King Charle's TRIAL JUSTIFIED: OR, Eight Objections against the same fully answered and cleared, by Scripture, Law, History and Reason. Being the sum of a Charge given at the last Sessions held at Trewroe in the County of Cornwall, April 4. 1649.  
By Colonel Robert Bennet.  
Published by Authority.  
LONDON, Printed for R. A. 1649.   

The sum of the Charge at the Sessions held at Trewroe April 3. 1649. for the County of Cornwall.  
GEentlemen, By the good providence of God we are once more met upon this employment of Justice, the conservative of our civil peace; wherein the goodness of our God is the more observable, that even while the Sword (which had wont to silence the Law) hath been called to act in most parts of the Kingdom, our Judicatures nevertheless have had their freedom to hear and redress the people's complaints, Deus nobis haec ●tia fecit; this is no other than the finger, yea the right hand of the Almighty amongst us. It is fallen unto the lot of a very insufficient person to give the Charge this day, especially considering the late transmutations in the Nation, which in no reason may be slipped over in silence at such a time as this. I know they have given occasion to the raising of many regretfull Objections in the minds of the people, the which to remove, I conceive it a proper work for this occasion.  
Object. 1. Say some, The King is dead, and by what Authority dost thou these things, and who gave thee this Authority?  
Resp. We act as Justices by Commission, and Authority from the Legislative power of the Kingdom, the Commons in England, virtually the same Authority gives us our Office that gave all the Kings of England their Office and Trust, which appears by that Interrogatory to the people in the old form of their Coronations, Will you have this man to reign over you? Which Solemnity the Law intends should be at a general Convention of the whole Kingdom, and inflicts a penalty upon every man of estate that shall be then absent; and the practice of the Kingdom was suitable to the Law, the greatest number of Kings, since the Conquest, having no other colour to the Crown, but the Parliament and people's Authority. We sit as Justices by the same Authority, which was to choose the Laws and Customs, by which the Kings of England were bound by Oath to govern the Kingdom: The same Authority by which all the Courts of England stand, and their Officers uphold the justice of the Commonwealth, even from that authority under God we derive our present power, which gives a legal existence to all the just powers Civil or Military, which ever were or now are in the Nation. And although this and other services had wont to be in the King's Name, it will appear to have been but for matter of form, and that the life and power was in and from the people, because the people brought that power into a Law, the Law trusted the King with it, to convey it to particular persons, the people limited the trust they gave the King in the Law, he might not dispose it as he pleased himself, he might not Commission an Alien, or a Papist: and therefore the people are the original of all true power, and that conduit Pipe of Authority (the King) being cut off, the trust returns to the first givers (the people,) from whom our authority as out of the very fountain issueth.  
Object. 2. But the King is dead, not by a natural, but a violent stroke: How cometh that to pass?  
Resp. The King indeed is fallen by the stroke of Justice, which smote him openly for his Crimes, and the blood he had shed in the face of Heaven; and I confess when persons of highest trust among the people are brought to the Axe, it presents us a doleful case: Nevertheless when fury doth not hurry them, but Justice lays hold upon them in the way of God, we have all cause to sing, Gloria Dee in excelsis, in terris pax, inter homines benevolentia.  
Object. 3. But is not the Person of the King privileged? doth not the Scripture say, He that toucheth him shall not be innocent?  
