AN ANSWER TO THE LORD DIGBIES Speech in the House of COMMONS; To the Bill of Attainder of the Earl of Strafford, the 21th. of April. 1641. Written by occasion of the first publishing of that speech of his Lordships. And now printed in regard of the reprinting of that Speech.  
Printed in the year, 1641.   

AN ANSWER To the Lord Digbies Speech in the House of COMMONS. To the Bill of Attainder of the Earl of Strafford, the 21. of April. 1641.  
THE interest which every good subject hath in the actions of the King and State, is sufficient to defend him from the imputation of being a busy body in maintaining the Justice of them. That, and my desire to do the Lord Digby service, by endeavouring to give him satisfaction in those scruples, which made him differ from his former self, have moved me to enter into an examination, of the grounds of that change which his Lordsh. hath declared in his speech to the Bill of Attainder of the Lord Strafford. They are but two.  
The first and main is the failing of that in the proof, which induced his Lordsh. to consent, that it was fit the Lord of Strafford should be accused of Treason, which was, his advising the King to employ the Army of Ireland to reduce England.  
For admitting the circumstances of Master Secretary Vanes, three several examinations at the Preparatory Committee, to be the same his Lordship hath reported, yet why they should prevail so much with his Lordship, as to work to an utter overthrow of his evidence, as unto the Army of Ireland: I must confess, I therefore cannot comprehend, because all his Lordship doth, or would have others infer thereupon is; That he who twice upon oath, with time of recollection could not remember any thing of such abusines, might well a third time misremember somewhat.  
For certainly notes taken by Sir Henry Vane himself, of words spoken by the Lord Strafford, either at the time, and upon the place when, and where they were uttered, or soon after when they were fresh in memory, are a stronger confirmation that his remembrance at last fixed upon the point of truth; notwithstanding the long trepidation about it, than the notes of any other Counsellor could have been. And there was a time when his Lordship avoweth, that he was fortified in his belief by the imagination that the notes he had been told of would have proved some other Counsellors.  
So strong indeed to my understanding, that I cannot see how the validity of Mr. Secretary's testimony can be in the least degree infringed, without making a great breach into his conscierce.  
For if I should allow (which I do not) that there could be no other use of committing those venomous parts of discourses to paper, but to accuse men, and to bring them into danger, certainly it then behoved Mr. Secretary to be very careful that the notes he took were no such disjointed fragments, as by falling into other hands, (as it happened) might make a great Minister of state, and his fellow Counsellor to be thought to have said that which was never intended by him.  
And if it betrue, as I rather believe, that Mr. Secretary's end in registering that indeed truly venomous advice of the Lord Strafford, was to make sure of his memory, in case he should ever be called to testify what had passed at that junto (which hath also happened;) it then behoved him no less to consider well what he put down in writing, for the support of his memory; and much more to recollect himself very well before he deposed any thing in remembrance of his notes, after the paper was burnt. And considering his having at first rashly said, that he could not charge the Lord Strafford with that of the Irish Army, it was a great providence of God, that a copy of the paper he had burned should have been taken, produced, and attested in the manner it was, without his having had any hand in any of them. For I do not know even what I should have thought of Master Secretaries testimony without this foreign help, although with it I think no single testimony can be stronger, and that his had not been so strong, though he had at first deposed the same he did at last, as it is now, notwithstanding his variation, taking in the confirming circumstances from without.  
I humbly beseech the Lord Digby, who I see hath a noble and Christian care not to have any thing driven to an aspersion on Master Secretary, first to think well upon the things I have now suggested to his consideration, touching the necessity which in duty lay on Mr. Secretary to take heed that there were not a syllable, nor title amiss in his notes, and then to tell himself what place there is left; for imagining there might be a mistake of herefor there, or this for that, and that it is probable there was so, since it is confessed on all hands, that the debate than was concerning a war with Scotland. For that there was any such mistake in the copy of his notes, cannot be fancied without infinite injury to Mr. Secretary's son, and to that most worthy Gentleman Master Pimme, who took the copy with a purpose to make the use hath been made of it, and who, I hear, have in general but high terms averred the truth thereof, having both had a sight of the original, and being both of untainted, and undoubted veracity. And that Master Secretary could not so mistake in the making of his memorial, is very manifest, by the incoherence of the Lord Digbies Criticism with the whole context of the preceding words, viz. That having tried the affections of his people, his Majesty was lose and absolved from all rules of government, and was to do every thing, that power would admit, and that his Majesty had tried all ways, and was refused, and should be acquitted, both with God and man; and that he had an Army in Ireland, which he might employ to reduce this Kingdom.  
