776 ?heHISTORY of the PURITANS. Chap.XI. K. Charles L t[ ing nothing worth enjoying without the liberty, peace, and fafety of x642. " the kingdom, nor any thing too much too be hazarded for the ob- " taming of at" 4ud of the His majefty in his anfwer, is not willing to charge his parliament we s an with mehaviour, but only a malignant party in both houfes. He de- nies the feveral plots and confpiracies mentioned in their declaration, and takes notice of their mifapplying the word parliament to the vote of both houles, whereas the king is an effential part of the parliament. His majefty confeffes that his going to the houle of commons to feize the five members was an error in form, but maintains the matter of theaccu fation to be juft, and therefore thinks he ought not to be reproached with it. He neither affirms nor denies the defign of bringing the ar- my to London, but quibbles with the words defign and refolution, (as Rapin obferves) king Charles I. being very fkilful in fuck fort of am- biguities. His majefty made no reply to the parliament's reafoning up- on the head, of the king's negletling to dfihargehis truji, but feems to infinuate, that the parliament fhoulsd in no cafe meddle with the go- Ruthw. vernment without an exprefs law. He denies his knowledge of any evil P. 79¢. councellors about him ; and declares that he did not willingly leave his PR apin, parliament, but was driven away by the tumults at Whitehall; and adds, 497 that by the help of God and the laws of the land, he would haveju/licefor thofi tumults; nor does his majefty own the promoting or retaining in his fervice any who are difaffected to the laws of the kingdom ; but he will not take a vote of parliament for his guide, -till 'tis evident they are without pailion or affeftion. The king charges them home with the greateft violation of the laws-and liberties of the fcbjeét. " What is become of the law that man was born to (lays he )? And where ismagna " charta if the vote of parliament-may make a law ? " His majefty con- cludes with a fevere remark on the parliament's calling the petitions prefented to him mutinous. " Hath a multitude of mean inconfider- " able people about the cityof London had liberty to petition againft the " government of the church, againft the bookof common prayer; &c. " and been thanked for it? And (hall it be called mutiny in the graveft " and belt citizens in London, and gentry of Kent, to frame petitions to " be governed by the known laws of the land, and not by votes of " parliament ? Is not this evidently the work of a faction ? Let heaven " and earth, God and man, judge between us and thefe men ! " The reader will judge ofthe weight of thefe declarationsaccording to a former remark. The parliament fuppofes the nation in imminent dan- ger, and the royalpower not exerted in its defence ; in which cafe they as guardians of the people, apprehend themfelves empowered to ad in its defence. The king fuppofes the nation to be in its natural(late, and in no 4
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=