Sacrifice
           under
           cruel
           and
           merciless
           hands
           .
        
         
           It
           is
           indeed
           this
           Answerers
           Conscience
           that
           flies
           in
           his
           face
           ,
           the
           reviving
           of
           this
           Noble
           Lords
           Memory
           speaks
           Terrour
           and
           Amazement
           to
           the
           Answerer
           .
           Thus
           did
           bloody
           Herod
           when
           he
           heard
           of
           the
           Fame
           of
           Jesus
           ,
           he
           presently
           cryes
           out
           ,
           
             This
             is
          
           John
           
             whom
             I
             Beheaded
          
           .
        
         
           He
           does
           prepare
           himself
           to
           make
           use
           of
           
             indecent
             or
             disrespectful
             Language
          
           ,
           (
           as
           himself
           expresses
           it
           )
           and
           comforts
           himself
           with
           the
           thought
           ,
           that
           his
           Name
           shall
           not
           be
           known
           .
           A
           pitiful
           and
           unmanly
           dealing
           ,
           not
           becoming
           a
           person
           pretending
           to
           Ingenuity
           .
           The
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           dealt
           otherwise
           ,
           and
           owns
           his
           Name
           ,
           and
           will
           let
           the
           world
           know
           what
           this
           Answerer
           is
           .
        
         
           In
           the
           four
           next
           ensuing
           Paragraphs
           ,
           he
           is
           much
           to
           seek
           for
           what
           end
           and
           purpose
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defence
           was
           Printed
           in
           that
           Pamphlet
           (
           as
           his
           wonted
           Rhetorick
           thinks
           fit
           to
           call
           it
           .
           )
        
         
           It
           could
           not
           be
           (
           as
           he
           most
           contemptuously
           says
           )
           for
           Consumption
           of
           Paper
           .
        
         
           Nor
           for
           the
           Bookseller's
           Profit
           ,
           for
           a
           Reason
           to
           be
           guess'd
           at
           .
        
         
           Forbear
           ,
           for
           shame
           ,
           to
           use
           these
           sly
           and
           silly
           Intimations
           ,
           they
           are
           fitter
           for
           School-boys
           ,
           or
           the
           Mountebank's
           Stage
           ,
           or
           for
           Billings-gate
           ,
           than
           for
           a
           Man
           of
           your
           Figure
           ,
           one
           may
           be
           ashamed
           to
           have
           any
           Dispute
           with
           such
           an
           Emperick
           ,
           or
           rather
           a
           jesting
           and
           jeering
           Merry-Andrew
           .
           Pray
           keep
           this
           Sport
           for
           the
           next
           
           Bartholomew-Fair
           ,
           and
           learn
           more
           Gravity
           and
           Civility
           .
        
         
           It
           could
           not
           be
           (
           as
           he
           further
           proceeds
           upon
           the
           same
           Enquiry
           )
           for
           the
           sake
           of
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Memory
           ,
           or
           any
           of
           his
           surviving
           Relations
           ;
           for
           what
           was
           written
           in
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defence
           ,
           is
           (
           says
           he
           )
           but
           a
           painting
           to
           the
           Life
           ,
           the
           too
           deep
           Concern
           of
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           ,
           in
           a
           weak
           as
           well
           as
           criminal
           Enterprize
           .
        
         
           This
           is
           wonderful
           boldness
           and
           daring
           in
           this
           Answerer
           ,
           still
           to
           pronounce
           him
           a
           Criminal
           (
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           )
           
           whom
           the
           Supream
           Power
           of
           the
           Nation
           ,
           and
           the
           highest
           Judicature
           and
           Authority
           have
           adjudged
           Innocent
           .
           And
           yet
           he
           has
           the
           Impudence
           to
           entitle
           his
           undutiful
           Pamphlet
           ,
           
             The
             Magistracy
             and
             Government
             of
          
           England
           Vindicated
           :
           And
           to
           Publish
           this
           ,
           after
           he
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           any
           Man
           knew
           that
           the
           Act
           of
           Parliament
           had
           pass'd
           ,
           asserting
           the
           Innocency
           of
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           ,
           and
           the
           Barbarity
           and
           Injustice
           of
           the
           Proceedings
           against
           him
           .
           Wherein
           this
           Answerer
           had
           so
           great
           an
           Hand
           ,
           and
           so
           bitter
           and
           sharp
           a
           Tongue
           .
        
         
           One
           would
           think
           that
           an
           ordinary
           Wit
           might
           have
           served
           to
           put
           him
           in
           mind
           ,
           that
           as
           yet
           there
           is
           no
           Act
           of
           General
           Pardon
           and
           Indemnity
           pass'd
           ,
           And
           who
           knows
           upon
           whom
           the
           great
           Exception
           may
           light
           ?
        