For what need was there to make so great a Muster of things done in England, for the acquitting of his Majesty with God, and man; towards the employing of the Irish Army, to reduce the Kingdom of Scotland.  
And though the primary debate of that day was concerning a war with Scotland, yet that debate must needs bring in a second, viz. how moneys might be raised in England towards the making of that war, the Parliament having refused to supply his Majesty, as the Lord Strafford most wickedly slandered the house of Commons.  
And if in the Lord Digbies conceit, it were not hard for Mr. Secretary to mistake in the manner aforesaid, then why was his Lordship so easily engaged to prosecute his accusation of the Lord Strafford of high Treason, with so much earnestness, founding his judgement on a Basis that might so easily fail, and which by the wavering of Mr. Secretary in his testimony he had cause to fear would fail; nay which had already actually failed so fare, that there was no expectance of more than a single testimony fortified with circumstances, some time before his Lordship gave over his former fervour.  
Or if it should be admitted, that there is no improbality of such an unwilfull mistake in Mr. Secretary Vane, than it cannot be denied, but that an other Counsellor of that junto might as easily have committed the same, or the like error in his notes; and allowing me this, I shall then beseech his Lordship without prejudice to Mr. Secretary, to give himself a good reason, why that ground of his accusation, that spur of his prosecution, that basis of his judgement of the Earl of Strafford as unto Treason, should be quite vanished away to his understanding, so soon as he knew the notes were Sir Henry Vanes, which till that instant had been in such force of belief with him, that had it remained in the same, he should not have been tender in the Lord strafford's condemnation. For in the scales of my weak judgement there is no such difference in the weight of two Counsellors notes, especially those which proved to be Mr. Secretary Vanes, having been at last, though slowly confirmed by his memory upon oath, without help of his paper; whereas those of some other Counsellors might have proved inferior in those two great credential circumstances, for aught his Lordship had then heard, or had reason to imagine.  
For it will not help his Lordship to say, that he hath expressed himself in those wary terms, that to his understanding that ground is quite vanished away, as unto Treason, toward the legal proof whereof a single witness is no better than none; because no notes could have supplied the defect of another witness, and all the rest of the junto had already upon their oaths remembered nothing of this matter. Before his Lordship changed his judgement, and for aught he could know, might have continued to do so, not withstanding the production of any of their notes, which they upon their re-examination might also have evaded, as his Lordship would these of Mr. Secretaries.  
So that upon the whole matter had this particular of the Irish Army been the sole charge, and proved no otherwise then his Lordship imagined it would have been, that is to say by Sir Henry Vanes single testimony without his notes, and some other Counsellors nores without his testimony, I cannot see how his Lordship could judiciously have condemned the Lord Strafford of treason with innocence according to his plinciples.  
And as for a diffusing of a complexion of treason over all, if that particular had been sufficiently witnessed, or becoming a With to bind all the scattered and lesser branches, as it were into a faggot of Treason, Sure the antecedent words are so much more powerful to that effect, as they are more comprehensive, and they were clearly deposed by my Lord the Earl of Northumberland, as well as by Sir Henry Vane, though no other of the junto remembered any thing of them neither, which doth take off much of the strangeness of Mr. Secretaries single testimony, and I believe hath been the ground whereupon many a tender conscience hath passed that Bill, wherein his Lordship was more scrupulous than I canyetfind sufficient cause for.  
For I crave leave to ask his Lordship this Question, whether, if some miscreant had been tampering with others to take away the life of the King, and this had been evidenced by two witnesses, whereof one had deposed, that he advised the doing of it by poison as the surest and safest way, the other denying those words upon oath, should notwithstanding have sworn clearly that he heard him persuade the kill of the King, and giving reasons for the necessity and lawfulness thereof, and his Lordship had been one of the jury, whether he would have made any more bones of condemning that villainy, then if they had both agreed in a tale touching the matter of poison: And if his Lordship could have swallowed that difference in their depositions well enough, it may then be a matter worthy of his further enquiry, from what quarter that Gnat came, which stuck so fast with his Lordship in a case fully parallel: There resting as little doubt in one that his Majesty might lawfully have employed the Irish Army to reduce this kingdom, if he might, and was to have done every thing that power would admit for the raising of moneys otherwise, after the Parliament had not supplied him, as there would have rested in another, whether he might have poisoned the King, after he had been satisfied that he might have killed him.  
