THE DECLARATION, VINDICATION, AND PROTESTATION, OF EDWARD DOBSON, Citizen, and Stationer, of LONDON.  
Wherein is showed the many illegal and unjust impri●onments which the said Stationer hath suffered, through the malicious and envious informations of Brownists, Anabaptists, Antinomians, and other seditious Sectaries: contrary to the Laws of God, the Liberty of the Subject, and the Laws of the Land, all which have been Protested, and Covenanted to be maintained with Lives and Fortunes.  
Together with the manner of his coming from Worcester to Northampton, and of his barbarous usage there, by the Governor and others, contrary to the Declaration published in the names of the two Kingdoms, upon the sincerity of which he did depend.  
Also a Relation of his illegal imprisonment upon a pretended suspicion of bringing a Saw to the Irish Lords (as is most scandalously published) for their escape out of the Tower.  
Poenas profundi, frauds Capitisque Rotundi,  
Et Judae suavium det Deus ut caveam.  
Deliver me, O God, I pray, from all that is amiss;  
Hell's punishment, Roundheads cozening, and from a Judas kiss.  
Possumus quod jure possumus.  Max. Leg. 
They have sworn falsely in making a Covenant.  Hosea 10.3, 4. 
novemb: 6th BRISTOL, but indeed London Printed in the Year, M.DC.XLIIII.   

The Declaration, Vindication, and Protestation of EDWARD DOBSON, Citizen, and Stationer of LONDON.  
IF (according to the old Proverb) Loser's may speak by authority, then may not I be silent, considering the many pressures and oppressions the arbitrary and tyraunicall Government usurped by my fellow-Subjects, but exercised over me, and other His Majesty's loyal Subjects, by reason whereof we are fallen to as sad, if not sadder condition, than the Athenians under their thirty Tyrants. Those than that would have beheld these men at the beginning of this Parliament, and have marked with what zeal and hast they went to Westminster to cry Justice, Justice, against the Earl of Strafford, for bringing an arbitrary and tyrannical government into Ireland, would have little thought that ever they themselves would have exercised the same government in England over their fellow-Subjects, as now they do? So that they stand not upon the Quid, but the Qualis, what persons: For, so long as themselves rule, they are content. It seems that they have learned some Maxim of humane policy, To hate and decline that in others, that they may, with the more security, and less suspicion, accomplish the same to themselves. This arbitrary and tyrannical government doth very ill beseem a Prince, the Earl of Strafford in Ireland, or any other Noblemen; but doth become Weavers, Basket-makers, or such kind of Mechanics in England very well. So the Irish Rebellion is called a horrid and bloody action, a cruel war: but the English and Scotch Rebellion is styled a holy and just War, the good Cause, a fight the Lords Battles, the maintenance of Religion, Laws, and Liberty. So the Kings tax of Ship-money was counted an illegal imposition, a heavy burden, and a great grievance, because it was taken without the consent of the three Estates in Parliament. But the taking (though in the same manner) the twentieth, and fift part of men's estates, besides Excise, plunder, and other illegal Taxes, are no burden, no grievance, but a great ease to the people. So the Oath ex Officio (though legal) w●s a great burden and oppression to men's consciences, because it betrayed Offender's into the hands of Justice. But the Scorch and English Covenant, (though forced with the greatest severity) or rather the French League, is no offence, no scruple at all, but a great ease to men's consciences. So the silencing ignorant, illiterate, seditious, and factious Ministers by the Bishops, was styled a Prelatical persecution, an Antichristian Tyranny, and a stopping the mouths of Gods faithful Ministers. But the silencing, imprisoning, and plundering of learned and pious D. Featly, D. Holdsworth, M. Udall, and many other Orthodox and Protestant Divines, unblameable until these th' … s, is nothing (with them) but the suppression of Popery, and Popish Ministers; for such they term● all who hold and conform themselves to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church established by Law. And