Prynn against Prinn.  
OR, The Answer of William Prynne, Utter Barrister of Lincoln's Inn: TO A Pamphlet lately published by William Prynne Esquire, a Member of the House of COMMONS.  
ENTITLED A Brief Memento to the present Vnparliamentary Juncto, Touching their present Intentions and proceed to Depose and Execute Charles Stevart, their lawful King.  
January 25. 1648.  
Imprimatur THEODORE JENNINGS.  
LONDON, Printed for Robert Ibbitson. 1649.   

Prynne against Prynne, OR, The Answer of William Prynne, to a Pamphlet entitled, A Brief Memento to the present un-Parliamentary JUNCTO.  
I William Prinne Utter-Barrester have lately perused a Pamphlet, entitled, A brief Memento to the present Unparliamentary Juncto, Touching their present proceed to depose and execute Charles Stuart their lawful King, and set forth by William Prin Esquire a Member of the House of Commons, And I have weighed the Reasons whereupon the said William Prinne the Member would endeavour to dissuade the rest of the Members now sitting in Parliament from acting or proceeding against the King. And I William Prinne the Barrister, do call to mind That I did heretofore publish a large Treatise called the Sovereign power of Parliaments and Kingdoms. Which I have divided into four parts, And in this Treatise I William Prinne the Barrister have pleaded the Parliament and Kingdoms Cause against the King and his party, And I have asserted this truth as the sum of all; That the Parliament is the highest Sovereign power of all others, and I have in my Epistle to the Reader before my first part, second Edition affirmed this.  
That I have proved the particulars contained in that Treatise with Arguments and Reasons, seconded and fortified with such Domestic and Foreign Precedents and Authorities of all sorts, as well divine as human, political, historical, and legal, as may (effectually convince the obstinate wills, abundantly satisfy the most seduced prejudicated judgement, and resolve the most scrupulous conscience, and eternally silence the ignorant and most malicious tongues and pens) of all Royalists and Antiparliamentary Malignants, who are not wilfully wedded to their long espoused errors, or more enamoured with fordid Court flattery for private self ends, than fairest though (hated ungainefull verity) which aims at nothing but public good.  
And further, I William Prinne the Barrister, have in my said Epistle protested before the great Judge of Heaven and Earth; that I have therein wittingly maintained nothing at all, but what my judgement and conscience  by any sinister end, or private respect, as aiming at nought else but the glory of God, the settled weal and tranquillity of our distracted bleeding, dying Church and State, the only motives engaging me in this service) inform me to be a well grounded ancient pregnant (though lately overclouded, undiscovered, neglected, much oppugned truth: And that albeit most of the particulars contained and debated in that Treatise, have for many years been decried (that I may not say stigmatised) for seditious, dangerous, antimonarchical Paradoxes, if not worse by the general Torrent of Court Parasites, Lawyers, and Theologues: That yet I doubt not but when seriously examined by the true Principles of Religion, nature, Law, policy, the various precedents and authorities of former Ages, and throughly digested without prejudice or partiality. They will appear, yea shine forth to be most necessary, profitable, loyal, State securing, peace procuring, verities, yea as the very nerves and sinews to unite, the pillars to support, the bulwark to protect both Church and State against all Invasions of Heresy or Tyranny, and to keep all the potent Members of them within their several bounds.  
And the truth of this my Position.  
That the Kingdom in Parliament assembled, is above the King.  
I William Prinne the Barrister have special reasons in my said first part. Pag. 6.  
Because the King was first created and instituted by the kingdom and people; and not the kingdom and people by the King.  
Because the King was ordained only for the kingdom and people's service and welfare, not the kingdom and people for him.  
Because as the kingdom and people first created, So they still limit and confine the King's Jurisdiction by Law; to which they are and aught to be subject.  
Because the kingdom and people oblige the King by a solemn Oath to rule according to Law, and to be obedient unto Law.  
Because the kingdom and people have power to depose the King, in case he contemn the Law, and violently rob and spoil his Subjects.  
Pag. 100 Because the whole kingdom and people are the original supreme sovereign power, by whose common consent and authority all lawful Kings, kingdoms, and Royalties were at first created and instituted, and from whom they derived all their Regal Jurisdiction.  