         
           But
           he
           gives
           a
           very
           just
           occasion
           to
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           ,
           to
           let
           the
           World
           know
           for
           what
           end
           and
           purpose
           he
           long
           since
           writ
           ,
           and
           so
           lately
           Printed
           so
           despised
           a
           Pamphlet
           ;
           by
           which
           ,
           even
           his
           Adversary
           may
           be
           convinc'd
           ,
           it
           was
           not
           meerly
           for
           Consumption
           of
           Paper
           ,
           or
           for
           the
           Bookseller's
           Profit
           ,
           but
           truly
           for
           the
           sake
           of
           that
           Lord's
           Memory
           ,
           in
           asserting
           his
           Innocency
           ,
           and
           at
           the
           desire
           ,
           and
           for
           the
           sake
           of
           his
           surviving
           Relations
           .
           And
           for
           the
           truth
           of
           what
           is
           thus
           affirm'd
           ,
           he
           does
           appeal
           to
           those
           Noble
           Relations
           of
           his
           ,
           who
           are
           yet
           alive
           .
        
         
           While
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           was
           upon
           his
           Tryal
           ,
           or
           very
           soon
           after
           ,
           there
           came
           a
           Letter
           to
           his
           Defender's
           hand
           ,
           who
           was
           then
           in
           the
           Countrey
           ;
           near
           Eighty
           Miles
           from
           London
           ,
           and
           this
           from
           a
           person
           of
           great
           Honour
           ,
           and
           one
           of
           the
           nearest
           Relation
           to
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           ,
           requesting
           the
           Author
           of
           his
           Defence
           to
           afford
           the
           best
           Advice
           he
           could
           ;
           and
           accordingly
           he
           heartily
           and
           freely
           gave
           it
           :
           Much
           of
           which
           does
           appear
           by
           what
           is
           Printed
           by
           him
           .
        
         
           This
           was
           not
           the
           only
           Letter
           he
           receiv'd
           from
           that
           Lord
           's
           great
           Relations
           ,
           upon
           that
           sad
           occasion
           :
           But
           after
           that
           bloudy
           stroke
           had
           been
           given
           ,
           a
           Paper
           was
           Publish'd
           as
           the
           Speech
           intended
           by
           that
           Dying
           Lord.
           
        
         
           In
           Answer
           to
           which
           ,
           the
           now
           Answerer
           and
           Adversary
           (
           as
           is
           too
           evident
           )
           did
           publish
           his
           first
           Pamphlet
           ,
           Entituled
           ,
           
             An
             
             Antidote
             against
             Poyson
          
           ,
           composed
           (
           to
           use
           its
           own
           words
           )
           of
           some
           Remarks
           upon
           the
           Paper
           printed
           by
           the
           direction
           of
           the
           Lady
           Russel
           ,
           and
           mentioned
           to
           have
           been
           delivered
           by
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           to
           the
           Sheriffs
           at
           the
           place
           of
           Execution
           .
           Thus
           far
           of
           the
           Title
           of
           that
           pretended
           Antidote
           .
        
         
           In
           the
           latter
           end
           of
           his
           second
           Page
           ,
           that
           which
           is
           mentioned
           in
           the
           Discourse
           out
           of
           his
           Pamphlet
           call'd
           the
           Antidote
           ,
           and
           which
           is
           barely
           repeated
           in
           order
           to
           be
           answer'd
           and
           confuted
           ,
           he
           grosly
           mistakes
           in
           this
           latter
           Pamphlet
           ,
           and
           falsely
           affirms
           ,
           it
           is
           admitted
           to
           be
           true
           ;
           and
           from
           thence
           endeavours
           to
           have
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           understood
           as
           arguing
           against
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           ,
           and
           acknowledging
           his
           guilt
           :
           Which
           is
           a
           very
           unworthy
           way
           of
           dealing
           by
           this
           pretended
           Answerer
           ,
           but
           easily
           discern'd
           by
           any
           wary
           and
           intelligent
           Reader
           .
           Nay
           ,
           this
           Answerer
           himself
           immediately
           after
           ,
           before
           he
           is
           aware
           ,
           clears
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           again
           from
           the
           Imputation
           ,
           by
           taking
           notice
           that
           the
           Defender
           of
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           endeavours
           to
           invalidate
           the
           Credibility
           of
           the
           Evidence
           given
           against
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           .
        
         
           This
           Reply
           declines
           the
           taking
           notice
           of
           many
           of
           this
           Answerer's
           Paragraphs
           ,
           that
           are
           spent
           meerly
           in
           vilifying
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           ,
           it
           being
           obvious
           that
           they
           were
           intended
           onely
           to
           render
           mean
           and
           contemptible
           the
           person
           he
           undertakes
           to
           answer
           ;
           it
           being
           beneath
           this
           Reply
           to
           repeat
           them
           ,
           and
           to
           follow
           the
           Answerer
           in
           his
           rude
           and
           scurrilous
           way
           of
           writing
           .
        
