A Plea, or Protest, MADE By WILLIAM PRYNNE, Esquire, AND By him sent unto J. M. Knight, one of the eleven impeached Members.  
Wherein he declares the injustice and illegality of the Lords, Commons; and Grandees of the Armies Proceed against him.  
Whereunto is annexed the Case of A. B. (a Citizen of London, and a free Commoner of England) truly stated, in reference to a pretended impeachment of Treason depending in the House of Peers against him: With an Answer to certain Queres framed thereupon: Unto which is annexed the Answer of the said A. B. unto the Lords assembled in Parliament in point of Law, in reference to the said pretended Impeachment; in which it is fully proved, that the House of Lords (by the known and declared Law of England) hath not the least jurisdiction in the world over any Commoner whatsoever in any case whatsoever: With a full Answer to all their Precedents in such cases; And that it is not safe for the said A. B. to kneel at the Lords Bar, because it is a stooping and submitting to their Jurisdiction.  
Published for the common good of all honest Englishmen, By Lionel Hurbin Gentleman, March 17. 1647.  
Printed for jah. Hornish. 1648.   

The Protestation of J. M. Knight of the Bath, to the Articles of high Treason, dr●wn up by M. William Prynne of Lincoln's Inn Esquire, and sent by him unto the foresaid J. M. for his legal Plea, Protest and Answer to his Impeachment at the Lords Bar.  
ALl advantages of exception to the incertainty and illegality of the Articles exhibited against this Defendant in the name of the Commons assembled in Parliament, in maintenance of their accusation and impeachment of high Treason against him, to this Defendant now and at all times hereafter saved, when he shall be legally charged and proceeded against in a full and free Parliament: He this Defendant, not by way of Answer, Plea, or Demurrer, but of Protestation only, saith, that as he cannot acknowledge all or any of the said Articles to be true in any part thereof in manner and form as they are exhibited, being no ways conscious to himself of any crime of High Treason, much less of levying any new or actual War against the King and Parliament, in whose faithful service and defence he hath during these late unhappy troubles, spent most of his time, and engaged a great part of his estate, without any recompense or salary; so in discharge of his duty to the Parliament and Kingdom, and performance of his solemn League and Covenant in point of conscience towards God, he is now further necessitated most solemnly to protest, that both Houses of Parliament for the space of seven months' last passed, and at the time when the Articles of his present Impeachment were Voted in the House of Commons, transmitted to the Lords House, and he this Defendant ordered to put in his Answer thereunto, were and ever since have been and still are under the open actual horrid force, power, menaces, Guards and Garrisons of Sir Thomas Fairfax, and the Army under his Command, who refused to disband, according to the Houses Votes and Ordinances, marched up in a body against them to Westminster, contrary to their express Orders and Commands, impeached, suspended divers, and forced away the major part of their Members, constrained them by menacing Declarations, and their approaches towards the Houses to retract many Votes and Ordinances passed in both Houses when free and full, and to make divers new Votes, Orders, and Ordinances, against their wills and judgements, quite contrary thereunto, and have since got the Command of the Tower of London into their hands, and erected new Garrisons of horse and foot at Whitehall, and the Mues, and placed armed Guards upon both Houses, to intimidate and force them to carry on their projects and designs, and Vote what they and their Confederates shall prescribe: In which regard he this Defendant humbly conceives, that the House of Commons are utterly disabled and made uncapable to exhibit, Vote, and transmit, and the House of Peers (divers of whose Members have been lately since the said force impeached, suspended, imprisoned, and kept out of the House upon the selfsame pretended false Articles which are charged against this Defendant, of purpose to deprive them of their Votes, as is conceived) put into an absolute incapacity for the present to receive and prosecute these Articles of Impeachment of High Treason against this Defendant, the rather for that the respective Parliaments of 15. E. 3. 21. R. 2. 11. H. 4. 31. H. 6. & 39 H. 6. and both Houses in this present Parliament assembled in their Ordinance of the 20. of August last, have solemnly adjudged and resolved, that all Acts of Parliaments, Attainders, Impeachments, Votes, Orders and Ordinances of one or both Houses of Parliament, made and passed whiles the Parliament and Houses were under any actual force and menaees, (especially of an whole mutinous Army marching up against them, and quartering and erecting new Garrisons round about them) are merely void in Law, and aught to be so reputed and declared; and that more especially in this Defendants case, who was originally impeached and prosecuted in the Commons House with ten other eminent Members, in the name of Sir Thomas Fairfax and the Army under his Command, and by their menaces, force, and violence, suspended, and ejected out of the Commons House, whereof he was lately an actual and still is a rightful Member, without any legal Trial, or any witnesses or proof legally examined against him, or being once admitted to his lawful defence by the Army and their Confederates mere arbitrary power and party in the House, who have no lawful Authority to suspend or eject their Fellow-Members, who have every way the selfsame and as good right to sit and continue in the House as themselves; and therefore whiles both