The Lord Strafford saw very well, that the knot of the With was in this part of that desperate advice of his, and the Lord Digby may remember the poor shift he made to lose it by explaining himself thus. His Majesty was to do every thing that power would admit, that is every thing that power would lawfully admit, to the doing whereof I suppose his Majesty needed not to be loosed, and absolved from all rules of government. And so for those other words in the end of the 22. Article, that his Majesty should first try the Parliament here, and if that did not supply him according to his occasions, he might then use his prerogative as he pleased to levy what he needed, & that he should be acquitted both of God and man, if he took some other courses, though it were against the will of his subjects. And the declaration he made in open counsel mentioned in the end of the 21 Article. That he would serve his Majesty in any other way in case the Parliament did not supply him; that is lawful way, and lawful courses, said the Lord Strafford, now he found the point of these mischievous words turned upon himself. And yet there was a time when no man urged with more vehemency, that no such Prerogative courses to raise moneys could be lawful; and I am sure no lawful courses at any time would have been against the wills of any of his Majesty's subjects.  
This was all that the mighty wit of the Lord Strafford could devise in avoidance of the stabbing guilt of that most treacherous, and wicked Counsel of his. But the Lord Digby helpeth him with many better guards.  
First, by professing that he can have no notion of any body's intent to subvert the Laws treasonably, but by force. What a wide door hath his Lordship in few words set open to wicked judges and Counsellors, to trample the public liberty of Kingdoms and States under foot, and then to escape without punishment, or with less than can restrain them; or secure others from their lewd practices. May not their concurrence and constancy in giving such wicked judgements, & counsels upon all emergent occasions, be as sure evidences of their intents to subvert the Laws, as the readiness of swordmen to abet and maintain them therein. May not a free mighty Monarchy be thus in an age, or two, quietly converted into a most slavish, and impotent tyranny, by the pen, and abuse of the sword of justice, without the use of any other on the Prince's part, if the Laws of the land, and of the Religion professed in it, bind the people from drawing their swords in maintenance of their liberty? and shall their obedience to God, and the King, and their Laws, leave them without hope or means of redress by the same Laws or what sufficient redress, and reparation can be made then if the result of a hundred such wicked judgements and Counsels shall be only a great misdemeanour, and a hundred misdemeanours cannot make a felony; nor a hundred Felonies amount to a Treason, according to the Lord strafford's position maintained publicly at his trial: I wish the Lord Digby had longer ruminated upon his ill digested judgement in this point, before he put it over for good.  
I proceed to the next words. They are. And this design of force not appearing, all his other wicked practices cannot amount so high with me. Wherein if by this design his Lordship mean the particular design of bringing the Irish Army into England, then is the consequence most inconsequent. For sure if the Lord Strafford had not, he might have had some other design upon this Kingdom, that would have amounted to height treason in the Lord Digbies eye: or if by this design his Lordship intent generally the design of using force, then sure it was made plain enough to his Lordship at the trial, that the Lord Strafford did more than design the using of force to the subversion of more than one of the fundamental Laws of England and Ireland, having actually levied war upon the King's liege people, to constrain obedience to his illegal summons and orders upon Paper-petitions, and to raise moneys upon them against their wills.  
But his Lordship saith, He can find a more natural spring from whence to derive those, and all his other Crimes then from an intention to bring in Tyranny, and to make his own posterity, as well as ours slaves. As from revenge, from pride, from Avarice, from passion, from insolence of nature. Is it possible that so sharp a wit as the Lord Digbyes, that can so quickly espy the mishap of any argument brought forth against the Lord Strafford, should not see this misconception of his own in his excuse? Shall no man be a Traitor, that can find another more natural, spring from whence to derive his treasonable designs and actions, then from an intent to commit Treason? Then the Lord Strafford would not have been a Traitor with the Lord Digby, though he had brought the Irish Army into England, if that action had originally flowed from one of the foresaid Springs, as I believe it would have done. Then his Lordship may absolve many, and I am sure will one of the Gunpowder Traitors, whose son hath found so much Princely compassion and favour from his Majesty, and the King his Father, upon (I believe) a well-grounded opinion, that the Father's design to have destroyed the King his Master, proceeded not from any malicious mind to his sacred person, but was derived from his zeal to his Religion, a purer spring than any of those his Lordship hath found out, to wash the Lord Strafford, which certainly have been the springs of all the foulest treasons in the world.  
