Page images
PDF
EPUB

Die Veneris 6° Decembris, 1678.

An Address to defire his Majefty to caufe Popish Recufants, reputed ones, and fufpected Papifts to be apprehended, difarmed and fecured, was brought from the Commons and read,

And after fome Debate, the Question was put, whether to agree to this Address as it is now worded?

It was refolved in the Affirmative.

Diffentient'

For that it is humbly conceived to be contrary to, and against Law in feveral Particulars, and both unjustifiable and dangerous for those that put it in Execution.

Northampton,

Anglefey,

Ferrers.

Die Martis 25° Martii, 1679.

Hodie za vice lecta eft Billa, An Act for disabling Thomas Earl of Danby.

And after fome Debate, the Queftion being put, whether this Bill fhall be now committed?

It was refolved in the Affirmative. Diffentient' Anglesey; for these Reasons.

ft, Because no Summons or Hearing of the Party is first directed, which by the effential Forms of Justice ought to be.

2dly, Because it's conceived this will be Error.

3dly, Because it's a dangerous Precedent against all the Peers, to have fo penal a Bill precipitated.

4thly, Becaufe no Committee can proceed on any Bill without hearing Parties, and no Peer is to be tried in Parliament, but by the whole House of Peers.

Having giving my Vote against the bringing in an A&, entitled, An Act for the Difabling Thomas Earl of Danby; and voting against the Commitment of the Bill, I enter my Diffent. Berkeley.

Die Veneris 20 Maii, 1679.

Hodie za vice le&ta eft Billa, An Act for freeing the City of London and Parts adjacent from Popish Inhabi

tants.

The Queftion was propofed, whether this Bill shall be amended?

Then

Then this previous Queftion was put, whether this Question shall be now put?

It was refolved in the Negative.

Then the Question was put, whether this Bill shall pafs?

It was refolved in the Affirmative.

Diffentient'

Because this House hath fent down a Bill to the House of Commons, for the better Difcovery and fpeedy Conviction of Popish Recufants, wherein the Conviction of Recufancy was for refufing the Teft, and not the Oaths; the fame Bill was fent down from this House about the End of the laft Parliament.

As also because there are Thousands of Diffenters that will be faithful, even to Death, against the common Enemies the Papifts, which, by the Addition of the Oaths to the Teft, may be tempted to think themfelves, in Intereft, obliged to take the Papists Parts against us. Shaftsbury, Pr. Huntingdon,

Berkeley,
Derbey,

[ocr errors]

Kent,
Chandos,

Stamford,
Delamer.

Die Lune 15° Novembris, 1680.

Hodie 1a vice lecta eft Billa, An Act for fecuring the Proteftant Religion, by disabling James Duke of York to inherit the Imperial Crown of England and Ireland, and the Dominions and Territories thereunto belonging.

After Debate, the Houfe was adjourned into a Committe for the freer Debate.

The House being refumed, it was propounded, that the Question may be put for rejecting this Bill.

Contents 61

Not Cont. 32

Contents 63
Not Cont. 32

Dissentient'

The Queftion was put, whether the Question for rejecting this Bill sball be now put?

It was refolved in the Affirmative. Then the Question was put, whether this Bill fhall be rejected?

In was refolved in the Affirmative.

Because rejected upon the first reading.

Crew.

Die Martis 23° Novembris, 1680.

The Question was propounded, whether there fhall be a Committee appointed in order to join with a Committee of the House of Commons to debate Matters concerning the State of the Kingdom.

The Queftion being put, whether this Queftion fhall be now put?

It was refolved in the Affirmative.

Then the main Queftion was put, whether there shall be a Committee appointed in order to join with a Committee of the Houfe of Commons to debate Matters concerning the State of the Kingdom?

It was refolved in the Negative.