Resp. The King must not be touched by the secret, or open violence of men upon any pretence, when he performs his office: Nay, he may not be touched for his offences upon men's irregular passions; but the King and every son of Adam, may and must be touched by the Ordinance of the Almighty set up against evil doers, even by the impartial hand of Justice, which is Innocency itself. I confess that King that sits upon his Throne, and scattereth the wicked with his eyes. That King that faithfully judgeth the poor, his Throne shall be established for ever, he is the privileged King that must not be touched. But such a one was not the person fallen, but a mighty hunter of his poor people before the Lord; and if so, The holy God who respecteth not persons hath given us in his Book precept and instance beyond all exception, that in such case no mortal humane flesh hath a privilege from the stroke of Justice to the loss of life. As therefore the Objector hath appealed unto Scripture, unto Scripture shalt thou go, Gen. 9.4.5.6. verses. God forbids all eating of Blood because it was the life of the Creature, in the fourth verse: The reason of this prohibition appears in the entrance to the fifth verse, your blood of your lives will I require, he will surely make inquisition for the blood of man; and then the Lord expresseth himself in the manner in a universal proposition, which (saith Deodat.) lays impartial hold on great as well as on petty offenders. At the hand of every man's Brother will I require the life of a man, which I understand in the active, as well as in the passive sense, viz. that every brother do bring, as well as be brought to Justice for bloodshed: And that God requires this at the peril of the neglecter (though a brother) as well as declare it to the terror of the spiller of blood (though a brother) and then at the sixth verse we have a plain irrepealable Law in the cause; He that sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed; with such a reason annexed, as admits no exception amongst the sons of Adam, for in the Image of God made he Man, so that two universal Propositions arise out of these words. First, Every murderer is to be put to death. Secondly, Every man that will be guiltless of bloodshed, must endeavour to bring the Murderer to Justice. And in further evidence to the truth hereof, let us consider, what a likeness here unto have all God's expressions upon this occasion. More precisely in the 35. of Numbers, a Chapter treating only of this subject of bloodshed, there we see the first universal Proposition frequently repeated in terminis, The murderer shall surely be put to death, verses 17.18.19.30.31. And no less plainly have we the second universal Proposition in verses 31.33.34. expressly declaring that bloodshed defiles the Land, that the Land cannot be cleansed, but by the blood of him that seed it. And that therefore they should execute the Murderer, that they might not be defiled with blood. There shalt take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer. The murderer shall surely be put to death. So we see it is plain, every man that will be guiltless of bloodshed must endeavour to bring the murderer to justice. And therefore if the King be descended of the sons of Adam, and if he have unjustly spilt the blood of his people, the Scriptures are plain that he hath no privilege, and that unless the people endeavour that the hand of Authority touch him for it, the blood he hath spilt hath defiled them all, and they cannot be innocent. His Throne can give him no privilege in this case of blood, God would not endure that his Throne should exempt from Justice: the Sanctuary was his Throne amongst men, yet God commands the murderer to be taken thence & executed, Exod. 21.14. And wise Solomon understood it so, when he commanded Benhaiah to execute blood guilty Joab having the horns of the Altar in his hand: & if God would have the blood guilty person plucked from his own most sacred Throne, yea executed in it, (which in other causes was an insufferable profanation) it cannot displease him to pluck a Murderer to Justice from the Thrones of men: and as the Scriptures clear the Thesis, so their instances make good the practice, that Kings are responsible to God and to men too, for their bloodshed and misgovernment: that they have no such privilege of Impunity for their Prsons as their Parasites have flattered them to believe, which King Agag found to be true, notwithstanding his Plea that he acted, Loco & tempore belli, and had Quarter given him, 1 Sam. 15.33. the Kings of Israel and Judah give us many precedents of the same: the cause of Jehu upon Jehoram being very opposite, God giving testimony by a blessing upon his posterity, 2 Kin. 8.30. and although the persons that acted in chief in such causes, for their indirect intentions and other prevarications, often drew upon themselves the wrath of God, & altered the nature of the work in their own persons; yet did not that at all cleave to it in the Abstractum of executing Justice upon the capital Offender, which all along we find approved as well as commanded of God. And if I may be permitted to travel amongst the Nations of the world, what people hath not avowed their right herein? Let the Queen-Regent of the Western world, Imperial Rome (as she gave law to all the rest) speak for all. How often did it change the form of the Supreme Authority for the corruptions of those that were entrusted with it. Remarkable is the Sentence of the Senate upon the Emperor Nero, who for his misgovernment and baseness was adjudged to be whipped to death, saith my Author, In consensu Senatus praecipuorum Ducum, & exercituum jùste Decretum est ut Tyrannus telleretur. Although he escaped execution by being his own Executioner a day too soon.  
Object. 4. But was not David guilty of the death of Uriah, and yet he did not suffer for it? Nay, did not David execute the Amalekite that slew wicked King Saul, because he stretched forth his hand against the Lords Anointed, notwithstanding the Amalekite pleaded, that saul's escape was past hope, and that what he did was to put the King out of the anguish and pain he was in?  