         
           It
           was
           indeed
           no
           Secret
           to
           the
           Learned
           ,
           that
           a
           Variance
           between
           the
           Indictment
           and
           the
           Evidence
           ,
           might
           be
           alledged
           on
           the
           
             General
             Issue
          
           ;
           nor
           that
           Treason
           and
           the
           Misprision
           of
           it
           are
           different
           Crimes
           ;
           nor
           that
           proofs
           of
           Treason
           must
           not
           be
           by
           Hearsay
           nor
           Argument
           only
           ;
           nor
           that
           less
           than
           two
           Witnesses
           are
           not
           to
           be
           allow'd
           for
           proof
           of
           that
           Crime
           ;
           nor
           that
           the
           Witnesses
           ought
           to
           be
           credible
           :
           But
           these
           are
           not
           so
           generally
           known
           to
           such
           as
           are
           not
           profess'd
           Lawyers
           ;
           and
           may
           be
           usefully
           remembred
           to
           such
           as
           are
           brought
           upon
           their
           Tryals
           for
           their
           Lives
           ,
           and
           are
           denied
           the
           help
           of
           Councel
           when
           they
           most
           need
           it
           ,
           and
           are
           apt
           to
           be
           more
           under
           a
           consternation
           ,
           when
           
           they
           are
           beset
           with
           such
           sad
           apprehensions
           of
           their
           danger
           ,
           and
           baited
           at
           by
           a
           multitude
           of
           crafty
           Wits
           ,
           and
           such
           as
           abuse
           their
           Parts
           and
           Eloquence
           ,
           to
           destroy
           the
           Innocent
           ,
           and
           the
           Court
           (
           it
           may
           be
           )
           not
           always
           so
           indifferent
           as
           they
           should
           be
           .
           And
           these
           useful
           and
           well-intended
           Assistances
           ,
           as
           ordinary
           and
           useless
           as
           the
           pretended
           Answerer
           would
           represent
           them
           ,
           were
           very
           thankfully
           entertain'd
           ,
           and
           made
           use
           of
           by
           several
           persons
           of
           great
           Abilities
           ,
           and
           of
           the
           best
           Quality
           ,
           who
           afterwards
           fell
           under
           the
           like
           cruel
           and
           malicious
           Prosecution
           :
           but
           they
           were
           no
           profess'd
           Lawyers
           .
           And
           most
           of
           these
           are
           still
           living
           ,
           and
           will
           and
           do
           testifie
           the
           truth
           hereof
           .
        
         
           The
           Answerer
           in
           his
           fourth
           Page
           falls
           to
           argue
           the
           points
           in
           Law
           upon
           the
           great
           Head
           and
           Title
           of
           Treason
           .
        
         
           This
           Reply
           forbears
           to
           repeat
           what
           the
           Answerer
           says
           upon
           this
           subject
           ,
           or
           to
           repeat
           what
           this
           Repliant
           has
           formerly
           printed
           ,
           but
           therein
           refers
           himself
           to
           what
           is
           so
           printed
           .
        
         
           Only
           finds
           it
           necessary
           to
           state
           the
           point
           in
           question
           in
           as
           few
           and
           plain
           words
           as
           he
           can
           ,
           and
           leave
           it
           to
           any
           impartial
           Reader
           to
           judge
           of
           it
           .
        
         
           The
           great
           Statute
           of
           Treason
           ,
           viz.
           that
           of
           the
           25th
           of
           Edw.
           3.
           was
           the
           only
           Statute
           upon
           which
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           was
           indicted
           ,
           and
           this
           is
           acknowledg'd
           and
           profess'd
           by
           the
           Attorney-General
           ,
           as
           appears
           by
           the
           printed
           Narrative
           of
           the
           Tryal
           ,
           and
           he
           could
           best
           know
           his
           own
           meaning
           .
        
         
           They
           could
           not
           proceed
           against
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           upon
           the
           late
           Statute
           of
           Treasons
           ,
           made
           in
           13
           Car.
           2.
           for
           that
           Statute
           limits
           the
           Prosecution
           to
           a
           certain
           time
           ,
           after
           the
           Treason
           committed
           ;
           which
           was
           elaps'd
           in
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Case
           .
        
         
           Now
           the
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           does
           specifie
           and
           enumerate
           the
           several
           and
           particular
           Heads
           ,
           and
           Sorts
           ,
           or
           Species
           of
           Treason
           ,
           that
           might
           be
           proceeded
           upon
           ,
           or
           tryed
           and
           adjudged
           in
           the
           ordinary
           Courts
           ,
           viz.
           in
           the
           Kings-Bench
           ,
           or
           Judges
           of
           Oyer
           and
           Terminer
           ,
           or
           Gaol-delivery
           .
           Such
           as
           that
           of
           Newgate
           ,
           or
           the
           Sessions
           for
           Gaol-delivery
           at
           the
           Old-Baily
           ,
           where
           the
           Noble
           Lord
           Russel
           was
           brought
           to
           his
           Tryal
           .
        
