Memoranda: TOUCHING THE OATH Ex officio, Pretended Self-Accusation, and Canonical Purgation. Together with some NOTES about the making of some New, and alteration and explanation of some Old, LAWS. All most humbly submitted to the consideration of this PARLIAMENT.  
By EDW. LAKE, Philo-Monarcho-phil.  Justitia Reip. Basis. 
LONDON, Printed for R. Royston, Bookseller to the Kings most Excellent Majesty, at the Angel in Ivy-Lane, 1662.   

To the Right Honourable WILLIAM, EARL of STRAFFORD, Viscount Wentworth, Baron Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse, Newmarch, Oversley and Rabye, Knight of the most Honourable Order of the GARTER.  
MY LORD,  
SUch hath been the power of Custom for many Ages, that the Authors not only of just Volumes, but of small Treatises too, have ever been desirous (I know not whether I may say, Ambitious) to dedicate them to some person of eminent quality and condition, as it were Clients to their Patrons, for the protecting and crediting them. Hereby the Authors have oftentimes gained their desires, and the Patrons (especially when the excellency of such Books did deservedly acquire it) addition of honour and fame, and also propagated the continuance thereof to all posterity. Numerous instances hereof might be given, but Maecenas may be instar omnium; which name of a Nobleman hath in a manner monopolised all noble Patrons, as Patron 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
My Lord, I am far from having any such opinion of this small Treatise, (indeed not deserving that name, being in great part but an epitomised Collection, and the rest brief Memoranda's or Notes, rather to excite others to proceed upon that Subject, then to rest on this:) though if by this, or any other Act of mine, any access of Honour could accrue to your Lordship, I hold myself justly obliged humbly to present and tender it. But, my Lord, the full scope of my intention in this Model is, to the best of my Judgement, (which I always submit to better) and of my skill and power, to contribute something tending to the further happiness and continuance of Truth and Peace, with Justice and Honour, in this Church and State, now by God's blessing (to whom be all Honour and Praise) ex postliminio, as it were, freed from Slavery and Tyrannical Oppression, and restored to a capacity of their pristine Beauty and Splendour, by the most happy Restauration of our most Gracious SOVEREIGN, whom God preserve: This, I am sure, (as my Heart prompts me to speak) is my sole intention, which aims only at the advancement of the Public Good, and is not tainted with any drachm of private Interest. And, my Lord, knowing you do Patrizare that most honoured Father of yours, (whose Memory must never perish, whose Loss this Church and State have too sadly felt, but Quis talia fando, etc.) and that I may say as Tertullian (de Resurrectione carnis) says of the Phoenix raised out of the ashes of his dead Sire, Alter idem. Justitiae & Honoris cultor sincerus maximè, as he was; that emboldens me to desire your Lordship's leave to prefix your Name, that this may be as an Accessary to follow its desired Principal: And knowing you to be such, I cannot but (as all, that know you as well as I, I am confident do) wish for the common good, that your Lordship were put in statum merendi, into the sphere of your proper Activity, that the Public might reap the benefit thereof, of, and that your Talon might be no longer (as it was whilst Rebellious Usurpation caused it, and did obicem ponere; now removed) wrapped up in a Napkin, nor your Candle hid under a Bushel: So wishes, so prays,  
MY LORD, Your Lordships much bounden and most humble Servant, EDWARD LAKE. Westminster 11. Novemb. 1661.   

To the READER.  
SOme account may perhaps be expected to be given of this small endeavour, touching the passing that Act of clearing the doubt touching Coercive Power in Causes Ecclesiastical; wherein is that Proviso that forbids all Ecclesiastical Judges to tender or administer an Oath to any person Ex Officio or otherwise, or Purgation; whereby any person may confess or accuse himself, so as to make him or her liable to censure or punishment. There were not a few persons, unfriends at least to the Discipline of the Church of England, that insulted much (as is touched hereafter) and clamoured of the oppression of the Ecclesiastical Courts, that hath been (say they) all the time before the passing of that Act, that took away that Oath: It was suitable to their interest to call that oppression. When Brutus had murdered Caesar, he called him Tyrant; Ita enim appellari Caesarem facto ejus expediebat, saith Velleius Paterculus, Histor. lib. 2. From the time of passing that Act, till within these few days, I expected from abler pens some Vindication of the proceed of Ecclesiastical Courts, as touching such Oath and Canonical Purgation, and the lawful and expedient use thereof before that Act; but none that I hear of attempting it: I looked upon the cause as a Derelict, took it up, and though (by the late iniquity of the times) I being too much several ways unfurnished for such a Work; yet, if but to give some satisfaction to indifferent men, and to wipe away at least in part causeless calumny, and to stir up others to a further prosecution hereof; I conceived I might adventure upon this little Model or Platform, and perhaps more fitly at this time then another, till a more complete Structure may be raised upon this subject, if more be needful; being so learnedly and fully handled, especially by Doctor Cousins sometimes Dean of the Arches, and that late glory of our Church Doctor Andrew's, late Lord Bishop of Winchester. That I should escape from objections and censures too, I can scarce suppose, upon such a Subject as this is, ingrateful to such men as are haeredes ex ass, to the ancient opposers of it, and are inveighers against it; and those that executed it, quos laeserint, oderint, always excepting the Members of both Houses of Parliament out of that number. Some too perhaps may dislike my Dedication of it (though no Act more free than that) as not to some of my own profession, or rather to my own most Learned and Pious Diocesan, the Reverend Father in God, Doctor Robert Sanderson Lord Bishop of Lincoln; having relation to him by Office of Trust: To him and them I should rather have made my address then Dedication, and have herein consulted with them, had time and convenience served before I had attempted this, and not carry Owls to Athens, go about to give instruction to them, from whom I should rather have received it. But as to that most Noble Person, to whom this is inscribed, though according to his Birth and Education, his motion hath always been in an higher Orb and Contemplation of affairs of greater moment, more immediately enabling him to serve his King and Country: But (they by being somewhat more particularly concerned in a great part of the subject matter hereof) therefore by some may be supposed partial and interessed. Yet even in the subject matter of these Memoranda he is not unversed, if not more particularly; yet as comprehended in that generality of Learning and Knowledge, whereto he hath from his younger years been habituated to, at the feet of such a Statesman, as was his most accomplished Father, and such Instructors as he by his especial and most discerning choice appointed him; and all this perfected up by most advantageous acquisition by travel and residence in foreign parts, amongst those who are justly ranked in the number of the most Civil, Learned, and Wise in Europe, and so consequently in the Universe; and so need not mine or others instruction herein more than others, not professed Lawyers. But all that is comprised in this Model, both in the Memoranda's and the Notes, somewhat grounded upon some year's experience I have had, and tending, as before, at least in my well-meaning opinion to the public good solely; is so most humbly offered to consideration, if by those in Authority it be thought fit. He is, I conceive, very fit to further and advance this, both in consideration of his abilities, and his being empowered as others of his noble rank and quality in the Supreme Judicatory of this Kingdom; and by his own Genius and propensity, willing and desirous to effect any thing aiming that way, as less cannot be expected from the Son of such a Father, and Husband of such a wife, his most noble and most virtuous Lady, (a pair in respect of the mutual parity of their most intense conjugal affection, and parentizing love to Loyalty, Justice and Honour, hereditary virtues flowing in their veins from their most Noble Loyally, Gloriously Acting and Suffering Parents; not easily paralleled) and therefore I have not so much Dedicated this to him, as supplicated his effectual adminicular hand hereto.  
Upon the whole matter as touching myself, this Model, as also, if not more especially the Notes subjoined; I having had no small share of Sufferings in the time of exilement of Monarch and Monarchy, and so consequently of joy and gladness in the happy Restauration of both; in my due gratitude and obligation, both by tie of natural duty, and of God and Man's Laws, have made it part of my study to endeavour to contribute my well-meaning mite to the public good, and the prevention of such miseries for the future, as too lately we have had too sad experience of. Instances might be given of many that have published their endeavours heretofore to such public ends, which have not proved ineffectual, and more especially Mr. Spencer touching the State of Ireland in Queen Elizabeth's time. If in any measure never so remote, they may any whit help to attain to that end they aim at; I shall be glad of it, and with that true candour submissively offering them, always protesting as I now do, that if there be any thing herein, contrary to God's word directly or indirectly, or to His Majesty's Prerogative, or the known Laws of the Land, Ecclesiastical or Temporal, or the politic Government either in Church or State, or which may give just offence: I do hereby absolutely retract it, as no ways by me intended or thought of, wishing this small taste may stir up others (more able) to make a further and better progress in this kind.   

Anno 13. CAROLI II. Regis. An Act for explanation of a Clause contained in an Act of Parliament made in the seventeenth year of the late King Charles, entitled, An Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute primo Elizabethae, concerning Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical.  
WHereas in an Act of Parliament made in the seventéenth year of the late King Charles, entitled, An Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute, primo Elizabethae, concerning Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical; it is (amongst other things) enacted, That no Archbishop, Bishop, nor Vicar General, nor any Chancellor, nor Commissary of any Archbishop, Bishop, or Vicar General, nor any Ordinary whatsoever, nor any other Spiritual or Ecclesiastical judge, Officer, or Minister of justice, nor any other person or persons whatsoever, exercising Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power, Authority or jurisdiction, by any Grant, Licence or Commission of the King's Majesty, his Heirs or Successors, or by any Power or Authority derived from the King, his Heirs or Successors, or otherwise, shall from and after the first day of August, (which then shall be in the year of our Lord God, One thousand six hundred for y one) award, impose or inflict any Pain, Penalty, Fine, Amercement, Imprisonment, or other corporal punishment upon any of the King's Subjects, for any Contempt, Misdemeanour, Crime, Offence, matter or thing whatsoever, belonging to Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Cognisance or jurisdiction, whereupon some doubt hath been made, that all ordinary Power of Coercion and Proceed in Causes Ecclesiastical were taken away, whereby the ordinary course of justice in Causes Ecclesiastical hath been obstructed: Be it therefore declared and Enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the Authority thereof, That neither the said Act, nor any thing therein contained, doth or shall take away any ordinary Power or Authority from any of the said Archbishops, Bishops, or any other person or persons named as aforesaid, but that they and every of them exercising Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, may proceed, determine, sentence, execute and exercise all manner of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and all Censures and Coertions appertaining and belonging to the same, before the making of the Act before recited, in all causes and matters belonging to Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, according to the King's Majesties Ecclesiastical Laws used and practised in this Realm, in as ample manner and form as they did, and might lawfully have done before the making of the said Act.  
And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that the afore recited Act of decimo septimo Caroli, and all the matters and clauses therein contained (excepting what concerns the High Commission Court, or the new erection of some such like Court by Commission) shall be and is hereby repealed to all intents and purposes whatsoever: Any thing, clause or sentence in the said Act contained to the contrary notwithstanding.  
Provided always, and it is hereby enacted, That neither this Act, nor any thing herein contained, shall extend or be construed to revive or give force to the said branch of the said Statute, made in the said first year of the Reign of the said late Queen Elizabeth, mentioned in the said Act of Parliament, made in the said seventéenth year of the Reign of the said King Charles; but that the said branch of the said Statute, made in the said first year of the Reign of the said Queen Elizabeth, shall stand and be repealed in such sort, as if this Act had never been made.  
Provided also, and it is hereby further enacted, that it shall not be lawful for any Archbishop, Bishop, Vicar General, Chancellor, Commissary, or any other Spiritual or Ecclesiastical judge, Officer or Minister, or any other person having or exercising Spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, to tender or administer unto any person whatsoever, the Oath usually called the Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath whereby such person to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess, or accuse, or to purge him or herself, of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment: any thing in this Statute, or any other Law, Custom or Usage heretofore to the contrary hereof, in any wise notwithstanding.  
Provided always, that this Act, or any thing therein contained, shall not extend or be construed to extend to give unto any Archbishop, Bishop, or any other Spiritual or Ecclesiastical judge, Officer, or other person or persons aforesaid, any power or authority to exercise, execute, inflict or determine any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, Censure or Coercion, which they might not by Law have done before the year of our Lord, One thousand six hundred thirty and nine, nor to abridge or diminish the King's Majesty's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical matters and affairs, nor to confirm the Canons made in the year One thousand six hundred and forty, nor any of them, nor any other Ecclesiastical Laws or Canons not formerly confirmed, allowed or enacted by Parliament, or by the established Laws of the Land, as they stood in the year of the Lord One thousand six hundred thirty and nine,   

The Contents of the Chapters.  

Chap. I. THe endeavours of the Innovators to change the course of Ecclesiastical proceed. That stupendious Fanatic Hackett his fearful end. Mr. Cambdens' judgement touching the Innovators. Their perseverance in their design of Innovation in King James his time and afterwards. The pretended taking away the Coercive power from the Ecclesiastical Courts how gained, what use was made of it by the Innovators, and how they boasted of their benefit by it. Two passages in the Long Parliament touching two Inconformists. Page 1.  
Chap. II. The two Provisoes in the late Act that takes away the doubt touching Coercive power in Ecclesiastical Courts. Dr. Cousin's Apology for sundry proceed by Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical. That groundless Opinion, That a several Royal assent to the executing of every particular Canon is required, is confuted. The validity of the Ecelesiastical Laws. The clamours of Inconformists, Innovators and fanatics, against the putting of Ecclesiastical Laws in execution, though the Ecclesiastical Officers and Ministers are by Act of Parliament severely commanded to do it. p. 10.  
Chap. III. The Heads of the several Chapters in that Apology of Doctor Cousins. Part 1. p. 27.  
Chap. IU. By the late Act the manner of proceeding in Ecclesiastical Courts is not altered, but left as it was. A summary relation of what Dr. Cousins in his Apology hath asserted and made good by God's Word, the practice of the Primitive Christians, the opinion of the Fathers, the Laws Canon and Civil, and the Laws of the Land allowing and warranting them. The like practice at Common Law, and at Geneva and other places, pretending strict Reformation. p. 24.  
Chap. V That it is consonant to God's Word to give such an Oath Ex officio, or otherwise. p. 28.  
Chap. VI That the opinion and practice of the Primitive Christians, and the Fathers of the Church, was to administer such Oath Ex officio, or upon Accusation, and for Purgation Canonical, with the practice at Geneva. p. 33.  
Chap. VII. That the like practice touching these Oaths, is and was in all Foreign Christian Nations, and other Nations not Christian, guided only by the Light of Nature. p. 37.  
Chap. VIII. That by the known Laws of this Land, the Ecclesiastical Judges were so warranted and commanded to give that Oath, according to the Canon and Ecclesiastical Laws. p. 39  
Chap. IX. That Oaths administered to parties touching matters damageable, criminal and penal to themselves, are urged and required by Temporal Courts, and by the Laws of the Realm. p. 41.  
Chap. X. The inconveniences and hurt that probably may follow, by the forbidding the ministering of an Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath, whereby such person, to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess or accuse, or to purge him or herself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment. Praise of the Civil Laws. Civilians first, and last, and greatest Sufferers. Amity 'twixt both Robes. His Majesties and the Lord Chancellor's savours to Civilians.    
TOUCHING The OATH EX OFFICIO, AND CANONICAL PURGATION.  

CHAP. I. The endeavours of the Innovators to change the course of Ecclesiastical proceed. That stupendious Fanatic Hackett his fearful end. Mr. Cambdens' judgement touching the Innovators. Their perseverance in their design of Innovation in King James his time and afterwards. The pretended taking away the coercive power from the Ecclesiastical Courts how gained; what use was made of it by the Innovators, and how they boasted of their benefit by it. Two passages in the Long-Parliament, touching two Inconformists.  
FOR many years together now last passed, some men have very earnestly endeavoured to have taken away, or at leastwise have much altered the proceed in the Ecclesiacal Courts of this Kingdom, used according to His Majesty's Ecclesiastical Laws, touching the Administration of the Oath ex officio, and at the instance or promotion of a party accusing, or stirring up the Judge's Office; to any party accused, or called, or enquired after by the Judge Ecclesiastical ex officio, or otherwise; whereby, as they phrase it, he must confess or accuse himself, and so render himself liable to penalty or censure. In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth they prosecuted it vehemently if not violently, and as before that time some Anabaptists in Germany had done the like in such Cases. Of their practices that way here, that most Faithful, Learned, and Grave Historion of ours, Mr. Cambden gives us an account in his Annals of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, printed at Leyden in the Low-Countries 1625. It is in the year 1590. After he hath there given a Relation of that stupendious and blasphemous Fanatic Hackett, of his beginning, how illiterate, insolent, fierce, and revengeful he was, that meeting one that had been his Schoolmaster an ingenuous person, under a colour of embracing him bit off his Nose, and the poor miserable deformed man, beseeching him to give it him again, that whilst it was green and fresh he might sow it again to his face; he would not do it, but like a dog swallowed it down; and so averse was he to all piety, that, that heavenly Doctrine he had heard in Sermons, he made sport with it, with his pot-Companions on the Alebenches. Afterwards when he had prodigally wasted his Estate which he had got with a Widow whom he had married; on a sudden he claps on the vizard of most specious sanctity, is wholly taken up in hearing Sermons, reading the Scriptures, and pretending to I know not what, heavenly Revelations, and counterfeiting an extraordinary calling, insinuated himself into the acquaintance of several Divines, that with inflamed zeal, laboured to bring in the Presbyterial Discipline of the Church of Geneva, into the Church of England, amongst whom was one Wigginton a Minister, and if ever any, an hare-brained one, and a contem●er of Magistrates. Then he goes on and relates Hacketts and his Complices most horrid and ridiculous madness, such as had not such a worthy Author and others related it, we might now doubt of the truth of it, as the next Age will probably do of our Modern fanatics late pranks: there he relates his fearful blasphemous speeches, as he expired and was turned off the Gallows, upon whom that pious and Learned Author gives this grave censure, Ita hostis humani gencris, dementat quos sanctitatem simulare, & ad solrietatem nolle sapere deprehendit. Thus the enemy of Mankind infatuates those whom he perceives to be counterfeitors of holiness, and will not be wise with sobriety.  
And then after a line or two upon Arthington and Coppinger, two of Hacketts Complices he goes on thus. " Nec hii soli, sed etiam alii, qui receptam in Ecclesia Anglicana Doctrinam, Episcoporum vocationem damnando, & Praesules contumeliosè calumniando, hactenus frustra impugnarant. Nunc pertractis in eorum partes nonullis, juris Anglici peritis, in corum Jurisdictionem & delegatam à Regina in Ecclesiasticis causis authoritatem, ut prorsus injustam, & linguas & calamos strinxerunt; declamando ubique, etiam libris publicatis, homines contra Regni leges, in Foris Ecclesiasticis indignè opprimi. Reginam ejusmodi authoritatem ex jure non posse delegare, nec alios exercere delegatam. Fora illa non posse a reo Jusjurandum Ex Officio exigere, cum Nemo seipsum accusare teneatur. Jusjurandum illud homines ad sui condemnationem cum ignominiosa confusione, vel in spontaneum perjurium cum animarum exitio praecipitare. Praeterea de aliis, quam matrimonialibus causis, non debere cognoscere, ex hujusmodi Veteri Rescripto."  
Mandamus Vice-Comiti Comitatuum nostrorum S. N. etc. quod non permittat, quod aliqui in Balliva sua in aliquibus locis conveniant, ad aliquas Recognitiones, per sacramenta sua faciendas, nisi in causis Matrimonialibus & Testamentariis.  
" Contra, Juris Ecclesiastici Professores Regiam in Ecclesiasticis authoritatem propugnarunt utique Parlamentariâ Authoritate in Regina investitam. Hanc oppugnare, nihil aliud esse, quam in Majestatem irruere & Sacro Sanctae Praerogativae violato obsequii juramento insultare. Fora Ecclesiastica de aliis quam Matrimonialibus & Testamentariis posse cognoscere, ex statuto Circumspect agatis & Articulis Cleri sub Edvardo Primo, docuerunt. Rescriptum sive legem illam prolatam, suspectam esse, quia temporis est incerti, & variae Lectionis. Alibi enim legi. Ad recognitiones vel sacramenta praestanda. Recognitionem item facere non significare, testimonium perhibere, vel respondere in jure, sed debitum agnoscere, & fateri vel placita de Catalogis vel debitis tenere. Juramentum ex officio, in foris illis, ut in aliis, ex omni memoria fuisse exactum, ad simoniam, adulterium & alia tenebrarum opera rimanda, praesertim cum Insinuatio, ut loquuntur, fuerit clamosa. Et quamvis nemo teneatur seipsum prodere, tamen per famam proditum teneri ostendere, utrum possit suam innocentiam defendere, & seipsum purgare, quandoquidem poenitentia imposita, non sit poena sed medicina ad peccatores curandos, alios à peccato deterrendos, & scandalum tollendum, juxta illud in Sacris Literis." Pro anima tua ne confundaris dicere verum. Est enim confusio adducens peccatum, & confusio adducens gloriam & gratiam." Sed quid de hiis immoror, quum dissertationes Richardi Cosini Legum Doctoris & Johannis Morrisii & Lanceloti Andrew's eruditae hac de re utrinque praestent? Regina haud ignara suam authoritatem per Episcoporum latera in hoc negotio peti, adversantium impetus tacite infregit, & Ecclesiasticam Jurisdictionem illaesam conservavit. That is, Not only these, (speaking of Hackett and his Complices) but others also, who had hitherto, though in vain, impugned the received Discipline of the Church of England, by condemning the calling of Bishops, and contumeliously slandering the Praelates; having now drawn into their party some Common-Lawyers, sharpened both their Tongues and Pens against their Jurisdiction, and the Authority which the Queen delegated in Ecclesiastical Causes as altogether unjust, declaiming every where, even in Books published, that men were unworthily oppressed in the Ecclesiastical Courts, contrary to the Laws of the Kingdom. That the Queen could not by Law delegate such kind of Authority, nor others to whom it was delegated could exercise it. That these Courts could not require the Oath ex officio from the defendant party, when as no man is bound to accuse himself. That Oath precipitates men to condemn themselves with ignominious confusion, or into wilful perjury to the destruction of their Souls. Besides, they ought not to hold cognizance of any other causes then Matrimonial and Testamentary, according to that old Mandate or Rescript," We command our Sheriff of our Counties of S. N. etc. that they suffer not any in their Balive to come together in any places, to make any Recognizances upon their Oaths, but in Matrimonial and Testamentary causes." On the other side the Professors of the Ecclesiastical Laws maintained, the Royal Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical as vested in the Queen by Authority of Parliament. To oppose this, was nothing else then to offer violence to Royal Majesty, and violating the Oath of obedience, to insult over the Sacred Prerogative Royal. The Ecclesiastical Courts may hold cognizance of other Causes, then Matrimonial and Testamentary, by the Statute of Circumspect agatis and Articuli Cleri, in the time of Edward the first as they made it appear. That Rescript or Law which they produced was suspected, because it was incertain for the time, and is variously read. Elsewhere I have read it, To perform Recognizances and Oaths, and to make recognition or recognizance, doth not signify to give testimony, or to answer in Law, but to acknowledge and confess a debt, or to hold plea of Inventaries or Debts. That the Oath ex officio hath time out of mind been given in these Courts as in others, to sift out Simony, Adultery, and other works of darkness; especially, when the Insinuation as they call it, becomes loud." And though no man is bound to betray himself, yet being betrayed by fame, he is bound to show himself whether he can defend his innocence and purge himself, seeing the penance enjoined is not a punishment, but a medicine to cure sinners, and to deter others from sinning, and to take away scandal, according to that in Scripture, Be not confounded in speaking truth for thy souls sake, for there is a confusion that brings sin, and there is a confusion that brings glory and grace." But what do I dwelling upon these things, when the Learned discourses hereupon on both sides are extant of Richard Cousin Doctor of the Laws, and John Morris, and Lancelot Andrew's? The Queen not ignorant that Her Authority was in this business struck at through the sides of the Bishops, tacitly crushed the violence of the Adversaries, and conserved the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction inviolate." Thus in a few words he sums up part of the marrow of these Learned dissertations, and gives his sound judgement thereupon. But still they went on in their design, in which I believe they will ever be found . We have had sufficient experience that way at what they aim, and that there is no hope of bending without breaking too. In their admonition to the Parliament in that Queen's Reign they tell us, to this effect at least, that if they cannot have what they desire by fair means, they will have it by a way shall make our hearts ache; and I think they have indifferently well made their words good. Yet blessed be God, we are delivered again from them, God give us care to beware of them, and not to fall again into their snares by those blessed Titles of Mercy and Moderation, heavenly good surely, if rightly applied. Let us but contemplate our fresh miseries, and the murder of our blessed King and Martyr, King Charles the First, and his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 'tis well to be hoped 'twill prove as much or more effectual, than the Pages Memento to Philip of Macedon in another case. These men, for they were all of the same Leaven, still persisted in their design, all along the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, and upon King James his coming in, thinking upon that change to have wrought something extraordinary upon a Prince that had a great access of Dominion, and probably at his entrance would endeavour to satisfy all or most, so far as with reason it could be expected, and to ingratiate himself as far as fitting with his new Subjects. But it was our happiness, though his trouble and vexation, that he was well acquainted with the factious and seditious humours of that gang in Scotland, (with whom and ours here of the same mould, I believe ever was and will be a correspondence and co-operation.) Ex viridi observantia this is too demonstrable. They then set upon King james with their most humble Petition, called The Lincolnshire Ministers Petition, perhaps denominatio à majori; it was a complication of many parts: there they desire favour for tender Consciences, and thereupon was the Conference at Hampton-Court granted, where their Reasons were, as it were, brayed in a Mortar, and they or most of them seemed satisfied; but many of them at least, soon returned to their vomit. In that Petition they promise all obedience, and profess they hold it contrary to God's Word, and the practice of the Primitive Christians, to resist the Prince, or to get Reformation by force or violence. To this effect they supplicate and hold forth; yet I believe it may be proved, that some of these individual persons in that Petition, adhered expressly to the late Rebels against His Majesty, if they were not actually in Arms against him, as most if not all of their Opinions were. How they crept in, or rather marched on furiously, though slily in the the late King's time, till they had weaved up their Web to their desire: we have seen and sadly felt. When the High-Commission and Star-Chamber were taken away, a great point was gained: To speak of nothing else but the subject upon which I am. Yet by the way it is observable, that many, if not most, moderate men are of opinion, that the Government will not be well settled, till both these Courts, though happily in many particulars altered and regulated, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, some other Courts much like them, be established; where extraordinary crimes and persons may be ordered: and in the former, the High-Commission, the shifting of criminous persons from one Diocese to another may be met with. It was no small part of their design, to trample upon Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and to take away the coercive power, and to make it precarious and ridiculous: as they would interpret that Statute, which, if credible relations be true, was but strangely got; insomuch that a great leading Member in the House of Commons then in that long Parliament, cried out, Digitus Dei fuit in eo; that though it were not intended, yet the words would bear it, which he rejoiced at; though many, and not of the least, able Lawyers in the Kingdom were not of his opinion. That Coercive power, for no other have the Ecclesiastic Courts, (except Suspension, a degree below it, which amounts but to a small coercion to refractory persons, in regard it goes no further, the secular arm cannot be called upon that;) that, I say, that coercive power is Excommunication. That is the power of the Keys, how far that power may be stayed, retarded or forborn, I intent not to dispute; but that it shall be totally taken away from the Church, Quasi non esset Deus in coelis, that surely is not to be believed, that it can be done by any power under Heaven. But that taking away that coercive power from the Ecclesiastical Courts, as they interpreted it, (and they knew they had argumentum à fortiori to maintain it) did not a little further and heighten their design. At the time of their raising their Militia against the late King, a person of no mean quality at a great Assembly made his Harangue to the people, (as I heard it from a very credible person, who said he was then and there present and heard it) and then and there enumerated the many great blessings this Nation had received from that blessed Parliament, (as he called it) That Ship-money was taken away, and the Star-Chamber was taken away, and the High-Commission was taken away, and the Spiritual Courts too are taken away: A man could not meddle with a Wench, (his expression was otherwise, which I am not willing to mention) but he must be questioned: Hinc illae lacrymae. Indeed that was a great Eyesore. Delinquents never love the Judges that punish them.  At laus summa, viris displicuisse malis. 
And this did not a little advantage the cause they had then in hand, very many persons that had been justly questioned in these Courts flocking in to their colours. But I take no delight to reckon up these strange passages, (to call them no worse) which were not a few when that storm was in raising, which afterwards shaked all the corners of the Land. Two only which concerned Ecclesiastical proceed, (to meddle with no other of higher nature, that the world rang of, and I would the memory of them could be perpetually abolished) I shall briefly touch, which amongst others were these: A grave and able Civilian, and then a Member of the House of Commons, was accused by an Inconformist, that he had excommunicated him, for not kneeling at the Communion when he received. I was present, and saw and heard it, and to my best remembrance it was for not kneeling at the Communion, at least it was for not performing some other Ceremony; so that as to this matter 'tis all one. The Civilian being called up to a Committee of the Lords, then in the Long Parliament, out of the House of Commons, to answer it. By his Counsel he desired time to send into the Country, where it was pretended to be done, to know whether he had done any such thing; it being impossible for him to remember every particular that he had done in his Jurisdiction, and that particular, he said, he did not remember. He had time given, and informed himself thereof; and at the next appointed time of his appearance, by his Counsel, pleaded that he had done no such thing, as he was accused of. The Accuser said, than it was done by his Deputy or Surrogate: That was denied too. Then he said, he was sure it was done by the Spiritual Court; and so it was, but not by any Spiritual Court where that Civilian had to do: Then the Civilian pleaded, that if he had done that whereof he was accused, he doubted not but he could have justified it: but since it appears that he was unjustly accused, and reaped some discredit by being thus questioned, and had been put to trouble and charge thereabouts, he desired reparation and charges: which by many of the Lords was yielded to, yet by the major part it was carried, that he ought not to have it; and the reason was rendered, because it would deter others from complaining. Si satis est accusasse, quis erit innocens? Nay, how far may it tend to the ruin of some, if some men be maliciously set upon them, to multiply accusations against them?  
The other was: Another Inconformist complaining of his being questioned in the Ecclesiastical Courts for his Inconformity: In defence it was alleged against him and proved, that he had said, He would as soon bow at the name of Judas, as at the Name of JESUS: and I diligently enquired, but never heard he was punished for it. But would there had been no more than these, though these are too much: Would some had not gloried, had not triumphed in their shame.  Bella geri placuit nullos habitura triumphos.  

