OBSERVATIONS Vpon the several parts of the LORD CRAVENS CASE.

THe examinations of Falconer was first framed, and then the Commissioners at Haberdashers-hall were sent for to give the said Falconer his oath at White-hall, there was no precedent Charge, or Accusation against the L. Craven, so as the wit [...]ss must of himself be an informer.

Of the three witnesses there is but only Falconer that hath any thing of crime in his Deposition, who is convicted of per­jury for the very matter of that Deposition; those Depositions are in the nature of Affidavids, and are no evidence to con­vince.

The constant ceurse was after information taken against any, to give them Copies of the Charge, to prepare themselves to answer, before any thing done against them: here was no Charge drawn up, whereto an answer might be made, nei­ther before nor after the Depositions, neither in Parliament nor elsewhere.

There was just cause for the doubt, no Act or Ordinance imposing sequestration for any such crime, and neither of these doubts were at any time resolved by the Parliament, neither is it known upon which point they voted the confiscation.

The Vote of Confiscation passed the same day the informa­tion was reported to the Parliament there was then no Charge, Jmpeachment, or Indictment to which the Lord Craven might answer, or whercin his crime did appear.

It is against the Law, and contrary to severall Acts of Parliament, that any should forfeit his Estate without con­viction upon a bare Vote without any Charge.

It were unreasonable to expound this vote, that men should be adjudged Traytors and Rebels without legall tryal, and it cannot be supposed that a parliament, which is to preserve the peoples liberty, should take it away, and deprive them of that security which common Law and Iustice gives them, being adjudged to lose life and fortune without tryall or hea­ring; nor did the vote intend that an [...] insufficient evidence in Law should be valid and perfect in parliament, for that in this case were to expose the parliament to reproach, and take away all credit of their proceedings.

The Declaration of the 24 of August 1649. within which the L. Craven is voted to be an offender, is but a bare vote not reduced into a Law, which ought not to confiscate any mans estate real or personal. It appeares by the vote, that it was only intended for Ireland, no man within it, but those that had served the parliament of England in Ireland, and had betrayed their trust, or had or should adhere to the son of the late King, or any of the forces in Ireland against the parliament; and the same vote is ordered to be printed and published, and sent into Ireland to be put into execution there. But the Vote was most severely put in execution against the L. Craven, who resided all these times in Holland, and never served the parliament in Ireland.

Ʋpon the issuing of these Orders for Confiscation some Members of Parliament bought part of the L. Cravens per­sonal estate▪ some of whom afterwards interested themselves in large purchases of his real estate.

All the Votes against the L. Craven were earried but b, one, two or three voyces, nothing clearly carried against him at any time after a vote in Parliament was carried in the Negative, to have the same question reassume [...] was unparliamentary, and shews that some in power which afterwards made hast to possess his estate were desirous of it from the first.

It is an unheard of course in Justice, that an estate should bee confiscate, and the party have a Summons afterwards, the judgment preceding the Summons.

The Summons without a charge or impeachment against him was illegal and irregular, as to ground any forfeiture upon the not obeying of it, it ought to have been to his person, and then if there had been a charge against him, the penal­ty for disobeying had been but a seizure quo usque, no con­fiscation or other forfeiture for that. This is the Law of En­gland.

Was it ever known before a person accused desired to be heard and it was declined? the truth of this appears by the petitions themselves remaining on record, in the hands of Mr, Scobel Clerk of the Parliament; Neither was Falconer ever heard viva voce before the Parliament, or any Committee of Parliament, without which course no man was ever before adjudged by parliament.

The Members of that parliament, which passed votes concerning the Lord Craven, stept in with the first to buy the Estate, (though it was absolutely contrary to what had been formerly setled by vote of Parliament, that the whole proceedings were unparliamentary and carried precipitately, as appeares by the progress.) All means being shut up, whereby the secret contrivance of this depo­sition of Falconer, and the falshood contrived in it, might be discovered; which is sufficient evidence that some did seek the profit of themselves by the ruin of another▪ and de­vouring the Lord Cravens Estate; (though sometimes Rebels in Arms and open hostility have been esteemed convict by the notority of the fact, being publikely avow­ed by themselves, and the supreme power, assaulted by them openly,) yet it was never known, that where the fact was particular & not apparent, but that it was to be dis­overed by examinations before any person was condem­ned to suffer in life, liberty or estate; For it were against all the practice of State that ever had been, and against common Justice, and pernicious to humane society, and for the prevention wheeeof, many Laws have been made in England; all which this course against the Lord Craven overthrows: And there is awide difference where a fact is denyed, and where it is avowedly continued; and therefore, violence against a Magistrate drawes on some­times the death of the Acterby the wilfulness and re­sistance of Authority without judgment (as it often happens in Tumults) but extraordinary courses are never just where ordinary may be used, where a man may be proceeded against by the ordinary way of Indictment and legal accusation, it is unjust to fall upon him by an absolute power without the requesite circumstances of judic [...]ture.

At this Tryall there was as great an Auditory as hath been seen at any Tryall.

Besides, as to the Infamous carriage of this perjured Witness, it was proved at the tryall, that he drunk healths to the Devil on his knees: That he said our Saviour Christ was a Bastard, and the Vitgin Mary a Whore: That he gave a man 20. s. in gold to permit him to bugger him: And also was committed to Aelesbury Goal, and after­wards to New gaet upon suspition of severall Felonies.