,litory of f the Puritans, exam ina. 3 2 9 Troubles of England, and feparate by itfelf in 4tos by Litchfield 1645, ; I can find no fuch Offer of Proof made by Mr. Whitlock ; and as he fubjoins no Authority for it, he will not I hope take it amifs, if we don't implicitly take his Word. * Upon their petitioning the King [in which the Houfe of ' Lords did not concur with them] to fettle the Militia, &c. he, without any Difcompofure, fent them a foft Anfwer ; That tho' the Nomination of thofe, to whom the Cuftody of Forts and Cailles were to be committed, was an infepara- ble Flower of the Crown ; yet he would leave them to the Juflice of his Parliament, if thro' Mif-information he hall committed fucha Truft upon any undeferving Perlon, and that when any particular Courhh for the ordering of the Militia was digefted by his Parliament, and pro- ' pofed to him, he would return fuch an Anfwer as fhould be agreeable to his Honour, and the Safety of his People ; conjuring: them not to be tranfported with groundlefs Fears and Jealoufies. And tho' in their Reply (lays Mr. Echard) next day, they acknowledged it an infeparable Flower of the Crown, to difpofe of the Forts and Caftles of the Kingdom, and that the Militia by Law was fubje& to no Command, but the King's Au- ' thority ; yet being fo deeply involved, they re- ' folved to let up their Reft upon that Stake, and go through with it, or perifh in the Attempt.' Neal, Ibid. Multitudes of Petitions were prefented to the Houfe, from the City of London, Middlefex, Hertford, Effex, &c. And there were Tome remarkable ones, ofwhich Mr. Neal has taken no notice. They were to the Houfe ofCommons, t S One from the Por- * Echard, Vol. II. p. zgo. Echard's Hiftory of England, Vol. II. p. 290. fers,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=