JAMES. 393 " and his nobles had shed the blood of the saints at Charing-' " cross, and the blood of the covenanters in Scotland.-That " the king was brought in to this end, to fill up the measure " of his iniquity ; and that the king's cup of iniquity had " filled more within the last year than in many years before. " -That 'he did bemoan they had not improved their oppor- " tunity when they had power in their hands, and he said it " would not be long before they had power again, and then " they would improve it better ; and that he did bewail the " apostacyof the people of God, and say, they had not fought " the Lord's battles thoroughly, but when the. Lord should " give power to them again, and give his work into their " hands, they would do it better.-That the death and " destruction of the king drew very near:' The indictment being read, and Mr. James required to plead guilty or not guilty, he desired a copy of his charge, and time to consider of it ; pleading that he humbly con- ceived it to be his privilege as an Englishman, and till then he was unable to plead one way or the other. He alleged, that Chief Justice Cook and Judge Heath had declared it good law, and that the latter gave John Lilburn a copy ofhis charge, being arraigned for high treason. His request, how- ever, was peremptorily denied ; and he was told, that if he would not plead, they would proceed against him for con= tempt, and considerhim as mute. Mr. James seeing he was overruled, pleaded Not guilty either in matter orform. Upon this he was sent to the King's-bench prison in Southwark, where lie remained till November 19th, when he was again brought to the bar. During this interval Mr. James received information from a person of respectability, that there was a jury picked on purpose to take away his life ; and that if he did not except against them, or most of them, he was a dead man. Upon his appearance at the bar at Westminster before fourjudges, and still pleading not guilty, four witnesses were produced against him. John Tipler, the first witness, said, that he was, at the time mentioned in the indictment, in a yard adjoining the meeting-house, and, through a window, saw Mr. James preaching, and heard him repeat those words mentioned in the indictment. To this evidence Mr. James excepted, that it was difficult to swear that he was the person, when the witness was not in the place, and only saw him through the window, which might intercept the light. The second witness was Justice Chard, who said he could declare nothing of the words spoken, only he found Mr. James preachingin the place
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=