AN ANSWER To several Obiectons made against some things in Mr. THOMAS CHALONERS SPEECH With an indifferent Censure of those Arguments delivered by him in the House of Commons upon the reading of the Scottish Papers, concerning the Votes of both Houses for the disposal of the KING'S PERSON.  Proverbs 15. 2●, 23. 
Without counsel, purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of Counsellors they are established.  
A man hath joy by the answer of his mouth: and a word spoken in due season, how good is it?  
London, Printed by Francis Leach 1646.   

An indifferent Censure of Mr. Chaloner his Speech, delivered in the House of Commons upon the reading of the Scottish Papers.  
DIvisions must needs be great, where mistakes are frequent; and those mistakes whether of ignorance or wilfulness, make divisions wider than clear understanding, though in dissenting Opinions, would suffer them to grow, my hearty wishes are that I could compose differences in our own Parity, to which my affection shall never be wanting, though my understanding may fail in it. The reason of my adventure at this time is occasioned upon Mr. Chaloners Speech in the House of Commons, when the Scottish Papers were there read. It was my fortune to peru●e that speech: and what opinion I then conceived of it, I cannot yet receded from, though I have since seen a Paper in answer to it, or as the Author calls it, Animadversions upon it, as a thing unsafe and dangerous, striking at the Honour of the Parliament, and interest of England. How the speech should be guilty of those Aspersions, I can neither find by any thing contained in itself, nor by any allegations of the Answer against it. I will therefore first deliver my own sense concerning the speech. The narrative part of it is undoubtedly true, the illustrative part, or matter of instance is very proper, if not extended by ignorant or wilful mistakes, beyond the proper latitude of an instance. his Result upon the whole matter, is no way derogatory from the Honour of the Parliament, as being no more than was already Voted in the House, nor injurious to the King's Person (though the answer be unsufferably injurious to Mr Chaloner, in falsely aspersing him with a personal grudge against his Majesty) of whose honour, safety and freedom. He speaks no more, but with caution, as it stands inrelation to the honour, safety and freedom of the whole people: which latter (as all rational men must needs grant) was first considerable both in the Covenant, and the law of nature itself: but he speaks nothing at all against the King, 〈…〉 is the debate of the Parliament come so far yet, as to question how the King's Person shall be disposed of; but by whom.  
But it is strange to observe how vainly this answer catches at parts & instances of the speech. To omit his Verbal exception against the use of those words abstractum and concretum, howsoever pedantik people have confined the signification of such terms: it is known that wise men in discourses of state have used them in that sense, in which the speech has, as he may find in one of these Scottish Lords, and none of the meanest in abilities among them, in his book entitled Lex, Rex.  
As vain is that exception, which he takes against that most certain truth in the speech, that the person either of Prince or private man, being in a foreign state, is at the sole dispose of that state where he resides, and to be ruled by their laws: and for two instances he thinks to make Mr Chaloner ashamed, one is a particular case of Prince Charles his now being in France, and the other General of Ambassadors in foreign Lands. But let any man say (to speak first of the Prince) whither Pr. Charles be not solely at the dispose of the State of France at this time I think no sober man will deny it, and that he cannot be recalled either by King or Parliament (which this answerer would make a dishonour to the Parliament) for the King sent him thither in probability because the Parliament of England should not dispose of his person. It is likely the State of France gave him leave to come over, and may suffer him to return again according to some promise of theirs: but what use they may first make of him, and how long keep him, the Answerer cannot tell.  
It is a known truth that Princes, who by misfortune, as storms at Sea, or the like, have been cast unwillinglly upon other Prince's Countries, not only may, but have been detained by those Princes, without imputation of Tyranny for taking that advantage. Was not james the first of Scotland being driven into England by cross winds, detained many veares here by Henry the fourth, and Henery the fifth Kings of Engl. Was not Philip the first of Spain driven upon the like accident on shore in England, detained by Hen. 7th? and though that politic Prince vailed his Coercive power under a show of courteous entertainment (as such civilities are usual in State) yet King Philip finding himself a prisoner, was content to grant some things to Henry, which he would not have done had he been in Spain, as my Lo. Bacon writes. But to come nearer our time, the King that now is, can best tell what he feared, When he was prince Charles in France, and posted away from thence in disguise, and I can tell what the pe●ple feared for him in Spain, and would more, had it not been for the Queen of Bohemia and her Children.  
And for his instance of Ambassadors, what can that make against the Speech, or the honour (as he would have it) of the Parliament? for it is as plain sense as can be that Ambassadors are protected by the faith of that State, where they reside: for though they be by consent of Nations to be protected persons yet none but the State where they reside, can ratify, and immediately give that protection.  
Where he seems to laugh at the instance of K. john, and says that it strengthens the Scottish Papers; it appears otherwise plainly in the Speech for it is there spoken as the opinion of Lawyers, if King john had been in Normandy at the time of the Summons, he ought to have been tried by the Laws of France, as Duke of Normandy, what soever had become of the King of England, and for the vast disproportion (as the answerer calls it) between one that is King of one Kingdom, and Subject of another, and him who is a free King of two Kingdoms. I say the instance was not to extend to all points: or if it did, the answerer is out in another kind, for there is also a vast disproportion between a King of 2. Kingdoms ruling in peace and justice, and one, who hath been long in actual War against the representative Bodies of his two Kingdoms, and now a prisoner in their Armies.  
But as the instances were proper enough, the narration of the speech is very true, and the case (though I will not presume to decide any thing) strange enough to admit of a debate: for it is a strange thing, (as he saith) That on Army of Sons in pay of the Kingdom of England, which by the treaty ought to be governed by the joint consent of the Committees of both Kingdoms upon the place, should in England take a King of England, without the privity of the English Committee and convey him to New castle, a Town likewise of England, and there keep him six whole Months, without the consent of the Parliament of England. But he came to them for a shelter, Against whom? Against that Parliament for whom they fought, and into whose hands I do verily believe, he might have been delivered with safety, and more happiness to himself and all his good people.  
I hope the intentions of our Brethren of Scotland were good in it, for I was ever loath to suspect any evil from them.  
But I am sure the effects of that shelter have been already very sad, as by jealousies here, to keep so many Armies at a needless Charge, and hinder the relief of poor Ireland.  
I have heard that some of the King's Counsel at Oxford advised him well: that if he would make an end of these calarnitous troubles, his best way was to come in (to his English Parliament, which was to come in to all his people: and that committing himself to any other hands, was but a continuing of these distractions, which advise I would his Majesty had followed, or that God would be pleased yet to direct him in the right way.  
FJNJS.