         
         
           The
           scope
           and
           drift
           of
           that
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           (
           as
           appears
           by
           the
           Preamble
           )
           was
           to
           confine
           those
           ordinary
           Courts
           and
           the
           ordinary
           Judges
           to
           plain
           manifest
           Rules
           ,
           what
           they
           should
           adjudge
           Treason
           ,
           and
           what
           not
           ,
           it
           being
           of
           so
           great
           Concernment
           to
           the
           lives
           of
           Men
           ;
           and
           not
           to
           allow
           the
           Judges
           or
           Lawyers
           a
           latitude
           or
           liberty
           to
           make
           what
           they
           thought
           fit
           to
           be
           Treason
           ,
           or
           to
           exercise
           the
           Tongues
           and
           unruly
           Noises
           of
           Lawyers
           in
           a
           matter
           of
           that
           moment
           .
           And
           that
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           being
           in
           its
           nature
           a
           confining
           ,
           restraining
           ,
           and
           explanatory
           Law
           ,
           ought
           therefore
           not
           to
           be
           largely
           extended
           or
           improv'd
           and
           stretched
           beyond
           the
           plain
           words
           and
           apparent
           sence
           of
           them
           .
        
         
           Now
           among
           other
           several
           Species
           ,
           or
           Heads
           ,
           or
           sorts
           of
           Treason
           ,
           particularly
           enumerated
           by
           that
           Statute
           ,
           there
           are
           these
           two
           ,
           pertinent
           to
           our
           Case
           ,
           viz.
           
           
             
               1.
               
               Compassing
               or
               Imagining
               the
               Death
               of
               the
               King.
               
            
             
               2.
               
               Levying
               War
               against
               the
               King.
               
            
          
        
         
           Whereupon
           the
           common
           Reader
           (
           for
           whose
           satisfaction
           this
           is
           written
           )
           may
           easily
           observe
           this
           distinction
           ,
           That
           the
           first
           of
           these
           is
           Treason
           (
           in
           the
           very
           imagining
           or
           conspiring
           )
           though
           the
           King's
           Death
           do
           not
           ensue
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           latter
           is
           not
           Treason
           in
           the
           conspiring
           and
           imagining
           ,
           but
           the
           Treason
           must
           be
           in
           the
           actual
           levying
           of
           War.
           
        
         
           So
           that
           barely
           to
           consult
           ,
           conspire
           ,
           or
           imagine
           to
           levy
           War
           ,
           though
           there
           be
           never
           so
           plain
           nor
           so
           open
           or
           overt
           an
           act
           of
           such
           consulting
           or
           conspiring
           or
           imagining
           of
           it
           ,
           will
           not
           amount
           to
           this
           Species
           or
           sort
           of
           Treason
           ,
           upon
           this
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           which
           is
           the
           only
           Statute
           upon
           which
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           was
           concern'd
           .
        
         
           For
           that
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           did
           not
           intend
           to
           make
           it
           Treason
           ,
           to
           consult
           or
           conspire
           to
           levy
           War
           ,
           without
           the
           actual
           levying
           of
           War.
           
        
         
           This
           will
           not
           be
           denied
           nor
           disputed
           by
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Adversaries
           ,
           nor
           by
           this
           Answerer
           .
        
         
         
           But
           perfectly
           to
           evade
           this
           Statute
           ,
           and
           the
           manifest
           intent
           and
           meaning
           of
           it
           ,
           they
           insist
           ,
        
         
           That
           though
           conspiring
           to
           levy
           War
           ,
           be
           not
           Treason
           within
           the
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           yet
           to
           conspire
           ,
           consult
           ,
           agree
           ,
           or
           conclude
           to
           stir
           up
           ,
           or
           raise
           ,
           or
           move
           Insurrection
           and
           Rebellion
           against
           the
           King
           ,
           and
           to
           consult
           or
           conspire
           to
           seize
           the
           King's
           Guards
           ,
           (
           which
           signifie
           one
           and
           the
           same
           thing
           with
           consulting
           or
           conspiring
           to
           levy
           War
           )
           these
           (
           say
           they
           )
           may
           be
           an
           open
           or
           overt
           Act
           ,
           to
           prove
           a
           consulting
           or
           conspiring
           to
           kill
           the
           King.
           
        
         
           What
           is
           this
           but
           to
           confound
           the
           several
           and
           distinct
           sorts
           and
           Species
           of
           Treasons
           ,
           which
           the
           Statute
           of
           25
           E.
           3.
           doth
           so
           carefully
           and
           industriously
           labour
           to
           distinguish
           ?
        
         
           And
           what
           is
           this
           ,
           but
           to
           make
           a
           bare
           conspiring
           and
           consulting
           to
           levy
           War
           ,
           without
           any
           actual
           levying
           of
           it
           ,
           to
           be
           Treason
           within
           this
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           which
           plainly
           this
           Statute
           would
           not
           have
           to
           be
           so
           taken
           ?
           and
           so
           the
           good
           design
           and
           scope
           of
           the
           Statute
           ,
           the
           security
           of
           mens
           lives
           is
           wholly
           overthrown
           by
           this
           Artifice
           ;
           and
           what
           shall
           be
           taken
           to
           be
           Treason
           ,
           and
           what
           not
           ,
           will
           be
           still
           as
           uncertain
           as
           it
           was
           before
           the
           making
           of
           that
           Act
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           
        