Thefe Lords following, before the abovefaid Question was put, defired Leave to enter their Diffents, if the Queftion was carried in the Negative; and accordingly do enter their Diffents and Reasons following:

Because we are fully convinced, in our Judgments, that the conferring of the Lords with the Commons, by a joint Committee of both Houses, is the most likely Way to produce a good Understanding between them, which we take to be moft neceffary at this Time for the Safety of the King's Person, and the Security of the Proteftant Religion against the bloody Defigns of the Papifts, as alfo for the Redrefs of other Grievances, which the Nation at this Time lies under.

[blocks in formation]

Die Jovis 25° Novembris, 1680.

A Petition of James Percy war read, defiring a Day may be appointed for him to be heard to make out his Title to the Earldom of Northumberland.

The Question was put, whether this Petition fhall be rejected?

It was refolved in the Affirmative. Before the Question was put, the Earl of Anglefey de

fired Leave to enter his Diffent, if the Queftion was carried in the Affirmative; and accordingly enters his Diffent.

Diffentient' Anglesey; for these Reasons :

ft, Because the Claim brought by Mr. Percy can be heard, examined and adjudged only in this Houfe.

2dly, It is a Right due to the Subject to petition this Houfe, aud the Caufe is not to be under Prejudice or rejected till heard.

3dly, It feems unprecedented, and against common Right and the conftant Course of Parliamentary Juftice. 4thly, By fuch a way of proceeding he is barred of Lis Appeal from a Difmifs in a former Parliament, which can only have in this Parliament, before the Grounds thereof are fo much as examined.

Die Veneris 70 Januarii, 1680.

Articles of Impeachment againft Sir William Scroggs of High Treason, and other great Crimes and Mildemeanors, brought from the Commons and read.

And a Queftion for committing him being propounded, The previous Queftion was put, whether this Queftion fhall now be put ?

It was refolved in the Negative.

Diffentient'

1, We that are of Opinion, that he ought to be com mitted, are deprived of giving our Votes, by putting only the Question of Bail, we being rather for Bail than to let him go altogether free.

2dly, We are of Opinion, that this Matter hath been twice adjusted betwixt both Houfes, viz. in the Cafe of the Earl of Clarendon, and the Cafe of the Earl of Danty.

Befides, we did think it very unfafe, and not agreeable to Justice, that he fhould be at large and execute his Place of Lord Chief Juftice, whilft he lies under the Charge of an Impeachment of High Treason.

Laftly, It may deter the Witneffes, when they fhall fee him in fuch great Power and Place whom they are to

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Die Sabbati 26° Martii, 1681.

A Meffage was brought from the House of Commons by Sir Leolin Jenkins and others, in these Words: "The "Commons of England affembled in Parliament, having "received Information of divers traiterous Practices and "Defigns of Edward Fitzharris, have commanded me "to impeach the faid Edward Fitzharris, of High "Treason; and I do here in their Names, and in the "Names of all the Commons of England, impeach "Edward Fitzharris of High Treafon: They have further commanded me to acquaint your Lordships, "that they will, within convenient Time, exhibit to your Lordships the Articles of Charge against him.” Mr. Attorney-General gave the House an Account of the Examinations taken against Edward Fitzharris, and faid, He had an Order of the King's, dated the 9th of March Inftant, to profecute the faid Fitzharris at Law; and accordingly he hath prepared an Indictment against him at Law.

[ocr errors]

And after long Debate the Queftion was put, whether Edward Fitzharris fhall be proceeded with according to the Course of the Common Law, and not by way of Impeachment in Parliament at this time? It was refolved in the Affirmative.

Memorandum, That before the putting of the abovefaid Question, Leave was asked for entring Proteftations; which was granted.

Diffentient'

Because that in all Ages it hath been an undoubted Right of the Commons to impeach before the Lords any Subject for Treasons, or any Crime whatsoever; and the Reason is, becaufe great Offences, that influence the Government, are most effectually determined in Parliament.

We cannot reject the Impeachment of the Commons, because that Suit or Complaint can be determined nowhere elfe; for if the Party impeached fhould be indicted in the King's-Bench, or in any other Court, for

the

« PreviousContinue »