Houses continue under this force and power of the Army, and whiles above half their Members are forcibly suspended, ejected, restrained or forced to absent themselves, this Defendant can neither in honour, justice, nor conscience acknowledge them, nor either of them to be in any legal capacy to exhibit, receive or prosecute any Charge or Impeachment against him, until they be totally freed from the Army's Wardship and overruling power, and all their unjustly impeached, suspended, ejected and absent Members restored to their ancient Freedom of voting and sitting in the Houses, without any Guards or over-awing Forces to terrify or daunt them. And moreover, this Defendant by Protestation only averreth, that the Speaker of the House of Commons and trust of those Members in it who were chief compilers and contrivers of these Articles against him, and the Speaker of the House of Peers, with nine other Peers who now pretend and are most likely to be his Judges, did in or about the 4. day of August now last passed, contrary to their trust and duty, not only desert their service and attendance in the Houses and fly to the Army without just cause, whiles divers other Members of both Houses continued sitting, but likewise enter into and subscribe a solemn Engagement to live and die with the Army in this cause, and to prosecute your Petitioner and others who then continued sitting in the Houses, who in pursuit of that Engagement, have exhibited these Articles against this Defendant, and thereby absolutely disabled themselves being pre-engaged parties to give any Vote at all, or prosecute this Impeachment in the Commons House, or to be indifferent competent Judges thereof in the House of Peers, who have no proper conusance of express Treasons triable by Verdict and Indictment at the Common-Law, and not in Parliament, it being against Magna Charta, ch. 29. 25. E. 3. c. 2. 4. 28. E. 3. c. 3. 37. E. 3. c. 8. 42. E. 3. c. 3. The Petition of Right, 3. Caroli, and sundry other Statutes. Upon which just grounds and considerations, he this Defendant by this his Protestation absolutely protests against all and every of the said Articles as null and void in Law, to which he is bound to give no present Answer in Parliament, and to except against all those Members of either House who have subscribed the Engagement to the Army, as being incompetent prosectors and Judges in his public cause; and therefore he this Defendant humbly appeals from an empty, forced, and overawed, to a full and free Parliament, where he shall be always ready to answer all such crimes properly triable in and by Parliament, as shall be objected against him in a due and legal way, not triable elsewhere by Indictment, Jury and the ordinary course of the Common-Law in other Courts of Justice, as this pretended levying of War is, both by Common and Statute-Law; and therefore this Defendant for the reasons aforesaid, humbly prayeth to be excused from giving any further or other answer to this void impeachment, till this his solemn Protestation shall be debated and overruled in a full and free Parliament exempted from the Army's Jurisdiction, Wardship and over-awing force.  
Courteous Reader, Thou art desired to take notice, that the reason wherefore the forementioned Plea and Protest of Mr William Prynne is now printed, is because since he sent it to the foresaid Knight (which will be punctually and fully proved he did, if he shall deny it) he hath since published a large Plea, to justify the Lords Jurisdiction over Commoners in Criminal Cases, and thereby done as much as in him lies to the height, to animate and encourage the House of Lords to proceed to adjudge, condemn and execute the foresaid Knight, and the four Aldermen of London, now Prisoners in the Tower, and who now stand impeached before the Lords Bar by the House of Commons (being forced thereunto by the over-awing power of the Grandees of the Army) of high Treason; But I desire any rational man in England (but especially all those that wish well to the foresaid Prisoners) seriously to consider, whether a more mischievous malicious and destroying action could be done, to destroy the Lives, Liberties and Estates of the foresaid Prisoners by the most malicious adversary they have in England, than that illegal and desperate Plea made by their much pretended friend Mr. Prynne, who thereby hath (if I have any judgement) stabbed them and there Liberties (as much as in him lies) to the very heart, but what should be the reason of his so unseasonable publishing of the foresaid desperate Plea at this very nick of time when they are all upon their trials, and their lives and Estates thereby at stake, and absolutely in danger to be destroyed, if they stoop and submit to their Jurisdiction (as is undeniably evinced in the following case of A. B.) I am not able to render, unless it be because the foresaid Knight would not follow his advice in delivering the foresaid Protest, which he of purpose sent unto him for that end, the which if any rational man please to compare with his foresaid Plea, he shall find it an absolute answer to the chief things in it, and a contradiction of it, and which in the following lines so much, as concerns the Lord's Jurisdiction over Commoners is fully answered.  

The Case of A. B. truly stated, etc.  
THe two Houses of Parliament the 26. of July 1647. were petitioned by the City for the Militia as the Houses had established to them for one year in May before; and notwithstanding had been the 23. of July (at the desire of the Army) altered and put into such hands as they desired. This Petition was seconded (though not with the knowledge of the City) by another from the Apprentices and others who came tumultuously upon the Houses, and prevailed for re-establishment of the Committee of Militia as in May before.  