CHAP. II. The two Provisoes in the late Act that takes away the doubt touching Coercive power in Ecclesiastical Courts. Dr. Cousin's Apology for sundry proceed by Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical. That groundless Opinion, That a several Royal assent to the executing of every particular Canon is required, is confuted. The validity of the Ecclesiastical Laws. The clamours of Inconformists, Innovators and fanatics, against the putting of Ecclesiastical Laws in execution, though the Ecclesiastical Officers and Ministers are by Act of Parliament severely commanded to do it.  
BY the late Act before mentioned, where the Doubt (so it is called there) about the Coercive power in Ecclesiastical Courts is cleared and taken away.  
One Proviso is, That that Act, nor any thing therein contained, shall extend, or be construed to extend, to give unto any Archbishop or Bishop, or any other Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Judge, etc. any power or authority to exercise, etc.  
If any be peccant that way, it ought to be amended.  
Another Proviso forbids any Archbishop, Bishop, etc. to tender or administer unto any person the Oath usually called the Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath, whereby such person, to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess or accuse, or to purge him or herself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment.  
This being now forbidden by Act of Parliament, every Subject aught to give obedience therein: But some now insulting and upbraiding the Ecclesiastical Courts, that all this while they have oppressed the Subject, with that proceeding which the Parliament hath taken away, renewing the old cry in Queen Elizabeth's time, and ever since against such proceed, which never till now (I always except what was done in the late times of usurped government) were legally prohibited. Though I am far from questioning the reasons whereupon that Act passed, but do humbly submit to it both in word and practice; yet I hope it will be allowed to make some defence against such persons, as so tax such proceed before the passing of this Act. And herein I shall follow that most able Civilian, Richard Cousin Doctor of the Laws, and Dean of the Arches, in that his Apology for sundry proceed by Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, etc. Mr. Cambden, as before, mentions him with honour, as surely he well deserved, and that work of his, if nothing else, evinces it. Mr. Swinburn in that Work of his of Last Wills and Testaments, printed at London for the Company of Stationers, 1611. in the first part, sect. 6. numb. 8. fol. 17. writes thus of him, and of that Work of his, that Apology: I find, saith he, written by that learned and no less religious man, Doctor Cousins (as I take it) in that worthy Work entitled, An Apology for sundry proceed by Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, etc. and so he goes on. Upon this subject he hath written so fully, that, I believe, little can be added to it; and if any should go about it (excepting such additions as well may be added, by reason of some emergencies since the time he wrote, and some other additions and explications, not derogatory from him) they would be forced very much to plough with his Heifer, which would but look too much like a Plagiary. I could wish the book were reprinted, and haply it will be so, which may serve for Topics to this subject. For as all the Poets after Homer are said to drink of his Fountain, according to that picture or statue of his, that denotes as much, with that Inscription, Ridet anhelantem post se vestigia turbam. Even so must, I conceive, all do from Doctor Cousin, that shall write upon this subject. I was upon Epitomizing that Apology of his, and had made some progress therein; but upon second thoughts desisted, thinking it better to refer the Reader to him, rather than to adventure to abbreviate him, and thereby perhaps wrong him: an offence that too many Epitomizers are guilty of; therefore, I say, I shall only make use of some Notes, as confessed arrows out of his quiver, and sip of some others elsewhere, and point the Reader to his full stream, where any that list may drink their fill.  
Upon these words in the late Act; Provided, that this Act., nor any thing therein contained, shall extend, or be construed to extend, or give unto any Archbishop, Bishop, etc. any power or authority to exercise or execute, etc. any jurisdiction which they might not have done before the year of our Lord 1639. or to abridge or diminish the King's Majestics Supremacy in Ecclesiastical matters or affairs, nor to confirm the Canons made in the year 1640.  
I say, upon these words some are ready (mistaking questionless the words and meaning of that Act) to renew that old exploded Opinion, or rather groundless Fancy, That a several Royal assent to the executing of every particular Canon is required. Hereto Doctor Cousin answers, That admitting this were true, than all the other opinions of those that oppugn the ordinary Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical stand in no stead, and might be spared, because this would cut off all at once. For none that exercise ordinary Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, have it in particularity, (which by the oppugners seems to be meant) otherwise then by permission of Law, to every of their proceed, and impossible were it, by reason of the infinity of it, and troublesomeness to procure such particular assent to the execution of every Canon. His Majesty's Delegates, when Appeals are made to His Majesty in Chancery, would signify nothing, could not exercise the power to them delegated, by reason of the want of such particular assent; and it is a gross absurdity to grant, (as even the Oppugners and Innovators do) That Testamentary and Matrimonial causes are of Ecclesiastical cognizance, (to say nothing of the rest of Ecclesiastical causes) and yet cannot by reason of this want be dispatched, nor can be dealt in by any other authority, according to any Law in force. This would speak a defect in the public Government, that the Subject should have a right, but no likely or ready mean to come by it; and great offences by Law punishable, and yet no man sufficiently authorized to execute these Laws. Since the abrogation of Papal pretended Supremacy, when the ancient rights of the Kings of England, of being Supreme Governors over all persons within their Dominions, as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal; and that no foreign Prince, Person, Prelate, State or Potentate, hath or aught to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, preeminence or authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm, and so forth, as in the Act and the Oath.  
Since these rights were, as it were, ex postliminio restored, and declared to have been, as they ever ought to have been, in the Kings of England, many Laws have been made in several Parliaments for the strengthening of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and the more effectual execution thereof, and some of the Ecclesiastical Laws were enlarged, astered and explained: 


* 25 H. 8.19.  The Statutes for Delegates upon Appeals.  

† 27 H 8 130. 32 H 8.7.  Not long after, two Statutes for assistance of ordinary Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and for the speedier recovery of Tithes in Courts Ecclesiastical.  

* 34 & 35 H. 8 19  The like for the recovery of Pensions, Procurations, etc.  

† 1 Ed. 6. c. 2.  In the time of Edw. 6. in a Statute (since repealed by Queen Mary) a great number of particular causes of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, are there (by the way) rehearsed, that Ordinaries and other Ecclesiastical Judge's might and did then put in execution.    
So 1 Mar. c. 3. 1 Eliz. c. 1. 5 Eliz c. 23. & 9 That Perjury or Subornation in a Court Ecclesiastical shall and may be punished by such usual and ordinary Laws, as heretofore have been, and yet are used and frequented in the said Ecclesiastical Courts. Which proveth the usual practice of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical hitherto used (without any special assent) to be lawful.  
So 13 Eliz. c. 4. etc. 10. and many more in the same Queen's time, and King James, and King Charles the First, that blessed King and Martyr. I say, many are the Laws that have been made for the strengthening of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and the more effectual execution of it; and some of these Laws were enlarged, altered and explained. But never was there any Law, Custom or Act of Parliament, that required a several Royal assent to the executing of every particular Canon. Many are the reasons which Dr. Cousins gives in the first Chapter of his Apology against that particular Assent; wherein he shows his great candour, and ingenuity, and desire to give abundant satisfaction to all Opponents, though never so unreasonable, that were it not as clear as the Noon-tide light, that no such particular assent is needful, some might think that he feared his cause, and be ready to say, that Defensio nimis operosa, reatum quasi arguit.  
But touching the validity of the Ecclesiastical Laws, there needs, I conceive, no more be said then what is expressed in that Act of Parliament 25 H. 8.19. the Ecclesiastical Laws, that were in use and practice before that Statute, are thereby established thus:  
Provided that such Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances and Synods Provincial, being already made, which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the Laws, Statutes and Customs of this Realm, nor to the damage or hurt of the King's Prerogative Royal, shall now still be used and executed, as they were before the making of this Act, until such time as they be viewed, etc. by the 32. persons mentioned in that Act: which is not yet done.  
The Ecclesiastical Laws, which have been made since that Act, and all that ever hereafter shall be made, so long as that Statute stands in force, (the requisites in that Act being observed) are thereby, I conceive, confirmed, or to be confirmed. The Submission and Petition of the Clergy mentioned in that Act is, That they would not enact or put in ure any new Canons, etc. in their Convocation, without the King's Royal assent and authority in that behalf.  
There it is said, That the Convocation in the time coming shall always be assembled by authority of the King's Writ, and that the Clergy must have the Kings most Royal assent and licence, to make, promulge, and execute such Canons, Constitutions and Ordinances, Provincial and Synodal: else they may not enact, promulge or constitute any such Canons, etc. And this course hath ever since been observed. Every Convocation called by His Majesty's Writ and the Clergy, had especial licence from His Majesty to enact such Canons, etc. and to execute them.  
The Provision following being observed, which is this, Provided that no Canons, Constitutions or Ordinances, shall be made or put in execution in this Realm by authority of the Convocation of the Clergy, which shall be contrariant or repugnant to though Prerogative Royal, or the Customs, Laws or Statutes of this Realm, any thing contained in that Act to the contrary thereof notwithstanding.  
If any be put in execution contrary to this Proviso, and contrary to any after-Acts of Parliament, whereby His Majesty hath further power acknowledged in causes Ecclesiastical, then 'tis illegal: but that is much sooner alleged than proved. The particular Ecclesiastical Laws in force, have by Dr. Cousins and others been sufficiently demonstrated, I humbly conceive. In case any Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical or Civil within this Realm, be not derived or claimed from the Crown, as to the execution of it at least; then the former objection were of force; but another Act of Parliament, 8 Eliz. c. 1. shows the contrary sufficiently: where all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is acknowledged United to the Crown, as there fully: and that very clause 1 Eliz. 1. together with His Majesty's Letters Patents directed forth for confirming Archbishops and Bishops, is brought in the preamble thereof as a strong proof, without scruple or ambiguity, that the authority and jurisdiction by the Clergy executed, is thereby given them from Her Majesty. This also, were there nothing else, were sufficient to entitle them the King's Majesties Ecclesiastical Laws, as well as other Laws, are called the King's Majesty's Laws. But they are up and down in the Acts of Parliament called the Kings and the Queen's Ecclesiastical Laws, 1 Eliz. c. 2. 5 Eliz. c. 25. 25 H. 8.27. etc. and even by the Note-gatherer, that great oppugner, against whom the Doctor writeth, they are called the Ecclesiastical Laws of England. And in this late Act above mentioned they are called the King's Majesties Ecclesiastical Laws.  
Yet for executing of these Laws by the Ecclesiastical Judges, what out-cries were made against them? especially in the beginning of the late Long Panliament, by His late Majesty, of blessed memory, called the Black Parliament, Summa imis miscendo; and what favours were then afforded to those Boutefeu's, as we have since had sad experience of them, God grant we may be cafeful of them for the future, I am unwilling to recite. Ecclesiastical Judges are not only tied by their offices and 
* Canon. 117. Canon. & Constitut. 1604.  Oaths, but▪ at lest in some particulars, for which they have, though most unjustly, been much clamoured against) are most severely by Act of Parliament charged to see the execution of, if not of others too, yet of one especial Ecclesiastical Law; for their care wherein some of them have been well-nigh ruined: that is, that according to that Act of Parliament, 1 Eliz. c. 2. For uniformity of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments, every person should diligently and faithfully resort to their Parish Church or Chappel, where Common prayer and such Services of God shall be used, upon every Sunday and other days ordained and used to be kept as Holidays, and then and there to abide orderly and soberly, during the time of Common prayer, Preaching, or other Service of God to be used and ministered, etc. Then follows thus, And for due execution hereof, the Queen's most excellent Majesty, the Lords Temporal, and all the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, doth in God's name earnestly require and charge, all the Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ordinaries, that they shall endeavour themselves to the utmost of their knowledge, that the due and true execution hereof may be had, throughout their Dioceses and charges, as they will answer before God for such evils and plagues, wherewith Almighty God may justly punish his people for neglecting this good and wholesome Law. Who would think, (had we not sadly felt their designs) that the great Magnifiers of Parliaments (for which I discommend them not, so they keep within due compass) would have been so bitter against those, that acted but according to these strict Parliamentary charges?   

CHAP. III. The Heads of the several Chapters in that Apology of Doctor Cousins.  

Part 1.  
C. 1. THe particular distribution of causes proved to be of Ecclesiastical cognizance, besides Testamentary and Matrimonial. With a discourse of  
C. 2. Bishop's Certificates against persons excommunicated, being a special point of their voluntary Jurisdiction, where there is no party that prosecuteth.  
C. 3. That matters in the former Chapter adjoined to Testamentary and Matrimonial causes (though properly they be not of Testament or Matrimony) are of Ecclesiastical cognizance, and how far.  
C. 4. General proofs out of Statutes, that sundry other causes besides Testamentary and Matrimonial, are of Ecclesiastical cognizance.  
C. 5. That Suits for Tithes of Benefices upon avoidance or spoliation, likewise that Suits for Tithes, Oblations, Mortuaries, and Pensions, Procurations, etc. are of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, is proved by Statutes especially.  
C. 6. That Suits for right of Tithes belong to the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and how far, is showed out of the books and Reports of the Common Law; so of places of Burial and Churchyards, and of Pensions, Mortuaries, Oblations, etc.  
C. 7. Of right to have a Curate, and of Contributions to Reparations, and to other things required in Churches.  
C. 8. Proofs in general, that sundry crimes and offences are punishable by Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and namely Idolatry, Heresy, Perjury, or Laesio fidei; and how far the last of these is there to be corrected: also of disturbance of Divine Service, or not frequenting of it, and neglect of the Sacraments.  
C. 9. That Simony, Usury, Defamation or Slander, beating of a Clerk, Sacrilege, Brawling or Fight in Church or Church-yard, Dilapidations or waste of an Ecclesiastical Living, and all Incontinency; are punishable by Ecclesiastical authority, and how far.  
C. 10. Several other matters reckoned in this tenth Chapter, as ordaining of real Compositions, and disannulling of them, suspension ab ingressu Ecclesiae, etc. Interdiction of a Church, Sequestration, Excommunication, Parish-Clerks fees, Goods due to a Church detained, Blasphemy, Idolatry. Apostasy from Christianity, violation and profanation of the Sabbath, Subornation of Perjury, Attestation of a woman's chastity, Drunkenness, filthy speech, violation of a Sequestration or Induction, hindering and disturbance to carry away Tithes, enjoining of Penance corporal, contempt of obeying the Decrees of the Ecclesiastical Judge, Fees due in Ecclesiastical Courts, Curates and Clerks wages, Forgery in an Ecclesiastical matter, as of Letters Testimonial, of Orders of Institution, burying of excommunicate persons, communicating with excommunicate persons, frequenters of Conventicles, digging up of Corpse buried, and generally for any matter Ecclesiastical indefinitely, by the Articuls cleri, may be cited: All these are of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction; and proofs that any Subjeet, Lay or other, may be cited in any cause Ecclesiastical.  
C. 11. That Laymen may be cited and urged to take Oaths in other causes then Testamentary and Matrimonial.  
C. 12. The grounds of the opinions to the contrary examined and confuted.  
C. 13. That judgement of Heresy still remaineth (at the Common Law) in Judges Ecclesiastical, and that the Proviso touching Heresy in the Statute 1 Eliz. 1. is only spoken of Ecclesiastical Commissioners thereby authorized.  
C. 14. That by the Statute Her Majesty may commit authority, and they may take and use for Ecclesiastical causes Attachments, Imprisonments and Fines. Herein he writes also how the Law was at that time.  
C. 15. That an Ecclesiastical person may be deprived of his Benefice without indictment or prosecution of party.  
C. 16. That after forty days an excommunicate person may be otherwise punished then upon the Writ De Excommunicato capiendo, and that the said Writ may and aught to be awarded upon contempts arising on other causes Ecclesiastical, than any of those ten crimes mentioned in the Statute 5 Eliz. 23.  
C. 17. Of a Prohibition, what it is, where it lieth not, and where it doth, and how it ceaseth by a Consultation, and of the Writ of Indicavit.  
C. 18. An Analysis or unfolding of the two special Statutes touching Praemunire, with sundry questions and doubts about that matter, requiring more grave resolution.   

Then in the second part of his Apology the Doctor sets forth his Proofs, together with his Answers, to the objections made against the manner of practice of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical by those that oppugn it.  
C. 1. Of the distinction of Offences, and several kinds and ends in punishing them, with the necessity of punishments.  
C. 2. Of two sorts of prosecution of crimes and offences, viz. by a party, and of office; the practice of them in Scripture, and in the several Courts of this Realm.  
C. 3. Of the sundry kinds of objecting crimes by a party mentioned in the Civil Law, as by reason of a man's public charge and function; also by way of Exception, Supplication, Complaint, Delation and Accusation. The true signification of the word Accusatio, its divers acceptions, definition and exposition thereof, with some reason of the frequency of Accusation in Courts of the Civil Laws in former times, is also declared.  
C. 4. That the prosecution of crimes by way of Accusation, is in most places forbidden, or grown into disuse. The reasons hereof be, partly the danger to the Accusers, and partly the hatefulness of that course. Therein also is disputed, whether all Accusation be unlawful, and certain points delivered to be observed by all them that will accuse others.  
C. 5. Of the several acceptions of the word Officium, the signification of the words Inquisitio, Questio, crimina ordinaria & extraordinaria, the reason why enquiry by office came in place of Accusation. Of Enquiry in general and special, of-Enquiry special, Ex officio nobih sive mero, mixto & promoto, and of the privileges of proceeding ex mero officio above the other.  
C. 6. Of Denunciation, a special means of stirring up the office, of the manifold use thereof on the other side the Sea. The general acception of that word, and of four kinds of Denunciation, how they differ one from another, what is required in them, and when a Denouncer is to be condemned or excused of expenses, and what course of dealing against crimes and offences, is holden both in Courts of the Ecclesiastical Commission, and in ordinary Courts Ecclesiastical of this Realm.  
C. 7. That the Civil and Canon Laws allow sundry means to ground a special Enquiry of office against a crime, besides Accusation and Presentment: therein is also contained an Answer to a supposed Rule, end declared how from general they descend to special Enquiry. And that besides those two, either a fame, or clamosa insinuatio, or private judicial Denunciation, or Canonical Denunciation, or Indicia, or taking with the manner, or other notoriety of the fact, or impeachment by some of the Complices, or collusion of the accuser, or the not objecting in due time, or when the Enquiry tendeth but to a spiritual punishment, may severally any of them serve to warrant such enquiry, with some observations touching the nature of most of these.  
C. 8. That to proceed sometimes against an offence, otherwise then upon Accusation or Presentment, or then upon an Appeal or Indictment, which two at the Common Law have respective correspondence unto the two former) is no divers, much less any contrary or repugnant course to the Laws, Statutes and Customs of this Realm. This is proved by Common Law, Statutes, and practice in proceed informative and punitive, with answer to certain objections made to the contrary.  
C. 9. How the second opinion (here to be treated of) is, that no Lay-person may be cited of office in any cause but Testamentary or Matrimonial; and that the drift of that opinion is against proceeding of office in matters criminal. The necessary use and equity of proceeding (sometimes) criminally by the Judge's office in Courts both Temporal and Ecclesiastical.  
C. 10. Containeth an Answer to some further objections, made against the conveniency and reasonableness of proceeding against crimes, of office.  
C. 11. That the Laws of the Realm do use Inquiries and Proceed ex officio, that they allow it in Courts Ecclesiastical, with answer to some objections that are made to the contrary.  
C. 12. Is set down a Reply to the Note-gatherers answers, given to certain reasons, that have been made long ago, for to show the like course to be also practised in Temporal Courts; and an answer to his reasons brought to prove, that in proceeding of office there is some contrariety unto the Laws of England.  
C. 13. That the Enquiry ex officio against crimes, is allowed both in Civil and Temporal Courts, and in Ecclesiastical also, by the two Laws Canon and Civil.  
C. 14 Containeth an answer to such objections, as upon the Civil or Canon Laws are brought against all proceed of office in causes criminal, by the Treatisor and the Note-gatherer.  
C. 15. Enquiry and proceeding of office, without an accuser, and grounded upon some other of the means, afore proved sufficient to enter into such enquiry, is approved by sundry examples of Scripture.  
C. 16. An Answer is made to such objections, as out of Scripture or Ecclesiastical Writers, be made against criminal proceeding of office, by the Note-gather and others.   

In the third part he concludes upon the whole matter, for which his Apology was made.  
C. 1. Of the lawfulness of Oaths. What an Oath is, and the reason or original formal cause of the use of Oaths.  
C. 2. An Answer to certain doubts made concerning oaths, as namely, why in Scripture God is said to have sworn, how by Oath he is said to be called to Witness. An Oath no tempting of God, but a part of his Worship. Why nevertheless some are repelled from taking Oaths. Whether Adjuration be lawful. After whose meaning an Oath is to be understood. Whether every promissory Oath be simply to be kept. Whether an Oath may be dispensed with, and how far, and whether a Christian may by mutual Oaths, contract with him that sweareth by false gods.  
C. 3. Division of Oaths according to the outward form of taking them, according to the matter and inward form of them, with plain description of every kind of Oath.  
C. 4. That the Ceremonies used in taking and giving of corporal oaths, with laying hands upon the Bible or Testament, and swearing by the Contents of it, are not unlawful.  
C. 5. The true issue of the next Opinion in question. Two sorts of crimes and offences prohibited. In what causes an Oath here spoken of may not be ministered, and the manifold convenience and necessity of an Oath, sometimes to be ministered in a cause criminal and penal unto the party, with some few objections touching inconveniences thereof, answered,  
C. 6. That Oaths of men touching matters damageable, criminal, and penal to themselves, are urged and acted by Temporal Courts, and by the Laws of this Realm.  
C. 7. Wherein are contained Answers to such Objections and Reasons, as be made for proof of a contrariety or repugnancy in these Oaths, unto the Statutes, Laws, or Customs of this Realm, and a Reply to the Treatisours Answers made unto certain Objections, supposed likely to be made in justification of this kind of Oath, by the Temporal Laws.  
C. 8. That ministering of such Oaths, is by the Law of the Realm, allowed unto Judges of Ecclesiastical Courts, and some few Objections made to the contrary answered.  
C. 9. That such Oath touching a man's own crime is allowed both by the Canon and Civil Laws; how far, and in what sort, and that the like is established and thought equal, by the Laws and Customs of sundry other Nations, as well ancient as modern.  
C. 10. An Answer to some Objections pretended to be made against this kind of Oath from the Laws Civil and Canon.  
C. 11. That not only such an Oath may be taken, but also being by Magistrates duly commanded, ought not to be refused, is approved by Scriptures, by practice of the Primitive Church, and of late times; together with a Reply unto certain Answers made unto some proofs here used.  
C. 12. An answer unto such Objections, as be pretended to be gathered from Divinity, Divines, and from the examples of godly men against ministering Oaths unto parties in matters of their own crimes.  
C. 13. Four several opinions of the Innovators against the parties taking of an Oath in criminal causes, with Answers also unto their Reasons and Objections.  
C. 14. That a man being charged by authority to discover his knowledge touching some offence, which his Christian brother is supposed to have done, is bound to reveal it, though it may breed trouble and punishment to his broaher, and the Reasons to the contrary are answered and refuted.  
C. 15. Their Arguments are answered, that condemn the ministering and taking of an Oath, as unlawful, because they have not distinct knowledge given unto them of every particular before the taking of it, and the like course by Examples, is upproved lawful and godly.  
C. 16. That after the party hath answered upon his Oath, it is neither unusual, unlawful, or ungodly to seek to convince him by Witness, or other trial, if he be suspected not to have delivered a plain and full truth; and somewhat also in approbation of Canonical Purgation, with answers to the Treatisors Objections against them.    

CHAP. IU. By the late Act, the manner of proceeding in Ecclesiastical Courts, is not altered, but left as it was. A Summary relation of what Doctor Cousins in his Apology hath asserted and made good by God's word, the practice of the Primitive Christians, the opinion of the Fathers, the Laws Canon and Civil, and the Laws of the Land allowing and warranting them. The like practice at Common Law, and at Geneva and other places, pretending strict Reformation.  
AS to the proceeding Ex officio, or otherwise in the Ecclesiastical Courts, according to Law and the due former practice, nothing in that late Act is said against it; and theresore implicitly, at least, it is allowed and approved. Rati habitio mandato aequiparatur, 'tis a Rule of Law. The Law in that case remains at it was before, nothing need be said in justification thereof, but only as touching the Oath Ex officio, or other Oath, not to be administered as there, and touching Purgation.  
Touching the Provisoes in that late Act, that which forbids Ecclesiastical Judges, to exercise any power, etc. as there; and that other Proviso that forbids them to tender, or administer unto any person whatsoever, the Oath usually called the Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath whereby such person to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess, or accuse him or herself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment. I say, touching the former Proviso he hath, I conceive, given full satisfaction in that his Apology, in answering to the objections made in his time thereabout. Therein also he clearly and fully justifies the proceed of Ecclesiastical Courts in general and particular cases. And to that other Proviso touching the Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath; and touching Purgation, as in that Act, I humbly conceive, salvo meliore judicio, he fully and clearly evinces it, that the saw and practice thereof was just, to tender and administer the Oath ex of●icio, or at the instance of a party, for the finding out of Simony, Adultery, and other crimes and deeds of darkness, 〈◊〉 mae probationis, so 〈◊〉 evil may be removed from the ●…nd. Always provided that there was just cause for the Ecclesiastical Judge so to tender and administer that Oath; that is, that there was, before such oath was so administered or tendered to any party, due proof made of a common fame, that the party was guilty of such crime, touching which such oath was to be administered; or at least there was, as in some cases, denunciatio Evangelica, or canonica, or insinuatio clamosa, or other sufficient indicia praesumptionis or suspicionis, to induce the Judge to tender that oath; and so the practice always was, and if it ever was otherwise, (as I believe that will scarcely be proved) it ought not to have been. He sets down the due cautions that ought to be had, when it is very probable that the person to whom that oath is tendered, will forswear himself, then to forbear it; and that in capital crimes, to the danger of loss of life or limb, it is not the practice in any Courts to administer such oath, for that very fear of Perjury; it being too much to be feared, that too too many would rather forswear themselves then endanger either life or limb, (though in some places of Scripture it appears, that even in such cases such oaths have been administered.) The Father of lies could speak truth in such a case, Skin for skin (or rather as some learned in the Hebrew would have it) 
Job ● 4.  Skin after skin, and all that a man hath will he give for his life. There also he shows the weakness and inconcludency of that vulgar Saying, Nemo tenetur seipsum prodere or accusare, being indeed the trite and general objection. That a man is not properly said to betray or accuse himself, when as public fame, or other sufficient indicia, presumptions or suspicions have accused him, these are instead of the accusers: and it seems disingenuous at least, in those especially that pretend to Learning, and have or might have examined the Canons, and Ecclesiastical Laws in that point, to urge one piece of a sentence and leave out the rest; where they found or might have found that sentence, Nemo tenetur seipsum prodere or accusare, they did also or might have found that which follows in that sentence, viz. Sed proditus per famam, tenetur seipsum ostendere, & innocentiam suam purgare. The accuser of his brethren cited Scripture to our Saviour; says he, 
Mat. 4 6.  He shall give his Angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, etc. leaving out that in the Text that follows after these words, 
Psal. 91.11.  He shall give his Angels charge concerning thee, that is, to keep thee in all thy ways; which altars the case. That note or comment upon the Law, (or if they will needs call it a Rule or Maxim it matters not) Nemo tenetur seipsum prodere vel accusare, sive propriam turpitudinem revelare, is to be understood in crimes simply secret, and which are no ways disclosed or come to light. But when such secret sins are by some of those ways, that open a way to enquiry of a person supposed criminous, come abroad, and so in some sort are manifested; then those former rules cease, and that of St. Chrysostom comes in, Homil. 31. ad Hebraeos, Non tibi dico, ut te prodas in publicum, neque apud alium accuses: but upon such disclosing, then Proditus tenetur seipsum ostendere, & innocentiam suam purgare. This is for the avoiding of scandal, and that the party may be reform. Therefore doth Aquinas himself reason thus, Thom. 2.2. Cum quis, saith he, secundum ordinem juris à judice interrogatur, non ipse se prodit, sed ab alio proditur, dum ei necessitas respondends imponitur, per eum cui obedire tenetur.  
As for tendering the Oath to the party where there is an accuser, that is not done upon the crime till the fame be proved, or sufficient presumptions, circumstances, indicia, or suspicions, or semiplena probatio, the oath of one sufficient witness at least, to induce the judge to give that oath, though penal in some sort to the party.  
This practice he proves consonant to God's Word, to the practice of the primitive Christian, and the opinion of the holy Doctors and Fathers of the Church; as also consonant to the practice of Geneva, and other at least seemingly strictly reformed Churches: and to the practice of all Christian Nations, and other Nations not Christian, guided only by right reason and the Law of Nature: as also that by the known Laws of this Land, the Ecclesiastical Judges were so warranted and commanded to give that oath: the Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons being full and clear in that point. Then he shows how the proceeding at Common Law in this Land is the same, not only in some criminal but civil causes also. For private debts 'twixt private persons penal to them, as in Wagers of Law, sometimes for a greater, sometimes a lesser debt, 'twixt two private parties, with the party's oath that is accused, and his Compurgators too; even as in Purgation Canonical in the Ecclesiastical Courts, together with other Purgation or Decisory Oaths at Common Law. Proceed in Chancery, with the several species and kinds of cases, wherein such Oaths at Common Law are tendered, being very numerous, and are by him cap. 6. in the third part of his Apology, and other parts thereof reckoned up, and fully set forth. And if this may be done in civil causes, ought it not much rather be allowed the Church in criminal, which works only, medicinaliter, to reformation? the Commonwealth works ad poenam, the Church not so; this to the amendment of the party, to bring him to a voluntary submission, and to take away the offence and scandal which he hath justly given to his Neighbour, and to lead a new life; that (perhaps) to the loss of liberty, corporal punishment, or livelihood at least, besides the infamy of being convicted of doing dishonestly and unworthily.   

CHAP. V That it is consonant to God's Word to give such an Oath Ex officio, or otherwise.  