Resp. First, for the case of David in the death of Vriah, although this Answer were sufficient to that Argument, to say, that it is absurd, and illogicall, because it concludes from a particular to a universal, and from a matter of fact to a matter of right Negatiuè: and another sufficient Answer to this Argument may be, that the death of Vriah being secretly contrived to be done upon an assault by the hand of the Enemy, where there were others in the party, and Vriah might have a possibility to come off, that therefore no humane Judicature (which is to proceed secundùm allegata & probata) could find the matter of fact; yet I rest not in these replies, but for satisfaction to this doubt I answer, That it was not David's Regal Authority that did exempt him from Justice in this case, but it was the indulgence of the Almighty upon his true repentance: and the Text is plain for it, 2 Sam. 12. at the fifth Ver. David unawres giveth a sentence of death upon himself to Nathan, and at verse 13. there is David's repentance, I have sinned against the Lord, then follows the Lord's indulgence, the Lord hath put away thy sin, and that is not all, thou shalt not die; there is David's full discharge from the hand of Justice for the case of the Amalckite: what a senseless argument more is this, to conclude from David's execution of Justice upon a wretch, for a bloody murder upon a King when he was in the most undoubted discharge of his duty, unto the exempting of a tyrant from Justice for his misdeeds? who did ever justify such a wilful murder upon any man though never so wicked!  
Object. 5. Quis est tam magnus pro tanto munere hoc? Is not the King Supreme who can try him, seeing, Supremo non datur Superius?  
Resp. There is great odds between Supreme in power to give, and Supreme in power given, he that is only Supreme in power given, is not so high but that there are greater than he, and such is the King, of whom it was true, that he was Major singulis, but Minor universis, and long since this Nation knew the King's Superior, Scilicet Curiam suam, saith old Fleta; the people in Parliament who often heretofore did and now again may try their Kings as well as other Officers.  
Object. 6. But what say we to that clause in the third Article of the Covenant, which respects the preservation of the King's person and Authority. The Article runs thus. We shall with the same reality and constancy in our several vocations endeavour with our lives and estates mutually to preserve and defend the rights and privileges of Parliaments, and the Liberties of the Kingdoms, and to preserve & defend the King's Majesty's person and Authority, IN THE PRESERVATION AND DEFENCE of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms, that the world may bear witness with our consciences of our Loyalty, and that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish his Majesty's just power and greatness.  
Resp. The plain purpose and scope of this clause in the Article concerning the King, was to testify the tender affections we had to him, and must (to our comfort) remain a Monument thereof to all Generations; as also that we endeavoured (if it had been possible) to win the King to us, before he had run himself and the Kingdom into more mischief: and the better to preval herein, we gave him, which may more, this Solemn assurance in the Covenant, that we meant to give him the greatest share in the preservation of Religion and the Liberties of the Kingdom, that we should exalt his Throne, and make him greater (if it were possible) in the affections of his people at home, and more scared of his enemies abroad, than any of his Ancestors: But the King in whose power alone it remained, by joining with us to put us into a condition to act what we did intent, rejects the Tender, Declares and makes war against us. What colour is there then to press it now upon us? the plain and Grummaticall sense of the Article being, that is covenanteth for some things absolutely and singly, viz. to Endeavour, etc. the preservation of the Privileges of Parliament, the Liberties of the Kingdom and true Religion; for other things it covenanteth under a restrained, limited and conditional sense, viz. to preserve the King's person and Authority; the express words are IN THE PRESERVATION of Religion and the Liberties of the Kingdoms, and no otherwise, nor farther 〈◊〉 so. And 〈◊〉 both sides always interpreted this Article; That the King and his party understood it thus, besides many other arguments drawn from their violent practices against it, appears very plainly in all their Pamphlets against the Covenant, many of which I have seen, the chiefest of that party concluding from this Article, that unless the King 〈◊〉 with the Parliament (to use their own words) turn Round-head, the Covenant provided not at all for him: Very much to this purposespeaketh a Treatise against the Covenant printed at Bristol about five years since, and another set forth by the University of Oxford, approved by general consent in a full Convocation, June 1. 