The day following, being the 27. of July the Houses sat, and adjourned till Friday following: upon Friday, after long waiting, and much inquiry made for the Speakers, it appeared they were gone to the Army, and deserted the Houses, whereupon both Houses chose new Speakers, and proceeded as before, and endeavoured to provide for the safety of the Parliament, City and Kingdom; and in order thereunto gave order to Committees formerly named to that purpose: whereupon the Army, with the former Speakers, & divers others, viz. 9 of the House of Lords that now sit, and 58 or thereabouts of the House of Commons, marched up towards the Parliament and City in a hostile manner, notwithstanding the Houses then sitting ordered the Army not to march towards the City, nor nearer it than 40 miles; which Orders were sent and delivered to the General and Commissioners of Parliament resident in the Army, to which they yielded no obedience, but contrarily marched nearer the City; and upon the third of August last the Army published their Declaration against the City and Parliament then sitting, pretending the Houses were no Houses of Parliament, but a company of Lords and Gentlemen assembled together, assuming to themselves a Parliamentary power, and all they that acted therein, or upon their Orders, they acted without any authority of Parliament; the Army avowing those that had left the Houses as invested with the Parliaments Authority; and that the Army would only act upon, and according to their Council: and this the Army engaged to make good with their lives and fortunes.  
This Declaration the said Speakers and Members upon the 4. of August entered an Engagement under their hands, to make good with their lives and fortunes: And upon these grounds the Army and they join and march upon the Parliament and City, and accordingly the 6. of August, the said Speaker and Members in an hostile manner came up with a part of the Army to the Houses, and there the Speaker and Members took their seats as before, and have ever since with that force, or some other part of the Army attending them, continued sitting.  
Upon the said 6. of August they appoint a Committee (another Committee than the Houses had appointed in the absence of Speaker and Members) to examine the force upon the Houses, the 26. of July, 1647. and that day or immediately after, endeavoured to pass a Vote for the owning of the Engagement entered into by the Speaker and Members as aforesaid with the Army, which would not then pass, as also a Vote for the nulling of all Ordinances, etc. betwixt the 26. of July, the day of the force, and the 6. of August, the day the Army put the Speaker into their Chairs as aforesaid, which many several days passed in the Negative; both these Votes and many more to this purpose which first passed in the House of Lords, consisting then of the engaged Lords, and from day to day renewed by those Lords, and sent down to the House of Commons for their concurrence.  
And at length by means of more force, and a Remonstrance from the Army of the 17. of August, the Vote was passed, and being obtained, divers of both Houses of Parliament, and of the City of London were examined upon, questioned, impeached and imprisoned, and for their very obedience to and acting upon the Order and Ordinances of the House of Parliament, (who sat in the absence of the rest and are allowed to be Houses of Parliament by that Order, wherein all they did in that time is declared to be null) are ordered to be brought to their Trial upon pretended treason and misdemeanour, amongst which A. B. is one, and is to be tried by those very Lords (if he submit thereto) who entered this Engagement, and who if they condemn not A. B. and the rest upon the said treason and misdemeanours, make themselves guilty for their thus acting and engaging with the Army against the Houses as aforesaid, and so will bring a condemnation upon their own heads.  
All which premised and considered, I frame three Quaeres.  
1. Query. Whether it be safe for A. B. questioned by the House of Commons, and the Army, to submit to any trial by the engaged Lords, who by their engagement have passed judgement upon him already, which they are to make good with their lives and fortunes, and must as the case lies condemn themselves or him. To which I answer negatively for these ensuing reasons.  
1. Ans. It's not to be supposed, that the Lords will declare themselves Traitors; and war being Levied by A. B. and them, each against other, the fact of one or the other, must necessarily be included in the Stat. of 25. Ed. 3. where levying war against the King is declared treason.  
2. A. The quality of A. B. his supposed fact is so prejudged treason by the Commons already, and who have so transmitted it to the Lords, as that the Lords, dare not descent, lest the House of Commons and the Army should fall furiously upon them and incline to abolish their usurped jurisdiction over Commoners or any other ways to be revenged of them, and therefore in case A. B. submit to a trial by those Lords the hopes of his life solely depends upon the defect of evidence as to the matter of fact.  
3. A. The Interest of those Lords, and of the Army Grandees whom they are obliged to serve, is to excute exmpelary punishment upon some that resisted the Army, otherwise their reputation with the people will be utterly lost; and therefore if A. B. put himself upon a trial by the Lords, assuredly they must and will lay Load upon him to the purpose.  
2. Query. If the first be not safe, than secondly what is A. B. his safest Plea, whether to the Lords none jurisdiction of his cause, being against Magna Charta the Petition of Right, etc. by the authority of, which the Commoners of England are only to be tried by their equals. Or to the incompetency of judging in this case being both judges and parties.  
