Thursday, April 30, 1657.
I came not in till the House was sat.
Mr. Grove moved, touching a clause about Exmoor, in
Mr. Bampfield, Major-General Disbrowe, and others, held
this an hour's debate, and at last it was referred to a Committee.
Major-General Disbrowe moved that a Committee might
be appointed to bring in a Bill to regulate the Chancery.
Sir Thomas Wroth seconded that motion.
It was referred to a Committee to consider of a regulation,
and to bring in a Bill to that purpose, if they see cause, and
the Committee are to meet to-morrow afternoon, in the
Speaker's Chamber, and all that come to have voices.
Colonel Ireland moved to have the Act made in the little
Parliament, for settling 500l. per annum, upon the Earl of
Derby confirmed. (fn. 1)
Major Brooke. This noble family is in the most distressed
condition of any family in England, and if you do not confirm
this they must go a-begging.
Lord Strickland gave a very fair character of the young
Earl, and seconded the motion.
Mr. Fowell. There is another Bill depending on the behalf of this Earl, but it is nothing to this. I desire you would
Lord Broghill. Both justice and charity call to you for a
confirmation of this Act, for the poor gentleman has suffered
sufficiently; and that only for his father's offence, and no
crime of his own that ever I heard.
The Master of the Rolls. I move that you will confirm it,
for the family is very distressed, and for the relief of the lady
who came from beyond seas, and was of an honourable family.
Major-General Disbrowe and Mr. Secretary moved, that it
might be so worded as that there might be no doubt nor
question upon the confirmation; and, therefore, that it might
be expressed to be in full force, and effectual in law to all intents and purposes, which was done according as follows:—
"Whereas, since the 20th of April, 1653, (fn. 2) in the great
emergencies and necessities of these nations, divers acts and
Ordinances have been made, without the consent of the people
assembled in Parliament, which is not according to the fundamental laws of these nations and the rights of the people,
and is not, for the future, to be drawn into precedent. Yet,
the actings thereupon tending to the settlement of the
estates of several persons and families, and the peace and
quiet of these nations, it is thought fit and necessary, until
further order be taken in Parliament, to confirm and continue
these acts and ordinances following:—
Resolved, that one act, intituled an Act for settling lands,
late of James Earl of Derby, of the yearly value of 500l. upon
Charles Earl of Derby, and his heirs, do continue and stand
in force, until other order taken by the Parliament.
Resolved, that all and every, the Acts and Ordinances before
mentioned, according to the true meaning of them, with the
amendments, alterations, and additions aforesaid, in pursuance
of the resolutions before-mentioned, and according to the respective limitations of time before expressed, and no otherwise, nor in any other manner, be continued and stand in
force, and be effectual in law.
Alderman Foot moved to confirm the Ordinance for the
Hackney Coaches, (fn. 3) but nobody seconded it; and unless a
motion be seconded, the Speaker is to take no notice of it.
It was agreed upon his motion, and that of others, that
notwithstanding the repealing and making void all other Acts
and Ordinances, acts done or to be done since the 20th of
April 1653, till the 1st of June, 1657, upon any of those Acts
or Ordinances shall be good and valid.
Mr. Godfrey. It is very hard to ratify all the Acts done
upon those acts and ordinances which you now make void,
without so much as looking into them or mentioning the
titles of them. Haply many of them are in their rules unreasonable or injurious, so I cannot, in conscience, confirm or
ratify them; but for common peace sake I would have all
persons that have acted upon them to be free from actions and
molestation. And because these are not before you I have
no reason in judgment to pass my confirmation upon them.
Haply, if they were before me, I should be further from confirming them.
Colonel Jones. This was considered by your Committee,
and every individual Act and Ordinance examined, and the
titles, as well printed as unprinted. Some Acts, as that for
the highways and sequestrations, indemnity will not reach,
unless the Act or Ordinance itself be confirmed.
Mr. Nathaniel Bacon and Mr. Hoskins moved some exceptions to this clause, but it was moved and the clause passed as
Resolved, that all other Acts and Ordinances, and every
branch, and clause therein, not confirmed as aforesaid, made
or passed after the 20th of April, 1653, before the 17th of
September 1656, (fn. 4) be declared to be, from and after the 1st
day of June 1657, null and void; and that all Acts done, or
to be done, before the said 1st day of June 1657, by virtue of
them, or any of them, be ratified and confirmed to all intents
Lord Broghill offered an order of the Lord Protector and
the council, dated the 11th day of May, 1654, upon the petition of Algernon Earl of Northumberland, Thomas Lord
Coventry, Philip Earl of Pembroke, heir, and William Earl
of Salisbury, and others, the executors of Philip Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery, deceased, touching a debt, for which
bonds were given to Mr. Flyer and others, who entered bond
for 50,000l. borrowed of the city for the public service, in the
beginning of the Long Parliament, &c. which was read.
