as well in parliament as otherwise, all the acts religion of this nation, and, as may justly be that are in force against Dissenters, all the en- feared, may have the same effect again, unless deavours of the fathers of the church, there are the Protestants be well united. The Presbya sort of men, and great numbers too, who will | terians, Independents, and all other Disseuters, neither be advised nor over-ruled; but, under may be more in number than the Papists, and the pretence of conscience, break violently may be willing enough to have the churchthrough all laws whatsoever, to the great dis- government altered, if not destroyed; yet, beturbance both of church and state. And if ing they cannot have any succour from abroad, you should give them more liberty, you will en- nor from the government here at home, I cancourage them to go on with more boldness; not see any great danger from them: for, it is and therefore I think it will be more conveni- not probable they shall ever have a king of ent to have a law for forcing the Dissenters to their own opinion, nor a parliament, by the yield to the church, and not to force the church discovery they made of their strength in the to yield to them; and I think we are going last elections: for, according to the best calquite the wrong way to do the nation good. culation I can make, they could not bring one And therefore I am against this Bill. in 20, and therefore, because they have not such bloody, desperate principles as the Papists, and because we agree in points of faith, and so there is no such great danger from them as from the Papists, I think we have reason to conclude, that the church is most in danger from the Papists, and that therefore we ought to take care of them in the first place; and we cannot do that by any way more likely to prove effectual, than by some such Bill as this.

|

Mr. --. Sir, I would not open my mouth in favour of this Bill, if I thought it would any ways prejudice the church, or church-government; but I believe it may have a quite contrary effect, and tend more for the preservation and safety of the church and church-government, than any bill whatsoever that could be contrived. We have a church-government settled by law, to which the major part of the people, like good christians and loyal subjects, Mr. Finch. Sir, this Bill is intended for the give obedience; but it is our misfortune that preservation of the church, and I am of opi there are in the nation a great many, who will nion, is the best Bill that can be made in order not submit to this government, who may be thereto, our circumstances considered: but I divided under three heads: 1. The Papists, know not what effect it may have, because you who differ from us in points of faith, and will are to deal with a stubborn sort of people, who not give any obedience but to the church of in many things prefer their humour before rea Rome: 2. Independents, Presbyterians, and | son, or their own safety, or the public good. some others, who agree in points of faith, and But, sir, I think this is a very good time to try, differ only in points of doctrine and ceremo- whether they will be won by the cords of love nies: 3. Quakers, who disagree not only in or no, and the Bill will be very agreeable points of doctrine and ceremonies, but in to that Christian charity which our church points of faith, and are a head-strong sort of professes; and I hope that in a time of so imunreasonable people, that will not submit to minent danger as we are in of a common estany laws made about religion, but do give obe-my, they will consider their own safety, and dience to the civil magistrates upon all other occasions. The church of England-men are not only the greatest number, but have the government of their side. What laws to make, that may tend most to the preserving of it, is your business. It is in danger from the Papists on the one hand, and the rest of the Protestant dissenters on the other, who in some measure agree in their enmity and disrespect to the church, and therefore the more care ought to be taken for its preservation.-Having thus, sir, discovered the danger of the church in general, it will be necessary, in order to find out a Remedy, to discourse a little of the strength and interest of each party in particular.-Sir, the Papists are not the greatest number, but yet, in iny opinion, upon several considerations, are most to be feared, because of their desperate principles, which make them bold and indefatigable, and the assistance they may have from Rome, France, and Ireland; but above all, from the great share they have in the ma- "The Bill was committed on the question, nagement of the government, by the means of but afterwards dropped, no doubt on the same a popish successor, and the fear of their get-political principles which first made way for ting the government into their hands hereafter its admission; for though it was expedient to by having a popish king: which of itself hath favour the non-conformists, it was not safe to been sufficient in former times to change the wage war with the church." Ralph.

the safety of the Protestant religion, and not longer keep afoot the unhappy divisions that are amongst us, on which the Papists ground their hopes. But rather, seeing the church doth so far condescend, as to dispense with the surplice, and those other things which they scruple at, that they will submit to the rest that is enjoined by law, that so we may unite against the common enemy: but if this Bl should not have this desired effect, but, on the contrary, notwithstanding this condescension, they should continue their animosities and disobedience to the church, I think still the church will gain very much hereby, and leave that party without excuse, and be a just cause for the making of more coercive laws.

After further debate, it was resolved, “That the said Bill be committed." *

Queries relating to the Execution of Lord Stafford.] Dec. 23. Some Queries relating to the

execution of Wm. late viscount Stafford, were offered to the house by the sheriffs of London and Middlesex. 1. "Whether the king, being neither judge nor party, can order the execution? 2. Whether the lords can award the execution? 3. Whether the king can dispense with any part of the execution? 4. If the king can dispense with some part of the execution, why not with all?”