A. It's not safe for A. B. to plead that the Lords are incompetent judges because they are parties, and the reasons are.  
First, Because that Plea, is not only an implicit acknowledgement of their jurisdiction over Commoners, but also a tacit confession of the matter of fact, for the very Plea implies a mutual Levying war, else they could not be parties.  
Second, Because that Plea, is not valid in Law, for the King sits by his Deputies in all Courts of justice, and yet he is in Law a party.  
Third, Because that Plea lies only, as to the equity of the Laws, and therefore admits of the exercise of the judicial power about it, and so the Commons which transmitted A. B. unto the Lords, and the Lords themselves must be judges of the validity of the Plea, and it cannot be supposed that either the Commons or the Lords, will take that dishonour to themselves to reverse their former judgement: and so consequently the House of Commons acknowledge the Injury they have offered to A. B. by imprisoning him, etc. And the House of Lords also acknowledge the wrong they have done to the Lord Willoughby and the rest of the seven impeached Lords by restraining them, etc.  
There remains therefore no secure Plea to A. B. but to the non-jurisdiction of the Lords over Commons.  
3. Query. If the first or second, be judged the safest Plea, then in the third place when is the proper time of pleading.  
A. 1. The only proper time is to begin, when the Lords send their first warrant to bring A. B. up to their Bar, before them to answer to the impeachment, and this to be done by a salvo to his Liberty put into the Lieu. of the Tower, in the nature of that which Sir john Maynard sent to Col. Tichhurne the 17 Feb. 1647. which you may read in Print it the 36 and 37 Pages of his case truly stated.  
2. But secondly, at the least A. B. must refuse to kneel at the Lords Bar, because it is a clear acknowledgement of their jurisdiction over him; and this appears by these ensuing reasons.  
First, Because kneeling at their Bar, is the only distinguishing note between those who come to their Bar; only by a bare Summons, or for witnesses, etc. and those which comes to their Bar as Deliquents, the first of which they never require to kneel, but only the second, viz. Those which they look upon as Delinquents; therefore whosoever kneels at their Bar, acknowledgeth the Lord's power and jurisdiction over him, to Summon him to their Bar as a Delinquent, and there to judge and condemn him.  
Second, The Lords claim to that adoration by kneeling, extends to no other than those Delinquents which are under their jurisdiction, and that only as they are Delinquents.  
Third, It's evident by the constant practice, of all such as are not looked upon as Delinquents, coming to their Bar; that kneeling is no note of Civil respect, it being never required of them, nor performed by them; and therefore by consequence must be a symptom of delinquency performed only by those that stoop to their jurisdiction over them to try them therefore.  
Fourth, It's very observable that in the ordinary Courts of justice, no man holds up his hand at the Bar but a Delinquent, that is a person adjudged a Delinquent (and under their jurisdiction) by a jury of twelve men, commonly called the Grand jury; and though some pretend kneeling in Law to be only an act of reverence, that implies honour and power, yet it is evident that all persons, appearing before the ordinary Courts of justice, in civil causes, from whom equal honour is due to them, and over whom they have power of jurisdiction, yet I say all such as appear before them in civil causes, are not required to hold up their hands at the Bar, but only those that are as before esteemed and judged Delinquents; so in the like manner no more are any required to kneel at the Lords Bar, but only those they judge Delinquents, by virtue of which kneeling they do ipso facto acknowledge and grant them a jurisdiction over them.  
Fifth, Now considering that kneeling is a stooping to the Lords jurisdiction, and also an acknowledgement of Delinquency, therefore whosoever knelt at the Lords Bar, doth acknowledge himself a Delinquent, and also before his legal judges, therefore it is undeniable, that after kneeling no plea against their jurisdiction can be legally admitted after such an undeniable submission to it; for in ordinary Courts though any privilege of being an officer, etc. in another Court might legally exempt the party, to be tried from the jurisdiction of an other Court that will try him, if he claim and challenge his privilege, before he sloop unto their jurisdiction, yet in case he shall first do any act that acknowledge their jurisdiction over him, before he claim and challenge his privilege; no Plea by him against their jurisdiction will be admitted afterward.   

The answer of the foresaid A. B. a Citizen of London, and a free Commoner of England, to the Lords in Parliament Assembled, upon the commands of the said Lords, that A. B. should return an answer to a scroll or paper called by them Articles of Impeachment, etc. against the said A. B.  
THe said A. B. saving and reserving to himself entire, his native liberty as a commoner of England, not to answer unto any Charge, Impeachment, or Indictment, by whomsoever exhibtied against him, before any persons unto whom the cognizance of the crimes of Commoners, and their trials doth not legally, and properly pertain: yet protesting against all indeavoures and desires of avoiding, or escaping a just and legal trial for any crime, or offence whatsoever, whereof he now pretendedly stands suspected and charged, and declaring his willingness, and readiness now, or any time hereafter, to answer to any crime that either is, or shall be, legally objected against him before any Cou●t, that by virtue of an established law, hath jurisdiction over him, he the said A. B: saith. That in case he were to be suspected for Treason Felony, or any other crime, there could be no legal just proceed to bring him to answer, but by presenement, or indictment of good and lawful men of the neighbourhood where such Treasonable, Felonous, or other criminal deeds are done; which is undeniably evident by the petition of Right made in the third of the present King, and the act for the abolishing of ship money and the other act for the abolishing the Starr-Chamber made this present Parliament anno 17. 