1647. Nay some of that side, of no small judgement, have maintained (and well enough they might) as to the King's interest which they endeavoured to set up) that it had been fare better the King had not been mentioned as all in the Covenant in that limited sense. That the Parliament doth so understand the Article, appears, that immediately after the Covenant had been taken, they did more vigorously prosecute, and require others to prosecute the war, even when the King was upon the place, without any respect to his person and authority, and after gave Commission absolutely without limitation or restraint in that case. And moreover, the parliaments using of the King's name in their public authorities, hath still been interpreted in opposition of his person, because his person was in opposition to his duty, which was to protect the people and the Courts of Justice, not to make war against them; and so and no otherwise they have still interpreted themselves to the people in the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, and all other engagements of like nature, as binding the people to the public Liberties in opposition to the King's person now in arms against them. And we have all along so understood them, and not otherwise; that if at any time the preservation of the King's authority and person stood in competition with Religion and the public Liberties; we have been instructed that the Covenant and Oaths aforesaid bound us to prefer the latter: Unto all which, if we add the war, mischief and bloodshed of three Kingdoms by the King maintained to the last extremity, it will appear, that neither the Covenant and Oaths aforesaid, nor any heart truly conscious of the glory of God can afford a plea sufficient to exempt the King from Justice; And sure, it is the horrible unrighteousness of our natures to think that God likes well the execution of inferior offenders, and the sparing of the Capital, in one and the same matter.  
Object. But there were no Lords consenting to this Trial of the King.  
Resp. You cannot say so; 'tis true, the majority dissented; but what of that? Hath the Negative of the Lords House been judged a sufficient Bar to the proceed of the Commons? The matter was otherwise about seven years since, when Master Pim was sent to the House of Lords to tell them, that if they refused to join with the Commons in settling the Militia, the Commons would do it of their own authority, and the Lords should have no share therein; and the matter was otherwise when about five years a worthy Gentleman of this County, now upon the Bench, being unjustly imprisoned by that House, was discharged with damages by the Commons to his immortal honour.  
I am sure if the King cannot justly claim a Negative against the People, because he is sworn to Govern by the Laws which the People shall choose; the Lords who never had the People's choice, but sit by Patent from the King, cannot claim a Privilege against the People, which the King that gave the Patent had not in himself. I honour the persons of the Nobles of England and their lawful Privileges, and I am persuaded that the truly noble amongst them will not keep up such Privileges as are not consistent with the Fundamental Privileges of the Free borne English Nation the mother of us all; and for the rest I am apt to say with the Philosopher, Nulla mihi inter malos & Tyrannos Nobilitas.  
Object. But the Commons House was not free; They had a Treaty with the King, How came that to be broken off? Did not the Army interpose, and take many Members, and Imprison them coming to the House?  
Resp. First, 'Tis somewhat worth your notice, That the Treaty expired before the Army acted, otherwise then by way of humble Message; nevertheless (if the Council of the Almighty had been so) I could have wished that there had never been a colour for this Argument of a force upon the Parliament, which hath been over and over the Plea of every side; I could wish there had been no colour for it when the Scottish Army was kept so long in the Kingdom at their first entrance, and after satisfaction given them; nor when the tumults came first to Westminster; or when the Seamen came first against White-Hall with Ordnance in Liters; nor upon the frequent insurrection, and insolent Petitions in and about London upon all emergencies; nor upon this last occasion mentioned in the Objection: But I perceive God had a purpose to stain all creature glory, by suffering men to run into folly so far, that sometimes by force they must be pulled out of the fire they had kindled upon themselves and others. The answer which the Parliament party gave their aduersaries upon this Argument, was, that they cordially endeavoured the public good, and the redressing of the soul abuses in the former government, that the 'zounds of Zerviah were too hard for them; that there was an intended, yea a visible mischief acting against the honest party by a Malignant party; that their own actings which had any appearance of force, had an equitable justice in them, were defensive, because they were either for the prevention, or for the