THE Proceedings In Relation to the TRIAL OF EDWARD FITZ-HARRIS, At the Kings-Bench-Bar in Westminster-Hall, Who stands INDICTED FOR High-TREASON, Which Proceedings were on Wednesday the 4th. and Saturday the 7th of this Instant May, 1681.  
For that he by several Hellish and Diabolick Practices, endeavoured to compass the Death of His most Sacred Majesty, and to Subvert the Government.  
With the Account of the Substance of his Plea, and the most Remarkable Circumstances that happened, during the Debates on either side.  
ON the 4th of this Instant, about 9 in the Morning, Edward Fitz-Harris was brought from the Tower by Water, strongly Guarded to the Kings-Bench-Barr in Westminster-Hall; where being demanded what he would plead, he delivered his Plea which was ready drawn up in Writing to the Court, and prayed that it might be Read, which was Granted; but before the Reading of it, one of the Counsel for the Prisoner stood up, and desired that he might be heard a few words, which were to this purpose, That they had endeavoured what in them lay to draw up their Plea to concur with the Law in all points: And farther, That they had taken a view of the Jornals of the Lords house, and the Entries of the House of Commons, to incert from them what was material in the behalf of the Prisoner, and hoped the Plea was such, as could not be refused, and therefore prayed that it might be Read and Accepted.  
A●ter which, the Plea was audibly Read, the substance of which was, That Edward Fitz-Harris the Prisoner at the Bar, having been Arraigned at the Bar of a Superior Court, (meaning the House of Commons,) and there put in jeopardy of his Life, he did humbly conceive that he could not be twice Arraigned for one and the same Treason, nor Tried in any Court than that where he was first Arraigned, etc. referring the rest to a Record that was pretended to be in the Lord's House.  
Upon the Reading of his Plea, Mr. Attorney-General refused to accept of it, alleging it was not only nought, but altogether frivolous, being drawn up on purpose to Question the Jurisdiction and power of the Court as to the Trial of the Prisoner, and to gain time by delay: And farther, That he had not had such time to consider of the said Plea as he ought, by reason he did not receive it before 10 of the clock the Night before, To the last it was answered, That some of the People that looked to the Lords House were out of Town, so that they could not without much difficulty procure such Papers as were Material in the behalf of the Prisoner, and therefore hoped that that would not any ways be prejudicial to their Plea, etc.  
When one of the Counsel for the King standing up, made answer, That the Plea was altogether frivolous, and contrived for delay to gain some advantage on the behalf of the Prisoner, for at that time they rather ought to have pleaded to the Matter of Fact, than at all to question the Jurisdiction of the Court. As to the Trial of the prisoner, when all the Judges had unanimously declared, That it was in their power to Try him, notwithstanding his being Impeached by the Commons; And farther, That the Plea mentioned only Treason in general, but named no particular Treason, which they ought to have done, that they might the better have known how to have given their answer and stated their Objections accordingly▪ the which by reason of the nomination of Treason in general, they could not do, not knowing whether the Treason to be mentioned in the Indictment was the same for which he stands Impeached by the Commons, and if not, than the Debate as to Law must consequently cease, and they must come to Matter of Fact.  
As to a Record said to be in the House of Lords, it was not mentioned what Record, the which had it been, the Jornal would be produced that there was no such Record relating to the prisoner.  
After these and several other learned objections against the Plea, Mr. Attorney General thought fit to demur to it, which with the consent of the King's Counsel, he did, and desired that the other side would join in demurrer, which they accordingly did, but prayed a considerable time might be granted to make preparation for Answer, considering the Life of a Man was concerned in it, but that was strongly opposed by the King's Council, who pleaded that in this Case delays were dangerous, and that they had had Four Days already to consider on it, and that it was so foul a Treason, that if the prisoner was Guilty of it, he ought to have no favour or mercy showed him, and that his Life ought to be destroyed, seeing he endeavoured to take away the Life of the Government.  