* Which five acts you may read in L. C. joh. lilburn's book called people's prerogative. p. 1. 2. 3. 4. & 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.  of the King.  
The very express words of the last, of which are, that, Whereas by the Great Charter many times confirmed in Parliament, It is enacted that no freeman shall be taken or imprisonned, or diffeised of his free hold, or Liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or otherwise destroyed, and that the King will not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgement of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land; And by another stature made in the fift year of the Reign of King Edward the third, It is enacted, that no man shall be attached by any accusation nor forejudged of life or li●●, nor his Lands, Tenements, goods nor Cattles seized into the King's hands, against the form of the Great Charter, and the Law of the Land; And by a statute made in the twenty five year of the reign of the same King Edward the third, It is accorded, assented, and established, that none shall be taken by Petition, or suggestion made to the King, or to his counsel, unless it be by indictment, or presentment of good and lawful people of the same neighbourhood where such deeds be done, in due manner, or by process where such deeds be done, in due manner, or by process made by writ original at the common law; and that none be put out of his franchise or freehold, unless he duly brought to answer, and forejudged of the same by the course of the Law, and if any thing be done against the same, it shall be redressed and holden for none. And by an other statute made in the twenty eight year of the same King Edward the third. It is amongst other things enacted, That no man of what estate or condition soever he be, shall be put out of his Lands o● Tenements, nor taken nor imprisoned, nor disinherited nor put to death, 
* So that in time of peace, for a general or any other, that hath commission of Marshal authority, to hang, or otherwise execute any man by colour of Marshal Law, this saith Sir Edward Cook 3 part inslit. foe 52 is absolute murdes: yea there he further saith Th. Earl of Lancaster being taken in an open infurrection (or rebellion) was by judgement of Marshal law put to death the 14 Ed. 4. this [saith he] was adjudged to be unlawful, and he gives this reason for it, because he was not tried by the declared law of the Land [which is every Englishmans birthright] the Courts of justice being all open, where-according to the aocustomed manner it was dispensed, see fo. ibid. 86 87. and 2 part fo. 529. see the petition of Right and William Thomsons plea a free commoner of England now condemned by Marshal Law, by the General, etc. to be [shot to death] printed in the 45. 46. 47. 48. 49 50 pages of the forementioned book, called the people's prerogative  without being brought to answer by due process of Law. And by another statute made in the forty two years of the reign of the said King Edward the third. It is enacted that no man be put to answer without presentment before justices, or matter of record, or by due process or write original according to the old law of the Land, and if any thing be done to the contrary, it shall be void in Law, and holden for error.  
And the said A. B. further saith. That for the better securing of the subjects lives, Liberty, names and estates, the Law hath provided that in the legal proceed aforesaid, to bring any person accused to answer, the informer or accuser shall not only be known, but also bound by the justices to prosecute his suggestion, that thereby the party accused may have due reparations in case of scandal: and to that intent was it enacted by the statutes of the 37 Ed. 3, 18. and 38. Ed. 3. 9  
That ●f any shall make suggestion to the King, of any crime committed by any other, the same person shall be sent with the suggestion to the chancellor, etc. and there to find surety to pursue his suggestion, which if he cannot prove, he shall be imprisoned, and there remain until he hath satisfied the party accused of his damages and slander; And the statutes of the 1. Ed. 6. 12 and 5 and 6. Ed. 6. 11. hath provided, that no man shall be indicted of treason, unless he be accused by two lawful and sufficient witnesses, or shall without violence confess the same.  
And the statute of the 1. & 2. of Philip and Mary chap. 10. enacts, that no man for any crime that is called Treason should be tried, but at the Common Law. And he the said A. B. further saith that both your Lordships, and the House of Commons in the whole stream of all your Declarations, declare unto the whole Kingdom, that you will preserve the subjects Liberties and freedoms, and the just and fundamental Laws of the Land, and in particular in your late printed Votes of 27. Jan. last, although you declare to lay the King aside, and make no more addresses to him, yet you there declare; to maintain and preserve the Laws of the Land, and to Govern the people thereby.  
And he the said A. B. further saith, that the not finding any indictment or presentment of him, for any real or supposed crime, by good and lawful men of any neighbourhood, where such supposed crime was committed, he ought not to be put to answer at all, neither can he with safety to himself, or to the Commons of England, or to the Laws and Liberties thereof, answer your Lordships any further than merely to point of jurisdiction, viz. That your Lordships by the knowue and declared Law of this Land hath not the least jurisdiction in the world over him, or any Commoner of England whatsoever in any case whatsoever.  
