Chap. III. The HISTORYof the PURIrANs. 509 clamations, by very great fines and imprifonment ; fo that any dif- K. Charles I. " refpedt to any ads of fixate or to the perlons of ftatefinen, was in no 1625. " time more penal, and thofe foundations of right, by which men valued " their fecurity, were never in more danger of being deftroyed. " The it IG,H COMMISSION alto had very much overflowed the banks The high " that fhould have contained it, not only in meddling with things not eomm:LIion. " within their connufance, but in extending their fentences and judgments " beyond that degree that was juftifiable, and grew to have fo great a t0 contempt of the common law, and the profeffors of it, that prohibitions " from the fupream courts of law, which have and mutt have the fu- " perintendency overall the inferior courts, were not only negledted, but " the judges were reprehended for granting them, which without per- " jury, they could not deny. -- Befides, from an ecclefiaftical court for Ib. p. 283. " reformation of manners, it was grown to a court ofrevenue, and im poled great fines upon thofe who were culpable before them ; fometimes " above the degree of the offence, had the jurifdifìion of fining been un- " que/tionable, which it was not; which courfe of fining was much more " frequent, and the fines heavier, after the king had granted all that re- venue for the reparation ofSt. Paul's, which made thegrievance greater; and gave occafion to an unlucky obfervation, that the church was built with the fins of the people. Thefe commiToners not content with the bufinefs that was brought before them, fent their commiffaries over the whole kingdom, to fuperintend the proceedings of the bifhops courts in their fe- veral diocefes, which of themfelves made fufficient havock among the pu- ritans, and were under a general odium for the fevefe exercife of their. power.: But if the bifhop or his officers, were negligent in their citations, or (hewed any degree of favour to the puritan minters, notice was im- mediately fent to Lambeth, and the accu/idperfòns were cited before the high commiffion, to their utter ruin. They alto detained men in priforr many months, without bringing them to a trial., or fo much as acquaint- ing them with thecaufe of their commitment. Sir EdwardDeering Pays,. that " their proceedings were in fotne fenfe worfe than the romifh inqui- " fation, becaufe they do not punifh men of their own religion, eftablifhed " by law ; but with us, Pays he, how many fcores of poor diftreffed mi- " rafters, within a few years have been fufpended, degraded, and excom- " municated, though not guilty of a breach of any eftablifhed law ? All which was fo much the worfe, becaufe they knew that the court had . no jurifdidtion of fining at all ; for the houle of commons, in the third and feventh of king James I. refolved, that the court of high common's: fining and imprifoning men for ecclfaJlical (fences, was an intolerable grie- vance, oppreffön, andvexation, not warranted by the /latute I Eliz. chap. r.. And Sir Edward Coke with the reft ofihe judges, at a conference with thn
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=