And as for the Lord strafford's respect to his posterity, since the Lord Digby knoweth (no man better) that we are all deceived with a show of good in every sin we are drawn into by him, who (he thinketh) gave the Lord Strafford the application of his rare abilities: And that not only many Ministers of State are easily engaged to be Instruments of overthrowing the Commonwealth, and glory of Kingdoms, so they may advance themselves and their Families to riches and honour, because that in so doing they imagine they get more in their private fortunes than they lose in their parts of the public; But even the wisest Princes themselves have by this deceit been drawn into the same error, as Philip the second of Spain, and Lewis the eleventh of France, (For an error it was in them, and may be demonstrated to have been so, as fare as Politic matters are capable of demonstration.)  
Nay since the Lord Digby avoweth that the consideration of his posterity did not hold the Lord Strafford himself from becoming the grand Apostate to the Commonwealth, not only in opinions, but by falling from them to practices, as high, as tyrannical, as any subject ever ventured on, and such as made him the most dangerous Minister, the most insupportable to free subjects that can be Charactered; I know not why his Lordship should esteem it so sure a preservative against the Treason he hath suffered for.  
I had almost said justly, and so doth his Lordship; For he doth not say, but the Lord Strafford was worthy to die, and perhaps worthier than many a Traitor. He doth not say but his words, counsels, and actions, have been proved to be such as may direct the King and Parliament to enact, that the like shall be Treason for the future, but only prayeth God to keep him from giving judgement of death on any man, or of ruin to his innocent posterity upon a Law made a Posteriori. So that if his Lordship may be freed from this scruple of Conscience, there is hope that he may change his opinion, and be brought a Posteriori; to declare his agreeing in judgement with himself, and the so much greater part of the House of Commons. And that I shall now hope to do by showing him a fallacy in the second, and last ground of his Argument.  
The fallacy lieth in this, that his Lordship doth divide those things in his consideration which God hath joined, and in doing this, will needs be wiser than the State, and Laws he liveth under, which no man ought to be, unless they thwart the Law of God. This he doth where he faith: There is in Parliament a double power of life and death by Bill, a Judicial power, and a Legaslative, that the measure of the one is what is legally just, of the other what is prudentially, and politicly fit for the good and preservation of the whole, but these may not be confounded in judgement, we may not piece up want of legality with prudential fitness.  
And truly if his Lordship had but added these words, Except some Case as yet wholly omitted, or not yet sufficiently declared, come to be judged in Parliament. I should have fully assented to his whole discourse in this point; But in either of those Cases to deny unto that representative Body, the High Court of the Kingdom a liberty to do any thing not unjust in itself (though not as yet legally declared to be just) for the preservation of that greater body it represents, when according to the sincere, and dispassionate judgement of Prudence, and Policy, it cannot be sufficiently secured by Laws already made, is neither agreeable to the Law of Nature, nor of the Land, nor of God, nor to a rule of his Lordships own.  
Not to the law of Nature, which, in any case where the safety of the whole cometh into question, doth not bind itself from ordering, in the great world, that light things shall descend, heavy ascend. In the little, that the whole man upon consultation shall consent to the cutting off, of a gangrened hand, or foot, though the former be contrary to that Common Law, whereby elemental bodies are governed in their motions; And the latter against that dictate of Nature, which inclineth each member to have a compassionate care of the preservation of another so strongly, that except in a like case, no part, nor the rest of the whole may, nor can consent to such a mutilation.  
Not to the Law of the Land, For in that very Statute of 25. Edw. 3. Cap. 2. whereby Treasons were first declared, there is a passage which doth quite overthrow his Lordship's distinction, and rules squared to his present purpose, as is yet plainer by divers subsequent statutes if I understand English, and there be no more but that, and a little right reason requisite to understand Statute law, as there ought to be. I will here transcribe the several passages, wherein I observe, that some or all of the latter Statutes are repealed, but that is not material to the purpose for which I cite them.  
25. Ed. 3. Cap. 2. And because that many other like Cases of treason may happen in time to come, which a man cannot think nor declare at this present time: It is accorded, that if any other Case supposed Treason, which is not above specified doth happen before any Justices, the Justices shall tarry without geing to judgement of the Treason, till the Case be showed, and declared before the King, and his Parliament, whether it ought to be judged Treason or Felony.  
21. Rich. 2. Cap. 3. And that this Statute shall extend and hold place as well to them which be judged, or attainted for these four points of the said Treason in this present Parliament, as of them which shall be judged or attainted in the Parliament in time to time of any of the four points of Treason afore said.  