thus have they learned (like the Jews) to put darkness for light and light for darkness; to call evil good, and good evil. It is not unknown to the world, how by their scandalous and lying Pamphlets, they labour daily to possess the people of the King's intention to bring in Popery. And what is this, think we, but only that they in the interim may with the less suspicion, and more security, bring in Atheism, Heresy, and all Sects and Schisms which have been ever since Christ. How have they trampled under Feet the Temporal and Ecclesiastical Laws? As by imprisoning of men's bodies, plundering and taking from them their estates, and robbing their King of his Forts, Towns, Navies, Magazines, and Militia. How do they obey Christ, who says, Render to Caesar (though a Heathen) the things that are Caesar's, when they take all from him? It is not, give to Caesar, but render implying, that Kings live not upon the gifts and alms of their Subjects, but that they have as great, if not greater right to their Revenues, as Subjects to their goods. With what conscience then can the two Houses usurp the Militia, which (by the Scripture) hath for many years belonged to the disposing of Kings, as appears by that Text in 2 Sam. 18.1. David the King set, or made Captains over Fifties, Hundreds, and Thousands. It doth not say, his great Council, or his Parliament; nay the word Parliament is not to be found in all the Scriptures: and we know that Parliaments had their original and being from Kings. What monsters then are they, that would undermine, depose, and destroy those that gave them their being? Are they any better than vipers, who eat out the bowels of their mothers? I speak not this of a free Parliament: there was never any King deposed or wronged by a free Parliament, neither is it de Jure in the power of a Parliament; for God says plainly, By me King's rule, or reign, Prov. 8.15. He doth not say, by Parliaments, or by the people's authority; nor are they accountable to their Subjects in case of error, or faults, but only to God, as is most clear in King David, who though he sinned against man, yet appealed only to God, saying. Against thee, against thee only have I sinned, etc. Psal. 51. I have sinned against the Lord, 2 Sam. 12.13. And whereas King Richard the second is instanced and objected: I answer, That the deposing of King Richard, to the scandal of this Nation, was an act of high Treason upon the fairest relation.  
I will now speak something concerning the abuses of the Church, and then of my own. And first, let us consider the sacrilege, profaneness, and many insolences offered in God's house by the Parliaments soldiers, as they are commonly called: as their hewing and hacking down the stone-workes, as if they intended to build their Babel with the ruins: their breaking down the rails, spoiling the Communion Table, pulling down Pulpits, as if they intended to set u a tub, or barrel to preach in: and which is worst of all, their picking the poors box, and stealing their bread from off the shelf, which is their prime aim at their first coming into the Churches to plunder. And as if the ills that they had already done could not be safe but by attempting greater, they proceed further, by laying violent hands on the Ministers, tearing the Surplice off their backs, trampling the Book of Common Prayer under feet, the abuse of which ought to be punished (according to the Laws) with great severity. Yet have not the two Houses of Parliament declared their dislike, nor punished any since the King's departure, as ever I could hear. The Philosopher says, Qui vitia non prohibet, jubet & approbat, Those that convive at vices, and do not punish them, approve of and command them. But let us consider further, what nonfence, false Doctrine and blasphemy is preached up and down the City by these orbicular Independents, lumps of ignorance, and silly fellows in black, most of them being ignominious and contemptible Mechanics. It was jerobohams' sin, in making the meanest and vilest of the people Priests: and I pray God that it be not the two Houses sin, in suffering the meanest and the vilest of the people to preach, and to make themselves Priests: even such as are, Tinkers, Weavers, Brewers, Bakers, religious. Sowgelder's, and Button-makers.  