Rom. 13.  EVery soul is to be subject to the Higher Powers. This is to be understood in all commands not contrary to God's Word; in such comes in the Apostles rule, 
Acts 5.29.  It is better to obey God then man. That the giving such an oath is not contrary to God's word: An oath duly imposed by the Magistrate, necessitates the Subject to take it, as appears by the commandment of God himself, Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name. The like is given by the Lord in the Prophet Jeremy, 
Jer. 4.25.  O Israel, thou shalt swear, The Lord liveth in truth, in judgement and righteousness. Joshua gave charge to all the Magistrates of Israel, that 
Josh 13.2,7.  They shall not make mention of the Gods of other Nations, nor shall cause to swear by them. Saul did not only charge the people with an oath, but 
1 Sam. 14.  made them vow with a curse, not to eat any food that day till night: therefore one of them reported to Jonathan, saul's son, That his father had made the people to swear. Some would cavil at this, as but an Adjuration, and would without reason difference that from an Oath; but in that Chapter, 1 Sam. 14. it is four several times called an Oath. The wise King Solomon imposed an oath upon Shime● in a cause capital to him, 
2 Kings 41.  Did not I make thee (saith he) swear by the Lord, etc. So King Saul 
1 Sam. 24.  urged David to swear unto him. For a private offence only between Neighbours, King Solomon testifieth that a necessary oath of Purgation may be required by the Complainant, 
1 Kings 8.  When a man shall trespass against his neighbour, and he lay upon him an Oath to cause him to swear, etc. King Josias 
2 Chron. 34.  made a covenant and vow, and caused all that were found in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to it. Nehemiah 
Neh. 5.12.  caused the Priests to swear, etc. It is assigned for a special mark of a Godly man, 
Num, 30.3. Psal. 15.4.  To swear to his neighbour, and not to disappoint him, though it be to his own hindrance.  
Abraham said thus to his servant, I will make thee swear by the Lord God of the Heavens, etc. 
Gen. 14.3.  this in a private cause, much more a Magistrate in a cause wherein the Commonwealth or Church of God hath Interest, to have it sincerely dealt in. 
Gen. 25.33.  Jacob moved Esau to the sale of his birthright, and took an Oath for confirmation of it. 
Deut. 19.17.  A man supposed to have born false witness against another, is thereof brought in question, and reexamined; if it be objected, it was not upon oath, by consequence of reason it must be upon oath, when what he has said before upon oath is reexamined, and this in a case very penal to him. The oath of Adjuration is very frequent in Scripture, Prov. 29.14. about not declaring cursing which he heard. By the History 
* Jud 17 1,2.  of Micah, as we are 
† 1 Cor. 10.3.  bound to do all to the glory of God; so it belongeth to the glory of God for a man, by due presumptions (burdened with a crime, and charged by the Magistrate) to confess of himself; as appeareth by the history of Achan. The lot fell upon him, but this was but an inducement to ground a special Inquisition against him; if hereupon he might have been executed, Joshua needed not to have required any further confession of him; 
Leu. 5.1.  but he goes further with a most solemn Adjuration, (in those days used for an oath, the Hebrew word signisying both, and being translated sometimes juramentum, and sometimes adjuratio. 
Josh 7.9.  Son, give glory to the Lord God of Israel, etc. albeit the punishment was capital, 
Ezra 10. ●.  Ezra adjured the Chief Priests, etc. Calvin in his Institutions gathereth, that Achan took an oath. When a man is found secretly murdered in the field, and the murder is not known, nor suspected; yet all the Elders of the next City thereunto should use certain Ceremonies, and then swear, 
Deut. 21.  That their hands have not shed this blood, nor their eyes have seen him that shed it In Leviticus a certain Sacrifice is to be made for certain sins, amongst which this is one, as Arias Montanus translates it out of the Hebrew; 
Levit. 5.1  If a soul, or a man shall have sinned, and have heard the voice of 〈◊〉 Adjuration or Oath, etc. That which is here said, if he ha●… heard the voice of an Oath: the Geneva Translation offereth it thus in the Margin, as if it were nearer to the Hebrew ●…en the other in that Text, viz. If the judge hath taken an 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 other. When a man delivers money or stuff on trust 
Exod. 22.  to be kept by his neighbour, if it happen to be embezzled away, and the thief be not certainly known or found, by the Law of God he must take a necessary oath of purgation and enquiry. The same also is a little after established by God touching any quick goods happening to be left in deposito. A sacrifice of Atonement for such a sin of Perjury is prescribed, 
Ibid. v. 10.  If any do sin (saith the Lord) and deny unto his neighbour, etc. 
Num. 5.14.  If a man be moved with a jealous mind against his wife, she is not only to be charged with an oath, but to have further trial to drink the bitter waters. 
J●r. 38 14.  When the Prophet Jeremy was charged by the King in a generality, to answer that which he would ask him, the Prophet promiseth so it should not be capital to him, he would answer it. Whether upon oath or not oath, (for before God 'tis the same) no doubt he answered the truth. 
a Jer. 37.13.  The same Prophet, when he was charged with a particular high crime, refused not to answer, or bid them prove it, but roundly answers it. 
b 2 Kings 5.  So Elisha examineth Gehaz● his servant. 
c Gen 43.3.  Joseph in Egypt gave an oath to his brethren. 
d Ezek. 7.13.  Zedckiah took an oath of Subjection, and is blamed and punished for breaking of it. 
e 1 Sam. 21.2.  The oath given to the Gibeonites was to be kept, and the violation of it punished. For the manner of proceeding, or the cause of questioning, we see many instances: First, in flagranti crimine, 
* John 8.4.  if a party be taken in the manner, as we say; or the fact is manifest: as 
f Num. 25 8  Zimri's was. 
g Deut. 21.1  Or though the fact be manifest, the person committing it is unknown, or the question is of the person, the fact being unknown; as in 
h John 7.18.  Achans case. Or by indicia, suspected signs; so 
i Gen. 3.8.  Adam hiding himself: So against 
k Gen 4.6.  Cain, Abel not appearing: Adam impeached Eve, and Eve the Serpent, and both were punished upon it. Or upon infamy and cry, 
l Gen. 18.20.  The cry of the Sodomites being great, I will descend, saith the Lord. And such kind of Inquiries are made both in the Law, 
m Deut. 17.4  If a report shall come to thee, or thou shalt hear; as also in the Gospel, as against the incestuous person, 
n 1 Cor. 5.1.  It is reported. Or by suggestion or complaint, as in 
o Job ●. 11.  Jobs cause, where the Devil was Accuser. Joseph only upon suspicion gave his brothers the oath. Evangelical denunciation, as Mat. 18.7. when Church or State are in danger, as in the Valley of Anchor, that is against the troublers of Israel, so signifies the word Anchor. When Peter and John were examined in the great Council, 
Acts 4.7.  By what power, or in what name they had done that miracle; Peter full of the Holy Ghost answered plainly and truly, though it might have been capital to him. What spirit are they of, who being required by lawful Authority to answer in matters not capital, yet will not answer at all? for upon a man's own confession judicial, though not upon oath, he may be equally convicted. 
Acts 6.  In the proceed against St. Stephen there were no Accusers in truth, but those who by Subornation denounced him to the Priests, and who are twice-called witnesses, because they deposed against him; yet he refused not to make answer, though capital to him. 
Acts 22.  When the Captain asked St. Paul, whether he were not that Egyptian that made a Sedition, etc. he answered directly and denied it. Likewise the same Saint Paul, in all other his conventing before Authority, mentioned in the Acts 
Acts 4.25, etc.  (even at the suit and accusation of a party) refused not particularly and truly to answer to all that was objected. And all this is done to the sifting out truth, and punishing crimes, either truly so, or at least thought to be so; and criminous persons are questioned, as well of the fact, as circumstances or fame; 
a Gen 3.9.  Hast thou eaten of the fruit of the forbidden tree? So the Princes questioned Baruch about Jeremiahs' book, 
b Jer. 26.17.  Tell us, how didst thou write these words? So 
c Ezra 10.11.  Esras examined the questioned persons concerning their own fact. So the 
d Acts 23.20  Highpriest, having committed Saint Paul, examined him further, for oftentimes Accusers (as the Heathen could observe) fall off; all cannot, some will not accuse; what then? many crimes, being the deeds of darkness, cannot be 
e Eph. 5.11.  revealed; 
f Prov. 16.5.  Because hand is in hand, and they will not bewray themselves. Because the name of Doeg sounds harsh, and to come forth to accuse a man is accounted poor and odious, a matter of cost, danger and 
g Prov. 25.8.  Infamy; must Villainy therefore be hid, and scattered abroad, and get strength, till they break out to the destruction of the Commonwealth? Or because none can or will (for 'tis all one, whether one will not accuse or cannot accuse) therefore it is not lawful to question? and without an Oath 'tis to little purpose▪ theresore God commands that way of Adjuration or giving an Oath. 
* 1 Kings 2●.  So the King adjured Micheas, 
† Mat. 26.93.  so the High Priest our Saviour, and both of them answered. But should any question Adjuration, even a clear oath was lawfully given even to the actor; as Exod. 22.8. 1 Kings 8 3. and therefore more than permitted to the Magistrate. For surely it were hard, if every private man might require an oath of the questioned, and not the Magistrate: should it be lawful in the case of a Pawn, and not of a Kingdom? An oath is an end of controversy, saith St. Paul; 
Heb. 6.16.  then an oath to be taken for that end. In a case Matrimonial, which is merely Ecclesiastical, Interrogatories were administered with oath, (as in a cause of Incontinency, Num. 5.) and the proceed being by Enquiry, without any accuser at all. And this which is to be noted in the case in Esdras, 
Esdras 1.8,9.  they are no ways forced to it, but desire to take their oath first, and to be examined after; than which there is no cause more suitable, then to the proceed in Ecclesiastical Courts before the passing of the late Act, and against which the Innovators heretofore used to take exceptions. In some of these  instances, we see how oaths were administered even in capital causes, much more may they be where there is not that danger, nay, no danger of loss of Goods, Liberty, or any other loss; but only for a medicine to the soul, for reformation of manners, and taking away scandal and offence given. They were questioned too, we see, upon small suspicions, signs, presumptions, or any other causes of question, nay, nothing at all as to the person questioned, upon whom no true colour of suspicion lay, (something like our Coroners proceed in some cases) but only a fact was committed, that was apparent, whereof it was possible that he was not guilty, as in the case of a person found slain; then much more ought it to be upon great suspicions, presumptions, or public fame thereof proved. This being thus by God's Word, in the next place we may look into the practice and opinion of the primitive Christians hereupon.   

CHAP. VI That the Opinion and Practice of the Primitive Christians, and the Fathers of the Church, was to administer such Oath Ex officio, and upon Accusation, and for Purgation Canonical, with the practice at Geneva.  
IT is well said by an ancient and learned 
* Cromatius in 5 Mat. Facit. canon. 36. council. Tolet. quart.  Writer, Dominus inter juramentum & loquelam nostram, nullam vult esse differentiam. And Aquinas saith, 
† Thom. 2.2. qu. 69. art. 3.  If he which is brought into question, and interrogated by the Judge without his oath, shall answer untruly, that therein he sinneth deadly. The old Christians in the primitive Church were far from such shifts of answering dangerous questions propounded to them by Heathen Magistrates, or from answering untruths to them. Tertullian is herein very plentiful, especially in his book called Apologeticon: 
Tertul. in Apol. c. 1.  A Christian, saith he, if he be indicted or denounced to the Magistrate, he rejoiceth in it; if he be accused, he propoundeth no defence; when he is interrogated, he most willingly confesseth; and when he is condemned, he giveth them or God thanks. And much more hath Tertullian to this purpose. St. Augustine 
Aug. serm. 28. de verbo Apost. cap. 6.  doth plainly establish and allow of Oaths taken concerning a man's open offences, being indeed such also in their own nature, If perhaps (saith he) thine Oath be urged, (meaning a Decisory oath, be exacted of thee by a private person) say not, I will not swear, for it cometh of evil which thou dost, but yet of his evil that exacteth it of thee; insomuch as thou hast no other means but thine oath to purge and clear thyself of the matter in handling. 
Aug. ibid. c. 10.  In another place he speaks and allows of oaths taken in way of purgation of one suspected for theft: 
Aug. ep. 137.  and in another place he says and approves of the same practice at Milan; this was in a civil cause criminally moved, and for theft; a crime, though not simply capital by the Civil Laws. In another place; 
Aug. in qu. Leu.  In denouncing others (saith he, speaking of Denunciation of faults to the Magistrate) this moderation is always to be used by us, that we relate it unto such which may rather help than hurt him, (in case the party shall swear falsely) either by correcting him, or by deprecation to God for him, so that he will by confessing his fault apply this remedy unto himself. 
Chrys. hom. 16. ad pop. Antioc.  St. Chrysostom alloweth of Decisory Oaths or Wagers of Law, and testifieth that such necessary oaths were in those times imposed to exact men's confessions, and whether they had stolen some certain thing or not. This he allows touching mere crimes in their own nature, and that upon the instance of a Plaintiff particularly interested but in his goods and chattels.  
This kind of oath was not only allowed in the old Church, but commanded to be put in use (as lawful and consonant unto God's Word) against persons convented and had in suspicion, even in one Church, which the most and hottest oppugners of this oath do reckon to be best, yea, and almost the only Reformation that may rightly be so called: For in the Discipline of France, concluded of in the National Synod there, 1559, 1561, 1563, 1565. it was thus declared; 
The Ecclesiastical Senate or Consistory, act. 12.  The faithful may be constrained by the Consistory to tell the truth, so far forth as it derogateth nothing from the duthority of the Magistrate.  
They may be constrained, say they, but there is no compulsion, but either Civil, which they will not arrogate to themselves, as torture or racking, imprisoning or fining, etc. or else by the party's oath, which upon pain of Perjury, if he once swear, or of conviction if he will not, doth as it were constrein a man to say truth. And that an Oath is meant by the Canon of the French Church, we are taught both by the History of Camperell a French Minister at Geneva, as also by that of those who danced in Widow Balthazars house there. 
Interepist Calv●n. in folio pag. 421, 422.  Camperell was appointed by the Consistory of Elders there, to be examined upon his Oath upon certain Interrogatories, whereof also two concerned what he had in his very purpose and intention of mind. 
Calvin. Farello pag. 64. epist. in folio.  The Dancers, because at first they denied it, were put to their corporal oaths, to declare the whole truth of that merriment. And all dancing there is held as an offence and grievous crime, as appears by the Ordinances of Geneva, and by the very last frame of Discipline concluded 1571. by the French Churches.  
For Purgation Canonical, as it was used in the Ecclesiastical Courts of this Kingdom, in a word 'tis the same in these Courts in a criminal cause, as at Common Law a Wager of Law is in a civil cause; differs no more than thus, this is touching out Lands or Goods, that touching our Good name and Credit. It is so far from being condemned by good and godly Bishops in ancient times, that by whole Councils it hath been prescribed: 
Concil. Tribur. canon. 21.  Let a Layman, saith one Council, if need be, purge himself by his Oath, and let a Priest by the consecration of the holy Sacrament, be interrogated. And another Council thus, 
Ivo. lib. 5. ex council. Agath.  Let a Priest, if he can, purge himself of the crime with seven of his Order, and a Deacon with three. So was it decreed by a third Council, 
Ivo. ibid. ex council. Herde●.  If a Priest or Minister be infamed amongst his charge, and it cannot be proved before the Bishop by witness, let him be suspended until he perform due satisfaction, lest the faithful people be scandalised: But, as our Elders have taught, then is the satisfaction due and orderly, when according to the Canons, or as the Bishops shall judge fit, he joineth unto him seven Compurgators, and swears by the holy Gospel laid afore him, that he hath not committed the crime laid unto him: When he is thus purged, then let him again freely execute his office. And in another Council we find 
Concil. Worm.  Purgation prescribed for Theft, and also for Adultery; and according to the prescriptions of these Canons and many others that might be alleged, examples of sundry ancient Bishops in the Church, that have themselves made their own Purgation, for avoiding and removing scandal and offence. 
12 qu. 4. c. Mandastis.  Sixtus the third, an ancient Bishop of Rome, but upon the accusation of one Bassus, did willingly make his Purgation upon his oath in a Council. 
Ivo. Carn. l. 5.  And so did Leo, another ancient Bishop of the same See, purge himself with twelve Bishops. Gregory the Great enjoined unto 
* Greg. ep. 23. ad justin. Presb.  Leo, 
† Id. ep. 8. l. 2.  Memius and 
* Id. ep. 8. l. 7. & ep. 79.  Maximus, three Bishops, to clear and purge themselves of several crimes by their oaths, whereof the last was for Simony. Innocentius also caused the Bishop of Trent to purge himself likewise of the like crime of Simony. And what be the Oaths touching Goods stolen or embezzled, which were left with a man upon trust appointed in Exodus, 
Exod. 22.7,8.  and those in salomon's Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple; 
● King's 8.31.  other than oaths of Purgation of a crime, imposed by the party having an interest? Likewise the oaths mentioned in Leviticus 
Leu. 6.2.  concerning goods denied, that are pretended to have been left in deposito; or goods gotten by robbery or violent oppression, or casually found after they were lost, yet by the finder denied; are they not for purgation and clearing of the party from the crimes imputed? and in some respect also decisory of the whole controversy, unless sound proofs touching the true guiltiness of the party may afterwards be found out and used? 
Num. 5 14.  The Oath of Jealousy taken with a further solemnity of Purgation, and imposed by the Priest, a public Magistrate in that behalf, is an oath not only of Enquiry, but of Purgation, to the woman denounced for suspicion of Adultery by her husband. 
Duet. 21.8  Lastly, the oath imposed by God's Law, upon the Elders of the City situated next unto the corpse of a man which is found secretly murdered; is a plain and most direct oath of Purgation, even in a crime (in his own nature) evil and capital to the offenders. For justifying of the Oath Ex officio, and at the instance of a party, and of Purgation with Compurgators, all in a manner as above, the authority of the Civil and Canon Laws is manifoldly extant; but that even the oppugners doubt not of, nor deny, but reject them, as in their conceit unreasonable and ungodly; and therefore 'tis needless to name them, being so easy to be seen, and obvious to every common eye. The received use of them, amongst most Civil Nations, make it to be little less than Jus gentium, and therefore by moderate and grave men not to be slighted,   

CHAP. VII. That the like practice touching these Oaths, is and was in all Foreign Christian Nations, and other Nations not Christian, guided only by the Light of Nature.  
TO prove this in Christian Commonwealths, the Canons of the Church, and the practice thereof in all such sorreign Christian Nations evince it; than which nothing is more manifest: To cite the particulars, at leastwise to recite them, would be voluminous; scattered all along the Civil and Canon Law. Dr. Cousins, in his third part of that Apology, chap. 9 quotes many of them, as they were used in the Roman Empire, before Constantine's time as well as after. 
Cons●…d. Hungar. de●…uram purga●…  By the customs of Hungary there be many and long Constitutions made for the taking such Oath, and of the manner of it. 
M●rian. in●… qualit●… qu. 84. Casonus in Pract. fol. 8●, num. 3.  It is testified also to be the usual practice of all the Dominions in Italy, that the party convented in Temporal Courts, whether by way of Accusation, or at the Prosecution of another, or by way of Enquiry, Ex officio judicis, must swear to declare the truth, in all those things that shall be asked of him, even of the crime itself. This is much stricter than in the Laws of England, Ecclesiastical or Civil.  

Ordenances du France, liv. 2. tom. 2. tit. 14. du droit deres●… have passage, etc. pag. 895.  For Merchandizes to be carried out of France, the Merchant must under his hand particularise the commodities with the weight and measure thereof, that there be no deceitful or forbidden Merchandise there, and upon the truth thereof he is to swear.  

Ordnance de France premter an. 1539. artic. 38.  In another Ordinance there, the Plaintiffs swear to the truth of what is in their Bills, and the Defendants answer upon oath, to confess those things which be within their knowledge. 
Marcus deciscor 674.  In other matters criminal it is reported to be the custom of France, for the party Defendant only to make faith when they are objected, and he is thereupon to answer, whether he hath committed them or not; but he is not to take a corporal oath, betwixt which two (before God) there is no difference. 
Grand Constumier entre les constumes du Normandy.  But by the custom of Normandy, the Appealed of murder must upon his oath (holding his Adversary by the hand) solemnly swear whether he hath committed such fact or no: and Stamford affirmeth the Law of England to be the same in like case of Appeal.  
Amongst Nations of far elder times (in most flourishing Commonweals) oaths were taken by Plaintiffs and Defendants, in all causes whether civilly or criminally moved. 
Ex Polluce Sig●nius l 4. c. 4. de●…pub. Athen.  So among the Athenians, besides a sum deposited to be forfeited by the failer. 
Aeschines contra Timar●…um; pag 7. Grae è.  When Aeschines accused Timarc●us of a foul crime perpetrated upon him by one Misgolas, Misgolas was to be put to his oath. 
Plato lib. 11. de legibus.  Plato commends Rhadamanthus, that strict Justicier, feigned by the Poets (as Aeacus and Minos also were) to be a Judge in another world over Ghosts deceased, for his justice; I say, he commends him for exacting an oath in every cause in controversy. 
Arist. Polit. lib. 3, 10.  Aristotle, Plato's Scholar, testifieth and commendeth the like course. 
Herodotus in ●rato, lib. 6.  The history of Glaucus, an ancient Spartan, that most just people of Greece, evidences this; there the oath of a thing left in Pawn was usually given, Glaucus and his whole Family rooted out for denying such a Pawn left with him.  

D●ctis Cretens. lib. 2. beth Trojani.  King Agamemnon solemnly and publicly took his oath, that he had never polluted Hippodamia by Incontinency: so was the custom in Greece in matters criminal. 
Homer. Iliad l. 19 v. 257.  Homer mentioneth the same King purged himself also in another form, but with an oath too, that he had not violated Brise●s.  

Pausanias' Eliacis.  In the Olympic Games, the Gamesters with their Parents and Brethren swore they had used no fraud nor deceit.  

Cato de re Rust. c. 144, 145.  In the old Roman Commonwealth, private Householders put an oath to th●ir Labourers that gathered Olives, that they had not stolen nor embezzled any, etc. 
A●c sinal● sect. 1. de juram. calum. etc. inter solicitudines. X●philanus in Comodo. Tacit. lib. 2. Anal.  So the old Roman Law is upon presumptions, he that refuseth to take the oath, though the came be criminal, is taken for convicted. Victoria●us, General of Germany, displaced his Legate or Lieutenant, for refusing to take an oath that he was not bribed. So Tacitus speaks of a solemn oath, which the Senate caused to be taken by way of Purgation in high criminal matters.  
When the Praetor, one of the chief Magistrates in Rome, had made choice of 450. Judges to decide causes, 
Lex Servilia Glauciae apud Sigonium, l. 2. c. 6. de●…ud●….  he was to swear he had chosen none of them dolo malo, or for any sinister respect. And much more might be instanced to this purpose, to show the justice of such proceeding.   

CHAP. VIII. That by the known Laws of this Land, the Ecclesiastical Judges were so warranted and commanded to give that Oath, according to the Canon and Ecclesiastical Laws.  

2 H. 5. c 1.  ORdinaries are authorized to inquire of the Foundation, Estate and Government of Hospitals, being not of the King's Foundation, etc. and to make correction and reformation according to the Laws of holy Church, as to them belongeth: now by those Laws Enquiry touching crimes not capital is made by the Defendants oath, as is notorious and before proved, and this cannot but be penal to the parties visited when guilty. 
22 H. 8. c. 5.  Executors and Administrators are to take the oath of the truth of the Inventory; yet this may imply Perjury, or discovery of a man's own fault. 
1 Eliz. c. 2.  Ordinaries are to inquire of, as heretofore hath been used by the Queen's Majesties Ecclesiastical Laws, about uniformity of Common prayer.  

5 Eliz c. 1.  Ordinaries may give the Oath of Supremacy to a Clerk within his Jurisdiction.  

5 Eliz. c. 9  In this Act of Perjury the Laws Ecclesiastical have the powers reserved to proceed as before, which was by oaths.  
That allowance is made by Common Law to Courts Ecclesiastical to inquire, (and so consequently by such oaths) appears by two precedents of Consultation set down in the Register; 
Regist. tit. Consultation. fol. 48.  the first alloweth of an Inquisition made by the Dean of Yorks Official for defects in a Chancel, etc. 
Ibid. fol.  The other besides a consultation contains a commandment to the Ordinary to take full information, by way of Inquisition and other means, touching the value of Tithes. 
Ibid. fol. 5●. b.  An Ordinary proceeded against a Parishioner ex officio, as for a crime for Tithes detained by him. 
Ibid. fol. 49. ●.  Ad correctionem animae, the Ordinary proceeded against a Layman for Usury, even at the instance of a party grieved: so in several other cases, as in the same Register mentioned, fol. 43, 50, 51, 54, 55, 57 Upon the cavils of some busy people against Oaths ministered in Courts Ecclesiastical and Temporal, a Constitution Provincial was made against it: 
Constitut Provinc de haercticis, c. nullus.  Let no man, saith that Constitution, presume to dispute, etc. against Oaths, which are made either in Ecclesiastical or Temporal Courts, in cases accustomed, and in usual manner, etc. By this appeareth the practice of such Oaths in both Courts: 
A Treatise touching Constitut. Pro●…ine. and Legatine, c. 23. printed by Tho. Godfrey.  and Quintilius German in Henry the Eighths' time, who wrote against some Provincial Constitutions, allows of such Oaths to be taken. Many more instances hereof may be given, but it being apparent and notorious, that such proceeding Ex officio, and at the instance of the party, and Purgation in manner as before, was constantly practised in the Ecclesiastical Courts, according to the Canons, Constitutions, and Laws Ecclesiastical, before 25 H. 8. and by the aforesaid Statute of 25 H. 8. such Laws and practices have been confirmed, not being contrariant to the King's Prerogative, or the Law of the Land: And it appears that in such cases, according as is practised in the Ecclesiastical Courts according to the Ecclesiastical Laws, it is so far from being contrariant, that it is most consonant, and allowed and commanded by the Temporal Laws of the Land. say, it appearing by the Acts and Records of Ecclesiastical Courts, that such proceed were so constantly upon oath; there needs no more be said for justification thereof, but it may safely be concluded, that (before the making of that late Act) the Common Laws and Statutes of this Realm allowed such Oaths to be tendered by Ecclesiastical Judges; and therefore the oath of the party, in some matter of crime that might be damageable and penal to him, was both in practice, and was allowed also to be practised (in Courts Ecclesiastical) by the Laws of this Land.   

CHAP. IX. That Oaths administered to parties touching matters damageable, criminal and penal to themselves, are urged and required by Temporal Courts, and by the Laws of the Realm.  
IN the Chancery, when the proceeding is moved civiliter, and not criminaliter, not to any public punishment, but to the private Interest of the party, and sometimes lewd practices and misdemeanours criminal be in the Bill set forth; yet must the Defendant make particular answer thereto upon his oath. So in the Court of Requests, in the Marches of Wales the Court of the Council there, and in the North parts; so that to the intent of a Defendants being urged by oath (sometimes) to discover himself in a matter criminal, it cometh to as much in these Courts, as is challenged for unlawful in Courts Ecclesiastical: and the Chancery must needs be the ancientest court of this Realm, because from thence all original Writs and commissions do come, whereupon the other courts do ground all their proceed; therefore probably, as in sundry other points of proceeding there, they drew the exacting of the Defendants answer upon oath from the Civil Law: For that court of Chancery being here in time and nature the first, (after the Roman yoke, before the coming in of the Saxons, was shaked off here) it could not take light from other courts of the common Law, but from some other, that was before both it and them. The Romans, under whom we were then, gave us these Laws most probably; so they used, as their Histories testify, to most Provinces they subdued. Many of the same Laws were taken up and retained by the Saxons, especially until the coming in of the Norman Conqueror, who established the customs of Normandy. Amongst others they retained, till then, that Law was one, That all brethren should participate alike their father's Inheritance. 
Cicer sanil. ep.  We read of Trebatius, an ancient civil Lawyer, often mentioned in the Pandects, (who lived in Julius Caesar's time, before our Saviour's birth many years) did remain at Samarobrina in this Isle of Britain; 
Forcatulus.  and afterwards that famous Lawyer, Aemilius Paulus Papinianus, did profess the Law, and kept his Tribunal seat at the city of York.  
For the court of Star-chamber and High-commission, I mention not the proceed there, because those courts are taken away, though (as before) perhaps the want of them, especially if in some things regulated, will by many every day be more thought of: the proceed there are in fresh memory, to have been in like manner upon oaths in criminal causes.  
In all the courts of Record at Westminster, do not the Judges by corporal oath examine any person, whom they have cause, in discretion, to suspect to have dealt falsely about the return of any Writ, entry of rule, or such like matter, not being capital? 
13 E. 1. stat. Winton.  Men are to be assessed, and sworn to have such assessed Armour in their houses.  

a 17 E 2. Prerog Reg. c. 4.  The King's Widows sworn not to marry without the King's Licence, 
b 25 E. 3. de serv. c. 2, 7.  Labourers are to take an oath to do the labours appointed, etc. and if they refuse they are to be put into the Stocks. 
c 27 H. 4. c. 17.  Another Statute much to that purpose. 
d 8 H 6.7.  The Sheriff may upon oath examine the choosers of Shire-Knights for Parliament. 
e 27 E. 3. stat. staple.  Those that ship over Wools may be put to their oath by the Mayor, etc. and several more, as 11 H. 7.33. 51 H. 3. 27 E. 3.6. 23 Eliz 6. etc. all which oaths, though necessary and equal, may bring great damage to the party.  
Other Statutes there are, that may tend to make the party discover even matters criminal or penal to himself. 
Stat. de Exen. de inquisition. supercoronator. & 14 Ed. 1.  The Statute of Inquisition upon Coroners, the Enquirers shall make all the Bailiffs swear, That they shall well and faithfully do that which they have in charge by the King and his Council, and that they shall conceal nothing of it. This is general, and may be penal to the Bailiff.  

E. 3. stat. de moan. a c 9  Mayors and Bailiffs in every Port where Merchants and Ships be, shall take an oath of Merchants and Masters of Ships, that they shall do no fraud against that Ordinance touching Money. This may be penal too, and to discover their own guilt.  
The Statute 19 H. 7. c. 14. gives authority to divers great persons, to examine Defendants informed against for certain offences, and breach of Statutes, as well by 〈◊〉 as otherwise, by their discretion, and to adjudge, etc. In several other Statutes, where it is said to examine, is me●n, upon oath, otherwise it could not be so understood of the Witnesses; as 18 E. 42. 11 H. 7.23. 19 H. 7.14. 3 H. 7.1. 21 H. 8.10. 5 Eliz. 9  

24 H. 8.6.  Vintner's put to their oaths, whether they keep their wine to sell by retail or in gross.  

34 H. 8.4.  Concealers of Bankrupts goods to be examined upon oath, etc.  

5 Eliz. 1.  The Lord Chancellor ex officio to give the Oath of Supremacy to whom he thinks fit: this may be penal to the refuser.  

13 Eliz. 3.  Such as be supposed to be parties and privy to the fraud used in conveyances by Fugitives over the Seas, may be examined upon their corporal oaths, etc. the refusers to be fined. In which, as in the other Statutes, it is evident, that it may many ways happen, that such oaths may tend to the urging them to discover matters criminal and penal to themselves, that are appointed to take them: and the four last alleged concern oaths given, where neither Bill nor yet Information is preferred against the parties examined, and therefore to be tendered more than ex mero officio.  
In matters that induce damage to him that sweareth, there be sundry examples at the common Law; one or two may suffice. 
T. 25 E. 3. fol. 44.  A woman covert Baron (being to acknowledge a Fine) if it be doubted whether she be 21. years of age, she shall be examined upon her oath.  

P. 3 H. 6.38.  In an Action of Detinue of goods, the Plaintiff was examined where they were delivered.  

H. 3 H. 6.30.  A Plaintiff examined where an Obligation, which he pleaded, was made.  
Sheriffs, Stewards of Liberties, Reeves, Bedel of Strays and Waifes, Rent-gatherers, etc. or other Accomptants to the Prince, or other great Lord, are usually urged to their Accounts upon their oaths: this may be penal and ignominious to them.  