Likewise I William Prinne the Barrister, have showed, pag. 7, 8. That Parliaments have challenged and executed a just and legal power (as they deemed it) to depose their King for not governing according to Law, for following and protecting evil Councillors, for oppressing their Subjects, and for making war against them: And I have instanced in thirteen Kings of this Realm, who have been so dealt withal, whereof five since the Conquest,  
And Page 29. I William Prin the Barrister have inserted inter alia, the Articles whereupon King Richard 2. was deposed, with these words for addition, page 30. (which how parallel they are to the Court practices and doctrines of our times, let wise men determine) and page 80. I have made further Observations and Justifications upon the Precedent of deposing Richard the second, and I have inserted the whole proceed touching that deposition.  
And page 78 I have set forth the Passages upon the deposition of R. c. 2. and likewise made further observations and justifications thereupon. Likewise I William Prin the Barrister have showed page 9 That the Crown hath often been translated by Parliaments from the right Heirs, and settled on others who had no lawful right or title to it. And I have instanced in twelve particulars of this kind, whereof seven since the Conquest: And particularly that after the death of William Rufus, The Clergy, Nobles, and Commons refused to admit of any King but with capitulations and caveats to their own liking; and upon which terms they elected King Henry the first though he were not next heir to the Crown. All which particulars with much more of the like nature, I the said William Prin the Barrister have set forth in my said first part of the Sovereign power of Parliaments, and though I have mentioned them to have been acted and done by Popish Parliaments, Popish Barons, Prelates, and Commons, yet I have not instanced, That any of them were done upon any Popish principles; but for better clearing of the general reason of them all, I William Prin the Barrister have added p. 20. of the said first part; That these Jurisdictions were thus practised by the people to preserve themselves and the Kingdom from slavery and desolation; and that the Actors therein have been styled, Anglie Reipublice zealatores.  
And as touching William Prin the Member his first Argument, That their proceeding against the King is an offence within the Statute 25 Edw. 3. concerning Treason.  
I William Prin the Barrister do remember, That in the beginning of this late war, the Cavaliers used the same Argument against the Parliaments raising Arms; and I then made this Answer to it, page 107 of my said first Part; That the Parliament and whole Kingdom being the highest power, or any Member of the Parliament cannot by any public Acts or Votes of theirs, consented to in Parliament become Traitors, or guilty of High Treason against the King, either by the Common Law or the Statute of 25. Edw. 3. cap. 2. of Treasons which running in the fingular number (If a man etc.) That is any private man or men by their own private Authority (shall levy War) against the King it ought to be judged high Treason, and extends not to the whole Kingdom or Court of Parliament representing it (of which no Treason was ever yet presumed) the rather because the Parliament by this very Act is made the judge of all Treasons that are doubtful, and was never yet included within the words or meaning of any Law concerning Treason, and therefore cannot be guilty of it. Hence the depositions of Archigallo and Emerian two, ancient British Kings, by the unanimous assent of the Lords and Commons for their Rapines, Oppression, and Tyranny and of Edward the second, Richard the second, Henry the sixth, Edward the fourth by Acts of Parliament, the creating of Richard the third King, with the frequent translocations of the Crown from the right Heir at Common Law to others, whohad no good Title by the whole Kingdom or Parliament (no less than high Treason in private persons) was never yet reputed, much less questioned for or adjudged high Treason in the whole kingdom or Parliament, or any chief active Members in those Parliaments which by the law are unrepealable of. Treason, for any their judicial actions and Resolutions in such cases, being only tercious, and erroneous, reversible by other Acts in Parliament, not traitorous and rebellious, as appears by all the fore quoted Statutes, and by the statute 13 Eliz. cha. 1. which makes it high Treason for any person to affirm that the authority of the Parliament of England is not able to make Laws and Statutes of sufficient force, to alter, limit, and bind the Crown of this Realm, and the descent limitations and inheritance and Government thereof, or any man's Title or Right thereto.  