present encounter of such eville as were ready to overrun all. And that designs of that mischievous nature securely prevented, they did resolve to abandon all force, and to live only upon rule of Law. And when indeed & bona fide the case is such, I do not think but force, which is as much the Ordinance of God, as freedom, hath then its rightful use and exercise, viz. to set at liberty that justice and truth which corrupt men hold captive, under a pretence of Privilege, and that the equity of man's intentions and actings in such extremities, will justify before God and man, rather than the letter applied to uphold a mischief, & this case must needs be frequent in Imperfect humans Constitutions, unless rules seasonably make remedy upon complaint; and this was apparently the case between the King and Parliament in sundry particulars; and let the judicious say (having read the Army's Remonstrance) if this became not now again truly as much the case of the Kingdom as then: And yet besides all this, the Army will plead that when they did interpose an act, after multiplied addresses made to the Parliament and themselves, they did it for the removal, rather than the laying on of a force upon the Parliament, the Houses enjoying an unquestionable freedom when the King rejected the four Bills presented to him in order to a Personal Treaty, and consequently when they passed the Votes of Non-Addresses which followed thereupon, which Votes stood good many Months; but a party in Scotland liked not this course, their great design being to keep and maintain themselves an interest in this Commonwealth; and under the abused names of Treaty, Covenant, and Church-government, they close with the Cavaliers; in falls a round party that had appeared for the Parliament by Land, Batten and Jorden by Sea, the Lord Willoughby of Parhath formerly made Speaker of the house of Lords pro tempore, and the multitude of the City, & revolted Shipping united all together, quickly found a means to kindle such a flame in the bowels of the Kingdom, that nothing but the hand of God remained of power to quench it again; imperious petitions daily storm the Parliament, speaking concurrently with all the rest the same language for a Cessation and personal Treaty.  
Where was the freedom of the Parliament in the midst of all these tumults? and now many faithful Members being abroad to quench this horrid flame, and others over whelmed with this new faction, the rest got an opportunity to revoke the Votes of Non-Addresses so solemnly and deliberately passed, and to carry the House for a Personal Treaty upon the worst and most dishonourable terms that had ever ever yes fear the Sun on the part of the Parliament. All the Parliaments friends abroad, Presbyterians and others, stand amazed at the matter; the King's party in City and Country triumph and browbeat their Conquerors; Pamphlets printed to vent much scorn and menacies upon the Parliaments friends; at length we all petition against this defusive Treaty, the petition's rejected; then all honest parties of the Kingdom close, and as the last visible remedy, solicit the Army to interpose, by this time returning from one of the wonders of this generation (besides other pettier matters) the dissipation of the three potent Armies, in the North, West and South. The Army in behalf of the Kingdom at length humbly remonstrates to the Parliament against the Treaty, or at least that they would be more cautious what they did in it; for want of audience the Army is feign to declare against it; but they were now sunk into so deep a Lethe, they were sensible of nothing, although God himself in most men's judgements, declared against the Treaty: in that after so many additions of time to lengthen it out, and after the utmost industry used to shuffle up in end, the time expires, and all parties are forced to break off without any thing done, and to sum up the fruit of all this expensive tedious Treaty in a Vote, that the King's Concessions were not satisfactory; truth is he had granted nothing at all to the satisfaction of the Kingdom; and yet the strong factions in and about the Parliament within four days, and nothing more done or obtained, carry the House again into a Vote, that the Concessions were a ground to proceed upon to settle the peace of the Kingdom, all which tossng, turning, and overturning in so bad a business, was no other in my eye then the effect of a force upon the freedom of the Houses first mentioned. And then, and not till then, to prevent a worse mischief, the Army appears Vim vi repellere, to settle the Parliament in the freedom which it had before the Scottish Confederacy, and the repeal of the Votes of the Non-Addresses; and for their seizing the persons of the Members, I confess it is my opinion that they that had a hand in, or gave countenance to so dangerous a Treason, are not fit to be trusted with the Liberties of England. Desperate is the safety of that Common wealth, where the persons trusted with the supreme Authority challenge a privilege of impunity when they transgress.  