Serj. Maynard. I cannot find fault with the king's mercy in remitting part of the sentence against this lord; but this question has arisen, I believe, that the lords and we may be at difference upon it. Either the Papists hope that, by it, this lord may be acquitted, or that we may so differ, that all business may be at a stand.

the discharging of the Grand Jury of the hundred of Oswaldston, in the county of Middlesex, by the Court of King's Bench, in Trinity Term last, before the last day of the Term, and before they had finished their Presentments, was arbitrary and illegal, destructive of public justice, a manifest violation of the oaths of the Judges of that court, and a means to subvert the fundamental laws of this kingdom, and to introduce Popery. 2. That the Rule made by the Court of King's-bench in Trinity Term last, against printing of a Book called, The weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome,' is illegal and arbitrary, thereby usurping to themselves legislative power, to the great discouragement of the Protestants, and for the countenancing of Popery. 3. That the Court of King's-bench, in the Imposition of Fines on Offenders of late years, have acted arbitrarily, illegally, and partially, favouring Papists, and Persons Popishly affected, and excessively oppressing his ma

fusing sufficient Bail in these cases, wherein the persons committed were bailable by law, was illegal, and a high breach of the Liberties of the Subject. 5. That the said Expressions in the Charge given by the said baron Weston, were a scandal to the Reformation, and tending to raise discord between his maj. and his subjects, and to the subversion of the ancient constitution of parliaments, and of the government of this kingdom. 6. That the said Warrants are arbitrary and illegal."

Sir Wm. Jones. I think that the proposal of this matter from the Sheriffs does not deserve blame, but thanks, and that they did well to apply themselves to this house. I have considered of it, and I think there is no reason to gojesty's Protestant Subjects. 4. That the reto the lords about it; it will not prejudice us so much as some apprehend. The Impeachment is at our prosecution, and the Judgment at our suit. Death is the substance of the Judgment; the manner of it is but a circumstance. If a nobleman be judged to be hanged for felony, that he may be beheaded by the king's warrant lord Coke doubts; though the Judges argued that, in the case of lord Castlehaven, who was condemned to be hanged for bury, and his Judgment was changed into beheading. The Judgment against a woman, Resolutions for the Impeachment of the for high-treason, is to be burnt; but we know said Judges.] Resolved, 1. "That sir Wm. frequently that they have been beheaded, as Scroggs, knight, Chief Justice of the Court of was Anne Bullen. I take it easy to show, that, King's-bench: 2. Sir Tho. Jones, one of the if the substance be preserved, which is death, Justices of the said Court of King's-bench; the circumstances may be varied. No man and sir Rd. Weston, one of the Barons of the can show me an example of a nobleman that Court of Exchequer, be impeached upon the has been quartered for high-treason: they have said Report, and Resolutions of the House been only beheaded. But now, what shall we thereupon." do in this case? Shall we desire the lords to do what was never done before? By nature, Englishmen are not so severe; as if the substance could not be performed without the circumstances. What is then to be done? Either execution will be done by this writ, or by conference you will complain to the lords, that execution is not ordered according to Judgment, or that they have not done, in the upper house, what was never done before. To satisfy the Sheriffs, I would pass a vote, "That this house is content that Execution be done upon lord Stafford, by severing his head from his body."

Resolved, "That this house is content that the Sheriffs of London and Middlesex do execute William late Viscount Stafford, by severing his head from his body only."

Report relating to the Proceedings of the Judges.] The same day, sir Rd. Corbet reported the resolves of the Committee appointed to examine the Proceedings of the Judges in Westminster-Hall, touching the Discharge of the Grand Jury in the King's-Bench. Upon which, the house resolved, nem. con. 1. "That

Ordered, "That the committee appointed to prepare an Impeachment against sir Fr. North, chief justice of the court of CommonPleas, do prepare Impeachments against the said sir Wm. Scroggs, sir Tho. Jones, and sir Rd. Weston, upon the said Report and Resolutions."

Debate on Mr. Sheridan's Habeas Corpus.*] Dec. 30. Mr. Boscawen. Mr. Sheridan stands committed, as a judgment of the house, for breach of privilege. It seems to me, that his commitment does run on the hinge of an act of court in a criminal cause, which we may suppose in execution, where a Habeas Corpus does not lie, and he is not bailable, and they will not discharge him in a court of criminal causes. I think his commitment stands good, and you are to consider the privilege of the house.

"There was a bold forward man, Sheridan, a native of Ireland, whom the commons committed, and he moved for his Habeas Corpus. Some of the Judges were afraid of the house, and slipt out of the way; but baron Weston had the courage to grant it." Burnet.