And for direct Authorities in this very point Rob. Trisilian and Belknap (then chief Justices Holt, Fulthorpe and Burgh, Judges) Lockton Kings Sergeant, and Blake the King's Council, in the Parliament of 11. Richard 2. were some condemned, and executed others, and banished the Realm as guilty of high Treason; Only for affirming under their hands and seals, That the Duke of Gloucester, the Earls of Arundel and Warwick were (and that other Lords and Commons might be) guilty of high Treason for procuring a Commission and other proceed Voted in Parliament, and might be punished for it as Traitors; which opinion of theirs was also at another Parliament prima Henry 4. chap, 2, 3, 4. held a traitorous opinion, and the Judgement given against those Judges for this Traitorous opinion, tending to the utter subvession of Parliaments, was resolved and enacted to be just.  
This Judge Belknap foresaw, and therefore was unwilling to put his Seal to this opinion; saying, there wanted but a hurdle, a horse, and a halter, to carry him where he might suffer the death he deserved: for quoth he, if I had not done this I should have died for it, and because I have done it, I deserve death, for betraying the Lords. Which makes me wonder at a passage in Speed who Records it, now frequent in Malignants mouths, That the very shop where the Barons, original Treasons were forged was the Parliament house, wherein from time to time they forced on the King (Edward the second) presumptuous and treasonous ordinations, not only to reform the King's house, and council, and to place, and displace all great Officers, But even claimed a joint interest in the Regiment of the kingdom, together with the King, which William Juge (a Judge of the Common Law) with other like sticklers, Traitorously persuaded them was according to Law, which gross slander of the Parliament House, would have been capital at least in former ages, and may now endanger the necks of those who speak or maintain the same of this present Parliament.  
And I William Prinne the Barrister have added these words, pag. 108. Never did any of our Kings charge any Parliament with high Treason hitherto, much less indict or wage war against their Parliaments as Traitors, though they have questioned and deposed Kings for offences against (and for being enemies or Traitors to) the kingdom. Let none then dare to affirm, that the Houses of Parliament, are or can be Traitors now, for providing for their own and the Kingdom's safety. Ad to this, for a further answer to the said argument of Treason, produced by William Prynne the Member in his present Pamphlet, that in his Rehearsal of the said Statute, he hath foully miscarried and falsified the words of it.  
For, whereas the Statute mentions nothing at all touching deposing the King, he urges the Statute thus: That it is no less than high Treason for any man by overt act to compass or imagine the deposition or death of the King: Adding the word deposition, which is not where found in the whole Statute.  
And as touching William Prinne the Member his argument, that this proceeding against the King is contrary to the Oath of Allegiance.  
I William Prinne the Barrister did heretofore meet with the like objection, touching the Oath of Supremacy, in relation to the late war.  
Viz. That the King is the only supreme Governor of this Realm, and that Bracton, Fleta, and our Law Books resolve, that the King hath no Peer in the kingdom, for so he should lose his Empire, since Peers (or Equals) have no command over one another, much more than ought he not to have a superior, or mightier, for so he should be inferior to those who are subject to him, and Interiors cannot be equal to Superiors.  
The King ought not to be under man, but under God and the Law: If then justice be demanded of him by way of Petition (because no Writ runs against him) (though anciently some Writts did) if he do not justice, this punishment may be sufficient to him, that he may expect God will revenge it, Nemo quidem de factis suis presumat disputare, multe for●●●● contra factum sum venire, etc. Therefore the King is above the Parliament and whole Kingdom, not they above him.  
And this objection, I William Prinne the Barrister answered thus in my said first part, pag. 104. That the meaning of all these Books is, that the King is above every one of his Subjects, and hath no Peer nor Superior, if they be taken particularly and distributely as single men, as the words parem & superiorem, in the singular number, and the like (explain the meaning of the Books to be) but it we take them collectively in Parliament, as they are one Body, and represent the whole kingdom, than these very Authors resolve (in their forequoted words) that they are above the King, and may, yea, aught to restrain and question his actions, his male admistrations, if there be just cause.  
Secondly, Bracton explains himself, how he is highest, and without a Peer, to wit, in distributing justice: That is, he is the highest Justiciar in the kingdom, but as low as any in receiving justice.  