         
           And
           it
           was
           then
           a
           needless
           idle
           thing
           in
           those
           that
           made
           the
           Statute
           of
           13
           Car.
           2.
           and
           so
           of
           former
           Statutes
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           conspiring
           to
           levy
           War
           to
           be
           Treason
           :
           for
           by
           this
           practice
           and
           construction
           it
           is
           already
           made
           so
           to
           their
           hands
           ,
           by
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           
        
         
           Now
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           was
           Indicted
           for
           Conspiring
           to
           kill
           King
           Charles
           the
           Second
           ,
           and
           the
           overt
           or
           open
           Act
           alledg'd
           to
           show
           and
           signifie
           it
           ,
           is
           nothing
           but
           his
           consulting
           and
           conspiring
           to
           raise
           and
           stir
           up
           Insurrection
           and
           Rebellion
           ,
           and
           consulting
           to
           seize
           the
           King's
           Guards
           ,
           (
           though
           they
           were
           not
           actually
           done
           )
           which
           are
           just
           the
           same
           thing
           with
           conspiring
           to
           levy
           War
           ;
           which
           plainly
           is
           no
           Treason
           within
           the
           Statute
           of
           25
           Edw.
           3.
           and
           therefore
           most
           clearly
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           was
           not
           guilty
           within
           that
           Statute
           ,
           upon
           that
           Indictment
           and
           Evidence
           .
        
         
           Since
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           has
           compos'd
           this
           short
           State
           of
           his
           Case
           upon
           this
           great
           point
           ,
           there
           hath
           come
           
           to
           his
           hands
           ,
           a
           printed
           half
           sheet
           ,
           which
           has
           excellently
           well
           done
           the
           same
           work
           ,
           which
           had
           been
           but
           a
           few
           hours
           sooner
           ,
           it
           had
           saved
           the
           labour
           of
           this
           part
           of
           the
           present
           Discourse
           and
           Argument
           :
           This
           half
           sheet
           is
           justly
           entitled
           ,
           
             A
             Justification
             of
             the
             late
             Act
             of
             Parliament
             ,
             for
             the
             Reversing
             the
             Judgment
             against
             the
             Lord
          
           Russel
           .
        
         
           There
           is
           but
           one
           Point
           more
           to
           speak
           to
           ,
           and
           then
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Defender
           will
           bid
           his
           Answerer
           and
           Reader
           Adieu
           :
           And
           it
           is
           that
           Point
           which
           the
           
           Answerer's
           〈◊〉
           Print
           ,
           viz.
           his
           
             Antidote
             against
             Poyson
          
           ,
           did
           not
           mention
           ,
           and
           so
           no
           occasion
           was
           given
           then
           to
           consider
           of
           it
           ;
           but
           it
           is
           largely
           debated
           by
           Court
           and
           Council
           ,
           at
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Tryal
           ;
           yet
           being
           then
           but
           suddenly
           started
           ,
           tho
           it
           were
           well
           argued
           by
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Councel
           assign'd
           ,
           no
           Authorities
           however
           were
           then
           cited
           (
           thô
           call'd
           for
           by
           the
           Court
           )
           to
           justifie
           and
           make
           good
           the
           Arguments
           and
           Reasons
           urged
           by
           the
           Councel●
           ▪
           and
           it
           is
           a
           point
           in
           Law
           which
           the
           Act
           for
           Reversing
           the
           Judgment
           against
           the
           Lord
           Russel
           is
           principally
           ,
           and
           in
           the
           first
           place
           grounded
           upon
           ,
           viz.
           That
           there
           had
           been
           an
           undone
           and
           illegal
           Return
           of
           of
           Jurors
           to
           Try
           that
           Noble
           Lord
           (
           too
           often
           practised
           of
           late
           )
           and
           that
           the
           Noble
           Lord
           was
           refus'd
           his
           Lawful
           Challenge
           to
           them
           for
           want
           of
           Freehold
           .
           The
           truth
           of
           this
           as
           to
           matter
           of
           Fact
           ,
           doth
           evidently
           appear
           by
           the
           large
           Narrative
           of
           the
           Tryal
           ,
           Printed
           by
           that
           Lord's
           Adversaries
           ;
           and
           this
           is
           not
           in
           the
           least
           touched
           upon
           by
           the
           printed
           half
           sheet
           ,
           stiled
           ,
           
             A
             that
             of
             the
             Act
             for
             Reversal
             of
             the
             Judgment
             against
          
           that
           Lord.
           
        
         
           That
           Point
           in
           Law
           now
           only
           remains
           to
           be
           〈◊〉
           to
           ,
           viz.
           That
           in
           all
           Cases
           of
           the
           Tryal
           of
           a
           Man
           especially
           in
           a
           Tryal
           for
           his
           Life
           ,
           the
           Jurors
           ought
           to
           be
           Freeholders
           even
           at
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           and
           before
           the
           Statifie
           of
           〈…〉
           5.
           