Stamford Pleas of Crown, l. 3. c 14. M. 34 E. 3. fol. 3.  In an Appeal of murder (as before) the defender must before battle swear his innocency.  
One sworn of a Jury, and departing from his fellows, and returning, was by the Judges ex officio examined upon his oath, whether he had talked with the Defendant.  

T. 7 H. 4. fol. 19  A Tenant of Land was examined by the Judges, whether he confessed the Action of the Demandant by covin, which was found.  

P. 9 H. 5.1.  A woman that brought an Appeal for the death of her husband, but supposed by another name than she had indeed, was hereupon examined.  

H. 35 H 6. & Fitz H. Abridg. tit. ex●minat. num. 17  A suspected Jury to have received a letter from the Defenfendant, were all examined upon their oaths.  

* M. 35 H. 6.11.  A Sheriff examined supposed to have made a false return,  

† Brooke tit. Ley-gager, num. 77.  They have a custom in London, allowed good by the Common Law, to cause the Plaintiff to swear to the truth of his Declaration; which if he do, than the Defendant is condemned; if the Plaintiff refuse, he is barred.  

19 H. 6.43.  The like Decisory Oath at Common Law, which is peremptory to the Plaintiff, and so is the Wager of Law ex parte defendentis.  

44 E. 3.41.  In an Action of Detinue for a Chest sealed, with certain Gold, Silver, etc. the Defendant tendered his Law, (that is, his Oath) Quod non detinet, and the opinion of the Court was, he should have it.  
Dr. Cousins, chap. 3. in the third part of his Apology, writes thus: The grand Jury (as I take it) have their oath given to inquire and present, their own, their fellows, and others faults. And Part 3. chap. 14. he says, that at Assizes and Sessions Grand Juries are urged by oath to inquire and present Treasons, Murders, and other Felonies, breach of the Peace, violation of sundry Laws and Statutes, common Nuisances, etc. Now if one of the Grand Jury, being to be sworn, would deny to take the Oath, except he might have some certain offences (usually given in charge) left out and foreprised severally out of his Oath, lest otherwise he should thereby be driven to accuse himself: Or if one supposed most able to give evidence to the Coroners Inquest, upon a murder committed, should desire to be spared from telling his utmost knowledge thereof upon his oath, lest thereby he be driven to accuse himself: would the Judges spare them, and not rather repute them to be guilty of these crimes, for which they refuse to take oath and discover their knowledge? And why not then, other men should not, upon crimes nothing so penal, who refuse to take the oath to answer them, be judged by any man to do it upon good ground and conscience?  

10 H. 6.7.  If a Tithingman refuse to make Presentment, the Steward of the court may amerce him.  

19 H 7. c. 14.  Chief Constables and Bailiffs were to give evidences upon their oaths, touching unlawful Retainers, within the precinct of their Offices, and upon concealment were to be punished. And many more such.  
Therefore hereupon may it not be concluded thus? That whatsoever the Ecclesiastical Laws do allow and require, being not contrary nor repugnant to the Prerogative Royal, nor to the Laws Statutes and customs of this Realm, that may be lawfully practised by Judges Ecclesiastical. But this oath is such, by reason that sundry Temporal courts (by Law) hold the like course, and do not prohibit it in Courts Ecclesiastical; so that not being so much as divers courses, they cannot be contrariant or repugnant, therefore these oaths were lawfully practised in courts Ecclesiastical: or thus, That which is justice and equity in one court, cannot be unjust, unequal, or cruel in another court, that is thereunto no less authorized than the first: But such be these Oaths, as appeareth by the practice of the aforementioned Temporal courts, therefore they are lawful and equal also in Ecclesiastical courts.   

CHAP. X. The inconvenience and hurt that probably may follow, by the forbidding the ministering of an Oath Ex officio, or any other Oath, whereby such person, to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess or accuse, or to purge him or herself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment. Praise of the Civil Laws. Civilians first, and last, and greatest Sufferers. Amity 'twixt both Robes. His Majesties and the Lord Chancellor's favours to Civilians.  
DOctor Cousins hath touched upon some of such inconveniences in general, not much in particular, sparsìm in that his Apology, but not in any one distinct chapter. Some of such as I have thought of I shall set down.  
That Evil should be removed is often inculcated in holy Writ, and that right and justice should be done in all causes, as well criminal as civil, public and private, all Laws sacred and profane command: this tending to the well-being, even the being of all Kingdoms, Commonwealths and Governments whatsoever; as the contrary to the desolation and destruction thereof, and of all commerce and humane society. That in respect of the whole Church and Commonwealth punishments are most needful; the sacred Writ shows it, and gives many examples, where for the sins of a few, whole Armies and Societies have been punished. 
Josh. 7.  Achans stealing of the accursed garment, etc. was a cause of the overthrow of Israel in battle. 
1 Sam. 4.  So for the sin of Eli and his sons, many thousands of the Israelites were slain by the Philistines. 
1 Kings 1.2.  Solomon giving charge to kill Joab, says, Smite him, that thou mayest take away the blood which Joab shed causeless, from me and the house of my Father. And for Ionas his disobedience the whole Ship was in danger to have perished. The Heathen could say, Justicia est Reipublicae basis. 
Aristot. Rhetor. T●…odor. c. 14.  Aristotle could say, that punishment is a remedy to be used against faults; and Cassiodor, Remedium est contra peccatum accelerata correctio.  
For all crimes and offences are but as so many Maladies and distempers in the body of the Commonwealth, which if suffered to grow without the curb of Law, will quickly like a Canker disperse, either to the destruction or eminent danger of both: So that the necessity of punishment, and forcing justice to be done, both in civil and criminal causes, by the very ends unto which it is referred, clearly appears. 
a A●g inc●. 〈◊〉 tract. 7.  Charitas non est sed languor, ubi mali mores digna poena non castigantur. 
b Idem ep. 50 ad Bonifac. c. erro●. dist. 83.  Error, cui non resistitur, approbatur. 
c Cassiod l 3. u. c. epist 14.  Malum, cum perseveret, augetur. 
d C●cum Tanto de ceasu tudine.  Tanto sunt graviora peccata, quanto diutiùs animam detinent illigatam. Tully says, 
e Cicer. pro M●….  Impunitatis spes, magna peccandi illecebra. 
f C●…d A●d. didst. 45.  Quae est ista misericordia, quae bonitas um parcere, & omnes in discrimen adducere? The very Light of Nature did teach even Heathen men thus, 
g F. add. Aquild. I●a vulnerat.  Interest Reipublicae delicta puniri●… and 
h H. de fide pur. l. 7. sect. final.  Poenas ob malesicia solvi, magna ratio suadet. Now, if upon such weighty reasons, it be most needful that Justice be duly administered, and crimes punished, (for in criminal matters the greatest care is to be had, though no neglect neither to be in commutative and distributive justice to have that rightly performed) it must be granted, that all due and good means may be used to attain that end: Qui dat finem dat media ad finem. 
i F. de injur  Peccata nocentium expedit esse nota. Now when crimes cease to be secret, but are by fame, or by such ways as is aforesaid, so far discovered; if there be (as very often there is not) not other way to discover them, that so the evil and the scandal may be taken away, but by putting the party to his oath, thereby to clear himself, if further due proof thereof cannot be made, or by refusal of the oath to be taken pro confesso: than it follows, the evil and scandal must still remain, and all the sad effects thereof to Church and State may be expected to follow.  
Be the fame of a crime, Adultery or the like, never so pregnant, that Town and country, even the Kingdom ring of it: though an Adulterer and Adulteress have cohabited together a long time, yet if they were not taken or seen in flagranti crimine, or seen in bed together, which is a violent presumption, equivalent to a proof; and the parties deny the fact: some make it disputable, whether or no any manner of punishment (the fact being neither proved nor confessed) can be laid upon the parties for this great scandal to the Church.  
Some hold, that by the words of this late Act, that an innocent party, upon whom a fame is unjustly raised, and the beginning of it cannot be found, as often hath happened, yet though he offer to purge himself, the Ecclesiastical Judge is not to tender or administer the oath to him; though this seems otherwise, because the oath is forbidden but only in such cases, whereby the person to whom the same is tendered or administered, may be charged or compelled to confess or accuse, or to purge him or herself, of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment. But in this case of voluntary offer to take the oath, that reason of censure or punishment ceaseth.  
Reg. juris.  Volenti non fit injuria neque dolus. 
Such course by way of oath to find out the sin being forbidden, how great an encouragement it may prove to commit such sins, is obvious to the easiest judgement. It was extreme to make Adultery punishable by death, though that extreme be to be avoided, the contrary too must be shunned.  
If it be lawful at common Law, as in a Wager at Law, and many other cases, as before touched, to tender and administer such oaths, and in such causes as need it not so much, as these causes ordinarily do; wherein before that late Act it was administered in Ecclesiastical courts: then why not in Ecclesiastical courts? Except it be said, that the same course shall be taken to forbid it also at common Law, which, I suppose, is not intended; since Jury men, as Dr. Cousins (as before) in that his Apology affirms, had an oath given them to present their own and their fellows faults. Now such in Ecclesiastical proceed.  
The inequality of the punishment as to the difference of Sex. Indeed the permission of punishment as to one Sex, the Man, and the punishment to the weaker Sex, the Woman, who therefore deserves more commiseration: that inequality, I say, cannot at best but seem strange. For the man will always probably (except either by God's grace he will glorify him, by confessing his fault; or else, as before, be taken in flagranti crimine; or with such violent presumption as before) escape punishment though never so guilty: It is peccatum concatenatum, there must be two to act it. In that sin the man without the woman, or the woman without the man, signify no more than the letter q without an u following it, to make it into to a syllable. As for the man, his crime is transiens, leaves no vestigia behind it to discover him: not so oftentimes in the woman, the infallible indicium of her fault, her crimen manens appearing to every eye, though she is no more guilty thereof then the man: whom if she rightly name or accuse, yet that works nothing against him, except to keep the Bastard child as the reputed father thereof; wherein not a few light women probably name not the right father; so her single testimony serves to punish either the right or wrong father, but not to take away the scandal or evil caused by the man that offended. Our English Nation hath been accounted very friendly and favourable to the weaker Sex, and very many are the privileges and honoraries we give them more than in other Nations; for which in the opinion of generous minds we are accounted more honourable than others; insomuch as some have said, If there were a bridge 'twixt Dover and Calais, all the women in the Continent would come into our Island. But by this we may seem to hazard that honour.  
In Simony, Usury, and many other crimes of Ecclesiastical cognisance, be the fame, circumstances, suspicions, and all other inducements never so strong; yet this Oath being not to be administered, the offender escapes, neither the evil nor scandal is removed.  
Bishops by the Statute 1 Eliz. 1. are to give the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy ex officio to others, or whether it be ex officio or ad instantiam partis, the matter is all one; 'tis forbidden to give it to any person, whereby he may be charged or compelled to confess, or accuse, or to purge him or herself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he or she may be liable to any censure or punishment. The refusal of this oath is penal, and perhaps the person was so accused to the Bishop, or there was a common fame thereof, or other sufficient inducement to inquire thereof; if the party refuse to take this oath thus tendered to him, then is he by the Law liable to Censure and punishment for it: and I conceive it is not thought fit, that such a person, be he a Recusant of what kind soever, should plead this Statute, that this Oath should not be tendered to them.  
By the Law all Bishops and Ecclesiastical Judges, when they give Institution into Benefices, or give licence to preach, teach school, serve Cures, and in other cases, are to give to the parties the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy: should these parties refuse to take these oaths, it were penal to them.  
When the Bishops make their Chancellors, Commissaries, Advocates, Registers, Proctors, or the Deans and Chapters, their Commissaries, Officials, or Auditores causarum, or the Archdeacon's their Officials, or any other Ecclesiastical Officers whatsoever, the same oaths are to be given them: should these parties refuse to take these oaths, it were penal to them. So a greater part of the course of proceeding in Ecclesiastical Courts is taken away, then perhaps many think of.  
So in the Oath of Calumny and of Malice, to be tendered in the proceed in Ecclesiastical Courts; if the party refuse to take them, 'tis penal to him. And in many other cases, easy to be enumerated, but this may suffice.  
The guiltless and innocent have no benefit by taking away this oath, especially that of Purgation; nay, (admitting that which, as above, some affirm, That though they offer to take the oath of Purgation, the Ecclesiastical Judge is not to minister it) in that case they are endamaged by it, and cannot make their innocency appear in such a way and means as the Law did afford, and to be restored to all intents and purposes to their good name and fame, of which they were in a great part (though unjustly) bereft; and might have a good Action against any, that after such Purgation defamed them,  
The guilty hereby escapes punishment, which he may in some sort lucri loco reponere, if it may not be said of him as Virgil of the stinging Bee, ammam in vulnere ponit. 
Reg. juris.  The rule of Law is, Nemo ex delicto consequitur beneficium.  
The great Hypocrisy of those Innovators and fanatics in Queen Elizabeth's, King James', and in the late blessed King and Martyrs reign, King Charles the First, (to go no further) that then pressed the taking away of that Oath, and some of them we have seen go much further of late; who would be thought to be, and so hold it forth, that they are the greatest Zelots to have those sins punished, that by that means would escape it; yet cry, like the Lapwing, furthest from their nest; they would not have the means left to find them out, that so they might be punished: and other use for their ends (which we have sadly felt) they made of it, as is touched above. Herein they somewhat resemble Julian the Apostate, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He would seem to be a hater of a long incompt Beard, and entitles that Tract of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, An hater of Beards; and yet he says there of himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Longam istam barbam addidi, etc. ideo diseurrentes in ea pediculos perfero, tanquam feras aliquas in sylva.  
Many other inconveniences and hurts, that too probably may be feared to arise from the prohibition of these oaths, in such cases as before, might upon further consideration be enumerated: and though in the last place, yet even that too, of adding further discouragement to the professors of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws, who have not had a few for a long time together, may perhaps deserve to be thought upon. It is too visible that there are not a few, that would not have them enjoy so much of practice and power, as that without which the State can scarce spare them, that is in maritime causes touching Traffic and Commerce with Foreigners; a point eminently considerable as to the benefit of this Nation. For the Law itself, surely all Scholars and ingenuous men, of what Robe or Profession soever, cannot but honour it for the Antiquity, and in a sort Universality, and Excellency of it, and the great number of Nations, and so many, and noble, and well-civilized exercise, that were anciently, and in great part, and yet are governed by the rules thereof, and the helps received from it even by our own Nation too; many ways demonstrable. Before our Saviour's time, as is touched before, in the time of Julius Caesar, 
Cic. famil epist.  0 an ancient Civil-Lawyer, and often alleged in the Pandects, remained at Samarobrina in this Island of Britain; and after that the Oracle of that Law, 
Forcatulus.  Aemilius Paulus Papiniamus, professed the Law, and kept his Tribunal seat of Praetorship in the City of York: and no inconsiderable part of the Municipal Laws of our Nation have flowed from that Fountain, and drawn many Rules and Maxims thence. So that it may, as that learned Civilian, Sir Rob. Wiseman Knight, Doctor of the Laws, His Majesty's Advocate general for the Kingdom of Engl. in that Treatise of his of the Excellency of the Civil Law, be truly styled The Law of Laws; and as it was said to that Roman orator highly commending Eloquence, that he lifted her up to the skies, that he also with her might be raised up thither; so he in that learned and judicious Tract of his, setting forth the due and just honour and Encomium of the Civil Laws, deserves to be thereby perpetually honoured. And for the professors of the Civil Law in this Nation, their share of sufferings in these late tempestuous times was the earliest, began first, some years before the Loyal Clergy were destroyed: For upon the passing that Act for the taking away the High Commission, in the tail of it was that sting, which (as the then more powerful part interpreted it) took away the coercive power from the Ecclesiastical Courts, and so in a manner made them useless and precarious, if not ridiculous; and within a very few days after passed that Act for Poll-money, where every Ecclesiastical Judge, that had any Ecclesiastical Office of Judicature, (though some of those places were not worth 30 l. per annum, nor 20 l. per annum, and some less) paid 15. l. a greater sum than some men paid of 10000 l. per annum, and more in Land of Inheritance: So sharp-sighted was that Act towards that then in a manner even ruined profession. The reason of it was visible enough, and no ways dishonourable to that profession or professors, who acted justly according to the known Laws of the Land; had they done otherwise, surely they had not wanted legal punishment, as the times than were, and the cry that was then unjustly raised against them; when the furious flame of Civil war broke forth, that wasted the Church, all loyal Churchmen, and all that had dependence or relation to them, in regard of any Offices or Places, as most, if not all, Civilians had then. As to the Civilians, Sublatum fuit questionis subjectum, their Offices and Places were quite taken away. Indeed the most reverend Fathers the Lords Archbishops and Bishops, with Deans, Chapters, Archdeacon's, and other Dignitaries in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, tasted of the same cup, were A la mode then, but not so soon as the Civilians, root and branch destroyed: but the Beneficed Rectors and Vicars that for their Loyalty were thrust out of their Benefices, had a small pittance reserved them, (though when paid at all, miserably shrunk and lessened almost to nothing) that is, as they called it, the Fifths of their Live: But as to the reverend Prelates and Dignitaries, and the Civilians, there was nothing left, under such pitiful Step-fathers', were the then nicknamed Fathers of their Country, the prevailing party in that Long Parliament, during the time of the long continued usurping Power, even till His Sacred Majesty's happy Restauration; those causes and businesses, which of right aught to have been agitated and dispatched by Civilians in their several Offices and places, many of them, as causes of Defamation, Matrimonial causes, Tithes, if not Legacies also, and several other branches of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, were all along dispatched at Common Law or Chancery, contrary to all Law and equity; Probate of Wills, and granting of Letters of Administration, with all the connexes and incidents thereunto belonging, and from thence arising; were by Commission from that usurping Power, committed to a few persons of their own gang at London, so that the Subjects from all parts of the Kingdom were to prove the Wills of the dead, and take Administration of Intestates Goods, pass their Accounts, and act the rest concerning them, there before them at London. The Executors and Administrators must either come up thither personally to them, to take their oaths, or else have Commissions down into their Countries to do it; and the charges to the Subject for such Probate of Wills, Letters of Administration, and the rest, whether they went up themselves to London to dispatch them, or more especially if they sent up by others thither to have them done, as most commonly they did, and not scare one in forty did otherwise, and it was the cheapest way probably for them so to do, in regard of the charges, to send up by others that also had other business of their own there: Yet, I say, by these means, and the great Fees taken, the charges for proving every Will, taking Letters of Administration, and the rest, came ordinarily to about six times (sometimes much more) as much as was taken and due before these troublesome irregular times, by the Ecclesiastical Judges and Officers to whom of right they appertained: that is, the Fees and charges usually came to 50 s. or 3 l. or 4 l. or 5 l. and sometimes to 6 l. or more. Had such a Grievance, and so general throughout the Kingdom, reigned in the time of Kingship, when faithful and peaceable men acted according to the known Laws of the Land; surely the fall of Nilus to the Cadupes would not have made such a noise, as our factious Stentors would have then bellowed out. And too much of the grievance still remains, such Wills, Inventories, Bonds so Administration, with the dependencies thereupon, remaining still at London, whether the Subject, when they have occasion to see or use any of them, or sue for any thing concerning them, must either personally repair or send for them, or sue there: which is well hoped will by this happy Parliament be remedied, and a course taken that they may be transmitted into every County whence they came, for the Subjects ease, and that they there may sue upon occasion, for any Legacy or other matter concerning them. Should it be demanded at whose charge this should be done; the dictate of Reason, I humbly conceive, answers it; Qui commodum habet, idem & onus habere debet. And thus for no small number of years our Places, our Livelyhoods, were unjustly taken from us, only for our Loyalty; whilst others, that did it, gloried in their shame, took our bread out of our mouths, and did eat whilst we fasted and well nigh starved; and yet such is the unsatiableness and unreasonableness of some of our causeless persecutors, that they could well be content we should still continue in the same oppressed and miserable condition: And when His Majesty was happily restored, (for which all thanks, praise and glory be ever rendered to the God of miracles and mercy) the Civilians, as they were (as is before touched) the first and earliest sufferers, so were the last (not a small time after the most reverend Bishops, and especially after the rest of the Loyal Clergy were restored) that were readmitted to their places and Offices; and when that was done, still for a considerable time they were but precarious, and of little use or value as before, till the doubt touching coercive power was by Parliament taken away, which was not till the later end of Summer 1661. and then with the Proviso against the Oath Ex officio and Purgation, which not a little diminishes these Offices, besides upon reasons known, the forbearance of the full execution of such Offices, as yet, so far as by Law they might execute them, is considerable.  
Some Civilians, who in contemplation of their natural duty, and of their Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, served His Majesty in his wars against his then rebellious Subjects, thereby lost all their Fortunes both real and personal, that their enemies could find: and certainly never were more sedulous and rigid scrutators, or more rapacious Harpies, that would not let scarce any thing pass their clutches. Non fuit Autolyci tam piceata manus. And such suffering Civilians, both so in their Livelyhoods, their quotidianum, and their persons and liberties very often, humbly hoped when a time of re-settlement should come, that they should have been looked upon as well as others of the same profession, that sat still, underwent none of these dangers or hazards, nor suffered perhaps any thing, or but little in their Estates or otherwise, especially in comparison with the others, or as well as others that had some competency by reason of practice under the usurped Powers, as to take and execute Offices under them of great benefit, and I had almost said that way, if not otherwise also, immediately acted against His Majesty and his Authority, contrary to their natural duty, and Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy. To plead before the usurping powers, even after the end of the war, it was not, at least for a long time, permitted to those Civilians of the King's party, especially those that had served him in his wars here. For my own part, though I could never satisfy my Conscience so far, as to plead before any of the usurped powers, not so far to acknowledge their power, though some years before His Majesty's happy restauration, I was both here and in Ireland invited and desired to do it, yet I would not do it, nor ever did that way or any other give any acknowledgement of their power, or touch any of their Pitch, more than by a forced acquiescence, and sitting quiet and still when I was constrained so to do. Yet, I say, I am far from censuring any of these worthy and learned persons of either Robe, that did either agere or defendere before that usurping power, by way of pleading: I would not be misunderstood, as to be thought so much as to think amiss of the noble Profession or Professors at Common Law, both which I love and honour, and do very well know, and have heard many of them, suitable to their Births, Breed, and loyal and generous Minds, commiserate the oppression of the Profession and Professors of the Civil Law, and wish that the proceed in the Ecclesiastical Courts, by the Oath Ex officio and Purgation, might continue as it was before that last Act that took it away; even for the justice of it, as they conceive, as also lest it might seem, at leastwise in some men's judgements, to savour of a kind of partiality, that these Oaths Ex officio and Purgation should continue in proceeding at Common Law, and not in the Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Courts, or Courts Christian, as at Common Law by the Laws of the Land they are styled; a Title we like well, and surely that Nickname, suitable to such debauched and dissolute persons that gave it, because in these Courts their unclean crimes were punished, and that did commovere bilem; though they were punished there only, as before, Medicinally, to acknowledge their crimes, to ask God and the congregation forgiveness, and to take away the evil and scandal, and not mulcted or corporally punished by imprisonment or otherwise: I say, that Nickname, should it be given at all to any court, as it ought not, it would rather lean to such courts as inflict corporal punishments and mulcts upon such criminous persons, by Imprisonment, keeping the Bastard children, whipping, or otherwise corporally punishing them. I wish and hope, that as both the professions of both Robes sit as sisters under one Crown, derive from one and the same head, and draw from one and the same Fountain; so each knowing their certain bounds and limits of Jurisdiction, (which, if not clearly and explicitly settled, I wish and hope will be) may proceed christianly, charitably and friendly in their several spheres of activity, without clashing or the least dissension, to God's glory, the good of this Church and Srate, and the just distribution of Justice, to the benefit and comfort of all the Subjects in His Majesty's Dominions. Let us all remember, that not long since there was a generation of men, than too much in power, that had an equal tooth against both the Professions, would gladly have seen the destruction of both, and made too great a progress in it. The noble Professon and Professors of the common Law, could then expect little more favour than Polyphemus promised Ulysses, that he should be the last that should be devoured. And probably enough some of them stirred up some of the lesse-considerable common Lawyers, and such as favoured their side too much, (for in all Professions there is good and bad) to be iustrumental in the abolition of the Civil Law; and when that was done, when the outworks were taken in, then to have a bout with the Fort itself. They have showed their Method: No Bishop, no King. But concord and peace, it is to be hoped, will duly and indissolubly cement these two Professions, if amongst ourselves we do not ponere obicem, and disjoin the union. Let us never forget St. Paul's good counsel and caution; All the Law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye by't and devour one another, take heed ye he not consumed one of another. For the Civilians, if they have many enemies and but few friends, (as was said by one, that 'tis hoped hath no disaffection to that profession or professors of it, but rather in a just resentment of their oppression, suitable to his birth and noble disposition) if so, I say, they may comfort themselves in this, that they were put to the test in the beginning of the Long Parliament, when their factious Accusers were sufficiently numerous and virulent, and had they been found guilty, they had not then escaped punishment, severe and infamous enough. They could not easily have been highlier justified than that way, which made it appear to all the world, that that clamorous party, through the sides of the Civilians, intended to strike at and wound their Superiors, and so serve turns and ends, and compass their long-weaved design. If the Civilians do their parts in their Functions, uprightly and diligently, which their own consciences doubtless will prompt them to, and the vigilancy of their factious Adversaries over their actions, may serve to keep them awake; 'tis to be hoped they will every way find comfort and encouragement: However that peace at the last, and the continual Feast in the interim, will buoy them up above the greatest waves of envy or malice. Good men will be their friends, though the contrary be their enemies: and one Cato is better than a Theaire. And we cannot but be confident, that we shall never have cause to say, as some said in another case; Non nos Resp. sed defuit nobis Respublica.  
We have a gracious KING, whom God protect, bless, and prolong his days: Et Spes & Ratio studiorum in Caesare. He, we doubt not, will, as before him his Royal Father, Charles the first, King and Martyr, and his Grandfather King James, of blessed memory; look upon us with a favourable eye, according as he finds we endeavour faithfully and diligently to serve the Church and State, that is to serve him: they who fail therein deserve not to be remembered. And besides the general, His Sacred Majesty hath in particular demonstrated his gracious favour that way, by the addition of honour and honorary revenue to the Masters of the Chancery, Civilians for the most part: an act that, if possibly there can be an addition, adds to the just obligation of duty, service and gratitude which they own his most excellent Majesty. And all due thankfulness and honour the same Profession must ever acknowledge and render to the Right Honourable the Earl of Clarendon, Lord Chancellor of England, for his special favours to that Profession and Professors, and for his mediation and being instrumental (as none, I believe, can suppose otherwise) in the obtaining that favour and bounty to the Masters of the Chancery, and by furthering the continuance of His Majesty's gracious inclination towards them. We bless God, and His Majesty and his Lordship for it, and are, I hope, and ever shall be most thankful for it, and rejoice and comfort ourselves in it, and Rumpatur quisquis, rumpitur invidia.  
Now (as in the Preface) I thought fit to subjoin that little Manuscript, touching the Oath ex officio, with that Determination touching the same, by that glory of our Church, the late Lord Bishop Lancelot Andrews Bishop of Winchester.  

