there is every reason to credit,) were calculated to remove all doubts from the minds of the wavering, who were far too numerous at that moment to please the grandees of the faction, as Mr. Pym and his party were then styled, for it is exceedingly doubtful whether a majority of the House could then have been obtained to vote away his life, notwithstanding that they acknowledged his high crimes and misde

meanours.

The paper in question was headed, "No Danger of a War with Scotland, if Offensive, not Defensive." Then followed a conversation between the King, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (the Earl of Strafford), Archbishop Laud, and Lord Cottington, who was at that time the colleague of Sir Benjamin Rudyerd as Master of the Court of Wards and Liveries-the names of the several parties appearing under initials.

K. C.-" How can we undertake an offensive war if we have no more money?"

L. L. Ir.-" Borrow of the city 100,000l.; go on vigorously to levy ship-money. Your Majesty having tried the affection of your people, you are absolved and loose from all rule of government, and to do what power will admit. Your Majesty having tried all ways, and being refused, shall be acquitted before God and man and you have an army in Ireland that

you may employ to reduce this kingdom to obedience : for I am confident the Scots cannot hold out five months."

L. Arch." You have tried all ways, and have always been denied; it is now lawful to take it by force."

L. Cot." Leagues abroad then may be made for the defence of the kingdom: the lower House are weary of the King and Church: all ways shall be just to raise money by, in this inevitable necessity, and are to be used, being lawful."

L. Arch." For an offensive, not any defensive war."

L. L. Ir." The town is full of Lords, put the commission of array on foot; and if any of them stir we will make them smart."

The effect of the foregoing intelligence was electrical; nor can it cause surprise even at this period. The reply of Strafford, "That it were hard measure for opinions and discourses of privy counsellors, in a debate in council, to be prosecuted under the notion of treason" (however good as a technical objection to the reception of the evidence, if, under similar circumstances, a like defence were offered at the present day), was no answer to the unquestionably treasonable and wicked advice tendered to the King in his capacity of a state minister; and as to his subsequent denial of the genuineness of the minutes,

it can only be regarded as a means adopted to escape the penalty attached to so grave an offence.

On the same day, April 10, a bill was brought in for the attainder of Thomas Earl of Strafford for high treason, which was read a first time. And on the second reading of the same, four days after, Sir Benjamin Rudyerd again addressed the House as follows:

66

Mr. Speaker, I was not in the House at the first reading of this bill, although I staid here till it was past six o'clock. There hath not been in all this Parliament any business that was little but we could swell it up till it became a great one before we left it. Let us take heed we do not make this which is the greatest a little one indeed.

"We have wrapt up the three quarters-head cause of the Earl of Strafford in a bill, and are now in preparation to go up with it to the Lords. I am afraid this bill will prove but brutum fulmen-a lost blow. For I believe (and I am bound to speak what I think) the Lords will not pass it upon the notes they have taken already, and then the Earl of Strafford is acquitted of all. We may please ourselves, that we may demand further judgment, which will breed a contestation, which will make a division, which will bring a confusion; and this by Parliament.

"Justice must be done justly; it is an outward public act, and, therefore, ought to give a fair satisfaction to the world. But, principally, it is an inward private conclusion of the conscience to every man that

hath a hand in it. A sentence of death rightly given is justice; if otherwise, it is murder, and to a doubting conscience it is the same, which unrepented, is no less than damnation; for blood is a crying sin.

"I do believe that the Earl of Strafford is as wicked, a flagitious, facinorous malefactor, as was ever brought before a Parliament: but we find withal that he is ingenississimi nequam, et malo publico facundus— full of artificial delusions. Therefore, it behoves us to be the more exact in wiping off his deceitful paintings, that he may appear to the world in his own foulness beyond all contradiction, which we cannot so well do unless we return to the way we were in, notwithstanding the great disadvantages of time and money.

66

Wherefore, Mr. Speaker, my humble motion is, 'That we may desire a present conference with the Lords for an agreement and settlement in that course.' pray God direct us in the best way, for this kingdom had never more need of his help than at this instant."

I

Mr. Whitlocke having the same day reported to the House that the Lords had not exactly determined how the trial should proceed, the Commons on the following day, the 16th of April, "Resolved that it is sufficiently proved, that Thomas Earl of Strafford hath endeavoured to subvert the ancient and fundamental laws of these realms of England and Ireland, and to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government against law." On the 19th they voted

him guilty of treason, and on the 21st they passed the bill of attainder by a majority of 204 against 59. This bill was not passed altogether without remonstrance, for the Lord Digby made a most eloquent appeal to the House to spare his life; and though he said, "I believe his practices in themselves as high, as tyrannical, as any subject ever ventured on, and the malignity of them hugely aggravated by those rare abilities of his whereof God hath given him the use, but the devil the application." And further, "in a word, I believe him to be still that grand apostate to the Commonwealth who must not expect to be pardoned in this world till he be despatched to the other. Yet (he continued) do I, before God, discharge myself, to the utmost of my power, and with a clear conscience, wash my hands of that man's guilt by the solemn protestation that my vote goes not to the taking away of the Earl of Strafford's life."

As Sir Benjamin Rudyerd's name does not appear among the fifty-nine members who voted in the minority, it is clear he must have coincided with the general view of the House as to the propriety of shedding this great man's blood, though as far as language is concerned he does not in his speeches upon this question offer a stronger