And therefore he the said A. B. positively says, that in case he were legally indicted for Treason, or any other crime whatsoever, the case comes not under the cognizance of this honourable House; for the said A. B. being a Commoner of England; ought expressly by the established Laws of the Land, to be tried in some ordinary Court of justice, before a judge or judges, sworn, impartially to execute the Law, notwithstanding the commands of any power in England to the contrary, and the sworn jury of Commoners his Peers or equals (viz. a Grand jury and petty jury 
* As appreares by the 22 Ed. 3. fol. 20 &. 32 H. 6. fol. 26. & 14 H. 7. fol. 19  and no otherwise. These are the express words of the 29 chap. of Magna Charta, Nec super eum ibimus, nec super eum mittemus, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum, etc. That is, neither the King in his own person, nor any of his Justices, judges or Courts, shall try or condemn any man but by due course and process of Law, by the 
* See Sir Edward Cook's exposition of the words prepares, in his exposition of the 14 & 29. chap. of Magna Charta. 2 part. insti. fol. 28, 29, 46. 48. 50. where he positively saith, that Peers signify equals, or men of his own condition, and not freemen in opposition to Villains, as Mr. Will. Prin would simply and ignorantly, expound it, in the 62 pag of his late Erroneous and illegal plea for the Lords jurisdiction over Commoners, and so make the Lords by Magna Charta Peers to Commoners, because they are both freemen and not Villains; although that learned Lawyer, Sir Ed. Cook in the first part insti. fo. 156. ecxpresly saith, a Peer of the Realm shall not be impanelled in any case upon the jury of a Commoner, because he is not his equal.  lawful judgement of a jury of twelve men of his Peers or equals (viz men of his own condition) according to the Law of the Land; and the same is further enacted and confirmed by the 24 Ed. 3. 1 & 2 chap. where it is expressly enacted. That if any statute, judgement or decree be made or given contrary to this good law of Magna Charta, it shall (ipso facto) be holden for none, and so not in the least valid or binding, but merely void, and null in Law, which just and good law of the Great Charter hath been at least forty times confirmed in full and free Parliament; And the said 29 chap. of Magna Charta, and the other statutes made in exposition of it before recited, were and now stand strongly confirmed by this present Parliament, in the two  Acts for abolishing Ship-money and the Court of Star chamber.  
And the said A. B. further saith, that as the intent of the Law was, that all trials might be equal and impartial, and as free from will, pleasure and arbitrariness as possible could be, so it is founded upon these impregnable grounds of reason, justice and equity.  
First, the jury are to be of the neighbourhood where any such crime is committed, and some aught to be of the same Hundred, 
a See 1 part insti. lib. 2. chap. 11. Sect. 193. fol. 125. and chap. 12. Sect. 234 fo. 155. & 157. & the 13 Ed. 138. & 28. E. 1 cha 9  for the Law presumes that such may have some cognizance of the fact, or of some circumstances thereof or of the party accused, whose condition and manner of conversation is much to be regarded, for the discovering his intention in any fact supposed to be Treason or Felony, etc. and the rule of the law is, Actus non facit reum, nisi mens fit rea.  
Secondly, The jury that passes upon any Commoner one day, may themselves be in a condition, to be tried by him another day as one of their jury: and hereby they are bound to indifferency, and impartiality, considering it may be their own case.  
Thirdly, The party accused may challenge of except against the Iurers: either against the Array, if the Sheriff or Bailiff impannelling the jury, be wholly disengaged, and indifferent as to the cause, and the parties prosecuting: 
b See ut surpra & fol. 156. 158.  or against the Polls, And in case of Treason he may challenge 35. peremptorily upon his dislike, without rendering the least cause, 
c See 1 part insti. lib. 2 chap: 12. Sect. 234. fo. 156. & 3 part fo. 27. 32. 33. 227.  and as many more as he can render any reason for his just challenge; As in case he can challenge any for a Baron or Lord of Parliament, who as Sir Ed. Cook saith shall not be impanelled in any case, 1 part inst. to. 156. or for defect intestate, or other abilities or for disaffection, or partiality, or for any infamous crime, And hereby the judges of the party accused, may certainly be indifferent equal and impartial  
Fourthly, The matter of fact is only entrusted in the jury, and the matter of Law to the judge for the preventing of all errors, confederacies, or partiality.  
The judge is sworn to do justice to all according to law, without respect of persons, 
† Read his Oath at large made in the 18 Ed. 3. an 1344. and printed in Pultons col. of statute fol. 144 and L. C. john Lilburnes book called the people's prerogative pag 10.  and the jury are sworn to find according to their evidence.  
Now the said A. B. further saith, That from these reasons whereupon the Law recited was made and enacted, it is clear and evident, that the trial of any commoner pertains not to this House, In the least; who the Law of England were never appointed to be the executors thereof in any case whatsoever.  
