66

1

speaking. "I dare be bold to say," continued Sir Simonds, warming into confidence, as his well-beloved records and precedents came to him at need, "there "are almost precedents in every journal we have of the "House of Commons. Some I can remember upon the 'sudden, as Mr. Copley, in the time of Queen Mary; "Mr. Peter Wentworth, in 35th Elizabeth; and, in "43d and 44th of the same Queen, either one Hastings "took exception at Mr. Francis Bacon, or he to Hastings: "for I dare not trust an ill memory with the exact relation "of it upon the sudden. And all these were questioned “in this house after the day was past in which the words "were spoken. This, indeed, is the true, ancient, funda"mental right of parliament, that we should not be questioned anywhere else for things spoken within "these walls. But that we should not have power here to question our own members for words spoken within "these walls, either at the time when the said words were spoken, or at any time after also, were to destroy those very liberties and rights of parliament."

66

66

Having laid down thus clearly and boldly the undoubted parliamentary rule, D'Ewes went on to apply it to Palmer's case. Premising that the words spoken, and matter of fact in issue, must be stated exactly, he shewed that to resist any proposal to question the same, whether at the moment of delivery, or at any time after, would be to decline the justice of the House, which for his part he should never do, but should always be ready to answer, at any present or future time, to anythng he should there say. As for that which was objected, he continued, by the gentleman on the other side (and he pointed to Sir John Culpeper), that it were a dangerous thing for them to admit that a succeeding parliament might question what was done in a former, there was nothing more ordinary or more usual. There was no doubt what

"I was mistaken in the year," notes the particular D'Ewes in the margin of his Journal, "for it was

VOL. I.

"in-" but alas! the correction is not legible to me.

G

ever but that a succeeding parliament might not only question any particular thing done by them, as, for example, what was in progress at that moment, but might also revoke and repeal all the acts and statutes which they had passed. And the reason thereof was evident and plain. For they sat not there in their own right, but were sent thither, and entrusted by the whole kingdom; the knights being chosen by the several counties, and the rest by the several cities and towns. And, for that which was objected by the same worthy gentleman opposite, that, there being divers others in the house who were not there when the words were spoken, therefore the House was not the same, he (Sir Simonds D'Ewes) said confidently that the House was the same to all intents and purposes, not only quoad potestatem, but quoad notionem also; for of course he assumed there must be a perfect agreement as to what the words were that were spoken, before they could proceed to a censure of them. Whereupon, as though remembering his own absence at the extraordinary scene, he thus proceeded:

66

66

"And truly they may well be excused that were absent "out of this house at midnight, for it was about that time on Monday night last when these words were spoken; "and I do as much wonder that so many in this house "should object that the speaking of words is not an action, when that old verse assures us of the contrary"Quatuor et dentes et duo labra simul, &c.' And more strange it seems to me also, that when this worthy gentleman himself (and I pointed to Mr. Palmer) "hath so often stood up, himself, to speak, so many should "hinder him; for if they will not let him speak by way "of answering, yet let him speak by way of speaking."Some laughed at this, thinking I had been mistaken; "but I proceeded and told them, that I should be sorry "to speak anything in that house which I could not make good logic of; and therefore I still pressed, that if we "would not let him speak by way of answering, that is by coaction and as a delinquent, then let him speak by

66

66

way of speaking, that is sermoni libero et spontaneo. And "who knows," concluded the precise and learned orator, "but that he may give much satisfaction to this House by "his speaking? And therefore, Sir, I desire that he "may be heard."

The desire of the worthy Sir Simonds, however, failed to convince Mr. Palmer's friends of the expediency of yielding thereto. In vain the Speaker renewed the proposition that the member for Stamford should be heard. In vain was it urged that no man was entitled to object because none knew what he would say. The objectors stood so firm, that it became clear it would have to come to a division, and Hyde and Culpeper violently called out to divide. Palmer withdrew into the Committee Chamber, and the Speaker put the question-As many as are of opinion that Mr. Palmer shall be required to answer to the charge laid against him, let them say Aye. "But "then," interposes D'Ewes," Mr. Palmer's friends would "have had these words to have been added to the question, "namely, for words by him spoken on Monday night "last; but we that thought Mr. Palmer deserved to be questioned, would not agree to that addition. Whereupon it came to a division upon the question."