It seems this order was to stop proceedings at law against
Alderman Foot. I hope you will not stop proceedings at
law for a just debt, unless you provide another way to satisfy
it. I desire it may be referred to a Committee to consider of
a way of satisfaction.
Lord Broghill. I agree with that motion, to refer it to a
Committee; but would have proceedings at law stopped in
the mean time.
Lord Strickland. The city had opportunity enough to
reimburse themselves, but they thought the lords were security good enough. Those lords have all done you good
service, and it is pity they should suffer for their good-will
for the public.
Sir Christopher Pack. The city had; always rather have
monies than any man's security. There were other ways to
drain the treasuries, so that, without detriment to the public
service, they could never pay themselves.
The Master of the Rolls. We had always such confidence
in the city, that we thought we could not better trust pur
monies in any place than with them, so we made them treasurers and receivers. They had all we had. Those noble
Lords did freely enter into this engagement, when we were in
great distress, and for no benefit to themselves; but for the
public. I desire it may be referred to a Committee, and that,
the Lords may be free from actions in the mean time.
Mr. Lloyd. Consider how in justice you can do this, to
stop proceedings at law upon a just debt. You may as well
say they shall never pay it. If you intend so, you may so
express it. The money was lent to this House.
Mr. Bond. It is against. common justice that the lords
should suffer in it; for what they did so freely for the public.
It is fit the city should be satisfied; and had the Long Parliament sat till now, they had done something in it.
Sir Richard Onslow and Colonel Jones. It is reasonable
on both sides, both that the monies should be paid, and that
the persons should be indemnified.
Alderman Foot. I know the Committee will do nothing in
it, unless you find out some way to satisfy it.
Mr. Hoskins. It is reasonable both that the city should be
satisfied, and that the parties should be protected; I, therefore, would have it referred to a Committee.
Sir Thomas Wroth. The city has been the very support of
the nation, and they have all the monies; the countryman has
but pieces of land. They have lent you great sums, and
have lost nothing by it, I hope. I would not have them
despond; but hope the Parliament will, in due time, satisfy it.
Mr. Goodwin. I would not trouble you, if I thought you
were going to do what would satisfy the city. The Parliament have been seven or eight years in taking order about
this debt. I would have a certain time for the Committee to
make a report, and that the persons bound in the bond might,
in the mean time, be protected, and no longer. Otherwise
this may lye seven years more before the Committee.
Sir Thomas Wroth. I cannot sit silent and hear so much
reason moved. I desire a day may be assigned to bring in
the report, and that the Lords may be indemnified in the
Mr. Peckham. I move that the city be indemnified for the
debt, and likewise that the Lords be indemnified, and that it
be referred to a Committee; but I am against assigning a certain time; for, if you be not at leisure to receive the report at
that instant of time, the lords shall be laid in prison.
Mr. Godfrey and Mr. Bampfield moved that the report and
the protection may be limited to a certain time.
Mr. Thistlethwaite. This is the way to hold the debate all
day; first to consider the power of a Committee, before you
appoint it, is not parliamentary.
Colonel White. I would have the security taken of the
Lords. It is against propriety to take that away, till you
have provided other security. It is much of it orphan money. (fn. 5)
Sir Christopher Pack. There are but few that serve for
the City; (fn. 6) but I hope you will take care that they may have
justice, in the satisfaction of their just debts.
Ordered, that this business be referred unto a Committee,
to examine the business and report their opinion to the House,
as well for the indemnifying the persons engaged, as how the
remainder of the said debt may be satisfied; and, in the
mean time, that all prosecution at law, against the persons
bound in the bonds for the said debt, or either of them, and
against all and every, their heirs, executors, and administrators be stayed, viz. to Sir Christopher Pack, and forty-one
This Committee are to meet on Tuesday next, in the afternoon, at two of the clock, in the Inner Court of Wards; and
that they bring in their report to the House, within fourteen
days, then after: with power to send for persons, papers, witnesses, and records.
The question being propounded, that, touching the Acts
and Ordinances made from the 1st of April, 1642, until the
20th of April, 1653, this answer be tendered to his Highness,—that this House doth conceive no need of any declaration or confirmation, the same being valid in themselves, and
ought to be accepted and taken. (fn. 7)
Lord Broghill. I offer some amendments to the clause: as,
in the beginning of it, there is insecurity to the persons concerned; and the question is, whether by your saying you confirm them, you do not shake the foundation of them ? and of
whatever you have done yourselves, because not done by the
three estates, and as to that of declaring the undoubted right
of law-making in the people.