The Members of this House cannot be of the neighbourhood where the crimes of all Commeners are committed, and cannot be presumed to have any cognizance of the facts, or parties offending, neither do they allow themselves to be tried by commoners, so as to be bound to indifferency and impartiality, from the knowledge that the Commoners whom they try, may possible be of a jury 
* And hear it is worth observation, that if a difference or controversy for land, or money, etc. happen between a Peer of Parliament and a Commoner the jury who is to end the controveresis may by law be ordinary freeholders so one single Knight be returned amongst them 1 part inst. lib. 3 chap 12. Sect. 134. to. 156. and the same holds in attainder of treason or Felony 17 Ed 2 attaint 69 & 3 part insti. fol. 26. there must be an indictment of Peers for reason by twelve men of the neighbourhood where the offence was committed and ofter they are to receive a trial or judgement by twelve Peers at least. H. 4. fol. 19, ct 13 H 8 fol. 12, 10. E. 3. fol, 46, ● 3 a part insti. fol. 28. and the one must not be changed no more the than other and in confirmation thereof, that which was done after the condemnation of Sir Simon de Berisford, is famous, it is to be found Rot. Parl. 4. Ed. 3. Num. 2. And in the Rolls of Chancery it was enacted (or at least adjudged) That albeit the Lords and Peers of the Realm, as Judges of the Parliament, in the presence of the King had taken upon them to give judgement in case of Treason and Felony, of such as were not Peers of the Realm, that after that time no Peers should give Judgement upon others then upon themselves, according to Law. And A. B. further saith, that though this Record should be granted to be no Act, yet it is a solemn Judgement of the House of Lords, and therefore binding to themselves, who ingeniously confess, They can not, nor shall not hereafter judge Commoners, because it is against the Law of the land for them so to do.  for their trial in a short time, neither can the said A. B. nor any other Commoner whom this House would try, challenge in the case of treason thirty five of the Members thereof, for the whole house a mounts very seldom to that number, neither will this House allow him the said A. B. to challenge any one Lord or Member thereof, though he should allege disaffection, partiality, or that he is an engaged party, an examiner or prosecutor secretly, or openly, neither is any Member of this House, sworn to judge according to Law, or in matter of fact according to evidence.  
And the said A. B. further saith, that Magna Charta before recited, being not only a Statute, but also a Declaration of the Common Law, ●o Custom or precedents can be of any force in Law against it; for if your House can make precedents against both common and Statute Law, to condemn one Commoner of England either in his life, liberty or estate, by the same right you may condemn a hundred, a thousand, yea the whole House of Commons itself, who by this account are but mere cyphers, and all the Judges in Westminster Hall etc. are but cyphers, yea and all the Laws in England stand but for mere cyphers; and the said A. B. and all the rest of the Commons of England are thereby the perfectest slaves this day upon the face of the earth, and the end of all Government in clearly overthrown, viz. the weal and safety of the people; and no law left in England but your Lordship's will and pleasures for any man in the Kingdom to hold or preserve any thing he possesseth by, whether it be life, liberty or estate, and so the absolutest subversion of liberty and property is brought in amongst us that can be in the world. And therefore the said A. B. resolvedly saith, that if your Lordships shall show him as many precedents as will fill your House, that you have in all ages adjudged and condemned Commonors at your Bar, yet he values them to more in comparison to the several Acts of Parliament, and the common Law of the Land, (which is right reason, which is above Acts, and the Law and rule to make Acts by) that he hath before cited [which are point-blank against your Lordship's Jurisdiction ever Commoners] then he values the wind that blows: And the said A. B. further saith, that if your Lordships can make and create precedents to destroy so many scores of Acts of Parliament, which have for many hundred years confirmed the 29 Chapter of Magna Charta, [when they have been the fullest and freest] and which legally are in force, and unrepealed to this hour, [yea and pluck up the fundamental common Law of England by the very roots] then why do your Lordship's cousin, blind, deceive, and delude the people of England, in suffering the King and the House of Commons nominally to bear the name of coadjutors with you in making Laws?  
And the said A. B. further saith, that seeing both the Statute and Common Law is so expressly against your Lordship's exercising Jurisdiction over Commoners, that though some by force, fear or ignorance, have stooped or submitted to your Lordship's Jurisdiction, yet in Law submission is to no effect, nor no strength to the judgement, where the matter is coram non Judice, and though in former time there was no demurrer or exception to your Lordship's Jurisdiction over Commoners, yet now there is, and therefore the forecited Laws and Judgement are exception in law sufficient of themselves, to me or any other Commoner whatsoever, that shall make use of them; and for your Lordships to claim a jurisdiction over me a Commoner, from no legaller a ground then because your predecessors have granted it before you, is to set up an argument to justify all the wickedness in the world: and as sound an argument it is, both in Law and reason, for the present Judges in Westminster Hal to say, that it is legal and just for them to adjudge, that the King hath a true and legal all right in all the people's proprieties, because there predecessors adjudged it so in the late Case of Ship-money, or that the present King may at his will and pleasure chop off all your Lordship's heads, because his predecessor Richard the third did serve some of your Lordship's predecessors so in the Tower of London.  