           Cap.
           3.
           and
           that
           not
           only
           in
           Tryals
           within
           the
           City
           of
           London
           (
           as
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           was
           )
           as
           in
           all
           other
           Cases
           〈◊〉
           Towns
           Corporate
           ,
           where
           there
           was
           a
           Jurisdiction
           of
           Trying
           for
           Life
           in
           Cases
           criminal
           .
        
         
           It
           was
           not
           material
           〈◊〉
           the
           Go●●●●n
           Law
           or
           of
           what
           yearly
           Va●●ie
           that
           Freehold
           was
           ,
           or
           is
           to
           be
           ,
           but
           some
           Freehold
           (
           thô
           never
           so
           small
           )
           the
           Jurors
           ought
           to
           have
           ,
           or
           else
           it
           was
           a
           just
           cause
           of
           Challenge
           .
        
         
         
           It
           was
           indeed
           the
           Statute
           of
           2
           
             H.
             5.
             
             C.
          
           3.
           that
           first
           ●ate
           the
           yearly
           value
           of
           the
           Freehold
           ,
           and
           requir'd
           it
           should
           be
           of
           40
           
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           ,
           which
           40
           
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           was
           then
           in
           that
           King's
           Reign
           ,
           being
           so
           long
           since
           ,
           equivalent
           to
           a
           much
           higher
           Value
           now
           .
        
         
           And
           therefore
           the
           Books
           and
           Authorities
           that
           speak
           of
           Freehold
           of
           a
           less
           Value
           then
           40
           
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           ,
           must
           of
           necessity
           be
           understood
           not
           to
           speak
           of
           Cases
           within
           that
           Statute
           ,
           but
           of
           Cases
           at
           the
           
             Common
             Law.
          
           
        
         
           3
           
             H.
             4.
             fol.
             4.
             b.
             Rolles
          
           Abridgement
           ,
           Title-tryal
           ▪
           fol.
           648.
           
           It
           is
           there
           held
           ,
           that
           Freehold
           of
           any
           value
           was
           sufficient
           for
           a
           Juror
           .
           This
           proves
           that
           Freehold
           is
           requisite
           ,
           and
           that
           it
           was
           so
           before
           the
           Statute
           of
           2
           H.
           5.
           it
           being
           in
           the
           Reign
           of
           K.
           Henry
           the
           Fifth's
           Father
           ;
           and
           with
           this
           agrees
           
             Kelloway
             ,
             fol.
          
           46.
           towards
           the
           end
           .
        
         
           Some
           other
           Cases
           after
           the
           time
           of
           King
           Henry
           the
           Fifth
           ,
           proves
           the
           same
           ,
           as
           16
           
             E.
             4.
             fol.
          
           8.
           half
           an
           Acre
           of
           Land
           ,
           so
           it
           be
           within
           the
           Hundred
           ,
           says
           that
           Book
           ,
           is
           sufficient
           ,
           and
           it
           is
           well
           known
           ,
           that
           as
           to
           this
           qualification
           of
           having
           Freehold
           ,
           the
           same
           Rule
           governs
           in
           the
           rest
           of
           the
           Jurors
           ,
           as
           in
           those
           of
           the
           Hundred
           ,
           10
           
             H.
             6.
             
             Brookes
             Abridgement
             ,
             Challenge
             192.
             
          
           Hales's
           
             Pleas
             of
             the
             Crown
          
           ,
           260.
           
        
         
           Nor
           do
           these
           Authorities
           distinguish
           at
           all
           between
           Cases
           criminal
           and
           civil
           ,
           nor
           in
           Cases
           criminal
           between
           that
           of
           Treason
           and
           in
           Cases
           less
           criminal
           .
        
         
           This
           being
           so
           at
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           and
           the
           Statute
           of
           2
           
             H.
             5.
             c.
          
           3.
           only
           adding
           the
           yearly
           value
           ,
           
             viz.
             40
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           Freehold
           ,
           which
           before
           at
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           might
           be
           of
           any
           lower
           value
           .
           Now
           tho
           that
           Statute
           of
           2
           H.
           5.
           be
           Repeal'd
           ,
           as
           to
           Tryals
           in
           Treason
           ,
           as
           in
           truth
           it
           is
           by
           the
           latter
           Statute
           of
           2
           and
           3
           of
           Phillip
           and
           
             Mary
             ,
             cap.
          
           10.
           which
           Enacts
           that
           all
           Tryals
           in
           Treason
           ,
           shall
           be
           according
           to
           the
           course
           of
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           the
           result
           is
           ,
           that
           still
           there
           must
           be
           Freeholders
           to
           Try
           ,
           thô
           they
           may
           be
           Freeholders
           as
           at
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           of
           any
           yearly
           value
           whatsoever
           .
        