Mr. Grave. I have as great an opinion of the Long Parliament as any man, especially till violence was offered to
them, (fn. 8) but they were not infallible. They were the representatives of the people, but many of them were kept out, and
others brought in, not by the people. (fn. 9) Some things they did,
such as giving 1,000l. a year, and 500l. to one another; and
the High Court of Justice I cannot give my consent to, and
I think a great many here will not. Divers suffered by that
court, whose death I would be 10th to have a finger in. I
mean not of the king. We have been passing laws by retail,
I would not have us now pass them by wholesale. We have
passed above sixty. I desire they may be left upon their own
authority, which is not questioned in Westminster Hall.
Sir William Strickland. Those Acts and Ordinances of
the Long Parliament, had strength of authority enough of
themselves, and by your going about to confirm them, you
rather shake them. So I would have the clause wholly laid
aside, and would give a general answer to his Highness, that
you find them so valid that they need no confirmation.
Colonel Jones. I doubt, now that it is before you, how
you can pass it over. I desire it may be referred to a Committee to prepare some amendments to the clause, as was first
Mr. Trevor. I would rather have a declaration that the
laws are good and of force, than to confirm them; for that
argues a weakness in them.
Lord Strickland. I move that you would leave them to
stand upon their own authority. There needs no staff to help
those to go that can go without it. I would have you rise
now, and leave it as it is.
Major-General Disbrowe. There is more necessity of putting a clear and undoubtful sanction upon these laws than
upon any other. This is the very foundation of your settlement. Though Westminster Hall question them not now,
we know not what they may do, and that were very disingenuous for you to permit. This will not only quiet men's
estates but their minds too; and by denying a confirmation
to them, you overthrow the settlement upon which you are.
I do therefore move, that your confirmation of these may be as
firm and effectual as can be devised, which will both quiet
your own and the nation's settlement.
Lord Howard. I doubt some will think a declaration too
short, others will think a confirmation too large. It will be
but loss of time to refer it to a Committee, for if you cannot
agree to it yourselves, how then can a Committee ?
Colonel White. It is most material to confirm these of
any; for they were the foundation of the cause and quarrel,
and the foot upon which we all stand. Therefore, in order
to our own settlement, and the security, of those that have
acted by them; you ought to confirm them.
Mr. Godfrey. It is impossible for your Committee to
word it so well as to give you satisfaction. How can they
agree about the words, when you cannot agree about the
thing ? I had rather leave it quite out, for you cannot caution it so but there will be objections on one side or other,
and the laws are not at all strengthened by any sanction upon
them, if they be not laws: if they be laws, there needs no
By the same rules that those acts may be questioned hereafter, may your own acts and all your settlements be shaken;
there are but two arguments against that authority:—
1. Is it according to the constitution, because not by three
2. The barring out of the members, (fn. 10) i. e. the non-freedom
Those laws cannot be hereafter questioned but upon those
two accounts, and may not the same be objected against the
authority that confirms them, yourselves I mean, and so overthrow your whole settlement? There is no reason for this
satisfaction; your confirmation can do no good at all. If to
satisfy yourselves you do it, I suppose you are satisfied already. If to satisfy others, there is as much satisfaction
given to them as you can give them. They that are not satisfied by the former authority are not satisfied by yours; for
the same objection, both as to the constitution and the members, lies equally against both.
Sir Charles Woheley. Since his Highness makes it one of
his scruples, I would move that some general answer may be
thought on, that you conceive those laws are of force already,
and need no confirmation. It will make such an earthquake
in the nation as never was.
Mr. Bond. I was against the clause, but now you are
possessed of it, I would have you lay no blemish upon the
Long Parliament; for certainly their authority was equivalent with yours. I would have it recommitted, to the end
something may be done in it.
Sir John Reynolds. I would have it recommitted, that the
answer might be short, in general terms, viz. that they are
laws, and you conceive they ought to be so esteemed. Otherwise you do not only shake men's estates, and make men in
that way undersell one another, but shake men's minds, and
all settlements, nay the very settlement and foundation upon
which you stand.
Mr. Secretary. I apprehend no such difficulty of an
answer. I am of opinion that the laws made in that Parliament are as valid as need be, without any confirmation; but
seeing it is before you, and if you should pass it over, there
may be several constructions made of it abroad, and we are
to satisfy men's fears as well as their reasons, there is an
honourable person now speaking to you, viz. Sir Charles
Wolseley, who offered you something. I hope the question
will be well worded; some general answer. I doubt not it
will give his Highness and all people satisfaction. I cannot
word it to you, but as it was moved.