A Manuscript treating of the Oath Ex officio, said to be Doctor Davenants, late Lord Bishop of Sarisbury.  
1. THat which the Commons House complained of is, that the Commissioners Ecclesiastical proceed Ex officio, that is, (say they) without a known Accuser.  
2. And that they cause men to answer upon their oath, that which they would have is this.  
1. That no man should be dealt with, but an Accuser should stand forth, and that no Oath should be ministered to a man in his own cause.  
That which your Lordships have enjoined me, is to show my opinion, whether the courses complained of be warrantable by the Word of God or no.  
Two parts there are distinctly to be spoken to, the one of proceeding without a known Accuser, the other of proceeding by way of Oath.  
I begin with them generally at large, and after as they concern Ecclesiastical proceed.  
1. The end of all Judgements in all Courts, is to remove evil. The Heathen man says, Interest reipublicae ut malefics tollantur: the health of the civil body consisting no less in removing evil persons, then doth the natural in purging out evil humours. And the very same is God's course in his Commonwealth; ten several times in Deuteronomy he repeats it,  sic tolletis malum de medio Israëlis.  
2. Evil then is to be removed, not only civil but Ecclesiastical; so doth God take express orders, that corrupt Religion, contumacy in disobeying his Priest, Incontinency, Defamation, (matters all of Ecclesiastical cognisance) should be removed, expressly terming every one of them malum in Israële. And so in the New Testament doth the Apostle speak of the case of Incest; Vos autem auferetis malum de vobis. These than are evils, and Ecclesiastical evils, and to be removed.  
3. If they must be removed they must be known; for St. Hierom saith well, Quod ignorat medicina, non curate. Physic both corporal and civil must know the peccant humour, before they can purge it.  
4. If know it they must, by the parties themselves they shall never know it. The first that ever did trespass, were not so ready to commit sin, but they were twice as ready to conceal it. And as Tertullian saith to good purpose, Reliqui omnes congeneres primo: All other offenders do as the first did, seek to keep their offence from being known. The offences themselves, ye know, are called opera tenebrarum, and Incontinency, that defileth the body as well as the spiritual Whoredom, which is corruption in the Worship of God; either of them, we know, is angularis actio, and kept from knowledge as much as may be.  
5. Then, if they must be known, and will not by the parties themselves, some other means must be used to bring them to light; where if there be a party to stand up and accuse, 'tis well, and he not to be refused. But we know, and I refer myself to your Lordships, that it is holden an odious matter to be an Accuser, and with the better sort of men more odious: Few that be well disposed will be gotten to it, and even they that will, I refer me to your Lordships again, whether Solomon saith not true, that One evil will not be accused but out of another evil: that is, grudge or spleen to wreak ourselves upon some party, that we conceive hath wronged us; otherwise the faintness of men to become Accusers will make that much evil will not be removed, if this be only the way to remove it; but God saith, All evil must be removed so near as may be.  
6. For that cause God hath authorized those that hold Judicial places for the removing of evil, not only to receive accusations when they be brought against it, but if none be brought to make enquiry after it, in the 13, 17, and 18 of Deuteronomy, that by enquiry it may be found, and found it may be removed: Which Enquiry is not left at large promiscuously, hand over head, but hath his limitation upon what ground to proceed. Now, if you ask what ground we can have, no better rule for it, then if we follow Gods own proceeding in his judicial courses; for the judgement is Gods properly, and not Man's; and there is nothing more to be desired, then that God would give the King his judgements; for the judgements of all those that be in place, are then best when they are likest Gods: the rather for that God, needing not to hold any course of Enquiry, because to him all things are clear and manifest, not only then but before they be done, and yet binding himself to a certain way in his proceeding, no other reason is or can be rendered, why he should so do, but only to instruct us how to proceed by his example. In God's court, true it is, there is an accuser allowed, even the accuser of us and our brethren, who (we see) is sometimes heard and received, though his suggestions be untrue; as in Jobs case. But is there no proceeding but upon accusation? I take it to be very clear, that it will fall out, divers judgements of his having been given upon another ground.  
In Adam's case no accuser stood forth, what was done was as yet not known, only he was taken in suspicious manner, flying from God, lurking in a Thicket; which was plainly species mali, and God thought it meet to be enquired on: and so may we upon like suspicion, though there be no accuser, even by his Warrant.  
In Eves case neither had she any accuser, but by examining Adam she came to be impeached tanquam particeps criminis, at the least; which, as we know, was by way of detection, which is not properly accusation, yet sufficient enough to ground a sentence upon, as (we see) God did, and they that sit in his place may do the like.  
In cain's case it fell out clear otherwise then in adam's, for in Adam's the fact was unknown, in cain's only the party, for the murder was evident.  
Now to find out the party, the way which God taketh is by presumption, for that there had been malice born Abel by Cain, and he admonished thereof, his very countenance bewraying as much; this did God hold cause enough to ground an Enquiry upon, and so may we. In the case of Sodom there is yet another way; clamour multus est, saith God, there is a great rumour or fame runneth upon Sodom's naughtiness, I will go down and inquire of it, saith God in express words. So that whether there be accusation or no, vehement suspicion, or detection, or strong presumption, or fame will supply the want of an Accuser; and the Judge even by very duty is authorized to proceed to inquire upon any of these.  
A little to insist on this of fame, whereof our Saviour Christ in the Gospel hath made that a branch which we call denunciatio Evangelica; when a party of good credit discloseth unto the Judge a fault, but will not sustain either the hazard, trouble or charge of an Accuser. Yet doth our Saviour Christ give warrant to the Church, even in that case to call the party, and take order with him. But this point of proceeding upon fame, hath not only warrant of proceeding in God's example, but in his express charge; two several places of the Law where the ground is, Deut. 30.12. Deut. 17.4. If it be told thee that such or such a fault is done, the proceeding is perscrutando & interrogando. Perscrutando, that is, by searching and evidence; Interrogando, that is, by interrogating the party about the fault suggested. And we see plainly in a case of Ecclesiastical correction for matter of Incest, the Apostle goeth no further, but layeth this for his ground, There goeth a report, that such a party there is among you. As therefore when an accuser offereth himself, he is not to be rejected; so though none do, rather than faults should go uncensurable, the Judge even of very duty is to search them out: In his search not proceeding without some of these that have been mentioned, but with these he hath good warrant, even as good as Gods own example and commandment.  
Sufficient hath been said to show, that without an Accuser a Judge may proceed by enquiry to interrogate a party, but whether upon his Oath, that is the second point to be showed, no less warrantable by the Word of God than the former.  
In the case of the Woman suspected to have made a fault to her husband, and that upon no other ground, but upon her husbands own jealousy; the Ecclesiastical Judge was not only authorized to examine her concerning it, and then to rest on her denial; but also to put her to her oath, and make her to abjure it with execration, as it is plainly, Num. 5. And it is a case of a sin against the seventh Commandment.  
In a sin against the eighth Commandment, betwixt man and man: If one had committed aught to another's trust, and were persuaded that he had played false with him, he might bring him before the Judge, and have the matter searched into, and at the Plaintiffs instance the Judge was to lay an oath upon him, and the other not to refuse it. And of this there are more cases than one, Exod. 21. And if in private causes betwixt man and man this manner of proceeding be allowed, it will follow à fortiori, if for the private benefit, much more that which God granteth to a private man, it is to be presumed he will not deny to a Magistrate: that which to satisfy one party he licenseth, he will likewise think meet to licence for the taking away of offence, and giving satisfaction unto many. And the chastity of a man's Wife shall never be more precious to him, than the keeping of his own Spouse the Church, free from the like stains of pollution.  
In a sin against the sixth Commandment, a case of Murder, one is found slain; no man can be accused or suspected for doing it: In this case the Governors of the next City to the body so found, are by the Law to come to the place to offer a sacrifice, to invocate the name of God, and solemnly to testify by that Invocation, that they are no way; privy to the murder. This is the course in the Law of Moses, but before ever the Law was written, we see the very same holden by Joseph under the Law of Nature. In a matter of State, in a suspicion of a sin against the fifth Commandment: It pleased him to charge his ten Brethren as Spies coming to discover the weakness of the Land; there was no party to accuse or to say aught against them, yet for all that he put them to it sub attestatione juramenti, to answer, They were no such men.  
The very like course was holden in the search for Elias; he was thought to be the cause of the long and great drought: The King sent all over the Land to seek for him, and to have him apprehended; these especially that were thought to be the Professors of the same Religion, all denied him; it would not serve the turn, he put them to their oaths, and they refused them not, yet was there none to accuse them at all. Yet for the good (as it was supposed) of the State, this course was well allowed.  
So have we Interrogatories administered, and the parties sworn to them, in cases of the fifth, sixth and seventh Commandment.  
And if this may be done in civil causes, and be not unlawful in them, we argue that much rather it ought to be allowed the Church in her proceed.  
First, for that both Commonwealth and Church be to remove evil, yet work they not both one way; for the Commonwealth, as it is well known, doth agere ad poenam; the Church never so, but doth only agere ad poenitentiam, seeketh to alter men's minds, from the evil courses they have entered into, seeketh by making them to yield to a voluntary submission rhemselves, to take away the scandal, whereof they have been a cause.  
Now there is great odds between those, and great reason more means be allowed those, that seek for nothing else, but the reformation of the party and his souls health; and those that end their proceed always in the loss of life, limb or liberty, or living, as doth the Civil.  
Besides, it is well known the civil power hath many ways and means to sift out the truth, though not by this, That the Church (if Accusations cease) hath none, but this only. Indeed therefore most proper and peculiar to her, because an oath is the bond of the Soul, and they be the sole causes the Church hath to deal with.  
The inconvenience is none at all: for admit a party should thereby disclose his offence, yet groweth thereby no damage unto him, in that his repentance only and reformation is thereby sought, and wrought, and nothing else.  
Thus reasons the Church, but for her practice taketh her ground to be full and good out of the fifth of Numbers, in a case of suspected Incontinency, which is merely Ecclesiastical. And again, out of 1 Esdras 8. & 9 in a case Matrimonial, which is merely Ecclesiastical also. In both which Interrogatories are ministered with oath, the proceeding being by Enquiry, without any Accuser at all. And that which is to be noted in the case in Esdras, they are no ways forced to it, but desire to take their oath first, and be examined after. Then which there is no case more like to the proceeding at this day, against which exception is taken.  
Out of these six it is manifest enough how agreeable to the Will of God this proceeding is: But beyond all this is the seventh in the fifth of Leviticus, where it appeareth that God is so careful to have all evil removed, as leave is given by him upon a fault committed, the party being unknown, to lay a solemn charge, and to bind it with a curse, and that at large, to take hold of any that were privy to the fault done, and did not come and reveal it.  
Which course was clearly of the nature of an Oath, as doth plainly appear by 1 Sam. 14. where it is said four several times, that Saul bond all the people with an oath, not to taste of any thing till the Sun went down, that they might pursue their enemies without any intermission: Which oath is judged by the Expositors to have been nothing else but the public denouncing of a curse, or adjuring them in the name of God not to do it, seeing it is held a thing impossible, that he should call so many thousands in particular, to take every man an oath, the time being so short, and he in such haste to pursue the Enemy. But it is a thing, as Nazianzen saith, not unusual, either before Christ or since, in the time of the Primitive Church, to make such adjurations, whereby the Church ever thought, quod poena commissi revolvitur in conscium, that he that concealed was subject to as great a curse as he that committed it.  
By all which it is evident, that such proceeding by oath may be, and is not unlawful.   
This, as before, is by some said to be Dr. Davenants, late Lord Bishop of Sarisbury, and others say it was the late Lord Bishop of winchester's, that most learned and pious Bishop, Dr. Lancelot Andrews. Whose soever it was, it seems it was to give satisfaction to the Lords of the Council touching such proceed Ex officio, and upon oath; and 'tis to be believed it gave them satisfaction, the Law so long after continuing the same, and no ways altered.  

The Theological Determination of Dr. Lancelot Andrews, afterwards Lord Bishop of Winchester, had in the public Divinity-Schools in Cambridge, in the Month of July 1591. upon this Question following.  Rendered into English for the use of the mere English Reader. 
Whether by God's Law it be lawful for the Magistrate to require an Oath of the Party, (that is, the party guilty or Defendant?) and in what case, and how far it is lawful?  
TOuching the questioning of parties guilty or Defendants by the Religion of an Oath, as also of such parties taking such Oath, or lawfully declining it; of late hath a Question arose, Whether by God's Law it be lawful for the Magistrate to require an oath of the party (that is, the party guilty or defendant) and in what case, and how far it is lawful? This question, to prevent any confusion upon your memory or my own, I will divide into five branches; and indeed in this short two day's space I have not bethought myself of a more distinct method.  

1. Whether it be lawful to exact or require an oath?  
2. Whether it be lawful for the Magistrate to do it?  
3. Whether from the guilty (or defendant) party?  
4. Whether it be lawful in every cause, or not in capital causes, but such as receive a milder punishment?  
5. How far this is lawful, and in what cases?   
Of which questions the first three have nothing of question in them, if we be sound in Divinity; therefore I shall in few words dispatch them.  
And first of all, it is a sacred right that such an oath may be lawfully required: In which matter I think it is very behooveful (as Christ did in the case of Divorcement) first of all to inquire what every thing was in the beginning: in the revolution of time many things are changed, the beginning is the most certain rule. Therefore I ask where and when the first mention of an oath is made in Scriptures? I find Gea. 24. Abraham forcing his servant to take an oath, in these words, and with this ceremony; Put thy hand under my Thigh, and I will make thee swear, that thou shalt take a wife for my son, of my Kindred. So the first oath mentioned in Scripture, is here expressed: and as it is the most ancient and first, so it is the most frequent and only mention almost of such a thing. This very term (to Swear) you will scarce any any where find it in the Old Testament, but either under the word Hiphil, that is the Imperative, commanding conjugation, in respect of him that gives the oath: or under the word Niphal, that is the passive suffering conjugation, in respect of him that takes the oath. And under the same rule are the Greeks, amongst whom Orcos is the name of the oath, which almost solely the holy Ghost acknowledges in the New Testament. In that word is a kind of straightening necessity, and as they say, an exigengy no less than there is in the word Orcos; for from the same word comes both, that is of straitning. Thereupon comes that common Proverb, War and Oaths are voluntary evils; and that they may be good, they ought to be pressed and expressed as St. Augustine of Oaths says wittily) either by the Authority of him that gives the oath, or at leastwise by the hardness of his heart that believes nor So that it is a sin either to swear or to make war, except it be at least in some manner exacted, and upon some and no light cause. Therefore that it may be required, or rather that it ought to be, the very force of Nature, the very force of the term itself evinceth it,  
But whether from the Magistrate? (this is the second branch.) Yes surely from the Magistrate.  
So the Divines of old; Not only every body but every soul is to be subject to the Powers, Rom. 13.1. Therefore the Powers have power to commit the body to custody, by imprisoning it, lest it escape: And so likewise the soul, to commit that to custody, by laying an oath upon it, lest it should have any subterfuge, by which name God himself hath most fitly called an Oath, the Bond or prison of the soul, Num. 30.13. by which the soul may as it were be tied up; and being so tied up, may be bound to answer appositely and readily. But yet it comes nearer: If it be lawful for the Master to force his servant to take an oath, as Gen. 24.3. Abraham did; if a father to his son, as Jacob to Joseph, Gen. 47.29. if a brother to a brother, as the same Jacob to Esau, Gen. 25.33. By how much better right is it lawful for the Magistrate to do it to his Subject, whose command is more excellent than any other command? I add also about the right settling in marriage of a son, if that be lawful, as Abraham to his servant; of choosing a fitting place of burial, as to Joseph; of passing away the right to Birthright, as Esau; and in private causes, I add also of the least concernment, if compared with the public: Then surely by better right may the Magistrate do it, in the common cause of the Commonwealth, whose Interest is greater than any other Interest. And that is provided for by God's Law, Exod. 12.8. in express terms; in the case of a Pawn, saith God, let them come before the Magistrate: In which place the Magistrates are named by the name of God himself, and not by any name, but by that very name which is taken from the force of an oath: as though he should say, Let them come before the Oath-givers, or those who (when they give the Law in God's stead) in his Judgement and in his Name may require his Oath to be taken: That is, God's Deputies, Psal. 82.6. in God's judgement: 2 Chro. 19.8. the Oath of God: Eccles. 8.2. therefore to the Magistrate. It is lawful to the Magistrate, I say, as well Ecclesiastical as Civil. Before him that is the Ecclesiastical Judge by Law, the Woman is commanded to purge herself in a case of suspicion of breach of Wedlock bond, Num. 5.19. Before him that is the Temporal Judge by Law, the man is commanded to purge himself in a cause of suspicion of breach of Social promise or Contract, Exod. 22.8. The practice whereof we see (and the practice of the Saints is the Interpreter of the Commandments) of the Ecclesiastical Judge in Ezra, who required an oath in a Matrimonial cause, Ezra 10.5. Of the Temporal Judge in Nehemiah, who forced an Oath in a cause of Usury, Neh. 5.12. Neither hath the pious and religious Magistrate only right to do this, but the Heathen Magistrate too, and that to God's people; Zedckiah gave his Oath of Allegiance to Nabuchadnezzar, 2 Chron. 36.9. though forced he gave it, and rightly too, if we believe Ezekiel; and afterwards by a sacrilegious boldness he attempted to break it, he scaped not unpunished for it, Ezek. 17.13. Lastly, I add that this was not lawful to do to their own people only, but also to guests and strangers, living within thrir Territories, either for trafficking or any other cause: In which regard Joseph, now become Viceroy of Egypt, imposes an Oath upon his Brethren in a case of Treason suspected, though both by Law and by Nature they were Canaanites, Gen. 43.3. therefore hence it now appears, that it is lawful to impose an Oath, and that it is lawful also to the Magistrate.  
But whether is it lawful to do it to the party, that is, the party guilty or defendant? (the third thing I propounded.) Nor can that be called into question, Exod. 22.8. He to whom the Pawn was concredited is the party guilty or defendant, Num. 5.19. The woman suspected by the jealous husband to have wronged his bed, is also the party guilty or defendant: but to each of them is this oath to be given, nor is it lawful for them to decline it. In a few words I will sum it up: Whether one deceitfully keeps his neighbour's goods, or perfidiously deteins his friend's goods, or restores not to the owner his found goods, when he requires them, Levit. 6.3. or (as it seems to me) in any other crime, (for it is mentioned indefinitely, 1 Kings 8.31. in whatsoever he shall sin) it is lawful for the Plaintiff or Agent to impose an oath upon the party, that is the guilty or defendant, or to lay an oath upon him, as it is in the Hebrew phrase; nor is it lawful for the guilty or defendant party to refuse it, whether it be imposed by the Agent or Plaintiff, or by the Magistrate. Indeed I cannot deny, but we are fallen into such times, that it may be expedient to impose the oath upon the party, Agent or Plaintiff, and not only upon the Defendant; for it may happen that they may both prevaricate, that is, the party Agent or Plaintiff by calumniating, and the party guilty or defendant by Tergiversation. But if we would take the Law from Heaven, from the holy Writ, to the party guilty or defendant, 'tis more necessary to be given. Examples are thereof: Scarce will you find in the Law an oath laid upon the Agent or Plaintiff, but very often may you find it upon the party guilty or defendant: Moses renders the reason of it; The actor (who for the most part is the party endamaged) he is inflamed with anger, he is wholly wrapped up in the Leaven of anger and revenge, struck through with the sting of malevolence, will be rash with his mouth, which the Wiseman forbids to be in an oath, Eccl. 5.1. therefore the matter of an Oath herein is altogether unfit. But the party guilty or defendant, whom the Law always supposes to be guilty of the crime charged, till the contrary appear, is much fit: In him there is less prejudice, less of affections, besides perhaps of fear, which is as it were the heart of an oath. Therefore it is lawful to lay it upon the party guilty or defendant, and fitting too to do so.  
Now I come to the fourth branch; In what cause this is fitting: which is more intricate, and hath more question in it. And I shall not seek any where else for the division of these causes, but in our Law, that is, the Law of Divines: there in the holy Law some are called wrongs or prevarications, Exod. 22.9. some capital causes, Deut. 21.21. whereof some of those being heinous, are punished with loss of life, life either by being deprived of natural life, or civil, that is, Banishment, or (as the holy Writ speaks) rooting out, Ezra 7.26. To which are allied causes of blood, such as are Deut. 25.12. Lopping off a limb; and there in the second Verse, inflicting of stripes: but these others were not so great, and were partly punished by pecuniary Mulcts, partly by imprisonment, Esth 7.26.  
Was there any place for such an oath to be given, in such crimes as were punished by loss of life? truly I do not persuade to that. First, the practice in Scripture contraries it; for I see when Achans life was in question, Joshua dealt thus, Tell me, my son, swear not to me. So likewise Saul in the like case concerning Jonathan, Tell me Jonathan, do not swear to me: a willing, not express confession; a simple interrogation, not under the bond of an oath. But (which is the hinge of the question) I see the Prophet Jeremy himself interrogated by the King himself, I will ask thee a thing, hid nothing from me: The Prophet covenants with him, If I declare it unto thee, wilt thou not surely put me to death? (nor did Jeremy thus covenant without the dictate of the holy Ghost:) as if in such causes God had given an immunity of answering, Jer. 38.14. And indeed Reason persuades the same; for indeed so ought Inquisition (as far as it may be) to be made by the Magistrate, that the manifest loss of souls may be avoided. When as from the mouth of the greatest Liar that most true sentence proceeded, Skin after skin, and all that a man hath will he give for his life, Job 2.4. it is to be feared that that, whatsoever, or all that a man hath, will comprehend as well the conscience of an oath, as the fear of God, and what else soever comes under the notion of Religion, as men are, and as they are disposed. Wherefore, though I define nothing (I know not how) in such causes as these, in regard of the present danger of Perjury: yet I think 'tis best to forbear the imposing of an Oath. And the Laws which we use (at least according to leave or permission) judge the same. But in other cases, being of lesser offence, and so punished more easily, I think otherwise: Except perhaps we take that sentence out of the Comic Poet, and place it in Divinity; An Oath is for the keeping of a thing, not for the losing of it: For by that general Law it is provided, Leu. 5.4.— If a soul swear, pronouncing with his lips, to do evil or to do good, whatsoever it is that a man shall pronounce with an oath, and it be hid from him when he knoweth of it, than he shall be guilty in one of these. And whereas this cannot be understood of the Evil of guilt or of a crime (as we speak in the Schools) lest an Oath, which is a bond of piety, should become a bond of Iniquity: it follows, it must hold in an evil of punishment; in which kind it is neither lawful to refuse an oath, nor after it is taken to break it.  
1. Not to refuse it. Solomon wittingly and prudently laid an oath upon Shimei, to the loss of his liberty, that he should not go beyond Cedron; and he lawfully laid this oath on him: and when afterwards Shimei (having sworn not to pass these bounds) yet did it, he lost his life for it, and justly, not only for passing beyond Cedron, but for the violation of his oath, 1 Kings 2.43. What would you have? even profane Shimei refuses not an oath, though to the loss of his liberty. Nor Micheas, who by the King was bound up under the Religion of an oath, (neither was that once only, or that the first time, but it had been done sometimes before) when he was free, refused; but being sworn, refused not, but answered: though his certain punishment was before his eyes, though for his answer he was to be sent to prison, 1 Kings 22.16. By which example it appears, as well that it was then the custom in Israel to take an oath to answer, as also that the Prophet Micheas durst not (perhaps he was ignorant of God's Law in that point) do as we do nowadays, either covenant that the oath shall not entangle us, or endanger our liberty; or if that may not be granted, then to use Tergiversation.  
2. Not to break the oath. That is, (as the principal argument) if it may lawfully be performed: for except it be so, rightly saith St. Augustine, Justice breaks unjust bonds. I hope the Magistrate shall not have less power than every one of the vulgar, and every private person: every of them have at least that small power. If he be sworn to his loss, yet he must not change in that he hath promised to his neighbour, Psal. 15.4. and if not his promise to his neighbour, than not to the Magistrate, by a better right sure, or equal at least. What then? even profane Esau revoked not his oath, though it was to the loss of his Inheritance. But that private men, once for all, may know under what Law they are in this case, it is not lawful, no not for a King, to do it: Zedekiah took an oath to his loss, and as at the first view it seems, even as well to his own slavery, as the slavery of his people, Ezek. 17.13. he changed: but God both detested and revenged that fact of his. Nor is it lawful for a Commonwealth so to change: The Commonwealth of Israel made a League with the Gibeonites, and swore to it, and this was contrary both to their profit and the public command of God: Joshua (Josh. 9.15.) though not fit to have it changed, and he thought right: The same oath Saul afterwards presumed to change, though he did it in zeal towards Israel, yet that was expiated, first, by the danger of the loss of his Kingdom, and afterwards by the cutting off his posterity, 2 Sam. 21.2. Therefore this is not lawful for a King, a Commonwealth, nor a private man to do. Now I conclude: So be it there be not danger of loss of life in it, in matters and causes, which are punished either by pecuniary Mulcts, or by imprisonment, it is lawful for the Subject to undergo that oath, and for the Magistrate to require it. But in this point is much doubting; this Oath, how far it is lawful, and in what manner and case? Which whilst I treat of, all my action is (as they call it) the pursuing of the Judicial proceed, by which it may be known at length, in which way we may go where we may go no further: and hereof I see three parts, (as far as concerns our purpose) which are thus designed in holy Writ, 1. The admission of the suit or complaint, as the Hebrews call it; that is, the entrance of the cause into judgement, out of Isaiah 1.23. St. Paul calls it receiving an accusation, 1 Tim. 5.19. The second is the state and position of the cause, that is, the foundation of the suit or complaint, as the Hebrews give it the name out of Deut. 19.13. The Greeks call it, the matter to be judged and determined. St. Paul (if I be not deceived) says it is an end of strife, Heb. 6.16. The third is, Inquisition upon the proofs, that is, as the Jews call it a Pervestigation or sifting of the suit or complaint, out of job 29.16. the Greeks call it a Structure of the cause. St. Paul calls it a confirmation, Heb. 6.16. (for with the fourth, which all men call the Sentence, I have nothing to do.) Therefore these three things are to be in all Judiciary proceed, That the party ought to be lawfully questioned; after that, the state of the cause; then, the proofs are to be looked into. And in the first part there is no use of an oath, that I know or have read of: yet that I should inquire hereof, some men's error makes me do it, which error I shall lessen this day, (if it may be done) who think themselves not sufficiently accused, nay they think they shall accuse themselves, except an accuser step forth and show himself; and who falsely and rashly suppose, and yet the suppose it, that that oath which is required of them for the stating of the cause, that is the second part, that is to be required to the first part, this is the admission of the suit or complaint.  
So I propose it thus: In every suit or complaint the matter either is so apparent, as that it is manifest as well concerning the fact as the person: whether the person be deprehended in the deed doing, that is, (as they say) taken in the manner, as she was, john 8.4. Or so with an high hand, or (as we use to say) with a notorious boldness, as attempted before the Magistrate and all the Congreation, as was Zimri's wickedness, Numb. 25.8. In which cases so openly acted there was no need of accuser or witness: or if it be so, that the fact is manifest, but the person is unknown; as in the dead body found, but the murderer is not known, Deut. 21.1. or the person is known, but the fact unknown, as in Achans case, Josh. 7.18. In which matter so controverted, a man may, by the judgement of the Divine Law, be called into question four manner of ways.  
For either one may be brought forth upon some signs o● presumptions, as in that first piece of God's justice, (which all humane justice imitates) it was done against Adam, without an accuser, only upon signs and presumptions, that is, that he fled, and hid himself amongst the Trees, (a sign of a guilty mind) Gen. 3.8. In the second piece of justice against Cain, that likewise was upon signs and presumptions, (that is, Abel appearing no no where) effusion of blood being found, cain's anger or envy towards Abel foregoing it, Gen. 4.6,10. This is the first manner.  
The second is, Or one may be brought forth upon the impeachment of another, as in that very first piece of justice; Adam only was cited, but he being questioned (as usually it happens) impeaches Eve, she likewise the Serpent, Gen. 3.12. and so they two hereby were made parties guilty or defendant.  
The third is, by Fame, or rather Infamy, as for the most part suspicion follows in the neck of the facts of wicked men, talk or fame follows the suspicion, and insinuation or complaint follows the talk or same: And thus was the course against the Sodomites, Gen. 18.20. The cry of the Sodomites is great, I will go down now and see, etc. saith the Lord. And after the same manner were Inquisitions made both in the Law, If it be told thee, and thou hast heard it, Deut. 17.4 and in the Gospel against the incestuous person, 1 Cor. 5.1. It is reported.  
The fourth is by Suggestion or Complaint, as in jobs case, cap. 1.11. where the Accuser of our brethren (as St. john calls him) would have made that holy man guilty of Hypocrisy, a false crime, yet a crime; and that partly juridically, under which name amongst the Hebrews they were called Masters of the suit or controversy, Isaiah 50.8. (we translate it Adversary.) And here the punishment of the offending party was sought after, that he might give satisfaction to the person wronged; partly (as it is called) Evangelically, wherein one is denounced or reported to the Church, where only the medicine or remedy is sought after, that the Church may have satisfaction in cause of scandal: In the first, the thing itself (as we use to say) speaks and impeaches the party guilty; in the second, one guilty person impeaches another; in the third, the speech of the people is the Accuser; in the fourth, any one under the proper and true name of an Accuser.  
To this I add a Fifth, but not (a● these) as an ordinary remedy to determine the controversy; but plainly an extraordinary one, not to be put in practice but in the Valley of Anchor, that is, against the troublers of Israel; (for so the word Anchor sounds) that is, in some-heinous wickedness, or the state of the Church and Kingdom being in danger: in such cases we run to extraordinary remedies, that is, to Lots as joshua did, which in certain causes is not granted, Iosh. 7.16. In this joseph made use only of his own suspicion, Are not you Spies? (saith he) to see the nakedness of the Land ye are come, Gen 429. and when they denied, yet without sign or token, fame or any Accuser, he questioned them, thrust Simeon into prison, and forced the rest to take an oath: Nor did they appeal to the Law of Nations, or complain that they were used contrary to Law and right. For where the peace of the Commonwealth is concerned, that is of such moment, that I doubt not, that God suffers his spirit of jealousy to come upon the Magistrate, touching the safety of his Israel, no less than he suffers the Husband to have his, touching the chastity of his Wife, Num. 5.14. For the matter in question, it is in a main degree, dangerous, that it ought not to be dissembled: and the persons with whom 'tis acted use not to bring in any witnesses, (but such as are guilty themselves) by whom they may be convinced. And as to the crime we speak of, it is of that kind of wickedness that leaves no prints, footsteps or marks behind it, by which they may be taken hold of: Wherefore in those cases it is no less lawful to question or accuse upon suspicion only, than it is by the Pillory, Stocks, or 
* A punishment amongst the Heathens, where the party was put into a Boat, and another Bo●t whelmed over him.  Boar, (for such purpose these things were in God's 
† Jer 29.26  Commonwealth.) Bither of which in other, either controversies or crimes, no man allows. Well does Seneca (if I temember well) render the reason hereof, Where Villainies run riot beyond measure, 'tis unjust that justice should be tied to degrees: to which that plainly extraordinary question of him; who about that wicked extraordinary act of Achan betook himself to lots, is not very unlike. The God of Israel would have them to be troubled, that go about to trouble the Israel of God: and hereof the Valley of Anchor is a perpetual monument. Now, whomsoever the Magistrate calls in question by any one of these four, or if it concern the peace of the Commonwealthy; or of the Church, the fifth way either) foregoing, the party is lawfully called. Nor is there any reason he should fear, that he should accuse or bewray himself, he is now lawfully accused and bewrayed. He is, now that he is accused and bewrayed, to take care how he shall lawfully defend himself. And hitherto of the right of Accusation.  
Now I assume the second. The matter being thus before the Judge brought into doubt, the party guilty or defendant, either confesses the crime committed, as Achan did, and then the Judge hath no more to do but to pronounce sentence; or (which is most commonly done) denies it: which Solomon most elegantly expresses, Prov. 18.17. He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him. Now the party guilty or defendant denying, by repelling the objection, and the Agent or Plaintiff affirming his intention: thereon arises that contradiction St. Paul speaks of, Heb. 6.16. the bounder or end of which contradiction is, that which in every Judicature is sought for, as there the Apostle observes; but no bounder will be found, till the matter be put in an equal balance, except the one party have a better confirmation than the other; 'tis the Apostles word in the same place, therefore 'tis the Judge's part to inquire on which part that lies. 'Tis but a light labour and little praise to end such contentions, as are easy and plain; but that's the worth of a Judge, to sift out such causes, where the right is obscure and perplexed: The cause which I knew not, I searched out, saith job of himself, job 29.16. And to do that dexterously and fitly is the honour of a Magistrate, saith Solomon, Prov. 25.1. to whom himself, that sentence he pronounced, in that most difficult cause 'twixt the two Harlots, touching the uncertain mother of the surviving child, was an high honour, 1 Kings 3.27. But before these confirmations, that is, the foundations of the cause, aught to be or can be set forth, it is necessary some state of the cause must be settled; or as it were a hinge must be, on which the cause may be turned, and that first of all to be made manifest, what and how far he affirms and the other denies, wherein each of the Litigants may rightly call the other, to set soot to foot and hand to hand. Says the jew, and prudently does he say it, First of all place me the comroversie upon his foundation; which except you do, (as very aptly some speak out of Prov. 21.) the whole Action is but mere vanity, tossed on this side and that side, this way and that way, 'twixt the Agent and Defendant: which as we cannot endure here in the Schools, much less ought it to be suffered in Judicature, whose proceeding throughout, aught to be solemn and sacred, and the very Justice of Justice, as it is, Deut. 16.20.  
This subject matter to be judged, or state of the cause, or (if any would rather call it so) the bounder of the controversy, is to be sought out, either in the behalf of the guilty or defendant party, or of the Agent: Not of the Agent, oftentimes he cannot, because oftentimes there is none such, when one is called into question upon presumption, or else upon fame; and when there is, he is almost rapt and transposed, or is driven on, either out of hatred or some other obliqne desire, that he himself is unstated; so that from him in vain is the state of the cause required: Wherefore to the party guilty or defendant is this favour granted, or rather this honour is given, (who is always a person certain, and whom the Law accounts not convicted for guiltless) that he should either by affirming or denying fix to himself the state of the cause; yea, that by his answer only the state of the whole controversy may be settled, and not only the state of the controversy, but (except he be convinced of falsehood by the testimony of two witnesses beyond all exception) an end too of the controversy. But that he may not, if he be lose and free, depart from that state so by him fised, and afterwards not stand to that state, but shall recoil and go back from his purpose; a bond, a bond of the soul (as God gave it the name) he is to enter into, that is, a religious affirmation, by which his soul is as it were bound up with a chain, to speak out the truth holily and sincerely, that is, the truth (not that absolutely, but) as he knows it or believes it; nor must go contrary to his conscience, which we call lying, but even as he were acting with God himself, so must he act with the Magistrate, that is God's Lieutenant, that represents him, and requires right.  
That Israel and the people of God proceeded thus, (that is, swore to make true answer) that practice of Michaeas' (of which I made mention above) and that, which is much apt, that other in that questioning of Elias, 1 Kings 18.10. evince it; where, when they had expressly answered, He is not with us, the King not herewith contented, forced them to an oath, that they had not found him: as if no Law could compel a man, to rest on the answer of a man unsworn. Wherefore as it is altogether fit, that the party guilty or defendant should be bound up, lest he might evade or change the state of the cause, and thereupon one state, and then another follows, and indeed so there will be no place of consistency or settling the cause: So he ought to be bound up, not with his bare naked answer, or (as others would have it) with a pecuniary Mulct, (these are not bonds of the soul, which is the Interpreter of Truth) but with that alone, true and only bond of the soul, that is, by an Oath. And thus at length the whole hinge of the cause being fixed as it ought to be, let us proceed to those Confirmations, as St. Paul calls them.  
Neither is it fitting (as I hear some complain) that the guilty or defendant party should be so bound up, and the Agent altogether free. Nor is our Law so: but as it is not safe for the party agent to be sworn, for the reasons that I have twice named, 
Apot. 12.10.  (and God himself suffers Satan, whom he knows to be a Calumniator, to be also an Accuser) yet the accusation is so to be put into suit or action, and the accuser is so by contract to give security, under the penalty of a certain pecuniary Mulct, or of a certain note of Infamy, under the price of the loss of his time, 
Exod. 11.19.  (as the Law speaks) except he prosecute and prove the suggestion and accusation he hath given in: So it is provided for on both sides; on the one side by the Religion of an Oath, on the other side by a double Mulct, and no simple Infamy; so that the Agent cannot calumniate, nor the party guilty or defendant cannot fly back. Now that first of all the guilty or defendant party should be sworn, and then answer, (which some cannot away withal) it is just and lawful; for if he should do it unsworn, he should do it but in a trifling manner, (that is, being free from the Religion of an Oath) if any clause in the action should more closely press him, he should refuse to answer, should turn himself to and fro, seek shifts, diversions and cautels, should answer nothing explicitly and home; that which in conscience of Religiou he is tied to do, after he has bound himself by oath to do all things holily and clearly, that he had rather be guilty of doing an injury then of Perjury, and would rather subject himself to loss then damnation.  
Shall we take a form hereof from the Law and the holy Writ? none seems to me fit for that purpose, then that questioning of Ezra, in the 9 and 10. Chapters of Ezra, where the parties guilty or defendant answer, but first were sworn: The order and course of which judicial proceeding was this; some of the principal persons come, and relate the matter to Ezra, of Marriages contracted by many (suppose an hundred and ten) with strangers, chap. 9.1. Ezra forces those guilty or defendant parties, even many of them not guilty or complained of, to take an oath, chap. 10.5. he forces them too in a cause, in which they might be convinced by witnesses: but first he forces them. After that, as in the 5. chap. 16. verse, Esdras with the rest, to whom the care of that cause was delegated, sit upon the cause, which the third Month after they bring to effect. Which form being used by Ezra, a ready Scribe, and skilful in the Law of his God, it may answer the desires of any man not unjust, as to the practice of the Law, as they speak) and the knowledge of the rules thereof. And this is the former use of an oath, just and lawful, in the settling of the foundation of a suit or controversy.  
The other is, when arguments are used to make good the snit or controversy begun. Now the arguments, or these Confirmations, to which the Judge gives credit, are partly marks and presumptions, (such as the nature of the cause bears) certain and undoubted, partly in corrupt and sound testimonies.  
Presumptions or marks, such as are brought forth by the Parents in the case of the slandered Virgin, Deut. 22.17. Testimonies, upon whose credit the whole action is confirmed, Deut. 19.15. In the number of which (I say of Testimonies) I place an Oath, and that bounder of controversy, or (as they speak) that decisory oath of controversy, Heb. 6.16. The Hebrews out of the old Canon make two parts, or rather, if you will, two kinds of an Oath.  
The former is a solemn contestation, wherein any call God to witness for want of other witnesses, who either cannot or will not bear witness, even God they call to witness, who is present every where and in all actions, and hath the right of a witness: The Lord Jehova lives, before whom I speak; this is a form of contestation, judges 8.19. The later I may call it an Execration, wherein a man gives oath to his contestation (or joining issue in the cause, as 'tis called) pawning as it were his salvation, and renouncing all the hope and help he hath from God, if he bear witness falsely: So do the Lord to me, and so let him add; there is a form of Execration, 1 Sam. 14 44. Neither have Divines thought it of less concernment, or that the guilty or defendant party was less bound, whether he used either of those forms, or both. I add also, whether the Magistrate contest the guilty or defendant party, or by adjuration he be execrated, or he do it to himself by taking an oath; for 'tis all one whether this or that be done: whether an oath be laid upon the guilty or defendant party by the Judge, or he lay it upon himself. And that they take for granted, as well by Prov. 29.24. in regard of the position, as by judges 17.2. by reason of the condition. But this controversy brings another: I prosecute not that, I prosecute that I begun, touching Arguments.  
Now God hath given power to the Judge to inquire of the Arguments touching the crime, and of citing the Testimonies; as also to the giving of oaths, and that for the collecting the consirmations of the cause. That power is mentioned Deut. 13.14. Thou shalt inquire (saith the Lord) and that in general; whereof he subjoins two kinds, the first, Thou shalt search, that is, presumptions and arguments. The second, Thou shalt ask, that is, witnesses and those that are knowing of the passages concerning that cause.  
The Arguments. So it was lawful for Joseph to search his brethren's sacks, that he might find the Cup taken away by theft, Gen. 44.5. So is it lawful for our Magistrates to search the hidden corners and secretest rooms of the house, so to find out marks or presumptions of suspected crimes.  
Testimonies. So it is provided by God's Law, Leu. 5.1. If a soul hear the voice of swearing (the Chaldee Paraphrast, a most ancient Interpreter of the Law, hath added to it, 
* Here seems to be some mistake in the printed Latin.  nor where we have erred; nor is it to be doubted but that it was according to the sense of the ancient Church, even before Christ's time) made or given by the Judge, and he can be a witness of that matter, as one that saw it and knew it, (in which place the Septuagint turns the word knew it, into being conscious of it) if he that is so conscious of it, shall be called forth to give his testimony; if he reveal it not, he shall bear his own imquity. Therefore 'tis lawful to make inquisition, and upon oath.  
And first of all 'tis lawful to make Inquisition touching the party guilty or defendant, even amongst others, though his Brethren, though they be religious persons; as Obadiah touching Elias, 1 Kings 18.10. There is no Nation or Kingdom whither my Lord hath not sent to seek thee, and when they said, He is not there, he took an oath of the Kingdom and Nation, that they found thee not. And methinks 'tis likely, when this Oath was common to the whole Kingdom, it fell also upon those religious men, whose Knees were not bowed to Baal, nor had their lips kissed him, neither did they in this cause (though it was to the prejudice of their Elias, and that too before wicked Magistrates) refuse to give their testimony. Neither is it only lawful to inquire concerning the guilty or defendant party, amongst others only; but also to inquire of him himself, concerning himself. The great Judge gave us a precedent herein, in that first Inquisition that ever was, Gen. 3.11. Who toldihee that thou wast naked? hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? So the Prince's interrogated Baruch touching Jeremiahs' book, Tell us, how didst thou write all these words at his mouth? So Esdras the very parties guilty or defendants touching their own fact, Esr. 10.11. So the High Priest committed St. Paul to custody, to inquire something of him more perfectly, Acts 23.20. For oftentimes Accusers fall back, (which the Heathen man long since observed:) All cannot, some will not accuse; what's to be done then? Some men's wickedness, because they are truly the works of darkness, nor can be brought to light, Ephes. 5.11. because they join hand in hand, nor will discover themselves, Prov. 16.5. Because the name of Doeg is harsh, and even the very thing, to go forth to accuse, is now become poor and odious, a matter of cost, danger and infamy, Prov. 25.8. And shall we suffer wickedness to lie hid and spread abroad, and by delay to gather strength, till at length it break out to the ruin of the Commonwealth? and because no man can or will (for it is all one, whether he will not or cannot accuse) is't not lawful to inquire? surely 'tis lawful. But 'tis in vain to inquire without the bond of an Oath. The Holy Ghost in the old Testament expresses it by the word adjure, and so the King adjured Micheas. In the New Testament also by the word adjure, so the High Priest adjured our Saviour, Mat. 26.63. and they both made Religion of not answering to the Question. Touching the Hebrew word there is no question, but that both by the force of the name, and the use of it, it imports an Oath. I add, nor is there of the Greek word neither, if Beza and the rest of the Translators, render right that request of the Devil, which is in Mat. 5.7. I adjure thee that thou torment me not: that is, assure me by giving me an Oath or swearing to me, that thou wilt not torment me. So seems it to them: but that term of Adjuring I pass by. I take the other (if it be another) of laying an Oath upon the party guilty or defendant; that is, that by Law it is permitted to the party agent to force him against his will to take an oath, Exod. 22.8. 1 Kings 8.31. and therefore 'tis more than permitted to the Magistrate. Surely very bad were the case of our affairs, if every private man should have power to require an oath of the party guilty or defendant, and the Magistrate should not have power: if in the case of a Pawn it should be lawful, and not of a Kingdom: if one may be forced to swear, that he hath not put his hand to his neighbour's goods, and cannot be forced to his oath, that he hath not put forth his hand to the peace of the Commonwealth. If, as to the Law, his case be better that makes troubles in the Church of God, than his that has done it about his friend's money. Compare these one with another: First, the Magistrate, than the party agent, one perhaps of the meanest of the common people; then the case of a man's small sum of money, and the case of the Commonwealth further; that Pawn sometimes may somewhere be discovered, but those clandestine conspiracies cannot (unless you grant such Inquisition) for that's vanished into the air, left no impression behind it. Either I am very much mistaken, or (whether you consider the persons or the matter, or the moments, or the events of the things) the equity and necessity of an oath is here greater. Therefore that the party guilty or defendant should be so interrogated in his own cause, 'tis allowed by God's Law: and that also by the laying on an oath is lawful. And this last use of an oath is just and lawful, not only that the state of the question may be settled by the answer of the party guilty or defendant, (as before is laid down) but also that the confirmations of the cause, that is, the pillars of the proofs may be gathered together, whereupon the Judge may rely to determine the suit on one side.  
This may suffice for this purpose, unless that, as I believe, there rest one knot or another, not worthy the losing: but that (as the world goes now-a-adayes) every scruple that men make, becomes a rock; they complain, that by these means men are compelled to an infinite oath, except before hand they may have the Question, and afterwards take the Oath. The reason hereof I have given before, and therefore will not here repeat it: This only I maintain, that the usual oath given cannot be declined by reason of Infinity. For whilst those bounds, and as it were ends of an oath, the Prophet Jeremiah speaks of, Jer. 4.2. (which always in Divinity were accounted the bounds, and as it were the ends of an oath) in truth, justice and judgement: whilst these were observed there was caution enough had: nor other ends doth the Scripture acknowledge or require.  
1. In Truth: that is, truly. That no man be compelled to swear contrary to that he knows; as it was charged upon Micheas, 1 Kings 12.16. Tell me nothing but truth in the name of the Lord. Or if any man like better that Attestation of St. Paul, Rom. 9.1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the holy Ghost. This is enough for the first part.  
2. In Justice: that is, justly. That nothing be sworn but what is possible: in which case Abraham's servant took care, Gen. 24.5. Perhaps the woman will not be willing to follow me, etc. The Heathen themselves too had that caution, So far as I know and am able. And also to the honesty of it; wherein they in Ezra 10.3. made provision, that is, According to the Law. St. Paul also, Acts 23.3. Commandest thou me to be smitten contrary to the Law? This is sufficient for the second part.  
3. In Judgement: that is, maturely not rashly; (for so do the Interpreters distinguish it.) Of which, says Solomon, Eccl. 5.1. whilst thou art speaking to God, Be not rash with thy mouth; but taking due time to deliberate thereupon, answer. These are the ends of an oath, which the Scripture acknowledges; nor do they require more, as it is defined, if these three ends be kept: 1. I will speak nothing but truth in the name of the Lord: 2. Of such things I know and as far as I am able, and according to Law: 3. Taking so much time to think on't, that there can be no danger from an infinity or endlessness. Though every petty question is not clear, (which often happens from the occasion) 'twill be safe enough to contain within these bounds; not to answer any thing falsely or rashly, nor to answer concerning such things which he remembers not, or is not bound by Law to it: that is, he will do that, which without an oath he is bound to do. And he that desires to be more safe than thus, in my judgement rather desires to arrogate an infinite liberty, then to decline an infinite oath; or he is guilty, or something else that I will not speak of.  
And now, whilst thou art taking care how to avoid a sin by swearing, I think it matters not much, whether before hand thou promisest by a promissory oath to speak truth, or afterwards thou swearest by an assertory oath, that that which thou hast spoken is true: It comes to the same pass before answer, by promissory oath to promise to deal truly, or after answer by an assertory oath to attest, that thou hast dealt truly: I have said, and I will say; I have done, and I will do: there are two times, but the Oath is the same. Wherefore as to the matter I think it matters not much, yet thus far it may, that it much conduces to the managing of suits at Law, both that they may be clear and explicit, as also readily dispatched. That they may be clear and explicit, lest (if the party guilty or defendant, being not tied by the bond of an Oath, may seem to be at liberty to prevaricate) the whole controverted action may float up and down, and have neither foundation nor hinge. That they may be readily dispatched, lest (in case the party guilty having answered, will not swear to the truth of his answer) the Judge should be compelled often to iterate the questions, and act the same thing over and over. It is also considerable too, because in that form of judgement, which is most agreeable to God's Law, 
Ez●a 10.5.  and suitable to this Law of ours which is called into question, this order is observed; first of the oath, and then of the question; and th●… at their request concerning whom the question is made. For whereas for the dispatching of controversies, God's Law has made accurate provision; nor in Scripture is there no sooner made mention of judgement to be given, 
Exod. 8.14.  then that it should be done speedily, lest if it be long in doing it become ●our. Rightly did they require, Ezra 10.13. that he might not be necessitated upon the judgment-seat, to give answer to all questions: It was tedious, not the work of one day; therefore after he had in a solemn place given them the oath, they might come afterwards at leisure, at times appointed, and enquiry might be made into the several circumstances of the fact, by virtue of the oath before taken. The same practice is used now by us, and the same custom prevails; which, whether you look upon the advice, is most just; or the Ordinance, it is most like the Divine Law. For if the Questions must go before the Oath, (so that it should be unlawful for any to take an oath but in open Court) surely one day would scarce suffice for one cause, and the people (contrary to Jethroes advice) should stand in judgement from morning to the evening.  
That last is, which some (doubtless for want of understanding) would have the Oath so given them; that after they had taken the Oath, there should be no farther enquiry: And this they hold, grounding themselves upon that sentence of St. Paul, An Oath is the end of all strife. 
Heb. 6.16.  I stand not upon it that it may be so interpreted, that the original Greek word there peràs, rather is the State of the Controversy than the End of it: But be it so, the end; let the Oath be the end, but not every Oath, or by whomsoever taken, or howsoever performed (this can scarcely be thought to proceed from a man in his right wits) but I hope it must be such an Oath, of the credit whereof there may be no contradiction: in case the Contradiction ought to be ended by that Oath. Wherefore if the Judge must end the Suit or Controversy without contradiction, it must be so clear, that no man even without Examination, or after Examination, will or can contradict it. For to desire to free every Oath of every man from all Inquisition, what is it but to plead for perjury? What else is it, but as it were upon warning given, so by this kind of Authority given; to solicit men of lose Consciences to commit this wickedness? For whether the Actor, or Defendant, or Witness take it, the Oath is of the same Conscience, of the same face, there's an end: if one will swear that what he sues for, or complains of is his, is true, presently he carries the Cause: But afterwards, it must be unlawful to inquire whether he hath sworn true or no, Because an Oath is the end of all Controversy. If this be granted, it makes well for perjured men. Let them make their peace with God as well as they can; from the Law they need fear nothing, nor shall be punished by the ear for what they sinned by their mouth. How juster is that? Yea truly if the Oath be sound, let the Inquisition thereupon be twice, or thrice, or seven times, if it be thought fit, it will always as out of a furnace come forth more clear and pure, and the very Inqusition itself, will become an acquisition of more credit. But if the Oath be not of good, but doubtful credit or suspected: Let it be inquired into, and let Justice break unjust bonds. Surely this is reason, and is it only reason? Doth not the Law say the same? Whether one contend by oath, either in his own cause for himself, or in another's against another for himself. For himself: The woman of suspected chastity, when she had upon her oath denied the adultery, laying a most heavy curse upon herself if she were guilty; was she thereupon presently dismissed? (for an Oath is the end of all controversy:) No, a new question was made, whether she had sworn truly or no? for proof whereof she was to drink the Bitter waters, which would be the confirmers of the Oath if true, and the revengers if false, Num. 5.24.  
Against another: When the Law had provided, that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses, who being sworn had given testimony against a man, the matter should be established, Deut. 19.15. Lest any man should take humane testimonies for Divine Oracles, in the next Verse 'tis commanded, that the suspected witness must stand before the Lord, the Priests, and it must be enquired into whether he hath carried himself sincerely and truly in the testimony he hath given; but if he be convicted of falsity, then shall he be punished as he should have been whom he complained of. But I shall transgress upon the time, and upon the Church too, (the Clock having a while ago called us off) if I should further follow these trifles, which whoever list may bray with arguments, they of their own accord so overflow: therefore I restore you to yourselves and conclude. If (as the Prophet saith) 
Isa. 28.17.  this Judgement, which we use, be laid to the Line, and Righteousness to the Plummet of God's Word, there shall be in those things no sin. For the Magistrate to require, and that from the party guilty or defendant, (especially if the cause be not capital, or a cause of Blood) an Oath; and that he may do it so far, whether it be that the controversy may thereby be set upon its foundation, whilst the state of the cause is sought for: or that the truth of the proofs may be made evident, whilst the question is handled. Nor does the ends of the Oath, or the order, or the examination, offend against Divinity, and therefore cannot be declined. They that decline it, first they do it out of ignorance of God's Law: then the example is dangerous, that one may thus for his pleasure inquire into public judgements without judgement: if we may call into question the rest of the affairs of the Kingdom, and the moments of the Commonwealth: lastly the Law itself if it make not for us. That God Almighty may avert this from us, to whom turning ourselves let us pray, that he will give us grace to be modestly wise and sober in all things, to see in our minds how irreligious it is, how unchristian to decline the judgements of our Nation: but rather with all our endeavour, with all the strength and force of our Wit to maintain them, which maintain the Commonwealth and us all; for next after God and his service most true is that saying of Elihu, 
Job 36.17  Judgement and Justice maintain all things.   
Upon the consideration most especially of what hath been written by Dr. Cousins, in that Apology touching the Oath Ex officio, and Purgation, and what is said in that short Manuscript, and in the Lord Bishop Andrews Determination thereupon, and of the inconveniences and hurt that probably may be feared to ensue upon the prohibiting that Oath and Purgation, together with the practice still at Common Law in the like cases, and the rest that is here set forth; as it is hoped that Act may be thought fit to be revised and reexamined, and perhaps altered: so with the like humility, all that is said or shall be said in this Treatise, is most submisly tendered to His Sacred Majesty, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in this happy Parliament now assembled, to be weighed by them, if so to their Wisdoms it shall be thought fit; otherwise to be as unsaid and retracted, as is every thing there, if it be dissonant to God's Word, His Majesty's Prerogative, the Laws of Church or State, or the known Laws of the Land, or the just policy and government in Church or State, or against Christian charity or brotherly love.  
Should any man object, That some Civilians desired that this Act, whereby the Oath Ex officio and Purgation is forbidden, should pass at the end of the recess of Parliament, the latter end of this last Summer, 1661. when many other Acts of great concernment were in agitation, and some then passed, and some stayed, supposed that they will be resumed and considered of at the next meeting of Parliament: that, I say, this Act should not stay (as some would have had it) till that next meeting, but rather pass now, though with these Provisoes on it. I can say no more than this, that Certa incertis praferenda; if they could not have all they would have, yet to have something, that in a manner wanted all, was but reasonable prudence: it had perhaps savoured of morosity to have done otherwise, especially considering that those that have long fasted would be glad to eat; though, I hope, these that administered this food to them, did not fear they would (as hungry men use to do) feed too fast, to their hurt, not to their nourishment, and therefore did set the less meat before them; but upon a pause after this refreshment there may be a supply: Neither need (I humbly conceive) any thing that is already done, hinder the review or alteration of this Act in that point. For it is no new thing nor discommendable, (but contrary) to make Laws upon present reasons or emergencies, and yet upon future accidents or contingencies, and variation of the times and occasions, and other necessary requisites, which could not well be foreseen at the making of these Laws, nor perhaps dreamt on till they happened; to alter, change or repeal the former. Hereof many instances might be given, but in so plain a case I shall mention but one, and that in a matter of Ecclesiastical cognisance, touching Precontracts of Matrimony, in 32 H. 8. c. 38.  