         
           That
           the
           Statute
           of
           2
           H.
           5.
           (
           while
           it
           was
           in
           force
           )
           did
           extend
           to
           Cases
           of
           Treason
           (
           thô
           Treason
           was
           not
           expresly
           mentioned
           in
           it
           ,
           and
           the
           Statute
           speaks
           very
           ambiguously
           
           and
           obscurely
           )
           appears
           by
           the
           Authorities
           following
           ,
           viz.
           Stamford's
           Pleas
           of
           the
           Crown
           ,
           161
           ;
           and
           
             P●●lton
             de
             Pace
             Regis
             ,
             &
             Regni
             ,
          
           187
           ;
           and
           by
           the
           Statute
           of
           33
           
             H.
             8.
             c.
          
           23.
           in
           the
           Proviso
           ,
           that
           reserves
           to
           the
           Party
           the
           Challenge
           ,
           for
           want
           of
           40
           s.
           Freehold
           ,
           even
           in
           case
           of
           Treason
           ,
           though
           it
           make
           the
           Treason
           triable
           in
           any
           County
           .
        
         
           See
           Sir
           Christopher
           Blunt's
           Case
           ,
           Justice
           
             Croke
             ,
             37
             Eliz.
             fol.
          
           413.
           
           In
           an
           Information
           of
           Intrusion
           ,
           by
           the
           Queen
           :
           a
           Juror
           was
           challenged
           for
           want
           of
           Freehold
           ,
           and
           upon
           Examination
           of
           the
           Juror
           ,
           it
           appear'd
           he
           had
           Freehold
           of
           15
           
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           value
           ,
           and
           that
           was
           adjudg'd
           sufficient
           ;
           which
           admits
           it
           had
           been
           a
           good
           cause
           of
           Challenge
           ,
           had
           there
           been
           no
           Freehold
           at
           all
           ;
           and
           it
           necessarily
           implies
           that
           it
           was
           requir'd
           by
           the
           
             Common
             Law
          
           ,
           for
           no
           Statute
           interposed
           ,
           as
           to
           any
           lower
           value
           than
           40
           
             s.
             per
             Annum
          
           .
           Nor
           does
           this
           Case
           distinguish
           between
           the
           Case
           of
           Intrusion
           upon
           the
           Queen
           ,
           and
           any
           other
           Case
           .
        
         
           But
           it
           may
           reasonably
           be
           argued
           ,
           if
           Freehold
           be
           necessary
           in
           a
           Juror
           ,
           who
           is
           to
           try
           a
           Case
           of
           Intrusion
           only
           ,
           a
           Fortiori
           ,
           is
           it
           requisite
           in
           a
           Case
           of
           High-Treason
           ,
           but
           in
           that
           Case
           of
           Sir
           
             Christopher
             Blunt
          
           ,
           another
           Juror
           was
           challenged
           that
           had
           no
           Freehold
           ,
           and
           he
           was
           therefore
           set
           aside
           .
        
         
           Now
           that
           the
           Challenge
           for
           want
           of
           Freehold
           extends
           to
           the
           City
           of
           London
           ,
           and
           other
           Cities
           and
           Burroughs
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           to
           the
           Counties
           ,
           is
           abundantly
           proved
           by
           the
           Statutes
           of
           11
           
             H.
             6.
             c.
             1.
             7.
             
             H.
             7.
             c.
          
           5.
           and
           23
           
             H.
             8.
             c.
          
           13.
           to
           which
           the
           Reader
           for
           brevity-sake
           is
           referred
           .
        
         
           It
           is
           no
           where
           maintain'd
           that
           an
           agreement
           to
           Poyson
           or
           Stab
           ,
           &c.
           is
           no
           Treason
           ,
           if
           the
           very
           Act
           do
           not
           ensue
           ,
           as
           the
           Answerer
           very
           falsly
           alledges
           in
           the
           Second
           Column
           of
           his
           6th
           Page
           ,
           towards
           the
           lower
           end
           ;
           for
           those
           have
           a
           manifest
           tendency
           towards
           killing
           ,
           nor
           are
           they
           any
           distinct
           species
           or
           sorts
           ,
           or
           kinds
           of
           Treason
           from
           the
           killing
           of
           the
           King
           ,
           as
           that
           of
           Levying
           of
           War
           ,
           and
           seizing
           the
           King's
           Guards
           (
           especially
           not
           shewing
           what
           Guards
           )
           are
           a
           distinct
           species
           from
           that
           of
           killing
           the
           King
           ,
           and
           need
           not
           necessarily
           be
           understood
           to
           terminate
           and
           conclude
           in
           
           a
           killing
           the
           King
           ,
           taking
           the
           King
           Prisoner
           ,
           or
           seizing
           his
           Person
           ,
           may
           more
           reasonably
           be
           thought
           to
           aim
           at
           a
           killing
           of
           the
           King
           ,
           or
           have
           a
           tendency
           towards
           it
           .
        
         
           And
           the
           Indictment
           ought
           surely
           to
           have
           declar'd
           and
           express'd
           clearly
           and
           plainly
           what
           Guards
           were
           meant
           ,
           there
           being
           variety
           of
           Guards
           ;
           for
           every
           Indictment
           ought
           to
           contain
           certainty
           .
        
         
           Herein
           the
           very
           Indictment
           was
           faulty
           .
        
         
           The
           bold
           Answerer
           hopes
           the
           King
           will
           always
           preserve
           those
           Guards
           ,
           thô
           the
           Parliament
           have
           declar'd
           their
           sense
           to
           the
           contrary
           ,
           when
           the
           present
           extraordinary
           occasion
           shall
           be
           over
           .
        