Colonel Jones offered a clause to this purpose, that nothing
herein should be construed to confirm any thing that is contrary to the humble Petition and Advice.
Mr. Bampfield. We all agree that till violence was offered
to the Parliament (fn. 11) the laws ought to be confirmed; but for
what was done since, I cannot in conscience consent to some
of them,—as what was done in Pellam's plot, and the putting
to death a minister, (fn. 12) and several lords, that were condemned
by that high court. By one breath, besides, you say that a
king and House of Lords shall be taken away, and by the
same breath you set them up. I think there is no need of
such confirmation, but would rather leave them as they
Lord Whitlock. I know no difference between the authority of that Parliament at one time or at another, and I think
the shorter your clause is the bettor. It is well offered to you
with two or three words addition, so as the matter of them be
not contrary to the Petition and Advice.
Mr. Speaker added the words.
Mr. Bodurda and Lord Strickland. The words were left
out because they give place to dispute. It will be said this
or that is contrary to the Petition and Advice.
Sir Richard Onslow. You must have these words in,
otherwise you will set a-foot that law, and say those laws
ought to be accepted and taken of force, which will overthrow
your whole settlement.
Mr. Fowell. Unless you put in those words, you make
and unmake at the same time, and erect that law again, which
is against setting up a single person.
Mr. Bacon. I would have the words kept in, otherwise
you throw down the whole foundation of your settlement.
Sir Charles Wolseley. I move, that the words may be
omitted here, and that a clause may be brought in, after you
have done all, to repeal all laws contrary to the Petition and
Sir William Strickland. I move that the words may be
omitted, for it will raise more scruples.
Mr. Godfrey. I would have the whole clause left out, or
at least those words, which will but raise scruples and doubts,
and do you no service at all.
Mr. Highland. If you put in those words, you take away
half the laws you are going to confirm, and I doubt you will
leave out the best of them; as all those laws that were
made in the name of the Commonwealth, and that for cutting off the King's head.
Colonel Jones offered a proviso; provided that nothing
herein shall be construed to extend to confirm any tiling contrary to the Petition and Advice.
Colonel Mathews. Either leave out the clause, or else
take further time to consider of it. Let us look back upon
ourselves and our cause, and be careful how we invalidate
any of those laws. It is a business of vast consequence.
Mr. Bampfield offered a clause, to say that you do not
think that any of them ought to be questioned or invalidated.
Sir Richard Onslow. I doubt you may do too much as
well as too little; for if you say all laws contrary to the Petition and Advice shall not be confirmed, every law not
made by the three estates is void, and then your settlement
is out of doors.
The question being put, that these words, "wherein as
to the matter of them, they are not contrary to the humble
Petition and Advice," be part of the question,
Mr. Speaker declared for the Yeas.
Major Burton excepted; and the House was divided.
The Yeas went forth.
Yeas 50. Lord Howard and Colonel Jones, Tellers.
Noes 61. Major Burton and Mr. Noel, Tellers.
So it passed in the negative.
And the main question being put, it was
Resolved, that touching the Acts and Ordinances made
from the 1st of April, 1642, until the 20th of April 1653;
this answer be tendered unto his Highness; that this House
doth conceive no need of any Declaration or Confirmation;
the same being valid in themselves, and ought to be accepted and taken. (fn. 13)
Major-General Disbrowe. I move, that the proviso (fn. 14) may
be read; for I doubt you have pulled up your settlement
at one blow.
Mr. Secretary. I second that motion; for without this
proviso, your vote is quite opposite to your Petition and
Advice. And if his Highness should ask what becomes of
those laws that are against the Petition and Advice, you
must answer, they are of force; and where are you then ?
Sir John Thorowgood. We that have acted upon the
High Court of Justice business, are in great danger if this
proviso should pass. I desire you will lay it aside, and
Mr. Highland and Mr. Moody. You have laid aside the
substance of this proviso, and it is against the orders of the
House to bring it in again.
Mr. Disbrowe stood up and said the Noes had it when the
main question was put, but it was too late.
Mr. Bampfield. I think there needs no proviso; for the
Petition and Advice itself repeals all that is contrary to it.
Mr. Trevor. Neither another clause, nor a proviso, is
proper in this case; but those words are of necessity to be
added here in this place. Otherwise, you quite contradict
your Petition and Advice, and you will not set up laws, one
to fight against another.