The Counsel for the prisoner laboured to prove that it was usual to give time in such Cases, and cited two Precedents, but were overruled in both: by Reason they were only Indicted for Misdemeanours, and the prisoner for the Capitallest Crime that the Law makes mention of: Then they objected that Pluncket had time given him till the next Term, out in that likewise they were overruled. My Lord Chief Justice informed them, that he was Indicted for Treason in another Kingdom, and that his Witnesses being there, he could not possibly get them over before the Term would be expired; So that in conclusion, the prisoner had till Saturday Morning allowed him to prepare for his Trial; when about 8 of the Clock he was brought to the Bar.  
When Mr. Attorney General gave the Court an account what more he had observed touching the Insufficiency of the Plea, and that it was drawn up on purpose to endeavour to lessen the Jurisdiction of the Court, which ought not to have been attempted: That the power of that Court was unquestionable as to the Trial of the prisoner, notwithstanding any Impeachment lodged in the House of Commons, nor could it hinder the Trial as to matter of Fact; to which the Counsel assigned for the prisoner, pleaded that the prisoner being Impeached by the Commons of England in the names of themselves, and in the names of all the Commons of England, No Inferior Court ought to undertake the Trial, that is, to take it out of he hands of the highest Court of this Kingdom, the which the Lords and Commons Assembled in Parliament are declaring, that such things had been formerly done but that they proved of Fatal Consequence to those Judges who gave Judgement in such cases, for that it was a Breach of the Rights and privileges of Parliaments, which ought not to be Infringed, nor did it consist with the Granduer of the Nation, that such Infringement should be made at this time, but did confess that there was no Record in the House of Lords as had been formerly suggested, Inferring that an Impeachment was much of the nature of an Appeal, where the Son and the Wife of any murdered person might bring their Appeal, and notwithstanding the murderer had been Tried and acquitted or after Condemnation pardoned. And that an Impeachment is not at the Suit of the King but at the Suit of the People, and that all the people of England, viz. the Commons, are his Accusers, and therefore the Jury and Judges upon the Bench being Commons of England, they could not see how they could undertake to Try him, but that he ought to be Tried before the Lords in Parliament, they being the Rightful Judges to determine any matter at the suit of the people; that is, i 〈…〉 se of an Impeachment: In Order to confirm which, many Precedents and Ancient Records were Cited, especially the Case of the Earl of Shaftsbury, who being Committed by Parliament for High Misdemeanour, he moved at the King's Bench-Barr, that he might be brought thither by Habaes Corpus and Bailed, but it was refused him by the Judges then Sitting, declaring they would not meddle in that Case, by reason he was Committed by Parliament during the pleasure of the King and House of Lords.  
To these and many more, the King's Counsel very learnedly replied, and stated their Objections to each particular point, saying, That no Impeachment lodged in the House of Commons could hinder the proceeding of an Inferior Court, for if so, the Justice of all Inferior Courts be encroached upon, and in time be much bestraightned and confined within narrow limits; and notwithstanding all the Prisoners Counsel had said It was absolutely in their Power to Try him; and that the nature of an Appeal was different from that of an Impeachment: And farther, Since they had allowed, That the Commons are the Grand Inquest of the Nation, whether or no they had not made this Presentment for the King? and if so, the Prisoner without any more ado might be Tried at the King's Suit, and therefore prayed the Court that the Plea might be overruled.  
To which the Court was pleased to Answer, That notwithstanding all that Counsel had said, they were fully satisfied that they had power to Try the Prisoner as to Matter of Fact, notwithstanding the Impeachment of the Commons, that they intended to preceded according to Law, and had not any thing to do with Matters in Parliament, but this Treason being committed out of Parliament, and the Criminal brought before them, they ought to do Justice, but would not be hasty on them, but would give them yet longer time, by reason it was a matter of weight and moment; and therefore ordered the Lieutenant's Deputy to carry back his Prisoner.  
Finis.   

Printed for, J. Millet, in the Year 1681.