Now I believe no man in the word unprejudiced with a former opinion, will underftand these words otherwife than thus. That, however enormous the cafes fhall happen to be, the Judges fhall never go beyond the bare letter of this Law, but leave all to the fafer judgment of Parliament.

AND if a Parliament upon an extraordinary occafion, as that of the Genoa Embaf fador, fhall in their great prudence inflict any unusual punishment; by what colour of reafon fhould that be conftrued, as if they would have all the ordinary Judges hereafter do the fame thing, without tarrying for their judgment?

ONE Parliament's proceeding is the best fort of precedent for another: But that it fhould be an example for inferiour Courts, is as prepofterous and dangerous, as if a Schoolmaster should imitate a General, and instead of whipping a scholar, fhould put him to death by a general council of school-boys.

BESIDES, the very meaning of the clause is only to restrain the forwardness of inferiour courts; and yet this abfurd interpretation enlarges their authority; by which it is not hard to guess how it comes to be encourag'd.

ADD to this alfo, that fuppofing it were fit to enlarge their power of judging any new offence,

offence, why should not the fame Parliament which firft determines that offence, determine also what new power the Judges fhould have concerning it? whereas by their interpretation it must be understood, as if a Parliament in EDWARD the Third's time undertook to judge of new cafes that might happen in ours, and increas'd the jurifdiction of future Judges in all those yet unknown cafes.

UPON this vulgar error, the Parliament in my Lord of STRAFFORD'S cafe, (being compos'd of fome members infected with it, and of others who found it neceffary to fatisfy thofe members as well as the rest of the world in their fears about it) ex abundanti cautela, added this claufe in that A&t against the Earl of STRAFFORD. ("Provided that "no Judge or Judges, Juftice or Juftices "whatsoever, fhall adjudge or interpret any "Act or Thing to be Treason, in any other "manner than he or they, fhould, or ought

to have done before the making of this Act, " and as if this Act had never been or made.")

THIS was fo prudent a caution in that time of prefumptuous Judges, (in imitation of the like wisdom exprefs'd in an Act of the first of Queen MARY) that it ought not to be blam'd: tho' it has accidentally confirm'd

L 24

firm'd many in their mistake about the Judges power, after that Act was pass'd, if this Provifo (laft repeated) had not prevented it.

BUT certainly, if the Act of EDWARD the Third placed no fuch power in the Judges'; this claufe against any fuch power, brought in for the greater caution, is far from giving a new interpretation to that Law, or any fuch addition; especially fo dangerous a one as this would be.

FORD.

IT is not altogether foreign to this matter, if I observe another very common miftake about that Bill against my Lord of STRAFAbundance of people, especially the old Cavaliers, understand this Provifo laft recited as a reflection on the Bill it felf; and as if his cafe was fo very hard even in the opinion of the Parliament it felf, that it was ordered by this clause to be no precedent for the future.

THIS is a ridiculous error in many refpects: First, Becaufe doing a thing in one Parliament, and ordering it to be no precedent to another, is an errant bull; fince the very doing it, is, and must be a precedent at the fame time 'tis ordered that it fhall be none. Secondly, It would have been an unparallell'd open injuftice, to put one man to

death

death for fuch a crime, as even in the opi- · nion of those who punifh'd him, was not great enough to be capital in any other perfon, or at any other time. And it will not weaken this argument to fay, That it was an unjuft, cruel Act, and therefore a good many diffented from it: For those diffenting members themfelves could not be fo uncharitable as to imagine all the members of both Houses who pass'd the Bill, not only fo bafe and bloody as to be all the while against it in their confciences, but fo foolish alfo as to own it in the very Bill it felf. And therefore nothing can be plainer than that 'tis only a grofs mistake among ignorant pcople, to think they meant it in that manner.

ACCORDINGLY, that Act of CHARLES II, which has revers'd this Bill of Attainder, and in the Preamble recited every thing imaginable in favour of that Earl, yet takes no notice of this claufe, which had more difcredited the Bill than all the rcft, if it could have been interpreted in that manner.

THE laft claufe in the Bill is about Highway-men, who had formerly been condemn'd for Traitors, only to inveft the Crown with their forfeited eftates. Here it is moft juftly provided, that hereafter they fhall only fufL 3

fer

fer as felons, or trefpaffers, according to the known Laws in those cases; and all fuch ill gotten eftates are again restored by the Crown. Which is another remarkable inftance of the benign intention of those wife Legislators, fhining almost in every word of this famous Law,

I would not have communicated these rambling thoughts to any but a friend; nor to your self neither; if, among the several mifinterpretations upon my refigning one great Employment, and refusing a greater, you had not suspected me of a little laziness; from which I hope this way of imploying my leifure, may be fome vindication; and I with it does not prove a much greater, by fhewing I needed no other reafon befides my difability, for not accepting the highest Post in a profeffion I was never bred to; an honour too much, to think any man fit for, except a Lawyer.