66

66

The tellers appointed on the one side were Hyde and Sir Frederick Cornwallis, and on the other Sir Thomas Barrington and Sir Martin Lumley, the member for Essex. The Ayes went out, and proved to be but 146; the Noes (of whom D'Ewes was one) sat still, and were 192. It being directed, upon this, that Hyde's addition should not be made, Sir Robert Hatton, the member for Castle Rising, and a determined royalist, jumped up to speak against the other question; but Mr. Speaker interrupted and told him he was out of order, for he could not now speak until the question had been put. It was put accordingly, the same tellers being appointed on both sides; and the Ayes (of whom D'Ewes was one) going out, were 190, whereas the Noes, sitting still, were but 142. It was thereupon immediately ordered, that Mr.

Palmer should be required to speak; and being called down from the Committee Chamber, in which he had remained since before the first division, he was informed by the Speaker that the House required him to make answer to the charge laid against him.

He presently arose, and, professing his innocency as to the particular matter alleged, made relation of some foregoing passages. That when, upon the vote being determined that the Declaration should pass, a motion was made by Mr. Peard that it should be printed, divers protested against it; and that himself desired also to have his protestation entered, against the printing but not the passing; and that when, afterwards, it was moved that the names of such as had protested might be entered, he being unsatisfied, and desiring it might be debated first whether such a protestation might be made or not, wished a day to be appointed for that end, and thereupon desired that his own name, and the names of the rest who had protested, might be entered by the Clerk. And that Mr. Hampden thereupon asking him, how he knew other men's minds, he answered, because he had heard others desire their names to be entered, and heard them cry "All, all." But for the other words charged upon him, that he had protested "in the name of himself and the "rest," he declared he did not remember that he had spoken them. But he was very sensible of his own misfortune, and sorry for having given that occasion to the House to question him. And so, having ended, he withdrew again into the Committee Chamber.

Bulstrode Whitelocke, member for Marlow, and a personal friend of Palmer's, though himself a supporter of the Remonstrance, rose immediately after to confirm generally, by his own recollection, the substance of the statement just made: but the hour was now late, it having long struck four, and it had grown so dark that the Speaker was no longer able to discern who stood up. Cries from both sides became loud for an adjournment, and order was accordingly made that the further con

sideration of Mr. Palmer's offence should be resumed at ten o'clock the next morning. Dark as it was, however, the House was not allowed to rise until the indefatigable Mr. Pym had obtained direction for a committee, consisting of himself, Mr. Denzil Holles, and others, to take examinations of divers Irishmen' then in the serjeant's custody, suspected of privity in the late horrible design; and his purpose in so demanding this immediate committee was, that those who on examination might be found not fairly obnoxious to suspicion might at once be dismissed. Through all the frequent conspiracies and dangers of this troubled time, the reins of authority seized by the House were held with a firm, yet wise and temperate, hand; and no strain upon the liberty of the subject that could be safely spared, was countenanced or permitted by its great leader.

On Thursday, the 25th of November, the Speaker took the chair at ten o'clock, but Mr. Solicitor St. John interposed before the resumption of Palmer's business, to obtain leave to bring in a short bill for the levy of tonnage and poundage, and after him Denzil Holles rose to remind the House of that suggestion of the worthy member sitting below him by the bar (designating Pym) which had found favour on Monday night, to accompany the Remonstrance by a Petition to his Majesty; as to which he moved accordingly that some might be appointed to draw this Petition in such manner as to show what had necessitated them to make their Declaration. Some little debate ensued hereon, and ended in the adoption of Holles's motion that the Petition should be prepared and presented by the same committee that had drawn the Declaration; to which was added an order, on the motion of Sir Gilbert Gerrard, member for Middlesex, that they should include in the said Petition a form of congratulation for his Majesty's safe return from Scotland, which

1 "He hoped also" the liberal leader told the House on this occasion, "that they had the woman in hold

"who had conveyed letters into "Ireland."