8. Hen. 6. cap. 6. And that this ordinance extend as well to such hurnings made after the first day of the reign if our Sovereign Lord the King till this time, as to burn to be made in time to come.  
22. Hen. 8. cap. 9 And that the said Richard Roose, for the said murder and poisoning of the sard two persons, as is aforesaid by authority of this present Parliament shall stand and be attainted of High treason. And because that detestable offence now newly practised and committed, requireth condign punishment for the same. It is ordained and enacted by Authority of this present Parliament, that the said Richard Roose shall therefore be boiled to death. His offence was poisoning a Pot of Pottage.  
By all which I conceive it to be elcere as the Noonday, that the Parliaments of England, have heretofore as now, used to look backward as well as forwards, if the occasion required it. And so, that his Lordship's distinction, hath no ground in the Law of the Land.  
And truly it hath is little in the law of God. For in that we read, that Moses and Aaron, and all the Congregation, to whom the man that was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath day was brought, at first indeed did only put him in ward, because it was not yet declared what should be done to him: But when it was declared, they then stoned that same man to death for that former fact by a Law made a posteriori.  
The very same proceeding was held with the son of the Israelitish woman, whose Father was an Egyptian for blaspheming or cursing for he was also stoned to death a posteriori, and a general Law declared upon the occasion, that as well the stranger, as he that is borne in the Land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord shall be put to death.  
This furnisheth an Answer to the Objection I have heard made to the former Instance, that the gatherer of sticks on the Sabbath, was put to death by a special direction from God, which may no more be drawn into example now, than Abraham's going about to sacrifice his Son.  
For, not to divert into that Question, whether that Declaration of God Almighty, aught to have been a direction to the Jews to punish the breach of the Sabbath with death, which for aught appears, was not so understood by them, unless Nehemiahs' threatening, Neh. 13.21. may be taken in that sense. I humbly conceive, that by the generality of the Law, which ordained, that Blasphemy should be punished with death, it is plain that the execution of that Mongrel Egyptian Jew, for that sin was not extraordinary. And from both those Instances, that by the example of the God of Heaven it is lawful for the Assembly of Gods on Earth to put offenders to death for Crimes desorving capital punishment, though committed before they were declared to be such. And it may be, so much may also be gathered from that famous place, Deut. 17.9.10. which I refer to further consideration.  
Lastly, his Lordships own Rule in his speech for the Tryenniall Parliament, is this, That the King out of Parliament hath a limited, a circomscribed Jurisdiction; But waited on by his Parliament, no Monarch of the East is so absolute in dispelling grievances. For it is well known, that if any man how great soever do once become a public grievance, That is to say, A dangerous and insupportable Minister to the State; those Eastern Monarches do not use to stand upon punctilios of Laws made, or to be made, no nor so much as upon the formality of legal proceed, Wherein there hath been more either right, or favour showed to the Lord Strafford by the King and his Parliament, than I believe ever was to any like Offender in the whole world before him, which I 〈◊〉 to his Majesties, and their eternal glory and praise.  
I know well what may be replied by so me others, not by the Lord Digby of the dangerousness of this last mentioned doctrine of his, and am as sensible thereof as another man.  
But I do humbly conceive, that there is yet more danger in the Lord Digbies fore-rehearted doctrine: And that all that is in the last recited (being also as I take it more conformable to the Law of the Land) may be prevented by some good Ordinances, otherwise needful to be made, which is an Argument I must not digress into here.  
In sum I hope ere this it is plain, that in stead of the Prayer his Lordship made, it had been more needful for him, to have prayed to God to keep him from making distinctions, where God himself hath made none, which his Lordship knoweth is not well pleasing to God, and must needs have observed to have been the original of many great divisions, and combustions in the Church, and so might now have been in this State, if God of his mercy, and by his overruling, power had not prevented it, contrary to his Lordship's prudential judgement, who I perceive would else have found a wrong Father for those seared distractions of the Kingdom.  
Or if all I have yet said be not enough, let this suffice, that the Lord Digby himself, not only in a former speech made before he altered his mind, but in this very speech doth clearly allow of this very kind of proceeding, which he would feign see me to disallow.  