But to leave this, and come to the illegality of my own imprisonments. The cause then of my first imprisonment was, for selling a Book entitled, A Declaration of the Practices and Treasons attempted and committed by Robert late Earl of Essex against Her Majesty, etc. This Book was published by the authority of Queen Elizabeth, and the whole State, in the year 1600. For this book so lawfully licenced was I most unlawfully sent to Newgate by Isaac Pennington the Traitor, and pretended Major, as the King styles him: during my imprisonment in Newgate, one Clerk, a pretended Constable, with his rabble, forces the key of my shop from me, than goes to my shop: and because he could not open my shop door quickly, breaks it open, and falls to plundering; where he took a sword and gold belt, a Set of Pictures, Sir Edward deering's Speeches, twelve of the aforesaid Books, and a Bible, saying, that I was a Malignant, and that they were Malignants goods (for such they make those and their goods that have any thing to lose) and that he would carry them to the Lord Majors, but whether he did or no, I leave to his own conscience which best knows: I am sure I received them not again, although I have used all possible means that may be. Now whether this be the Liberty of the Subject, I appeal to all the world? or whether there be such a thing as liberty left us in London, unless liberty to plunder? or if when they say liberty, they do not equivocate, and mean imprisonment, bondage and slavery? For they have Maxims ex contrariis, to fight for the King and yet shoot great Cannon shot at him: destroy his Person, and yet preserve the King: that treason cannot be committed against his Person, but his Power, which Power the two Houses are: and therefore D. Lopus and Parry, who attempted to destroy Queen Elizabeth's Person, were not traitors, but died very innocent; and the learned Judges who condemned them as guilty of high treason, did them great injustice: so did the Judges who judged, the Earl of Essex (this man's Father) guilty of high Treason for attempting and endeavouring to take away evil Counsellors from Queen Elizabeth, as appears by the Earl of Essex's Defence, and their Reply. The Defence, For my part I intended no hurt to Her Majesty's Person, but only to take away her evil Counsellors, etc. The Reply. The Judges delivered their opinion in matter of Law upon two points: The one, That in case where a Subject doth attempt to put himself into such a strength as the King shall not be able to resist him, and to force and compel the King to govern otherwise then according to his own royal authority and direction, 'tis manifest rebellion. The other, That in every rebellion, the Law extendeth as a consequence, the compassing the death, and deprivation of the King, as foreseeing, that the Rebel and Traitor will never suffer the King to live or reign, which might punish or take revenge of his Treason and Rebellion. And therefore this is not only the sense of the Law, but even common reason and experience teacheth as much: For the Subjects never obtained a superiority over their King, but immediately followed the death and deposition of the King, as in the example of Edward the second, and Richard the second.  
But to return to any own occasion: I wonder what Clerk or any of these holy, pious, and religious plunderers (who rob men in the fear of the Lord, and under a colour of Religion, and long Prayer, devour Widow's houses) will answer Christ at the day of Judgement, when he will say, I commanded you that you should not covet, rob, nor plunder your neighbours: Why did you? Why truly Lord, I was told that they were Malignants, and that their goods were Malignant goods: blendes Lord, I had an Ordinance of Parliament for what I did then. Let them see whether their pleading that their neighbours were Malignants; or that their Ordinance, or rather Patent to plunder, will bear them out at that day, for the breach of God's Commandments. But these frantic Brownists and wild Ambaptists have learned new Maxims of Divinity, as first; That the dominion of things is founded in grace, and not in nature, from whence they conclude, that they may rob the wicked as (they say) the Isrealits' did the Egyptians. Secondly that the wicked are usurpers and that they only have right to the creatures, being (as they style themselves) the meek of the earth, but not to insist on these things, and come to the second cause of my imprisonment, which was; For beating one Nicholas Tew, an Anabaptist, for saying, The King had none but Rogues about him, and for ask him, with what conscience he could say so, he having taken the late Protestation to defend the King's Honour? For this (by the information of the said Tew and one Thomas Andrews an arrant honest man) was I apprehended, and had before Isaac Pennington, my old friend, who committed me to Woodstreet Compter, and the next day was sent with a Rabble to the Parliament House, from thence I made my escape to Oxford: after my departure they plundered me of all the Ware in my Shop, to the value of above one hundred pounds, besides my wearing , and (contrary to the rules of good housewifery) left not so much as an egg in the nest, for the hen to sit upon: not content with this, they make a further gradation to perpetrate their impieties by murdering me in my reputation, and scandalising me in their Libels, giving me a nickname, more befitting the inventors. But it 'tis not strange that they slander me, when they stick not to slander the footsteps of Gods Anointed, their King, neither is it any marvel that they rob me, when they fear not to rob God, by robbing Churches, and Churchmen, their lawful King, and all the true Nobility: but by whom are they thus rob? But by those who despise all Arts and Learning, like the fox that contemned the grapes because he could not reach them. When they had thus plundered me, they summon my own mother, and brothers, to make Oath, whether they knew of any more estate that I had, either in money, goods, or debts. O monstrous: Tyrant: I can the Pope, can Antichrist use more Tyranny over conscience, than these? To make a mother take an Oath to ruin & undo her own child by discovering his estate, that they may rob him? And thus they deal with men's servants, compelling them by their unconscionable Oaths (judas like) to betray their Masters, making them take Oaths to discover their Master's Estates, being contrary to the Covenant of their Indenture, of keeping their Master's secrets. Thus themselves being treacherous, false, and perfidious, to their King, would have servants be so to their Masters. Now those that refuse their illegal Oaths, and Covenant, they imprison; as they have done a young Apprentice of M. smith's, for refusing to be unfaithful to his Master, by betraying his Estate, for them to plunder. In like manner deal they with the King's Soldiers, their Prisoners, Either take our Covenant, or else lie in Prison, and be starved, for you shall have no maintenance or allowance from us, not so much as of your own Estates which we have plundered you of. And thus they dealt with me when they put me in the dungeon in the Gatehouse at Westminster. Now I say, that it is a quaere; whether an Oath or Covenant extorted in this nature obliges, and binds the conscience? The Schoolmen conclude negatively that Extortum non est tenendum; And in my opinion, it binds men to nothing but to repentance. Again, it is another quaere, whether an Oath or Covenant can be imposed upon the consciences of His Majesty's Subjects, without his assent, or without the consent of the three Estates of a free Parliament? The Common Law concludes negatively too. An unlawful Oath it is thought, may lawfully be broken, though not lawfully taken. Herod sinned in keeping his Oath, so did jephthah in keeping his Vow. And I wonder why they should call it the Nationall Covenant? Sure they mean, the Covenant of the S●ismaticks and Browni●●s of the Nation; for Protestants will not take it willingly. Not to insist upon this. I have been imprisoned, and under Custody ten times since the King went a way, but not as an evil doer; and that is my joy, my comfort. Only for a pretended Malignant, and because I knew not how to departed from my allegiance, for denying to contribute money to destroy the King and Kingdom, For refusing to be under the tyranny and slavery of my fellow Subjects, and to forfeit the freedom and liberty purchased to us by our great Ancestors with the labour and industry of so many years. For these causes and for these crimes have I been plundered, imprisoned, and rob. Nor am I like to have remedy, or to be bettered, but rather worse: For they have safely done so many evils already, that they will still do more. But to pass by this, Let us loyal English consider how happy we are in our King over other Nations? They fight for their King there, our King fights for us here. Was there ever King so ready to lay down his life for his Subjects Liberties, as our now King Charles? Who is like to the good Shepherd, that will lay down his life, for his sheep, as appears by his readiness to hazard his life and sacred p●●son in defence of us his poor distressed Protestants groaning under the bloody and cruel persecution, of Papists in Ireland, and Brownists, Sectaries, Puritans, and Roundheads in England. Saint Paul fought with beasts at Ephesus. But the King fights with beasts in England, unreasonable beasts; who would have the Bishops preach and keep hospitality, and yet will allow them no means They say that the Bishops would bring in Popery, but they would bring in Popery themselves. For they would take away all the Clergies means, and make them all begging Friars.  
But to return again to my own occasions. I was no sooner discharged out of the Gatehouse, but one Thomas Weaver, one of the Earl of Essex's Lifeguard, meets me in Thames street, and after some greeting, would needs have me to prison again, without any Warrant. I endeavoured to persuade and convert this Weaver, but all was in vain: for I had no sooner cast the beam out of his eye, but the shuttle got into his brain: and so I left him.  
I now come to speak of my coming to Northampton from Worcester, which was thus.  