And further, that the Oath of Supremacy (that the King is the only supreme Governor) relates only, or at least principally, to the Popes and Foreign Prince's authorities formerly usurped in this Realm, as the Title, words, and scope of the Statute of 1. Eliz. cap 1. and the very next words in the Oath itself undeniable manifest; therefore it refers not at all to Parliaments, or their jurisdiction, Power, Superiority, Pre-eminence, or Authority: nor are they so much as once thought of by the prescribers of this Oath, which had its create on and authority from the Parliament. And I William Prinne the Barrister having thus answered the Oath of Supremacy, This semblable answer may be added touching the Oath of Allegiance, that the Statute 3. Jacobi 4. which creates this Oath, is entitled an Act for better discovering and repressing Popish Recusants, and that the Oath itself relates only to the Pope's unlawful exercise of authority and jurisdiction within this Kingdom, and that it so appears to be, by the said William Prynne the Member his own Rehearsal of it. In this objection, save that in this Rehearsal, he hath dealt as before, and hath made bold in this particular also to satisfy the words of the Oath, which in truth runs thus.  
That the Pope neither of himself, nor by any Authority of the Church of Rome, or by any other means, with any other, hath power or Authority to depose the King.  
But the said William Pryn the Member, in his said Rehearsal makes the Oath to run thus.  
That the Pope neither of himself, nor by any authority of the Church of Rome, or by any other means, nor any other, hath power, etc. and so instead of the words with any other, implying the Authority of the Pope joined with others, he makes it a distinct clause nor any other; and so upon this forgery, including the Parliament within those words nor any other, he would make this proceeding against the King to be contrary to the Oath of Allegiance.  
And touching William Pryn the Member his Arguments, That there is no Precedent in the old Testament of any one King judicially impeached, arraigned, deposed, or put to death by the Congregation.  
As also that no Protestant Kingdom or State, did over yet depose their King.  
I William Pryn the Barrister do refer the Reader to my Appendix annexed to my fourth part of the Sovereign power of Parliaments, manifesting p. 1. by sundry Histories and Authors, That in the ancient Roman Kingdom and Empire, in the Greek and Germane Empires derived out of it, in the old Grecian, Indian, Italy, Hungary, Bohemia, Denmark, Poland, Sweden, Scotland, yea of Judah, Israel, and others mentioned in the Scripture, the Supreme Sovereignty and power resided not in the Emperors and Kings themselves, but in their Kingdoms, Senates, Parliaments, People, who had not only a power to restrain, but to censure and remove their Emperors and Princes for their Tyranny and misgovernment: In which Appendix also is an Answer to the principal Arguments which are produced to prove that Kings are above their kingdoms and Parliaments, and not questionable or accountable to them, nor censurable by them for any Exorbitant actions; and p. 2. are these words.  
I shall infallibly prove, That in the Roman State and Empire at the first, in the Greek Empire since; in the Germane Empire heretofore and now; in the ancient kingdom of Greece, Egypt, India, and elsewhere; in the Kingdoms of France, Spain, Hungary, Bohemia, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Scotland, and most other kingdoms in the world, yea in the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, and others mentioned in Scripture, the highest Sovereign Authority both to elect, continue, limit, correct, depose their Emperors & Kings, to bond their Royal power and prerogatives to enact Laws, create new Offices, and forms of government, resided always in these whole Kingdoms, Senates, Diets, Parliaments, People, and not in the Emperors, Kings, or Prince's persons.  
Lastly, as page 110. in the deposition, of Mary Queen of Scots mother to King James is set forth: Together with the approbation of the fact by the State of England at that time: Touching the name or Title which William Prin the Member is pleased to give to the Parliament now sitting, calling it A Present Unparliamentary Juncto.  
I William Prin the Barrister do call to mind, That when the King, and divers of the Lords, and of the Commons in the beginning of our late Troubles had disserted the Parliament, I did then in my said first part of the Sovereign power of Parliaments, page 43, 44. maintain and prove, That the remaining part was a Parliament, notwithstanding the personal absence of the rest; and that as long as those absent are Members of the Parliament, they shall still be judged legally present whether they will or no.  
FINIS.   

Jan. 25. 1648.  
Imprimatur Theodore Jennings.