The Speaker. The thing, in fact, stands | Westminster-hall; and what laws this house thus. Sheridan and Day were committed by joins in making, are to bind inferior courts, your Order the 9th of Dec.; they were brought but cannot be understood to bind themselves to the bar the same day, and ordered to con- as a court; that would prove not only dangertinue in custody during the pleasure of the ous, but destructive to the dignity of parlia house, and no person to be admitted to come ments, and level them with the courts in Westto him unless it were with necessaries. Then minster-hall. Great care ought to be taken that order was mitigated, and you ordered him how you allow of restraints and limitations to to be taken into custody. Then you ordered a the proceedings of both houses, being so great committee to examine him and Wilson. The a part of the legislative power of the nation, Act directs, That the Judges, within such a lest thereby you should by degrees render them time, grant a Habeas Corpus, when desired, useless. A commitment of this house is always and they are required to bail where the Act in nature of a judgment; and the act is only gives that liberty.' Now the question is, Whe- for cases bailable, which commitments upon ther a Habeas Corpus lies in case of any of judgments are not; at least commitments by your Commitments, the parliament sitting? this house were never yet allowed to be bail[And he reads the Act.] In the Act here is able; and I suppose you will never grant them nothing relates to Parliament-Commitments. so to be. Can it be imagined that this house, The Head-Court' is the King's-bench, and who represent all the commons of England, this seems not to relate to the parliament. This should not be entrusted with as much power is a commitment of parliament, and if so, the for the preservation of their constitution, upon Judges cannot grant a Habeas Corpus. which the support of the government so much depends, as ordinary courts and officers are entrusted with, which are only designed for the welfare of particular persons. I am of opi nion, that no act can deprive this house of that power which they have always exercised, of committing persons without bail, unless in express words it be so declared: nor of discharging upon bail, after committed. The same reasons which may be given for discharg ing such as are not committed for breach of privilege, if it be grounded on the act for the Habeas Corpus, will hold as strong for the dis charging of persons committed for breach of privilege; and so consequently deprive this house of all its power and dignity, and make it insignificant. This is so plain and obvious, that all judges ought to know it; and I think it below you to make any resolve therein, but rather leave the judges to do otherwise at their peril, and let the debate fall without any question.

Serj. Maynard. You are going upon a sudden to give an opinion in a thing not thought of before. As I take it, his Habeas Corpus is granted: now, what is to be done in this case? I desire not to be concluded in any thing I shall now say, but I will tell you my apprehension; where shall he go to be bailed, but to this house? Your remedy for breach of your privilege is commitment, and no action can be brought against either the lords or commons. When you commit a man, you do not always express the cause; if the Judges bail him, he is gone, and there is an end of him.

Serj. Stringer. This is a matter of great concern. I would consider whether a Judge can deny a Habeas Corpus. By the Act, the jailor is to pay the penalty of 500l. upon affidavit; That he is refused the copy of his commitment.' So far a Judge may safely go. But the great point is, Whether the judge can discharge him. If so, farewell all the privileges of the commous! When the matter comes to a Habeas Corpus, the judges may be informed how he stands committed. It is said, That this Sheridan is a second Coleman,' and, if so, let him be hanged as he was. I would take time to consider this, and I believe the opinion of this house will go a great way with the Judges.

Sir F. Winnington. All I move for is this, That no entry be made upon your books for the present;' but upon the whole frame of the act, I see no Habeas Corpus lies upon a commitment of parliament.--No entry was made in the Journal, and it was adjourned to to

morrow.

Debate on Placemen and Pensioners in Parliament.] What followed the same day, related to Placemen and Pensioners sitting Parliament; on which occasion

Sir Wm. Jones. Sir, the privileges of both houses are concerned in this business, and in that the very being of parliaments: and therefore we must be careful what we do in it. I Sir Fr. Winnington expressed himself thes: have perused the Habeas Corpus bill, and do-Sir, the last house of commons being sensi find, that there is not any thing in it that doth reach, or can be intended to reach to any ⚫commitment made by either house of parliament during session. The preamble of the Act, and all the parts of it, do confine the extent of the Act to cases bailable, and directs such courses for the execution of the act, as cannot be understood should relate to any commitment made by either house. This house is a court of itself, and part of the highest court in the nation, superior to those in

ble how narrowly this nation escaped being ruined by a sort of monsters called Pensioners, which sate in the late Long Parliament, had entered into a consideration how to prevent the like from coming into future parliaments; and in order thereto resolved, that they would severely chastise some of those that had been guilty, and make the best laws they could to prevent the like for the future: and for that purpose a Committee was appointed, of which Mr. Serjeant Gregory, now Judge Gregory,

|