For after all the expression of his so nice tenderness of conscience in this point, even his Lordship notwithstanding moved, that laying aside the Bill of Attainder, the House would think of another such a one as might secure the state from the Lord of Strafford, saving only his life. Which under favour had not only been to condemn him a posteriori to worse than death, That is, either to have lived in perpetual imprisonment, or to have become an ignominious fugitive, and vagabond, after he had been branded by the House of Commons, by his Lordship, and by his most sacred Majesty in such a manner, as might well have put the same thoughts into him, that every-one that met him would have killed him, which made Cain cry out, That his punishment was greater than he could bear; But for aught his Lordship hath expressed, the Bill he moved for, might have trenched as deep to the ruin of his innocent posterity as the Bill of Attainder.  
Nay, I pray tell me, how but by a Law a posteriori could his Lordship have condemned the Lord Strafford of high treason, as he hath professed that he should and might have done with Innocence, if that of the Irish Army had been proved to his understanding: For I do not know whether as the case may be put, those words touching the Irish Army, had been treason, as yet declared by the Statute of 25. Edw 3. But it they be, than I am sure the former words are a much vaster treason.  
And to leave no lease of his Lordship's defence unventilated his reason drawn from the marking of a house infected with the plague being the same in other words with the Lo. strafford's taken from a boy, is of a little show, but no force at all: For under favour, these comparisons show no more, but that no action in itself indifferent, (such as that the old Rhetoricians make use of, the going up to the top of the walls of a Town of Garrison) ought to be made capital to any man that had no knowledge of that Law, which I allow to be good reason; But am sure his Lordship will not allow, that the Lord Strafford was charged with any such slight Article, and much less that the result of them all is a matter of indifference, or such a one to which the Lord Strafford could plead ignorance of the heinousness of the crime: For there is no man capable of committing the treason for which he hath suffered, but must needs know, That as the safety of the people is the supreme Law, so the attempting to introduce any new form of government, without their consents, especially an Arbitrary and Tyrannical one, is the greatest wrong can be done, and the highest Treason can be committed against a State.  
And sure Sir Thomas Wentworth who (as the Lord Digby himself hath noted in his foresaid speech for the Trichniall Parliament was the man that whilom in the House of Commons first moved for the inserting of that clause in the Petition of Right And that your Majesty would be also graciously pleased, for the further conmfort and safety of your people to declare your Royal will and pleasure, that in the things aforesaid all your Officers, and Ministers shall serve you according to the Loves and Statutes of this Realm, as they tender the honour of your Majesty, and prosperity of this Kingdom) was not ignorant of the greatness of this offence: If the Lord Wentworth, and the Lord Strafford were, as indeed a man may well think they were, that in their Story shall hereafter observe, that they no sooner were admitted to the honour of being in the number of his Majesty's Officers and Ministers, but they began and so continued to be the great transgressors and violaters of all the heads of the same Petition of Right, in the Kingdoms of England, or Ireland, and of most of them in both.  
I cannot observe any thing more in the Lord Digbies speech, that without wrong to his judgement may be thought to have been a ground of his so solemn Protestation, that his vote went not to the taking away of the Lord strafford's life: But I have observed two passages which may give a little light, how his judgement, so neat in other things, came to be corrupted in this.  
The first is an ungrounded apprehension, that neither the Lords nor the King would have passed the Bill, and consequently, that the passing of it in the House of Commons would be cause of great divisions in the State. For there is no passion doth multiply faster, or which in shorter time will raise a greater mist in the mind of a wise man then groundless fear.  
The second is; His Lordships having upon this occasion much inculcated to his own conscience, the height and weight of the Crime of committing murder with the sword of justice; But for aught appears in his Speech, having quite forgotten to put in a due Counterpoise thereunto, from a no less serious consideration of that saying of the Wise man; He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, Even they both are abomination to the Lord. And the precedent made upon King Ahab recorded in those words; Because thou hast let go out of thy hands a man whom I appointed to utter destruction, thy life shall go for his life.  
Wherein notwithstanding I would not be so understood, as if I who am a private man, did take upon me to judge of the Lord Staffords Cause. For, as I declared at the beginning, my intention throughout hath been only to vindicate the public proceed from scandal; and to clear that Lord Digby from his scruples. The first of which now I have done with the zeal that became me, I shall henceforth with aequanimity expect to see what grounds there was of the Lord strafford's hopes, that he may hereafter appear less guilty of the death he died, then as yet he doth to me.  
And though in the later I have used necessary freedom in expressing my present conceits of the Lord Digbyes Reasons, yet I reserve a thought that the weakness may be in my own understanding, and that though of myself I am not, yet by his Lordship I may be made capable of them, being one that hath his eminent abilities in no less admiration than any other whatsoever.  
FINIS.