32 H. 8. cap. 38. What Marriages are lawful, and what not.  
WHereas heretofore the usurped power of the Bishop of Rome, hath always entangled and troubled the mere jurisdiction and regal power of this Realm of England, and also unquieted much the subjects of the same, by his usurped power in them, as by making that unlawful which by God's word is lawful, both in marriages, and other things, as hereafter shall appear more at length, and till now of late in our Soberaign Lords time, which is otherwise by learning taught then his predecessors in times past long time have been, hath so continued the same, whereof yet some sparks he left, which hereafter might kindle a greater fire, and so remaining his power not to seem utterly extinct.  
Therefore it is thought most convenient to the King's Highness, his Lords spiritual and temporal, with the Commons of this Realm assembled in this present Parliament, that two things specially for this time be with diligence provided for, whereby many inconveniences have ensued, and many more else might ensue and follow: as where heretofore divers and many persons, after long continuance together in Matrimony, without any allegation of either of the parties, or any other at their marriage, why the same matrimony should not be good, just and lawful, and after the same Matrimony solemnised, and consummate by carnal knowledge, and also sometime fruit of children ensued of the same Marriage, upon pretence of a former contract made, and not consummate by carnal copulation, (for proof whereof two witnesses by that Law were only required) been divorced and separate, contrary to God's Law, and so the true Matrimony, both solemnised in the face of the Church, and consummate with bodily knowledge, and confirmed also with the fruit of children had between them, clearly frustrate and dissolved: Further also, by reason of other prohibitions than God's Law admitteth, for their lucre by that Court invented, the dispensations whereof they always reserved to themselves, as in kindred or affinity between Cousin-germen, and so to the fourth and fourth degree, carnal knowledge of any of the same kin or affinity before in such outward degrees, which else were lawful, and be not prohibited by God's Law, and all because they would get money by it, and keep a reputation of their usurped jurisdiction, whereby not only much discord between lawful married persons hath (contrary to God's Ordinance) arisen, much debate and suit at the Law, with wrongful vexation, and great damage of the innocent party hath been procured, and many just marriages brought in doubt and danger of undoing, and also many times undone, and lawful heirs disherited, whereof there had never else, but for his vainglorious usurpation, been moved any such question, since freedom in them was given by God's Law, which ought to be most sure and certain. But that notwithstanding Marriages have been brought into such an uncertainty thereby, that no Marriage could be surely knit and bounden; but it should lie in either of the party's power and arbiter, casting away the fear of God, by means and compasses to prove a precontract, a kindred and alliance, or a carnal knowledge, to defeat the same, and so under the pretence of these allegations afore rehearsed, to live all the days of their life in detestable Adultery, to the utter destruction of their own souls, and the provocation of the terrible wrath of God, upon the places where such abominations were used and suffered. Be it therefore enacted by the King our Sovereign Lord, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That from the first day of the Month of July next coming, in the year of our Lord God, 1540 all and every such Marriages, as within this Church of England shall be contracted between lawful persons, (as by this Act we declare all persons to be lawful, that be not prohibited by God's Law to marry) such being Marriages contracted and solemnised in the face of the Church, and consummate with bodily knowledge, or fruit of children, or child being had therein between the parties so married, shall be by authority of this present Parliament aforesaid, deemed, judged, and taken to be lawful, good, just and indissoluble, notwithstanding any Precontract or Precontracts, of Matrimony not consummate with bodily knowledge, which either of the parties so married, or both shall have made with any other person or persons, before the time of contracting that marriage, which is solemnised and consummate, or whereof such fruit is ensued or may ensue as afore, and notwithstanding any Dispensation, Prescription, Law, or other thing granted or confirmed by Act or otherwise. And that no reservation or prohibition, God's Law except, shall trouble or impeach any marriage without the Levitical degrees. And that no person of with estate, degree or condition he or she be, shall after the said first day of the Month of July aforesaid, be admitted to any of the Spiritual Courts within this the King's Realm, or any his Graces other Lands and Dominions, to any process, plea or allegation, contrary to this foresaid Act. Rep. 1 & 2 P. & M. 8. Rep. 1 El. 1.   
This Act was not many years after repealed, as followeth,  

2 & 3 Ed. 6. cap. 23. Part of the Statute of Precontracts repealed.  
Whereas in the two and thirtieth year of the reign of the late King of famous memory, King Henry the eighth, because that many inconveniences had chanced in this Realm, by breaking and dissolving good and lawful marriages, yea, whereupon also sometime issue and children had followed, under the colour and pretence of a former contract made with another, the which contract divers times was but very slenderly proved, and often but surmised by the malice of the party who desired to be dissolved from the marriage which they liked not, and to be coupled with another: there was an Act made, that all and every such marriages, as within the Church of England should be contrcted and solemnised in the face of the Church, and consummate with bodily knowledge, or fruit of children or child, being had between the parties so married, should be by authority of the said Parliament deemed, judged, and taken to be lawful, good, just, and indissoluble, notwithstanding any precontract or precontracts of Matrimony, not consummate with bodily knowledge, which either of the persons so married or both, had made with any other person or persons, before the time of contracting that marriage which is solemnised or consummated, or whereof such fruit is ensued or may ensue, as by the same Act more plainly appear: Since the time of the which Act, although the same was godly meant, the unruliness of men hath ungodly abused the same, and divers inconveniences (intolerable in manner to Christian ears and eyes) followed thereupon, women and men breaking their own promises and faiths made by the one unto the other, so set upon sensuality and pleasure, that if after the contract of Matrimony, they might have whom they more favoured and desired, they could be contented by lightness of their nature, to overturn all that they had done afore, and not afraid in manner, even from the very Church door and Matriage feast, the man to take another spouse, and the espouse to take another husband, more for bodily lust and carnal knowledge, then for surety of faith and truth, or having God in their good remembrance, contemning many times also the commandment of the Ecclesiastical judge, forbidding the parties having made the contract, to attempt or do any thing in prejudice of the same.  
Be it therefore enacted by the King's Highness, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, that as concerning Precontracts, the said former Statute shall from the first day of May next coming, cease, be repealed, and of no force or effect, and be reduced to the estate and order of the King's Ecclesiastical Laws of this Realm, which immediately before the making of the said statute, in this case were used in this Realm: so that from the said first day of May, when any cause or contract of marriage is pretended to have been made, it shall be lawful to the King's Ecclesiastical judge of that place, to hear and examine the said cause: and (having the said contract sufficiently and lawfully proved before him) to give sentence for Matrimony, commanding solemnisation, cohabitation, consummation and tractation, as it becometh man and wife to have, with inflicting all such pains upon the disobedients and disturbers thereof, as in times passed before the said Statute, the King's Ecclesiastical judge, by the King's Ecclesiastical Laws, aught and might have done, if the said Statute had never been made: any clause, article or sentence in the said Statute to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding.  
Provided always and be it enacted, that this Act do not extend to disannul, dissolve or break any marriage that hath or shall be solemnizated and consummated, before the said first day of May next ensuing, by title or colour of any Precontract, but that they be, and be deemed of like force and effect, to all intents, constructions and purposes, as if this Act had never been had ne made: any thing in this present Act notwithstanding.  
Provided also that this Act do not extend to make good any of the other causes, so the dissolution or disannulling of Matrimony, which he in the said Act spoken of and disannulled. But that in all other causes and other things there mentioned, the said former Act of the two and thirtieth year of the late King of famous memory, do stand and remain in his full strength and power, any thing in this Act notwithstanding. Stat. 1 Eliz. 1.   
By these the inconveniency appeareth, of taking away or altering an ancient long-settled Law, practised long in all Christian Countries, as this was; which had it not been good, probably the inconveniency and hurt of it had appeared in so long a time; and the Law for the Oath Ex officio and Purgation is of like antiquity and practice in all Christian Countries, without inconvenience or hurt thereby arising as yet, that I ever could hear of; therefore such Laws ought to be deeply weighed and considered of, before they be repealed or altered.  
And now that I am speaking of repealing and altering old Laws, and making new, I thought fit to close this Tract with some Notes of mine, drawn up almost all of them in the time of the usurped Government, and some after His Majesty's restauration, and communicated to the sight of some of Quality, touching the repealing or altering of some old Laws, and making new. Some are already past and effected, as that for the Lords the Bishops sitting again in the Lord's House in Parliament, and other things. These I offer with all humility to be considered of, if it shall by those in Authority be thought fit, otherwise to be as unsaid: Protesting that I retract, as before, any thing which is here mentioned, that shall appear contrary to God's Word, His Majesty's Prerogative, or the Laws of the Land, or the just policy and government of any of His Majesty's Dominions.   



Touching Parliaments.  

Parliament proceed.  AS a Parliament well constituted and acting regularly, conduces much to the happiness of King and Subject: so any exorbitancy or deviation therein (of which surely all  men cannot but confess we have had too much sad experience in the Long Parliament) works the contrary: corruptio optimi pessima.  
In the time of the Long Parliament some, as it were, idolised it, even almost to an opinion even of Infallibility, of which they have made too much advantage to the misery of King and People.  
Some advised then, that that great Wheel, that great Court should have had its sphere of activity, it's known certain bounds publicly declared, and not have been like a great River prodigiously overflowing all its banks and bounds.  
Such a Parliament acting regularly, is't not probable the Members thereof would not so much have thirsted to lengthen, much less to perpetuate it?  
They were called up to consult; may not he that calls his Counsellor forbear consulting him when he pleases, and dismiss him?  