I hearing of a Declaration published in the names of the two Kingdoms, the second of February last passed, 1643. for the acception of all those that would come in, and having divers occasions (my mother being dead) to come to London, I relied upon the sincerity of this Declaration, and came accordingly from thence to Northampton. No sooner was I c●me to Northampton, and presented myself to the Governor, Colonel Whetham, a quondam-Baker in London, but immediately I was stripped, and robbed of fifteen pounds, and after wards scandalously abused in a lying London-Pamphlet, that I had a Crucifix about my neek. Indeed the bringing so much money was enough to make any man a Papist, a Malignant, a Spy, or what they please. Something must be said for the unjust and perfidious taking away my money and goods, else the robbery would be too gross. From thence I was sent to London, and examined by the Committee for Examinations, and promised by them my money: about a fortnight after that, I went to petition for my money so promised, and was for peti ioning committed to the Gatehouse, where I lay five weeks without any relief. This course usage made me to think that the aforesaid Declaration was nothing but a stratagem or policy of the new State to get men's persons as well as their estates into they power, and then use them as they please. I wonder what Sir Edward Deering got by coming in to them? nothing surely, but was made (as they have made me) a religious beggar. We might well think, that those that break their oath with their King, will scarce keep faith with us, they having learned the Jesuits Maxim, Fides non est tenendacum Haereticis & Malignantibus. Not long after this I was again apprehended by one Cox and Hunt, two wiseacres, upon a pretended and forged suspicion of bringing a Saw to the Irish Lords, and was had without any Warrant to Guildhall, from thence without any examination or Mittimus brought to the New-Prison in Maiden-lane, and from thence to the Tower, before the pretended Lieutenant Isaac Pennington, of whom I demanded my accusers, but they were not to be found. After they had detained me some seven or eight days close prisoner, not letting me all that while lie in a bed, they send one Plucknut, a shark, to say, I was not the man that he saw go into the Tower with the Saw, he was a tall black man, and had a black beard: upon these words I was discharged. Now I appeal to all the world, whether this be according to the Laws of God, or the Laws of the Land, which they have so zealously covenanted to maintain. It is said, Acts 25.17. It seems unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not examine the crimes against him; and our Saviour dismissed the woman because her accusers did not appear, Joh. 8.10, 11. Besides, 'tis against the Laws of the Land, as appears by Magna Charta, 9 Hen. 3.29. in these words, That justice shall be delayed, deferred, or denied to no man. But why do I speak of Law or Gospel, to these who regard neither? Who have not the fear of God before their eyes. Rom. 3, 18. Who fear not to resist, disobey their King. God commanded his people to submit to the yoke of Nabuchadnezzar, a heathen, and an Idolatrous King, and threatened divers punishments to those who did resist, disobey, and not submit to him, as is most clear in the 27 of Jer. 8, 11. and called him and King Cyrus his Anointed, though Heathens. If then God would have his people to submit and obey Nebuchadnezzer, a Heathen and an Idolatrous King, certainly then much more would he have us to submit, not resist, and obey our Protestant and Christian King, who is not addicted to any of those personal vices which many of his predecessors have been. Lastly and to conclude, I do declare and protest for my Vindication, that notwithstanding the many slanderous untruths, that I am a Protestant, but not of the Amsterdam, Geneva, or New-Eengland Cut: I am for Monarchy regulated according to Law, The Doctrine and Discipline of the Church established by Law, and hope to see the King, like Solomon upon his throne, and with his countenance to scatter these cursing Shemei's, these railing Rabshake's and round breeches, like dust before the wind.  
Finally if the King prevail, all his loyal Subjects will be happy: but if the worst should come, and God should punish us for our sins by letting Rebels prevail; yet, Malo vinci cum Caesare, quam vincere et regnare cum Pompeio. I had rather fall, be overcome, ruined, and undone with my King, the Nobility, and loyal Gentry, fight for the true Protestant Religion, the Laws of the Lands and the Privileges of Parliament; Then to conquer, overcome, rule, and reign, with Essex; fight for Schismatiks, Heretics, Sacrilege, Rebellion, and Treason.   
FINIS.