         
           This
           daring
           presumptuous
           Answerer
           in
           defiance
           of
           the
           Act
           for
           Reversal
           of
           the
           Lord
           
           Russel's
           Attainder
           ,
           the
           Tryal
           having
           been
           partial
           ,
           unjust
           ,
           and
           illegal
           ,
           as
           the
           Act
           affirms
           it
           ,
           yet
           dares
           to
           averr
           in
           his
           last
           Page
           that
           there
           was
           Evidence
           enough
           to
           justifie
           all
           concerned
           in
           the
           Prosecution
           and
           Tryal
           .
        
         
           The
           Answerer
           ,
           towards
           his
           close
           ,
           takes
           great
           care
           ,
           and
           is
           much
           concern'd
           to
           justifie
           the
           King's
           Sollicitor
           that
           then
           was
           .
        
         
           And
           this
           would
           encline
           one
           to
           think
           that
           the
           then
           King's
           Sollicitor
           was
           not
           the
           Author
           of
           that
           
             Antidote
             against
             Poyson
          
           ;
           nor
           of
           this
           last
           Print
           ,
           entituled
           ,
           
             The
             Magistracy
             and
             Government
             Vindicated
          
           ;
           which
           are
           so
           much
           alike
           in
           their
           stile
           and
           strain
           .
           And
           in
           truth
           that
           late
           King's
           Sollicitor
           doth
           utterly
           deny
           that
           he
           had
           any
           hand
           in
           either
           of
           them
           .
           And
           Sir
           
             George
             Jeffries
          
           ,
           the
           last
           Lord
           Chancellor
           ,
           could
           not
           compose
           this
           last
           .
           This
           being
           so
           ,
           it
           may
           easily
           be
           judg'd
           where
           it
           must
           fix
           :
           for
           this
           ,
           look
           into
           the
           printed
           Tryal
           .
        
         
           I
           now
           refer
           the
           Answerer
           to
           justifie
           himself
           at
           Law
           ,
           if
           he
           happen
           to
           be
           in
           danger
           of
           an
           Exception
           out
           of
           an
           Act
           of
           General
           Pardon
           and
           Indemnity
           ,
           where
           he
           may
           have
           a
           fairer
           opportunity
           to
           defend
           himself
           in
           his
           own
           more
           immediate
           Concern
           for
           endeavouring
           to
           subvert
           the
           Law
           ,
           which
           ever
           proves
           too
           hard
           for
           all
           its
           Opposers
           .
           And
           I
           will
           so
           far
           follow
           his
           Humour
           and
           Vein
           ,
           as
           to
           conclude
           with
           Verses
           too
           .
        
         
           
           
             Rode
             Caper
             Vitem
             tamen
             hic
             cum
             stabis
             ad
             Aras
          
           
             In
             tua
             quod
             fundi
             cornua
             ,
             possit
             ,
             erit
             .
          
        
         
           Which
           I
           thus
           English
           :
           
             
               Go
               ,
               spightful
               Satyr
               ,
               bruise
               that
               Sacred
               Vine
            
             
               (
               The
               LAW
               )
               but
               know
               there
               shall
               not
               want
               for
               Wine
            
             
               To
               pour
               into
               thy
               Head
               ,
               which
               may
               suffice
               ,
            
             
               To
               render
               thee
               a
               perfect
               Sacrifice
               .
            
          
        
         
           FINIS
           .
        
      
    
     
       
         
           ADVERTISEMENT
           .
        
         
           
             POlitica
             Sacra
             &
             Civilis
          
           :
           or
           ,
           a
           Model
           of
           Civil
           and
           Ecclesiastical
           Government
           .
           Wherein
           ,
           besides
           the
           positive
           Doctrine
           concerning
           STATE
           and
           CHVRCH
           in
           general
           ,
           are
           debated
           the
           principal
           Controversies
           of
           the
           Times
           concerning
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           State
           and
           Church
           of
           England
           ,
           tending
           to
           Righteousness
           ,
           Truth
           ,
           and
           Peace
           .
           By
           
             George
             Lawson
          
           ,
           Rector
           of
           More
           in
           the
           Country
           of
           Salop.
           The
           Second
           Edition
           .
        
         
           This
           Book
           (
           first
           printed
           1660.
           )
           being
           so
           well
           approved
           of
           ,
           that
           it
           soon
           became
           very
           scarce
           ,
           and
           was
           sold
           at
           great
           Rates
           ,
           is
           now
           reprinted
           for
           
             I.
             S.
          
           and
           are
           to
           be
           Sold
           by
           
             T.
             Goodwin
          
           ,
           at
           the
           Maidenhead
           over
           against
           St.
           
           Dunstan's
           Church
           in
           Fleet-street
           .
           1689.
           
        
      
       
         Notes, typically marginal, from the original text
         
           Notes for div A26143-e600
           
             Reply
             .
          
           
             Reply
             .