Ordinance of Parliament.  The extent of an Ordinance of Parliament, having by some been tentored then, even almost to Infinity, might it not have been precisely circumscribed, and the exact definition of an Ordinance given?  

Privileges of Parliament.  As also the just privileges of Parliament explicitly have been made known, that the Subject might not then have sworn, or promised, or protested, to have maintained and observed them, and yet could not possibly know what they were.  
That due care should have been taken, that they might have been observed and kept inviolable on all sides, neither diminished nor screwed too high, and both the Members of the Houses and the People to have had their just rights entire: and for this purpose that that Protestation then put in by the 
The Bishop's Protestation.  Lords Spiritual the Bishops, with their Petition to have the force removed that kept them from the Lords House, should have been well considered on, and the right of Protestation in Parliament declared and maintained, being a great privilege. And whether after a just Protestation unjustly rejected, and the Members kept out of the House, by force, that so protested and petitioned, whether the other Members could then have proceeded further in the House?  
In the late King's time, in the beginning of his Reign, when the Earl of Arundel was imprisoned in the Tower, about his son's marriage of the Duke of Lenox's daughter, being of the Blood Royal, without the King's consent; the Lords would do nothing in their House till he was restored, in regard he was committed only for a misdemeanour, and neither for Treason, Felony, nor breach of peace, in which cases they then confessed, a Member of Parliament in Parliament time might be kept prisoner. 
The King none of the three Estates.  And the Lords Spiritual being one of the three Estates, as 1 Eliz. 3. and elsewhere, and the King being none of the three Estates, (the contrary whereof hath been falsely held) but the Head, and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons, being but Members; and further, the Lords Spiritual being one of the greatest Estates of the Realm, as 8 Eliz. 1. Some doubted whether one of the Estates can destroy another, and whether that come not near the contradicting that Axiom, that the Parliament cannot be Felo de se: whether that concerns not the Lords Temporal and Commons, as well as the Lords Spiritual? As for His late Majesty's assent, 'tis known how far the prevalent power in both Houses then carried that, and other things too, to the misery of the Kingdom: Who knows not in what condition the King then was? forced to fly by reason of the tumults from Westminster to remoter places.  
And as touching that Act of Parliament for their expulsion out of the Lords House, it is not to be forgotten, that when it was first brought into the Lord's House it was rejected, and ought not to have been brought in again that Session; yet afterwards it was contrary to the order and course of Parliament, brought in again when a great part of the Lords were absent, if not upon just fears frighted out of the House; and it being scarce safe for the King to deny them any thing, in that dangerous condition he was then in. As also that such Concessions or Acts as then, contrary to the King's free will, were wrested from the King, were not to be accounted legal, or good, or valid; whereof several instances may be given heretofore of such, and amongst the rest one 15 E. 3. the King then yielded to and granted certain Articles, pretended at least to have the form of an Act or Statute of Parliament, expressly contrary to the Laws of the Realm, and his own Prerogative, to which he had assented to eschew the dangers, which by denying the same were like to follow: in the same Parliament it was repealed in these very words following; It seemed good to the said Earls, Barons, and other wise men, that since the Statute did not proceed of our good will, the same be void, and ought not to have the name or strength of a Statute, and therefore by their counsel and assent we have decreed the said Statute to be void, etc. And perhaps it deserves to be thought of, how far in this case that Act of 42 E. 3. c. 1. reaches, where it is set down, that the great Charter should be kept in all points, and if any Statute be made to the contrary, it shall be holden for none. And one especial Law in that Charter is, for the preservation of the rights and liberties of the Church, whereof this of the Lords Spiritual, their liberty of sitting and voting in the Lord's House, is a known special liberty and privilege, and most ancient.  

Proceed of the House of Commons.  If we look back to the Long Parliament, was it not fit that that House of Commons should have been justly regulated to act no further or otherwise, then according to their just power, and the Commission and Summons by which they were called? which Commission or Writ of Summons is the foundation of all power in Parliaments, as it is well expressed by the Lords and Commons assembled at Oxford, Declaration of the Treaty, p. 15. What fearful exorbitances have been that way, the more sad it is to remember, the more care ought to be taken to prevent it for the future. The House of Commons in former times being desired by the Lords Honse to consult with them de arduis regni negotiis, to which the Lords are called, and the House of Commons remembering their call and commission, ad consentiendū hiis quae tunc & ibidem, etc. as in their Writ of Summons, humbly referred it back to the Lords as matters too high for them. And it may seem against the honour and gravity of Parliaments, or either House, as also to the grievance of the Subject, for both or either House, or the Committees of either of them, as in the Long Parliament, to trouble themselves with matters of very small or inferior nature, much below them, and in cases where the Law hath sufficiently provided remedy, and is still in force to be executed by the proper Judges. Were it in making new Laws thereabouts, that aught to be so: but I mean in making orders about the execution of such Laws, which properly belong to the ordinary Judges thereof, and are usnally executed by them, especially touching inferior matters, it looked then in that Long Parliament, as though they would have swallowed up all other courts, and made a kind of Justitium in them, during the time of their Session; such as meddling with the appointing of Churchwardens, and such like petty matters. The late Long Parliament deviated much, especially the pretended House of Commons, then to omit, as being too notoriously deplorable, the Iliads of miseries this poor Nation hath thereby undergone, besides that horrid one of the murder of our late King, of ever blessed memory, King Charles the first, acted by a pretended House of Commons. Was not that then too frequently practised worthy then of reformation? that is, the judiciary power being in the Lord's House, and the Commons House having power only over their own Members in some cases, and not having power so much as to give an Oath; yet how often did they then upon small matters, unworthy of their cognisance, in regard they might have been so easily remedied by the known ordinary Laws of the Land, and the ordinary competent Judges thereof, call orthodox, conformable and worthy Ministers, to appear before them from very distant remote places, sometimes near upon 200. miles, for setting a rail about the Communion Table, according to the command of the Ordinary; or matters of such inferior nature: these brought on and fomented by Inconformists then, to the great mischief to this Nation, too too much favoured, promoted and prosecuted by the then prevailing power. The Fees and charges were then very high, insomuch as some Ministers were almost, if not altogether, undone, before they could get up thither; and when they came, by reason of multiplicity of business in the Commons House, they stayed there long and upon great charge, paying high Fees still to the Sergeant or other Officers of the House, whilst they lay under restraint, which oftentimes was very long. When a charge after long delay was given in, than they gave their answer, after a long stay too: Then a Committee of many Members was appointed to examine witnesses, which was done without oath; then after a long time the cause was reported, many of these Members not having heard the whole cause, but some one part, some another; yet often concurring at the voting and reporting the cause to the House of Commons: which was a strange kind of proceeding, to call it no worse. In the Star-chamber and High-commission none used to give sentence but such as heard all the cause, and they usually excused themselves when they had not heard all the cause. Now, when the House of Commods had proceeded thus far upon the matter, yet they had done little or nothing, but vexed and undone a poor and perhaps guiltless Minister: for they were to transmit the cause to the Lords House, and there to begin it de novo, examine the witnesses again upon oath, which, as before, the other House could not do. And here 'tis to be considered, whether or no it were not anceps perjurium, a dangerous temptation to witnesses, that perhaps have spoken too largely being unsworn, will, if but for fear of loss of Reputation, confirm upon Oath what they have said without Oath. It is to be feared also, some poor men foreseeing this unevitable course of undoing them, have either wronged their own cause, and betrayed their innocence, by confessing themselves guilty; or, ad redimendam vexationem, compounded with their prosecutors, even to their own undoing, or well nigh. If there had been cause, and that it could not properly in an ordinary way have been remedied by the proper competent ordinary Judges; why should not the cause have been begun, heard and determined in the Lord's House at first?  
Can the Houses, especially the Commons House, then have been brought into such due order, as not to act extra spheram activitatis suae, 'tis well to be hoped they would not, as above, have been desirous to lengthen or perpetuate that Parliament, when they can, as by right, repeal no old, nor make no new Law, nor tax the Subjects estate, nor make Ordinances to have the force of Laws, without His Majesty's assent. King Henry the Eighth suffered the Houses of Parliament in Ireland, for a matter of two years or thereabouts, to continue petitioning him to dissolve them and dismiss them home, which he would not do till he saw cause. Though this is not in his commendation, yet hereby the just power of the King appeared, and the right of his Prerogative, which hath been too long and too much trampled upon. And surely the Law in this point is the same in Englaud as in Ireland, that the just bounds and limits on all sides might be preserved inviolate.   

Touching the Age of Parliament-men.  

Age of Parliament-men.  In the Lord's House none sit there under 21. years of age, and some wish none might under 30. though there they are singly for themselves, and represent not others, as in the House of Commons. But in the House of Commons there hath been sometimes, as was in the Long Parliament, Members about 16. or 17. years of age, if not some of them under, and their Suffrages and Votes were of as much force as the eldest, most experienced in the House. And it hath been the observation of some experienced and wise Parliament-men, that oftentimes in that House those that had the shortest wings were the highest flyers, and such as these could add number, and so consequently weight, to a side.  
The inconvenience and hurt that arose from hence is easily demonstrable, and hath too much appeared by frequent experience.  
Some have wished that there should have been no Member of the Commons House, under the age of 30. years, there being so large a field whereout to choose Parliament-men for every place, and it being even as it were ex diametro contrary to the nature and denomination of a Parliament, which is but a great Senate, so called à Senioribus, the constituting Members thereof.   

Touching the Election of Parliament-men.  

Election of Parliament-men.  Some have advised that it should be clearly free, without such ambient means as were used in the Long Parliament by some Factions: and whereas every man may give his suffrage for Counties, that hath 40 s. per annum, and in Cities and Corporations without such a value, that being the old custom. And that which was 40 s. per annum in former Ages, is worth now ten times as much well nigh, if not more: So consequently the Electors should be of better estate.  

The great number of Burroughs & Corporations.  There being such a vast disproportion betwixt the Cities, (always excepting London) and Corporations, Burroughs especially, and the Counties wherein that Burrow and Corporation is situate for number of Inhabitants, which heightens the concernment. In some Counties there being so many Corporations, that the County having but two Parliament-men to represent them, be the County never so great; yet every petty Corporation (whereof in many Counties, especially in the West, there are very many such) hath as many to represent it, of equal power in the Commons House, with any other Member of County or City. So that the Parliament-men serving for Cities and Burroughs, are in number by many degrees far much more than for Counties, which hath been conceived to have been no small cause of our late troubles.  
Some advised for that reason, and for other reasons too well known, notorious, and obvious to every indifferent eye; that the number of these Burroughs should be much lessened, or at leastwise that power of Electing Parliament-Members: Especially so many of these Corporations, Cities and Burroughs, having in these late troubles so clearly forfeited their Charters.   

Touching the manner of proceeding in Parliament, in the Commons House in the Long-Parliament.  
It hath been ordinarily observed as is touched above, that in Committees in that Long-Parliament, some have given their Suffrage or Vote Negatively or Affirmatively, upon the cause when it was to be reported; though they have not heard the whole cause, and sometimes but a small part of it.  
Great numerous bodies being sometimes too ready to divide into parties and factions, as hath been seen too often in that Long-Parliament, and so consequently endeavouring to heighten their own side; have taken hold of, and created all occasions and advantages that might further it. Oftentimes the Younger tiring and wearying out the Elder, or more incurious Members by long Speeches, and continuing the sitting of the House long and late in the night, till it was grown thin, and by the departure out of it, of so many of the more Aged and less sedulous Members, that the remaining party, according to the destined and strongly preoperated design, grew prevalent.  
To instance no more (and happy had it been for these miserable Kingdoms, that it never could have been instanced) that fatal great Declaration, or as the late blessed King and Martyr called it, the Appeal to the People, hammered out that way, by wearying out so many of the Members, by sitting so long, even all or the greatest part of the night, may witness this to all posterity: Which gave occasion to some to call it a Nocturnal Parliament, but very appositely did Sir Benjamin Rudyard, one of those ancient Members that was so wearied out, when one asked him what he thought of that Vote so carried for that Declaration, so late in the night, or rather in the next morning? answered, that it looked like the verdict of a starved Jury.  
Many other indirect ways (to call them no worse) were used by interessed parties in that Long Parliament, to compass their ends, much by surprises, when too many Members, either wearied out, as before; or else gone out, ither upon their pleasure or private concernments; or thereupon absenting themselves from the House, than the House being thin'd according to their desires, they easily gained the major part of the suffrages, or else clapped in early into the House, whilst the negligent party were in bed, or absent upon their private business, neglecting the public to which they were called; and so carried it, and by such like ways contrived and effected their laboured ends, perhaps by their engines so laid, to draw away many, whose company they would gladly have been rid of, out of the House, and to keep them out when so absent, or to hinder them from coming in at all. Such may not improperly be called Parliament Decoys, or rather, as in that Long Parliament, when some of the Members impeached eleven of their number, upon one of them in the charge against him they fixed the stigma of the Parliament-driver, and when it made for them, imputed it to him for a crime.  
It would be voluminous to reckon up the several species of the sinister artifices and gins, which were then dexterously used in that Long Parliament, to promote unrighteous ends; very often by tumults, which were at the best of some factious persons, by clamours and menaces, as it were, to force away such Members as they knew would oppose their designs. By Petitions too, which were but a kind of Tumults too in another dress, and most shamefully carried on and gained many times; whether we consider the inconsiderableness of the Petitioners, Oyster-women, Barbers, Schoolboys, (as in some Petitions against Bishops) if not others, as much if not more contemptible: or whether we consider the number of the Petitioners, many subscribing them that knew nothing of the contents of the Petition, if not sometimes giving power, with a strange implicit faith, to cerrain men of their Faction, to set to their hands to what Petitions soever their party should frame; the Petitions perhaps framed in London, and never sent into the Country, but thousands of hands sent up in Schedules, to be put to whatsoever the framers should please; if not also, which is much the same, some Petitions sent up out of far distant remote parts from London, with very many hands subscribed, and the Petitions after they were come up to London altered, and yet the same hands continued or set to it: Insomuch as in the time of that Long Parliament it was at lest once observed, that some Petitions, or a Petition, with some thousands of hands subscribed, and coming from some parts remote from London, and brought into the House of Commons, and there read in the morning, took notice, being mentioned in the body of the Petition, of some passages of words spoken in the House the foregoing evening: whereupon one merrily asked, What notable Mercury had that last night gone from London into those remote parts, and got so many hands in a night's time, and brought them back thither that morning? This did almost put some to the blush, if that had been possible; happy could it have suffundere sanguinem, ruborem; the want whereof did effundere sanguinem, cruorem: So common was this stratagem of Petitioning grown, that it gave occasion to some Satirist, to passed up that Distich upon one of the Back-doors leading to the Lords House, viz. 
Bellua multorum capitum, ●…pulus suit olim,  
At nunc multarum bellua fit manuum.   
It was long before the Romans would publish a Law against Parricide, and such unnatural and horrid crimes, and the Historian gives the reason, Ne dum prohibent, jubent; and haply that reason may well forbid me and others from too much enumerating the unjust subtleties and deceitful ways of this kind; and rather were it to be wished, that if possible they were buried in perpetual oblivion, and no Topics were left of them, except as Landmarks to avoid and detest them: For which ends, to good purpose perhaps it might be time well spent, to ruminate upon the Journals of the Long Parliament, with their Declarations, Ordinances and Remonstrances, and His Majesty's Declarations answering and confuting them, especially that of Aug. 12. 1642.  
For reformation of such obliquities, of tireing out the Members, and surprising of them in a thin House, (for as to that way of Petitions and Tumults, 'tis to be hoped it will not be attempted again.) Some wished this might have been remedied, if thought fit, by fixing a competent time for so many hours of the day to sit in, not to be exceeded but by consent of the major part of the Houses, to be constituted as hereafter followeth.  

A competent number of Parliament-men to be at every debate.  That no Vote should have been passed in either House, without a matter of two parts of three, or more, (as should be agreed upon) of the House heard the matter fully debated; and that no matter to be debated should be propounded till such a number had been visibly present in the House, which might at the first sight have been easily discerned, if the seats in the House had been so particularly disposed, that without telling their particular number by the Clerks, or any other, it might have been known: which might have been easily done thus:  

The manner how it may be constantly observed.  In the House of Commons, each long seat in the uppermost part thereof, down towards the door, to contain thirty or forty partitions, or more or less, as the length of the seat will bear, so that in each partition there could not one man sit, and an order made which seat should be first filled, and which next, and so successively one after another, and none to go into the second seat till the first were filled, nor into the third till the second were filled, and so to the rest in like manner. And to make it at the first view clear, the number of every partition in order to be in great legible figures set over the head of the person that sits in that partition, as 1. 2. 3. 4. etc. then it being known (being made so plain and certain) how many persons each seat, when filled, contained, as thirty or forty, etc. each seat being to contain equal numbers, if that may be, at least each seat of the side, so many and each at the end, so many equally. It is quickly determined, by seeing how many seats are filled, or how many are in such seats: whether the number required to be at the passing such Vote, be then there or not. The seats for Privy Counsellors may, notwithstanding this, be distinct and kept for them, and for Committees some such course to be taken too, if need were, in a due proportion.  
In the Lord's House such distinctions of seats and partitions cannot be conveniently so done, in regard of the requisite priority of place there, which is otherwise then in the House of Commons; yet the competent number there, (that House being not near so numerous as the Commons House) which had need be as many in proportion as the Commons House, might have been quickly and easily discernible.  
The number of forty in the Commons House, and a much less in the Lord's House, though by many accounted to be a competent number to make up an House; we have seen how upon design ill use was made of it in the Long Parliament, which could not easily (perhaps not at all) have been done with so great a number. To instance no more, the pitiful number of Peers present at the passing that pretended Ordinance for the late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury's death, may be thought on.  

Fees to the Officers of Parliament.  Some advised, that it might have been considered, what Fees should have been taken by the Officers of Parliament, Clerks, Sergeants, and other Officers: some then conceiving them to have been very high.   

Touching new Laws, Declarations, etc. to be made, and old Laws to be repealed and altered.  
WE have seen in that Long Parliament what ill constructions were made by some men of Precedents in foregoing Parliaments, accounting what has been once done there, quo jure, qua injuria, right and good, and to be deduced into practice; even those strange irregular acts in the tumultuous times of Richard the second, and Henry the fourth: nay, we have seen how Spensers' Treason, distinguishing the person and office of the King, so declared to be Treason by Act of Parliament many ages since, even urged for right; to instance no more.  
Some have advised, that such precedents, acts and proceed should have been examined, and by public Declaration by Act of Parliament purged or abolished, or declared illegal.  

Acts of Oblivion, etc.  And that, if but for that reason of preventing that male construction of citing ill precedents for Law, that an inspection should have been made into the Acts of Amnesty and Oblivion, passed in the first years of the Long Parliament, and also that passed this last Parliament. We have seen, especially if we looked Northward, how soon after such Acts of Indemnity and Amnesty, the Delinquents (as though they thought themselves justified in their former crimes) fell again into the same.  
And that there should in those past (and due care be had for the same in the future) have been a specification made of the crimes and offences intended there to have been pardoned and put into oblivion, lest otherwise implicitly and insensibly they might have been taken not to be crimes, and Loyalty and Fidelity (tacitly at least) accounted crimes, and so creep into precedent and example for the future.  
And that the first Paragraphs in the late Act of Pardon, Indemnity and Oblivion, might, if thought fit, be considered of; where in the first place are pardoned, All and all manner of Treasons, Misprisions of Treason, Murders, Felonies and Offences, crimes, etc. counselled, commanded, acted or done, since the first day of January, 1637. by any persons before the 24. day of June, 1660, etc. by virtue or colour of any command, p●…er, authority, commission, warrant or instructions from His late. Majesty King Charles, or His Majesty that now is.  
Though there might be some obliquity, error or abuse in the execution of Commissions from their Majesties, yet some stumble at these expressions of Treasons, Murder, etc. to be committed by Commission from the King, as without all question was committed by Commissions granted by others, and yet here they look like equal and even crimes: which no loyal man can own. It neither hurts nor hinders the pardon, but rather more strengthens it, that the crimes pardoned are specified: and let the application be made only to them that are guilty of them, not to the guiltless, and such as deserve honour and reward, for that which some would at least imply to be criminal; much less no ignominy or reproach.  
Surely the Loyal party that acted according to the known Laws, for so acting needed not His Majesty's pardon: Facinus quos inquinat aequat. Some men cannot think themselves cleared, except they can taint others guiltless with the imputation at least of these crimes, whereof they themselves only are culpable; and it is a question, whether their true meaning be not, that they would have an Exculpation (a term we have more lately had from the North) and even a justification from their known crimes, at least to be accounted no greater crimes, than the actions of those that acted by the King's authority, according to the known Laws of the Land, which they well know are no crimes, but the contrary.  
It is obvious to every eye, how some have sweat to have justified all the illegal Acts of the Long Parliament. Some make little or nothing of the endeavours, that then were, to have killed the late King in Battle, but only of putting him to death in cold blood.  

Restitution of some goods where the property is not altered.  And that, if thought fit, that such goods whereof the property is not altered, as Householdstuff, Plate, Furniture of beds, Pictures, Hang, eminent Jewels, or such like, plundered or taken away wrongfully, either by pretended Sequestrations, spoil or otherwise, should be restored to the owners, or (in some cases) a just value repaid for them, with a just consideration to be had of the parties from whom they were taken, and of their actings; and not to remain, as they do, in the view of the owners, perhaps purposely in despite exposed to such public view. This works contrary to His Majesty's pious intention, and that Act of Oblivion; it continues, does not abolish, the memory of our former divisions, when the spoiled shall see, as a continual Eyesore, their proper goods in the possession of the spoiler; whilst the spoiled for want of them perhaps is ready to starve, and perhaps the spoiler makes his livelihood out of them, if not steps of preferment too. The Heathen Poet could say of the Civil wars of Rome, 
Bella geri placuit nullos habitura triumphos.  But surely this looks like a continued triumph after the War.  

Reparation to persons spoilt.  Some have wished that that motion in the last Parliament, or Assembly, or Convention, that ended in December, 1660, made in the Lord's House, might be renewed, that the spoiled party might at least in some good measure be repaired by some public Tax made for that purpose, and due consideration to be had of such suffering spoilt persons, that constant never-changing Loyalty may have some encouragement and comfort, besides that of a good conscience.  

Touching the Long Parliament.  Some have wished that it might have been by Act of Parliament declared; if thought sic, that the Long Parliament (notwithstanding that Act for the continuing of it till it should be dissolved by Act of Parliament) was dissolved or declared void and null, from such a day as should have been by advice of the Judges and learned in the Laws agreed upon.  
And that also, if thought fit, consideration should have been had particularly from what time that dissolution, annulling or making void should have commenced; whether from the time that His late Majesty was driven from the Parliament by tumults and riots; which, as is known, some, if not many Members, especially of the then Commons House, (in that Long Parliament) that took up Arms against the King, were so far from causing to be suppressed, though His Majesty desired it, that they were set on by them; as is notorious.  
And also, if thought fit, that if not from that time, yet from the time they voted to live and die with the Earl of Essex, by them voted to be their General against the King, and upon the matter causing those Members to leave the House that would not vote with them. And whether that His Majesty calling them afterwards a Parliament, as they alleged, when they were in Arms against him, (though perhaps His Protestation to the contrary was entered in the Council-book) could any ways entitle them to a lawful Parliament?  
And also, if thought fitting, that it should have been by Act of Parliament declared, that any Member of Parliament offending against 25 E. 3. in raising or bearing Arms, or maintaining them against the King, ipso facto ceases to be a Member of Parliament, for that a Rebel and a Parliament-man are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
And also, if thought fit, that the Judges of the Land, consulting together, should have declared (as they did in King James his time, in that case about Watson and Clerk, the Seminary Priests, that the King's Coronation was but a Ceremony, and that without it the King was a complete King) that that Long Parliament was dissolved from such a day, as they should have found by Law that it was dissolved or annulled; whether it was from the time of His late Majesty's expulsion from his Parliament, as before; or from the time of voting to live and die with the Earl of Essex, or of their Votes of no further addresses to the King, who called them to consult with him; whether they did not then openly dissolve themselves, by refusing to consult with him? or from his death, when they could consult no more with him?  
And also, if thought fit, that it should have been so declared and enacted, that though the King had passed an Act, that the Parliament should fit till they were dissolved by an Act of Parliament; and that if it had been expressed that it should be so, notwithstanding that His Majesty should die in the interim; yet such an Act could not bind him nor his Successor, especially when in that Act for continuing that Parliament, till by such Act it should be dissolved, there is no such mention that it should continue after his death that called it; and that the King cannot be concerned, at leastwise concluded any ways in any Act of Parliament, to his damage, prejudice or diminution of his Royal Prerogative or Authority, except (at least) he explicitly and freely consent to it, & be specially comprised and named in that Act to that purpose; or whether he can though he so consent: it following plainly, that if by taking up Arms, or bearing Arms against the King, a Parliament-man ceases to be so, nor can sit any longer in the House. Then in that case none ought truly to be accounted secluded or excluded Members, but only these that would not then vote to live and die with the Earl of Essex, nor would assent to the raising of arms against the King; but thereupon left the House, or were expelled thence either by the Votes of the rest, or by menaces, just fear, that might incidere in constantem virum, or by tumultuous force: so that if the Parliament (if not by the reasons aforesaid, yet) at least by the death of the King being dissolved, as to think the contrary is most void of reason or truth; if, I say, it had not been so dissolved, than those secluded or excluded Members, they only ought to have been restored, and none of the rest that acted against the King by taking up Arms against him, or acting against him, aught to have been restored: Such offended against the Act of 25 E. 3. raising Arms against the King, etc. counterfeiting or making a new Great Seal, etc. and their being Members of Parliament, being as before inconsistent; and for the void places His Majesty to issue out Writs for free, legal and new Elections.  

The keeping of the Records in the Tower.  And also, that the keeping of the Records in the Tower, should be in the hands of a known trusty Loyalist, and none other, in regard of the danger of imbezelling or corrupting them, by any person of other principles not affected to Monarchical government by Law established, to the great damage of the King and his Subjects.  

The Militia.  And also, that the Militia, and all Offices and places of trust and concernment, for the peace and safety of the Kingdoms, and for the prevention of future Faction, Sedition and disturbance of such peace, and endangering such safety, should be committed only to the hands (and especially for a competent space of time, as by such free and legal Parliament, or by His Majesty shall be agreed upon) of known experienced Loyalists, and not to any that may be reasonably presumed or suspected to be otherwise. That rule may sometimes hold, and not be rejected: Qui semel est malus, semper praesumitur esse malus, presertim in eodem genere delicti.  

Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy explained.  And also, if thought fit, that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, should have had some explanation, alteration or emendation, especially in that point of not resisting the King.  
In the second Homily of Obedience, which book is confirmed by Act of Parliament, it is there expressed in terminis, as the Doctrine of the Church of Engl. that it is not lawful in any case to resist the King. That this should expressly have been put into these Oaths, and that all persons whatsoever, which are to take the Oaths of Allegiance or Supremacy, or that have taken them, may take them with such emendations; it being too notorious what strange interpretations have been made of these Oaths, as that they were made only against the Papal power, and as though nothing else were to be resisted. And in the beginning of the Rebellion in Scotland, the orthodox Divines of Aberdeen maintaining, according to that Doctrine of the Church of England, That in no case the King is to be resisted, and that so to do was contrary to God's Word, and to the opinion and practice of the primitive Christians: The other Divines, fomentors of that Rebellion expressly denied this, and alleged that the reason why the primitive Christians resisted not, was because deerant illis vires; the very same reason that Bellarmine gives for the same: so well do these two Factions concur. Though by the History of those times it appears, and Tertullian openly pleads it against the Emperor, that it was not for want of strength, for they had enough, but that it was contrary to their conscience, guided by God's Word, so to resist. And therefore why not much need, that all persons whatsoever should take this Oath, to declare their opinion in this point?  
And also, 
Robbery, the Law to be altered.  if thought fit, that the Law concerning Robbery ought to be in many cases, and especially for the first offence, mitigated, and not made capital: but that restitution be made to the party rob, and if the Robber be not able to do it, then to be forced to work it out. Which course, some think, would probably more terrify idle persons that turn thiefs, who had rather die desperately, then lead perhaps a long and wearisome life. Hereby many may repent and amend, and do good service to their King and Country. The party rob also hereby gets restitution, which seldom or never happens as the Law now is. Our Law (contrary to the practice in other parts of the Christian world) hereby becomes harder than the Levitical Laws: Some have hereupon said, that the Gospel, the Spirit killeth, and the Letter giveth life, contrary to St. Paul, which seemeth something Anti-Evangelical; The yoke of the Gospel should be easy.  
And also, if thought fit, 
Against condemnation upon a single testimony.  that none should be condemned to die upon a single testimony, when there is no other kind of proof by circumstances, or violent or vehement presumptions, equivalent to a witness, that makes a kind of semiplena probatio at the least, as in the Canon Law: In the mouth of two or three witnesses every saying shall be confirmed, says the Levitical Law: which is repeated in the New Testament, and in a manner at least is made Lex Evangelizata. The Lawmaker (Truth, Justice in the abstract) could as well have said, In ore unius vel duorum testium, as duorum vel trium, if he had thought it so fitting: and yet (as before) the Gospel seems to pinch harder than the Law. To that Objection, That then many Malefactors would escape; it may be answered, That secret things belong to the Lord, and to him they are to be left, and that it is better ten Knaves should escape, than one guiltless man should be hanged. We have seen and heard, how even in a manner miraculously God hath often revealed murder and great crimes, that we may suppose, that when such crimes cannot be in the ordinary way detected, it pleases God they shall be done extraordinarily. Many instances might be given of the sad consequences, by putting to death upon the testimony of a single witness: Judge Fortescue, in his book De laudibus legum Anghae, relates a passage about a Gentlewoman in Sarisbury, that was put to death, even burnt at a stake, for murdering her husband, and that sentence given upon the testimony of a single witness, which witness not long after upon his death, voluntarily and in a most penitent manner confessed, he had given false witness against that Gentlewoman, and that she was no ways guilty of that murder for which she was put to death: And Judge Fortescue there speaking of the Judge that gave sentence against her, hath these words, (as I take it, or to this effect, the book is not now by me) as they are there in the Latin version out of the Law- French; Soepius iste judex mihi fassus est, quod nunquam in vita sua animum suum super hoc facto purgaret.  
A notable instance this way (to relate no more, being numerous happened in London not many years since, as 'tis credibly reported: A young man, a Lawyer's Clerk, made love to a Gentlewoman's Chambermaid, and a fellow-servant of the Chambermaids, keeping company much with her, and the young man using also kind dalliance towards her, she conceived that he loved her better than the Chambermaid; but afterwards perceiving she was mistaken, she boiled with revenge against him, and the Devil watching as a roaring Lion whom he may devour, instigated her to accuse him of theft, that he had stolen from her Master's house, and taken away under his Cloak a Silver Boll: Upon this bare single testimony of hers the Jury found him guilty, he was condemned and died for it. Not long after the Chambermaid, grieving for the loss of her espoused husband, seeing her fellow-servants Trunk or Box unlocked, lift up the Cover, and there saw that very Boll, which she very well knew, for which the young man was condemned and suffered; she calls up her master, who found it to be the same Boll, which she, he showing it to her, could not deny; upon this she was prosecuted, condemned and suffered death; and the Chambermaid fell mad with grief, and died: And all this came from this judgement upon the testimony of a single witness. Should any object, That this might happen upon the testimony of two or more witnesses: It is possible, but not so probable; and the safe way is to follow the Rule .  
In the case of Treason two witnesses are required, and very requisite: and in other crimes, capital especially when also in many cases that are not capital two witnesses are required, why might it not be reasonably expected? though the atrocity of Treason is high, yet as to the person offending and suffering the punishment by loss of life is little different.  