And therefore the said A. B. conclusively saith, that the ignorance, fear or neglect of some Commoners to challenge at your Lordship's hands their fundamental and native rights and freedoms, to be tried only by their Peers or equals according to the forementioned Laws, doth not nor cannot prejudice any other Commoner whatsoever, which shall challenge as I now do; his right and freedom according to the express and declared Law of the Land, and whatsoever precedents Judgements or Dcrees have been, wherein this honourable House have exercised a Judgement or jurisdiction over Commoners, they are all expressly declared errors, and to be holden for nought, by this present Parliament in its purity, virginity, and freedom, in that forementioned Act, for abolishing the Starchamber Court, wherein the forementioned 29. chap. of Magna Charta and 28. Ed. 3. 3. and 42. Ed. 3. 3. etc. confirmed, which Statutes enact, that all free men shall have trial for their lives liberties and estates by their Peers equals according to the common or old Law of the Land, and have also these words, That whatsoever shall be done contrary shall be void in Law and holden for error. And the same doth the Petition of Right made in the 3. of the King, which is every branch, article, and Prayer of it, confirmed this present Parliament the 17 of the King in that excellent forementioned Act, for the abolishing of Ship-money.  
And the said A. B. saith, inasmuch as the Statutes above recited have reference to the punishment of offenders, they are not to be taken by construction, but only in and according to the letter thereof: and therefore are as binding to your Lordship's House, and the House of Commons both, till they be legally abrogated, as they are to the meanest man in England. And forasmuch as it is plain and without scruple, that the Laws and Statutes before recited, do absolntely restrain this honourable House from exercising over him the said A. B. or any other Commoner of England, any the least jurisdiction in any case whatsoever 
* Which is unanswerably proved, as well by reason and argument, as positive Law, in that strong and singular. Discourse called the Law's Subversion, or Sir john Maynard Case truly stated, pag. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. , for the forerecited Laws expressly again and again say, that no Commoner shall be passed upon, adjudged or condemned, but by the lawful judgement of his Peers, or equals, according to the due course of the Law of the Land; and the said A. B. is very confident, that there is not, nor never was, since the the great Charter was made one established Law, or Act of Parliament ever made in England, that ever gave the House of Peers (in Writs of Error, or any other case whatsoever) any Jurisdiction or power of passing Judgement upon Commoners, and therefore all and every the Judgements and Decrees, that your Lordships have made and given (especially since the late Act for abolishing of the Star-chamber) are thereby declared to be ipso facto, erroneous, and null, and void in Law, and your Lordship's liable (if not at the Common-Law, yet undoubtedly in the next free Parliament) to make legal satisfaction to all those persons, that by any of your Judgements, Decrees, Sentences, or Orders of Imprisonments, you have most illegally and without the least shadow or colour of Law wronged.  
And therefore he the said A. B. being a Commoner, doth hereby protest against submission to any trial before your Lordships, as not being his legal Judges: And he the said A. B. doth also claim the benefit of all the known and declared Laws of the Land, which is his undoubted Birthright, and appeal to his proper Judges, according to the said Laws, viz. two Juries of 24. legal men 
* The reason wherefore the jury is put in before the judge, is to erect a common error amongst the people of England, viz. that the judge hath more power in him, than the jury; when as indeed and in truth (if a man without offence may so say) the jury is as it were the God Almighty, and the judge is but as the Minister or Priest to pronounce and declare the sentence and judgement of God Almighty.  of England, his peers or equals, and the Judges appointed for to be the executors of the Law in the King's Bench, or elsewhere in the County where his pretended crime was committed, and the said A. B. out of love and respect to your Lordships & his native Liberties earnestly entreats your Lordships seriously to consider, that in the foresaid Act for abolishing the Star-Chamber, the Judges thereof are accused, That they have not kept themselves to the points limited by the Statute that gave them their power, and jurisdiction, but have undertaken to punish where no Law doth warrant, and to make Decrees for things having no such Authority, and to inflict heavier punishments then by any Law is warranted, and therefore saith the Act, the Proceed, Censures and Decrees of that Court, have by experience been found to be an intolerable burden to the Subject, and a means to introduce an arbitrary power and Government, (for which it was totally abolished,) all which with much more the said A. B. confidently avers, may be justly and truly said of your Lordships, in that you have fined, imprisoned, and murdered those that by Law you have not the least Jurisdiction in the world over, and therefore in common reason, equity and justice, better deserve to be totally abolished, 
* Which is undeniably proved by Lievt. Col. John Lilburnes printed Speech, that he made at the open Bar of the House of Commons against the Lords, jan. 19 1647. p. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.  than the said Court of Star-Chamber.  
FINIS.