His Majesties Reasons against the pretended Jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice
The argument of the King Charles-I
His Majesties Reasons. Against the pretended Jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice, which he had intended to have given there on Monday, Jan. 22. 1649. Faithfully transcribed from the original Copy of the King.
Since I have already made my Protestation, not only against the illegality of this pretended Court, but that no power on earth, can justly call me (who am your King) into question as a Delinquent. I would no longer have opened my mouth on this Argument, but have referred myself to those things which I then spoke, if this onely concerned my own particular; But the duty which I owe to God, to preserve the true liberty of my people
doth not permit me at this time, I should be silent; for how can any free born Subject of England call his life or any thing he doth possess his own, if power without law can daily make new, and abrogate the old and Fundamental Laws of this Land, which I judge to be the present case? Wherefore when I was brought hither, I expected that you would have studied to satisfy me in these Fundamentalls which do hinder me from putting in my Answer to the pretended charge, but since I do observe, that nothing which I can alledge can perswade you to it (although negatives are not so naturally proved, as affirmatives) yet I have thought good to declare unto you the Reasons for which I am confident, you are not in a capaโฃcity to judge me, nor the vilest man in England, for without
Page 103
showing my Reasons, I will not (as you) be so unreasonably importunate, as to exact either belief or obedience from my Subโฃjects.
Here was I restrained, and not suffered to speak any more of Reasons, there is no just processe against any man, which deriveth not its authority, either from the Law of God, or from the muniโฃcipall Laws of the Land.
Now I am most sure, that the Processe at this day made against me, cannot be confirmed by the law of God; for on the contrary the necessity of obedience is clearly confirmed, and streightly commanded in the old and new Testament; which if it be denyed, I am prepared presently to prove it; and as for the question now in agitation, it is said there, Where the word of a King is, there is power,ย and who can say unto him, what doest thou? Eccles. 8. v. 4. Then as to the laws of the land, I am as confident that no learned lawyer will affirm, that any charge can be brought against the King, since they all go forth under his name, and it is one of their axioms, that the King can not do an injury. Moreover the law on which you do ground your processe, is either old or new, if it be old, shew that law unto me, if it be new, tell me what Authority established by the Fundamentall laws of this land did give it birth and when? But how the House of Commons can erect a Tribunall of Justice, which was never one itself (as all lawyers will confesse with me) I leave it to God and to the world to judge; and it will seem most strange to any who ever have heard of the laws of England, how they can pretend to make laws without either the King, or the House of Peeres.
Neverthelesse it be admitted, but not granted, that a commission from the people of England, is able to confirm your pretended power, yet I see nothing that you can show for it for I am confident that you never asked that questioฬ of the 10th man in the kingdom; & in this method you do a most apparent injury, even to the poorest ploughman, if you ask not his consent, neither can you pretend any colour to this your pretended Commission, if you have not the concurring voyces of at least the greatest part of this Nation, of every degree and quality, which you are so far from obtaining, that I am confident you never so much as sought it.
You see then, that I do not onely speak for my own Right, as I am your King, but also for the true liberty of all my subjects, which consisteth not in dividing the power of Government, but in living under such laws, and such a Government, as may grant them the best security of their lives, and the propriety of their goods. In this I ought not to be forgetful, neither do I forget the privileges of both Houses of Parliament, which these proceedings do not onely violate, but give an occasion of the greatest breaking of the publick faith; and such (I believe) as the like was neโฃver heard of before, with which I will not at all, charge both Houses, for the pretended crimes which they impose upon me, are far before the Treaty at Newport, in which when I assented to, and did conclude as much as possibly lay in my power, and did justly expect the assent of both Houses, I was suddenly taken from thence and carried away as a prisoner, and against my will, I was hurried hither; and since I came to this court, I cannot with all my Indeavours, defend the ancient laws and liberties of this Kingโฃdome, together with my just privileges, and as much as I can possibly discern the upper House, which is the House of Lords, is totally excluded.
And as for the House of Commons, it is too much known, that the greater part of them are either imprisoned, or affrighted from sitting, so that if I had no other Cause, this was sufficient enough to make me to protest against the authority of your pretended tribunall. Besides all these things,ย the peace of the Kingdome, is not the least part of my cares, and what hope can there be of establishing it, as long as power reigneth without the Rule of the Law, changing the whole frame of the Government under which this Kingdome hath flourished these many ages; neither will I speak what is likely to follow, if these unlawfull proceedings shall yet continue against me; for I believe the Commons of England, will give you no thanks for this change, especially, when they shall call into their minds, how happily they heretofore have lived in the Reigns of Queen Elisabeth, and of the King my Father, and in my own Reign before the beginning of these unhappy tumults; and they will have a just cause to doubt, if they shall be so happy in any new Government.
In that time it will most evidently appear that I onely took up Arms to defend the Fundamentall Laws of this Kingdome against those who opposed my power, and totally would have subverted the ancient Government.
Having so briefly declared my Reasons to you, for which I could not submit to your pretended Authority, without violation of the Trust which God hath committed to me for the safety and liberty of my people. I expect from you either clearer Reasons to convince my Judgement, by demonstrating to me that I am in an Error, (and then surely, I shall be ready to give you an Answer) or else, that you suspend your present proceedings.
This I had determined to have spoken in Westminster Hall on
Monday, the two and twentieth of January, but against Reason I was prohibited to pronounce my Reasons.
In the year 1648. English style. 1649. vulgar style.
_____________________________