Touching Juries.  And also, if thought fitting, that Juries of life and death, as also in other Actions both criminal and civil, should be considered of, and better Juries impanelled then often are; and the Sheriff and Under-Sheriff, and other inferior Officers power in impannelling such Juries, be looked after. 40 s. per annum, as is touched above, was in the beginning of that Law or custom of trial by Juries, a good considerable estate, and so the persons probably more considerable and knowing. They anciently used to be twelve Knights, so says Sir Edward Coke in his Comment upon Littleton's Tenors, citing Mr. Lambert. Many instances might be given of the strange Verdicts given by some such Juries, out of their ignorance, or wilfulness, or both; who oftentimes expressly deny to follow the Judge's directions, but go quite contrary: but I spare to instance them, in reverence to the Law under which I was born and live, and the practice thereof, both which especially in most parts thereof, are very excellent. And we see what Pamphlets have been published by John Lilburn, if not by others too, affirming the power of Juries, not as is commonly held, to be only in matter of fact, but in matter of Law too; and how they have controlled learned Judges in their Verdicts, and obstinately carried it against them: and how the meaning of that Axiom, Ex facto jus oritur, hath been extremely racked. The meaning of Legalis homo, to qualify him to be of a Jury, is not, nor formerly was, meant to be only a man of 40 s. per annum, but to be at least in some good measure in legibus peritus, as some are of opinion, and so as it were a kind of assistant to the Judge.  

New 〈…〉  And also, if thought fitting, that new Laws should be made upon emergencies and accidents, when they happen, and are notorious and publicly known, be the crimes never so heinous and horrid. Till they have happened it may be thought fit, not to make a prohibitory Law against them for the reason afore mentioned, Ne●dum prohibent, jubent.  

〈…〉  As namely of making Eunuches of men or women. That case may be remembered of the Horse-gelder in Nottinghamshire, that spayed a young woman: and being a casus omissus, the Judge could find it no more than a misdemeanour. It hath been anciently forbidden by the Imperial Laws, and the punishment is capital. Cod. de Eunuchis lib. 4. tit. 42. l. 1.  
The stealing of a Winding-sheet out of a Grave.  

〈…〉  That abominable baseness of a woman and a Mastiff-dog, not far from Temple-bar London, not many years since: if the Law be not plain enough in that case, that it may be amended.  

Stealing or men, etc.  The stealing of men or women, girls or boys, by these extraordinary thiefs called Spirits, or others, to be carried into remote Plantations, where probably their Parents shall never hear of them. Shall we provide good Laws against the stealing of our  and our Goods, and not of our Children? Such kind of Plagiaries have been more taken notice of in other parts, and severely punished. St. Paul, 1 Tim. 1.10. amongst those against whom the Laws are made, reckons up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Menstealers.  

Against delays in Com●…  And also, if thought fitting, that a select Committee should be appointed to consider of the dilatory proceed in all Laws both Ecclesiastical and Temporal, delaying of justice being almost as bitter as injustice, and the promise is as well not to delay justice, as to do justice. Many instances might be given of delays in justice, and perhaps none more than in actions upon the Writ of Formedon, especially where there are many Copartners, which I have heard some Common Lawyers complain of.  

Fees in all Courts.  And also that such a select Committee should consider of Fees in all Courts, and to fix a settled rule for them, that only such may be taken as cannot justly be grievous to the Subject, and yet may be sufficient for the Officers that receive them: due consideration being had of their respective qualities, pains, charges, and all incidents and circumstances concerning them; and of the great rates of all commodities, raised exceeding highly since the time that such Fees were settled, especially in Ecclesiastical Courts, 21 H. 8. this hath always been a consideration for the raising of Fees.  

Against the 〈◊〉 examining of witnesses upon oath in the Defendant, defence.  And also, if it shall be thought fitting, that the practice of the Laws touching Non-admission of witnesses to be sworn upon oath, in defence of the party prosecuted against by the King, should be amended. And whether it seem not strange to some, that A. B. being indicted at London, for killing C. D. at Barwick upon Tweed, in such a place there, on such a day, about such time of the day; and the accused party endeavouring by the negative pregnant to defend himself, would prove, that that very day he was perhaps at St. Michael's Mount in Cornwall, about the same time of the day, and so could not be then at Barwick, and he produces sufficient witnesses upon this, yet they must not be examined upon oath; and why should the Jury rather believe witnesses without oath, then sworn witnesses, especially when they hear no just exceptions against the sworn witnesses? which haply the Defendant cannot at least upon an instant give, perhaps having not heard of them, till the very time of their production against him at his trial; and the cause being heard so summarily as is usual, and so exceeding small time of defence given, that he cannot possibly inquire after them, to resute their testimony by just exceptions against them. The usual answer is, Witnesses must not be examined upon oath against the King, as though it concerned not the King as much to save a guiltless man, as to hang a guilty. It was accounted a good speech of that Roman Emperor, that said, Mallem unum servare civem, quam decem occidere hosts.  

Against the examination of witnesses, in the hearing of one another.  And also, if it be thought fitting, that witnesses should not be examined, as usually they are at our common trials, both in civil and criminal causes, openly in the hearing of one another; when it is to be feared that it hath happened sometimes, that the craftiest witness has been put on to speak first, and he hath thereby given aim dangerously to the rest.  
Should any object that in such summary proceed it cannot well be otherwise: May it not be answered, that 'tis to be feared there may be more haste then good speed? and they might be examined privately and apart, not in the hearing of one another, even in such summary causes, almost in as short time, and according to the course of the Civil Law, that examines so apart; their testimonies, when all taken, might be published, and if need be even in their own presence, to confirm them viva voce. daniel's hearing of the cause 'twixt the two Elders and Suzanna seems to be summary, and yet he takes that course: had he not done so, probably it had gone hard with Suzanna; for it scarce can be supposed, but if the two Elders had been examined in the hearing of one another, they would have jumped in their testimony, and not varied; as they did in the species of the Trees; no doubt the latter would have concurred with the former.  

That person; wrongfully accused may have reparations from the accuser.  And also, if it be thought fit, that though the parties be accused in the King's behalf, as commonly they are in cases of Extortion, or other crimes or offences; yet if upon the traverse they defend themselves, and prove themselves to be guiltless, they should have due reparation, both in point of reputation, and trouble, and charges, from the party that caused them to be so indicted; otherwise 'tis very possible and probable, especially in point of supposed Extortion, for any man to be undone, when one or many, malicious or ignorant men, or both, may so, and very often indict any man, who, though he prove himself never so guiltless, and that it is no extortion but that the accuser was mistaken, and that it proceeded from his ignorance or malice, or both: yet he shall have no reparation, and it is well known that some so indicted, could have proved themselves guiltless, but knowing it was very chargeable, and to have justified themselves so often, as some malicious or ignorant men would have indicted them, would have quite ruined them in their fortunes; therefore to prevent that, have betrayed their own innocence, confessed themselves guilty of the accusation, and paid the Fine or Mulct, as many degrees easier: This is hard, Crudelis est sibi ipsi, qui famam suam negligit; what then, qui prodit? May it not be enquired then, if it be not fitting, that both a more easy and less chargeable course might be taken upon the traverse, and also that the guiltless accused party should be duly repaired both in reputation, and in charges and trouble? though I am not so rigid as to think upon a Lextalionis, but in some few special cases.  

That the Act for abolishing the Court of Wards and Tenors may be repealed.  Also, if it be thought fitting, that the Tenors and Privileges taken away from His Majesty, in that Act of abolishing of the Court of Wards, and the Wardships also should be restored, (only if any abuses have been crept in, in the execution, they may be regulated and amended) as that very able and most industrious Gentleman, Fabian Philipps Esquire, hath learnedly and fully set forth in that book of his on that subject, entitled, Tenenda, non tollenda, or the necessity of preserving Tenors in capite, etc. and if it should be thought fit still to continue the abolition of Wardships, etc. whether the Tenors notwithstanding should be continued? and whether a fit retribution to His Majesty should be made, then by Excise of Ale, etc. I need say no more of this, but let Mr. Philipps book plead for it.  

Rates to be set upon some Commodities for the sale of them.  And also, if it shall be thought sitting, that upon many more commodities than are yet, the known rate and value of what they should be sold for, should by indifferent and knowing men be set down, considering the great hurt done by selling many commodities at unreasonable rates, upon some accidental straits, in regard of some accidents of time, place or persons; and many imposing upon the unskilful and unwary buyer very often, as is notorious, demanding more than double the price they will take. In foreign parts, both upon books and other commodities, fitting rates are by Authority set down, whereby the seller may have a just gain, and the buyer not be overreached. Certum quid is the great satisfaction to the Subjects, as in Fees certain in all Courts, so at least in many commodities.  

About dignity and precedency.  Also, if it be thought fit, that in point of dignity and precedency, a fixed certain plain rule might be set down; which probably would take away much emulation and grudging, and quarrels oftentimes, amongst many, if it were clearly once determined: And amongst others, if it were so determined, who should have precedency, the eldest son of him whose father was a Knight, and the first Knight of the Family; or the eldest son of him whose father was but an Esquire, but the eldest son of a Knight, Senior to the Knight, father of the former, or whose Grandfather or direct Ancestor from whom he is lineally descended, and is eldest son and heir, was a Knight: the second conceiving it is his right, in regard he is the direct descendant and heir to the Signior Knight.  
And that, if it shall be thought fitting, no person that bore Arms against the late King, or His Majesty that now is, or had any pretended Commission or Authority so to do, shall own the Title of General, Lieutenant General, Major General, Commissary General, Colonel, Lieutenant Colonel, Major, Captain, Lieutenant, Cornet, Ensign, or any other Title, by reason of any such pretended Commission or Authority; nor any person shall so call them by any such Title under pain of a great Mulct toties quoties to be inflicted, both upon the person that owns such Title, and on the person that gives it, or so calls them. Nemo ex delicto consequitur beneficium; and so bad a cause ought not in any implicit manner to be approved; and rightly considered, 'tis an infamy to the parties to be called so.  

Against the Act of limitation of actions in some cases.  And also, if it be thought fitting, that in regard that many, who took the King's part in the late wars, could not have their right of suing for their own just due debts, owing them and contracted either before the wars, or in the time of the wars, in the Courts of Justice then in being; so that six years were elapsed, according to that Act of 21 Jacobi 16. touching limitation of Actions, and so they are thereby excluded to their great impoverisliment. There should be an abrogation or suspension of that Act, so as to give remedy in this case, that the spoiled may have reparation or retribution of justice, (if not reward) for his Loyalty.  

Against multiplicity of Statutes upon one and the same subject.  And also, if it be thought fit, that where Laws are doubtfully penned, they may be explained, and where there are multiplicity of several Statutes touching the same subject, some repealing part of a Statute, some enlarging and altering, so that the true meaning of the Statute becomes difficult and perplexed, that in such cases all the said Statutes several so concerning the same subject, may be repealed, and one plain and clear Statute thereof to be made; as namely these several Statutes in the Reigns of King Edward 6. Queen Marry, Queen Elizabeth, King James, and King Charles I. touching the prohibition of eating Flesh in Lent, and other Fish-days, and concerning Fasting-days, may be so repealed and made void; and one Statute made, clearly and plainly to comprehend all that is necessary upon that subject.   

Touching Ecclesiastical Persons, Courts and Causes.  

The Clergies Proctors in the House of Commons.  SOme have wished, if it were thought fit, that now the Lords Spiritual the Bishop's being restored to their right in the Lord's House, that the Clergy should have their Proctors to sit in the House of Commons, (if they desired it) representing the body of the Clergy, as they used to do till about Henry the sixths' time, or not long before, as it was then used, since which time it hath been disused. Some have affirmed, that a Clergyman of competent temporal estate, having in King James' time been chosen Burgess for a Corporation, was not suffered to sit there, nor a Clergyman to say Prayers there. Nor will some yield they can vote to choose a Parliament-man, either in County or Borough: so little of representation have they; and yet when in Convocation they give the King Subsidies, their grant must be confirmed by Act of Parliament. Anciently such care was taken that Bishops should be present in Parliament, that in their absence their Chancellors were summoned to sit there.  

About augmentation of Vicaridges.  Also, if it be thought fit, that whereas before the dissolution of Monasteries, the Bishops had power to augment poor Vicaridges out of the Tithes of Impropriations, so they are now commonly called, though the true name is Appropriations, the Tithes having been appropriated to some Monastery or Religious house or other, before the dissolution, and after that falling into laymen's hands, who held them improperly, living by the Altar and doing nothing there, got the Nickname of Impropriators and Impropriations, which now holds good; such is the tyranny of Custom in this and many other cases. Or if there were no Vicarage endowed, the Bishops might endow one, nay, and go so far as to leave to the Appropriator (which then was that Religious house to which it was appropriated, who then thought themselves as worthy to be kindly used, as a man would think our Lay-Impropriators Impropriators can do now) not much more than a 50. part of the Tithes, or thereabout.  

Against Mensals.  It seems hard that the Lay-Impropriator should have a matter of 200. or 300 l. per annum, or more, and the poor Vicar a matter of 20. Marks, or 20. Pounds, or thereabout; and hardest in Mensals, that is, as it was usual, when a Religious house could procure from the Patron the right of Presentation to some Living near their Monastery, whither one of their Monastery might repair to officiate, and return home to his D'orter at night; then they often procured these Live from the Popes, to be annexed and appropriated to their House, ad supportandam mensam, thereupon called Mensals, the Cure to be so discharged by one of their House, and no Vicarage to be endowed, and all the Tithes and profits to come to the Monastery. And thus it stood at their dissolution, and such small care was taken, that so they came into laymen's hands, who allow them something or nothing as they please, some inconsiderable small Tithes, or some petty small pension of 5. or 6 l. per annum, or sometimes something more or less.  
Near Market Towns and great Towns commonly were one or more Monasteries scituared, and the Abbots and Priors ordinarily got all or the most of the Live in such Towns for Mensals, as before: so that we see them at this day such pitiful small things as they are, and tenuitatem beneficiorum necessariò sequitur ignorantia clericorum: and in such Market Towns to supply the Vicar or Curate, Lecturers are taken in, and they must live of the benevolence of the people, which is usually, or at least amongst many of them more or less, as the Lecturers preaching pleases them; so he must humour their fancies or fast. And there must be a Lecture-day commonly on the Market-day too, that the Country people coming thither may drink in his Doctrine; which oftentimes has been very strange, and what the conseovence of this has been, we have sadly felt of late years, being not the least cause of our miseries; God grant it may be prevented for the future.  
It is alleged, that the power of the Bishops in use and practice before the dissolution of Monasteries for augmentation and endowment of Vicaridges is taken away, these Impropriations being turned into Lay-fees. Yet, I humbly conceive, (salvo meliore judicio) that the King had no more transferred upon him, than what the Abbots and Religious persous had: Nemo dat quod non habet. Nemo plus juris in alium transferre potest, quam ipse habuit. Reg. juris. Nor was more transferred to the possessors or their Ancestors, than what the King had: If so, then what was legally done in such cases, by the Bishops before the dissolution; why may it not now be done too? and yet some moderate remedy should be found for the purchasers, especially those that have so long enjoyed them; and the Bishops, Deans and Chapters, and others, namely the Bishop of Lincoln, who had very many great Manors taken from his Bishopric, which are at this day in laymen's hands, and a competency, such as it is, made up to him, almost, altogether out of small Impropriations. He and others should be duly considered, and not detrimented hereby.  

Touching the bounds of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical and Civil.  And also, if it shall be thought fit, that the bounds of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical and Temporal, may be clearly set down and fixed, to take away all matter of contention, that for want of it may arise; so that probably as few prohibitions as may be, need be sued forth. But as they now are two Sisters, under one and the same Crown, so they may live peaceably and friendly for ever.  

The Ordinaries power about distribution of Portions, etc.  And also, if it be thought fitting, that whereas the Ordinary, according to Law and long practice, hath distributed portions to the widow and children upon Intestates goods, upon the Administrators giving up their Accounts to him, for which they enter Bond upon their taking out of Letters of Administration, which distribution and bonds, and bonds taken for performance of Wills, are by some excepted against: that that and all other just powers of the Ordinary may by Act be ratified.  

Against concurrence of Jurisdiction; Peculiars, etc.  And also, if it shall be thought fitting, that for the quiet and ease of the Country, and in regard sometimes of the inconvenience and disorder in the execution of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, no peculiar Jurisdiction, nor concurrency of Jurisdiction be suffered, (the parties that have Interest therein to be otherwise satisfied.) The instances of the inconveniences of such peculiar and concurrent Jurisdiction may be given, but I forbear lest I might seem partial.  

All Wills, etc. proved at London from remote Counties, to be transmitted into the several Counties.  That all Wills, Inventories, Bonds for Administrations and Accounts, and other proceed touching them, which in the late Usurpation were out of all places brought to London, and no Record thereof in the County or Diocese, where the deceased died; so that the Subject is put to great trouble and charge, sending to London when he hath occasion to use any of them, and may be forced to sue at London when he would recover his right thereupon.  
That all such Wills, Inventories, Bonds, Accounts, and all other proceed concerning the same, or true copies thereof, to be made valid and authentic by Act of Parliament, be transmitted at the charge of the Register at that time, into the Registry of the Bishop of that Diocese, where the party deceased died, or had his principal mansion or dwelling house at the time of his death, or rather in regard of the largeness of some Bishop's Dioceses, including many Archdeaconries and many Counties, they should be so transmitted into the respective Registries of every Archdeacon or Commissary of the said Archdeaconry, and that every person concerned may sue for their right thereupon before the Bishop of the Diocese or his Chancellor, or such Commissary or Archdeacon, or his Official.  
During the late troubles the Episcopal and Archidiaconal power having been de facto abolished or suppressed, the Subjects have been forced to their great charge and trouble, to prove all Wills, and take Administrations, etc. at London, before Commissioners or pretended Judges there for proving of Wills, and granting of Administrations, etc.  

Degrees of Marriage.  That the Act of 32 H. 8. about the prohibited degrees of Marriage, be by Act of Parliament explained.  

Traitor's heads.  That the late Traitor's Heads and Quarters, of the Murderers of our late Sovereign, of blessed memory, and the others, that are set upon wooden stakes, should be set upon Iron pikes or stakes, as Piercy and Catesby's Heads were upon the Parliament House.   

Touching the suppressing of all Books and Writings, published against the Regal Rights, or the Right of the Subject.  

About the suppression of seditious books.  SOme have advised, if it be thought sit, that a most choice and able Committee be appointed to inquire after all Books and Writings whatsoever, which have spoke against the Regal Right, or the Right of the Subject; that they may, as many as can be got, either be purged or burnt, and declared against by Authority, and not remain as apt fuel for a new flame, but be buried as far as can be in perpetual oblivion. And perhaps in the first place, as most pestilent, those Tracts that have been writ about that ridiculous contradiction in adjecto of the two Houses coordination with the King the Monarch, when, as before is specified, the King is the Head, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons, the three Estates, by several Acts of Parliament specified, Lippis & tonsoribus notum: yet urged for designs mischievous abominably, as we have felt.  

Spensers' Treason.  As also that traitorous distinction of the Spensers, 'twixt the King's Person and Office, by two Acts of Parliament declared Treason; yet in these late times maintained by too many.  

goodwin's book justifying the murder of the King.  goodwin's book for the justification of the murder of the late King, and many other of that kind.  

Mr. Bucks book of Richard 3.  Mr. Bucks book of Richard the third, wherein he seems to impugn the right of the King from the daughter of King Edward the fourth, wife to King Henry the seventh, too much leaning to, if not affirming Richard the thirds right, by that monstrous Act of Parliament that illegitimates Edward the fourth's issue.  
In Sir Edward Cooks book entitled, The third part of the 
Sir Edw. Cooks Writings.  Institutes of the Law of England, concerning High Treasen, and other Pleas of the Crown, 1658. Printed at London by M. Flesher for W. Lee and D. Pakeman, §. Le Roy, pag. 7. he puts it down there for Law upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. De proditionibus, That if Treason be committed against a King de facto, and non de jure, and after the King de jure cometh to the Crown, he shall punish the Treason done to the King de facto, and a Pardon granted by a King de jure, that is not also de facto, is void.  
Strange would have been the consequence of this, if Cromwell had been made King, as some desired, and a loyal man should have killed him in order to the restitution of the true King de jure, our dread Sovereign King Charles the second: Or should a loyal man for the same end have killed him, though he had but (& de facto, non de jure) the title of Protector, how far would that have extended by the words in the same sect;. may be considered, where he says, that Statute of E. 3. is to be understood of a King regnant, and as follows there, and as he says most truly, a Queen regnant is within these words, Nostre Seigneur le Roy; for she hath the Office of a King. So perhaps it deserves to be examined, whether some of note and power, in the time of Cromwell's Usurpation, did not affirm that Cromwell was within these words, Nostre Seigneur le Roy.  
In regard Sir Edward Cooks Writings are by many held in high repute, and some have not stuck to style him the Oracle of the Law; therefore his Writings require to be more strictly looked into, and that if any errors be found therein, they may be detected and expunged, as being more dangerous, then in other men's Writings not of so great repute: Corruptio optimi est pessima.  

Illegal and seditious speeches.  Also it was advised, if it shall be thought fit, that such Speeches as have been publicly made by any Judges or noted Lawyers upon the Bench, or in any public Assemblies, against the Regal or Subjects Right, or the Law of Nations, which may give just offence to our Neighbours, may be taken notice of, and publicly declared against: Such us that, when that Act of 25 E. 3. was alleged, to justify Cromwell's Usurpation, and that Seigneur le Roy in that Statute included Cromwell the usurping Protector. And that speech of a great Lawyer at the trial of the Portugal Ambassadors brother, when it was alleged that he was by the Law of Nations to be sent back cum postulatu to his Master the King of Portugal, to be by him punished for his offence committed here, and that that Commission for trying him here, without the consent of the Portugal Ambassador, was the first Commission that ever was granted here to try any Ambassador or his servant, without the Ambassadors consent. Even the Bishop of Ross, Ambassador from Marry Queen of Scotland, though she was de facto deposed, or forced to renounce the Crown there; when he had committed a great offence, yet was only dismissed, and not further questioned. But to all this and much more that Lawyer replied, What have we to do with the Law of Nations, if it be contrary to the Law of England? One pretended afterwards to excuse him, and that he spoke but according to the words in the Statute of 21 H. 8.21. where it is said, We are free from any subjection to any man's Laws, but only to such as have been devised, made and ordained within this Realm for the wealth of the same, etc. which words are intended against the Papal Usurpation imposing Laws upon us.  

The illegal Preface to the Propositions at the Isle of Wight.  As also, if it be thought fitting, that that Preface to the Propositions sent by the House to the late King at the Isle of Wight, which seem to strike at, if not to take away the Kings Negative voice in Parliament, expressly contrary to many Acts of Parliament, the Kings most known Prerogative, and the most known Custom and Law of the Land; be declared illegal and derogatory to His Majesty's Prerogative, and just right.  

Rectifying of translation of some words.  As also, if it shall be thought fitting, that the translation of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Rom. 13.1. to higher powers, altered to the supreme powers; for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Pet. 2.13. is translated, whether to the King as supreme. The two Houses, and Powers inferior many degrees to them, have by some been interpreted to be meant by higher powers, and strangely hath it been wrested, if not exclusive of the King.  
As also, if it shall be thought fitting, that that expression 
Illegal Declaration.  about the time of His Majesty's coming over, in one of the Declarations or Remonstrances, that the Government was by the King, Lords and Commons; being derogatory to His Majesty's Prerogative and Legislative power, and the Government being in him radically, and but derivatively and subordinately in any others, for and under him: Therefore to be considered of, altered and amended.  

The Printing-press.  As also, if it shall be thought fit, that the Press be carefully looked into, that no seditious Books or Pamphlets be vented, to poison the people, or to confirm any in their bad principles. The want of this care hath grown into a great Seminary of mischief, which if nothing but our sad experience of it, should make us more wary for the future.  

A body of the Law to be framed.  As also, if it shall be thought fit, that (according as was begun by the late Lord Chancellor, the Lord Viscount St. Albans, which as 'tis said King James put him upon) a Body of the Laws should be digested and compiled, and then by authority of Parliament be ratified.   

Further touching Ecclesiastical matters.  

Ecclesiastical Courts to be Courts of Record.  The Ecclesiastical Courts proceeding according to His Majesty's Ecclesiastical Laws, sitting under the same Crown with all other Laws, some advice, if it shall be thought fit, that to all intents and purposes of Law they should be Courts of Record, as well as any other Courts.  

Reading the Articles of Religion.  By the Statute 31 Eliz. c. 12. the Incumbent is to read the Articles of Religion within two months after his Induction: and 'tis said, some have not taken Induction at all, because they would not read the Articles. Had the Statute limited it within that time after Institution, it had met with that fallacy.  

Signing with the Cross in Baptism.  In the form for Private Baptism, when the child privately baptised is afterwards brought to the Church to have the Baptism published, at the receiving the child then into the Congregation there is no Interrogatory, whether in the private Baptism it had been signed with the sign of the Cross, (as commonly, if not altogether they are not;) neither is there any mention then at the publishing of the Baptism, of so signing it. And it hath been found, that some persons have pretended weakness in the Infant, when it was not so, only to avoid the signing of it with the Cross.  

Churching of women privately.  There being no Law that allows private Churching of women, it is wished it might be always public in the Church, and with a Veil: and if within the month the woman be not able to come to Church, to defer it till the recovery of her health.  

Touching Absolution.  In Cathedral and Collegiate Churches usually one of the Singing-men (though in orders) gives the Absolution, and the Blessing at the end of Service; which some wish might be done by the Bishop if present, or Dean, or some Dignitary, or more eminent person present.  
And that the Anthems and other parts of the Service, which are performed singing, or in a singing tone, may be made more intelligible to all the Auditors; who many of them are scandalised by the contrary, which might be helped by some small alteration in the composure: so that (as sometimes was practised, and that without any hindrance to the harmony) first one of the Singing-men to declare out of what Chapter and Verses, or part of the Scripture, that Anthem is taken; or what Hymn or Spiritual Song it is: and then immediately before the singing each Verse, with a clear audible voice to read it. This would help much, but the best way were, that the Singing-men and Choristers were taught exactly to sing most articulately, clearly and plainly, and not to drown the words in their mouths that they cannot be understood; but openly and distinctly sound forth every syllable, that they might be as well or better understood, then when they only read them. And this hath been most commendably done by some expert Artists that way, and might by all: Mr. John Frost, late Westminster, and one of the Gentlemen of His Majesty's Chapel Royal, gave a most clear and most deservedly worthy to be imitated precedent hereof; than whom never any man read more plain and clear, and yet what he sung was (if possible) more plain and clear then what he read.  

Touching the Writ De excommunicato capiendo.  By the Statute for the trial De Excommunicato capiendo, the person excommunicate is to be published in his Parish Church, which sometimes the Minister refuses, or there is no Minister: In which case 'tis wished it might serve to have it fixed upon the Church door upon the Lord's day, or a copy left at his dwelling house, and the forty days to commence from that time.  
FINIS.   


A Table of the Particulars contained in the Notes touching alteration of some Laws.  
TOuching Parliament proceed. Page. 97  
Ordinance of Paerliament ibid.  
Privilege of Parliament. ibid.  
The Bishop's Protestation. Page. 98  
The King none of the three Estates. ibid.  
Proceed of the House of Commons. Page. 99  
Age of Parliament-men. Page. 102  
Election of Parliament-men. Page. 103  
The great number of Boroughs and Corporations. ibid.  
Touching the manner of proceeding in Parliament. Page. 104  
A competent number of Parliament-men to be at every debate. Page. 107  
The manner how it may be constantly observed. ibid.  
Fees of the Officers of Parliament. Page. 108  
Touching new Laws. ibid.  
Acts of Oblivion, etc. Page. 109  
Restitution of some goods where the property is not altered. Page. 110  
Reparation to persons spoilt. Page. 111  
Touching the Long Parliament. ibid.  
The keeping the Records of the Tower. Page. 113  
The Militia. ibid.  
Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy explained. ibid.  
Robbery the Law to be altered. Page. 114  
Against condemnation upon a single testimony. Page. 115  
Touching Juries. Page. 116  
New Laws to be made upon new accidents. Page. 117  
Making of Eunuches. ibid.  
Stealing of Winding-sheets. ibid.  
Stealing of men. Page. 118  
Against delays in Courts. ibid.  
Fees in all Courts. ibid.  
About examination of witnesses in defence. ibid.  
Against the examination of witnesses in the hearing of one another. Page. 119  
Reparation to persons wrong fully accused. Page. 120  
The Act touching the Court of Wards and Tenors to be repeated. Page. 120  
Rates to be set for buying commodities. Page. 121  
About dignity and precedency. ibid.  
Against the Act for limitation of Actions. Page. 122  
Against multiplicity of Statutes upon the same subject. ibid.  
The Clergies Proctors in the House of Commons. Page. 123  
About augmentation of Vicaridges. ibid.  
Against Mensals. Page. 124  
Touching the bounds of Jurisdictions. Page. 125  
The Ordinaries power about distribution of portions. ibid.  
Against concurrence of Jurisdictions. ibid.  
Wills to be transmitted into the several Counties. Page. 126  
Degrees of Marriage prohibited. ibid.  
About the suppression of seditious books. Page. 127  
Spensers' Treason. ibid.  
goodwin's book. ibid.  
Bucks book. ibid.  
Sir Edward Cooks writings. Page. 128  
Illegal and seditious Speeches. ibid.  
The illegal Preface to the Propositions at the Isle of Wight. Page. 129  
Rectifying the Translation of some words. ibid.  
Illegal Declarations. Page. 130  
The Printing-press. ibid.  
A body of the Law to be framed. ibid.  
Ecclesiastical Courts to be Courts of Record. ibid.  
Reading the Articles of Religion. ibid.  
Signing with the Cross in Baptism. ibid.  
Churching of women privately. Page. 131  
Touching Absolution. ibid.  
Touching the Writ De excommunicato capiendo. Page. 132     
FINIS.