Colonel Mathews. Of all places and times, it is not fit
now to offer those words, seeing you have just now thrown
this out. For that objection, that a single person is contrary
to those laws, I do affirm it is not; for a Protector has been
owned by a Parliament, and that Act does not lay hold of
any that have acted under that power. I desire you would
adjourn and go to dinner.
Major-General Whalley. I shall eat my dinner with a
very ill stomach, if you leave it without a proviso; for all
that have acted under a single person, have you declared
traitors, by making valid all laws in the Long Parliament;
amongst the rest, that about setting up the single person.
Lord Whitlock. I should be sorry any gentleman here,
should be a traitor for a minute. You have declared, by
this vote, that that Act against setting up a single person,
is clearly of force. Though the Petition and Advice be
against it, and has provided against it, yet this being made
since, it seems to repeal your Petition and Advice. Here is
a flat contradiction in itself, and one law fights against another.
Lord Strickland. We have acted under a single person
these three years, and not been reputed traitors, and it is
strange we should be so now. As to that of order of times,
it signifies nothing, for all votes in Parliament are of one
Sir Charles Wolseley. The laws of the Long Parliament
are of more force than they were two hours since. It is expressly against the Petition and Advice, the vote that you
have now made; and unless you pass this proviso, you destroy
your whole two month's work.
Lord Broghill. Unless you pass this proviso, you pull
down what you would build up, and you build up what you
would pull down. The case is different now than what it
was in the morning. You have declared that all Ordinances
and laws that you have not confirmed, shall be void. So
that, in effect, you destroyed the Government, which was the
only fence you had against that Act against government by
a single person.
Sir Richard Onslow. There is a necessity of this proviso
now. I was against it before, because I was against the
whole clause; for I would not have had those at all meddled with. You expressly set up laws to fight against one
Sir William Strickland moved, that you would only repeal that Act which makes it treason to set up a single person
and let the rest stand; fur the proviso may invalidate the
Major-General Gaffe. Far be it from any here to be so
disingenuous as to surprise men in any vote; but I think
there is no such danger to destroy the Petition and Advice,
though you admit this proviso, for it repeals the former Act,
as soon as it passes.
Mr. Fowell. To repeal that Act about the single person
is not sufficient: there are other laws which the Petition and
Advice lays low, as that about perpetuating the Long Parliament. By this vote we have established them, and turned
ourselves out of doors.
Mr. Tymbes was of another opinion.
Mr. Waller. You unmake what you would make. By
what misfortune this comes about, I know not; but since
this could not be strangled before, I hope it shall not be
strangled now. I know not what you mean, by settling what
the Long Parliament did; but I am sure you unsettle the
settlement yourselves have made, and go to my Lord Protector for his consent to that which you declare to be treason,
both for yourselves and him, to offer or accept it. I desire
that you would receive this proviso, otherwise you destroy
all you have done.
(It was a pretty, witty speech, but I have wronged him
Colonel White. I move that you would adjourn; for
there may be inconvenience in the proviso. There cannot
be much in omitting it. For my part, I was for the confirmation of all those laws.
The question being put upon the proviso, it was
Resolved, that this proviso be added; "provided that this
be not construed to extend to the confirming of the matter
of any Act or Ordinance of Parliament, which is contrary to
the humble Petition and Advice, presented to his Highness,
by the Parliament." (fn. 15)
Then, without any debate at all, it was
Resolved, that nothing in this Report be binding, or of
force, before the humble Petition and Advice be consented
unto by his Highness. (fn. 16)
Colonel Jones moved, that a Committee might collect all
the resolves, and attend his Highness with them, and know
when the House shall wait upon him for his positive answer to
the Petition and Advice.
Sir Charles Wolseley and divers others seconded that motion.
Sir John Reynolds moved, that the whole House might
attend his Highness with these resolves; but it was
Resolved, that the same Committee, who did formerly attend the Lord Protector, touching the humble Petition and
Advice, do attend his Highness with the several resolves of
Parliament touching the matter; and do desire his Highness
to appoint a time when the House may attend his Highness
for his positive resolution and answer to that humble Petition
Ordered, that this Committee do meet this afternoon, at
four of the clock, in the Speaker's chamber. (fn. 17)
Lord Broghill offered a report from the Committee for the
confirmation of some orders of the Long Parliament, touching
Lord Howard seconded the motion.
But it was too late to receive it then, and it was
Resolved, that the report touching some orders of the Long
Parliament be made by Lord Broghill to-morrow morning. (fn. 18)
The House was adjourned till to-morrow morning at eight,
and sat till eight o'clock and past (fn. 19) .