Object. 8. They that are apt to object that this doctrine exposeth persons in Authority to the daily violences of the instable multitude:  
Resp. Did they Christianly consider from whence the safety of Rulers ariseth, they would blush to make that objection; God is the alone giver of safety, and well-governing is the good Rulers best preservation; If the Heathen Poet could say, Integer vita scelerisque purus non eget Mauri jaoulis vec arcu; I would not have Professors of Christian Religion more faithless than the Gentiles; the uprightness of the upright shall deliver him; and let men make their Tower never so strong, unrighteousness will make them desolate. To conclude, although the King be dead, although he be fallen by the hand of Justice, notwithstanding his pretence of personal privilege from Scripture, or from his Supreme Authority, notwithstanding the clause in the Covenant, and the non-concurrence of the House of Lords, or pretended force of the Army upon some Members, or any other objection, our Authority as Justices of the Peace, appears to me unquestionable and sure. And what I have spoken upon this subject, I desire may not be understood to aggravate, or keep up differences amongst men; I have laid aside many pertinent things because I would not offend; & I profess seriously in a conscientious desire of the peace and good agreement of all men, that desire peace, I have been thus large to clear the foundation of the freedom and authority of the Commons of England, that we might all build our peace together upon this sure Cornerstone under God. You see I have not favoured any particular interest above other in all my Discourse, I have spoken under no other name but as an English man, and a promoter of common justice without respect of persons; 'tis your Privilege to enjoy it, as old as England; your unsettled minds hinder the enjoyment of it, and lengthens out your troubles and burdens, to the grief of those that labour for you, in this, and other Seats of authority; this is the worst I intent, public peace upon a foundation of equal Justice; and I specially commend it for the present service to the Grand Inquest; because in order thereunto by you the first part is to be acted: I shall not fall into a particular enumeration of offences, and Statutes made against them, as the manner is; it is common to you at every Assizes and Session of the Peace; and I am confident you need not a repetition (at present) thereof. Thus much only be pleased in the general to hear in that kind; Let not blood, oppression and fraud escape your severest inquiry; respect no man's person that comes in judgement before you, present all wilful and profane Blasphemers of the Name and Majesty of God; let vagrant Rogues, Idelers, and the common Nurseries of all baseness and mischief [Alehouses] feel the justice of the Law. And while you are together, bethink yourselves of something of your own, for the better securing of the County against invasion and insurrection: of something for the advance of your own Manufactures and Commodities; for the bettering of the condition of the poor (that, that shame of men Beggars and begging may cease amongst us) and whatever else may give an advancement to righteousness and peace, and we on the Bench shall join with you, and the God of Righteousness and peace direct us all. Amen.  
FINIS.   

To the Religious and Honourable Sir Hardrest Waller Knight, Commander in Chief of all the Western Forces and Garrisons.  
Honourable and Honoured Sir,  
BEsides the task which your trust hath put upon me amongst the Forces in field, a Garrison within this County, and besider the business of my own particular command, I have also all along 〈◊〉 a share in the Civil administrations; the last singly considered (I confess) had been enough to be laid upon such a one as I am, who pleads my excuse with you, if there appear not that exactness 〈…〉 business which is desirable; I am full of zeal to have all things amongst 〈◊〉 under a Contentful as well as a secure management; and therefore I was inclinable (being moved unto 〈◊〉) to give the Charge 〈◊〉 the last Sessions of the peace, where, as I had an opportunity, so 〈◊〉 it my duty to satisfy the Country concerning the late and present proceed of the Parliament, which have been miserably abused by 〈◊〉 specious objections raised to trouble and interrupt the settlement of the Commonwealth, the 〈◊〉 material of them, have been long since answered, and therefore what I did in that Province, is little other than a Repetition of old Parliament language, and that phrase of 〈◊〉. I have industriously kept myself unto in all my Replies to these Objections: And herewith I present the whole to your view; the 〈◊〉 I confess hath some small difference from what was spoken, the Liberty. I used in expression, carrying me into were variety then would beseem the paper; and in one or two passages, the 〈◊〉 gathering up what escaped the present expression. I assure you, else, it is one and the something in word and writing. I see not any 〈…〉 upon it as worthy the sending to you. That you may be persuaded the sooner to accept of my good will, and overlook my faults in your own business lest in my trust, when this Paper shall mind you of their employments which must be sometimes attended, is the 〈◊〉 design driven as by, Sir,  
Your affectionate Servant, ROB. BENNET. Cornwall April 23, 1649.