[This account of the proceedings in the House of Commons in 1604 from the beginning of the session until 6 April is among the manuscripts of the Duke of Rutland at Belvoir.  It is given here in unabridged form (as distinct from abridgements in the Journal of the House of Commons and the Diarium) so you can assess the significance contemporary Members of Parliament attached to the Buckinghamshire election compared to other business before the House. The account is taken from a transcription of the original manuscripts as printed in volume 14, Belvoir Mss.]

[19 March 1604]
        19 March, His Majesty's speech in his oration grounded upon thes[e] three [e]specially:
          1. First, His Majesties coming to the crown by his right and descent with so general applause to all his subjects of this kingdom, that whilst he lived he would never be unmindful of their acknowledgements and kindness.
         2. Secondly, the peace that came by His Majesty both outward and inward at home whereby all merchants had free traffic, and all wars which were in her late Majesty's time were quieted.
         Thirdly, touching the true religion and service of almighty God which he divided into three sorts: first, the professors of the religion at home which is established, which he allowed of and never purposeth to change; the second, catholics, which he called papists, who seek to have wars foreign or outward; thirdly, sectaries who sought for reformation at home and so troubled the state.
         After this speech by Mr. Doctor Herbert in the lower house delivered, Sir Edward Phelips was commended from the King by him to be a fit man for the speaker, and so elected by the lower house, and by them to be presented Thursday following videlicet 22 Marcii 1603.
[22 March 1603]
        At which day Mr. Speaker was presented to the King between one an two of the clock of the afternoon, and all being ended in the upper house, he came into the lower house, and after he had taken his chair and silence commanded, then a speech made by Sir William Fleetwood one of the knights in Buckinghamshire in the behalf of Sir Francis Goodwyn, the other knight, elected and returned by Mr. Sheriff, and yet stayed and not filed by the clerk of the crown, one Sir [blank in mss.] Coppyn; and therefore the matter was committed to certain committees to examine the cause but not censure it, but to relate it to the House and the House to determine of it and this to be done the next day in the morning at nine of the clock by the committees, then to be opened to the House and censured by the House.
         Also it was then opened to the House that Sir Thomas Sherley being elected a burgess for the Parliament was after his election arrested in London, and for him it was determined that a habeas corpus should be awarded to the sheriffs of London to bring him the next day, and a serjeant at Arms sent for that serjeant who arrested him and the party that caused him to be arrested.
         Also, it was moved that one Daniel Tasse, one of the guard at the door of the Upper House, kept out ten burgesses and gave them ill words in calling them "good man burgess" disgracefully, to the indignity of the Lower House wherein are knights, gentlemen, and others of good sort and reckonings, burgesses assembled by the King's commandment for the service of him and of the realm; and therefore it was ordered by the House that a serjeant at arms should bring him in the next day though some of the Privy Council moved to have it committed.
         Then was read a bill for the falsifying of recoveries against infants coming in either as tenants or vouchees, and then the court arose.
[23 March 1603]
        1. Friday the 23th of March there was propounded to the House a speech by Sir Robert Wrothe, Knight, to these several effects: first, that the book of Common Prayer might be established and confirmed; 2, secondly that there might be some course taken for wards and their lands by a payment and not by way of wardship; 3, thirdly against purveyors whom he termed the hellhounds of England;  4, fourthly against monopolies; 5. fifthly transportation of ordinance; 6, sixthly concerning the officers of the Exchequer; 7, seventhly, dispensation of penal statutes.  For which causes there was a commitment made to several committees, gentlemen of good sort, to consider of these things and to bring them to some heads, that by us might be drawn to relieve the inconveniences thereof.
         Next to this was moved to the House by Sir Edward Montague that certain abuses might be reformed and that the House would have consideration thereof for the good of the subjects, which were these: the intolerable burden upon the subjects in ecclesiastical and commissionary courts.
         Then secondly the suspension of ministers learned and grave being good pastors and preachers.  Thirdly the general ill providing to the subjects by converting of tillage into pasture.  These things also thus moved were committed to a grave commitment [sic] to be considered of, how to be reduced to a good head and a good provision for the general good of the kingdom.
         Thirdly it was moved by one Mr. Wentworth, a lawyer, that it might be examined by the House whether there were any in the House that were there as members not warranted.
         This being done then the Clerk of the Crown, for the cause between the right honorable Sir John Fortescue, Knight, Chancellor of the Duchy and of the Privy Council and Sir Francis Goodwyn, Knight, was sent for and by the House examined what returns he had from the sheriff of Buckinghamshire, touching the knights of the shire, who brought in two writs and 2 indentures with two several returns.  By the first writ it appeared it bare teste xxxio January, anno primo Jacobi Rex Anglie, etc., and upon that writ was returned an election made 22 Februarii, as appeared by the indenture of Sir Francis Goodwyn and Sir William Fleetwood, Knights; and upon the return of the writ it appeared that Sir Francis Goodwyn was outlawed, so that therefore it should be inferred that the election was not good; and the writ of the Parliament was returnable 19 Marcii.  Before xixo Marcii the King awarded another writ for an new election, reciting the first writ and the outlawry, and that therefore they should proceed to a new election, which was done, and the second writ dated before the xixth day of March, and by that second writ Sir John Fortescue was elected and returned.  And which of these two Knights should be accepted to be the member of the House was the question.  That Sir Francis Goodwyn should be the member of the House it was spoken by Sir William Fleetwood that the election of Sir Francis was good by law, first, for that the election commanded by the writ was performed for, though he were outlawed yet he was "idoneus", able to give good counsel and to advise, and by the return the statute of 7 Henry lV was performed, which was that the election should by the sheriff in pleno comitatu by indenture.  And that return by indenture should be good, so that then there was a concluding positive law.
         Then he alleged that the return of the sheriff was void as to the oulawry and but a negation [word unclear] and surplus, for by the writ he was but to make his election in the full county.  Which done and returned, the commandment of the King was performed.  And, further, the sheriff had not to do.  lt was also by the said Sir William Fleetwood alleged that the return of the first writ was not returnable until the 19th of March, then to award a second writ for election was void, for until the first writ here returnable the second could take no effect.
          And the first was not discharged by the awarding of the second, neithe[r] could be discharged but by a supersedeas and so inferred that the first elect[ion] was good and ought not to be rejected.
         And in fortifying of this position many lawyers spoke and much to the same effect, and they vouched a case in the Parliament 3 Eliz. Rne. of Fitzherbert outlawed and admitted.
         To encounter this, it was alleged by some other lawyers that the first election was void and by the words of the writ relying chiefly upon the word "idoneus", for that a person outlawed could not in law be said "idoneus", for that he was out of the law, and therefore not fit to be a law maker.  Also it was said that he could not use an action in his name and for his own use, neither could he in law be a sufficient witness, neither a juror for a trial, nor to serve as an indicter, also the words of Bracton were cited, de Utlagatis, quod gerit capud lupinum, and so fitter to consume than to preserve, and therefore not fit to be a member of that House.  And those insertions were seconded and followed, but not with so many for Sir John Fortescue as for Sir Francis Goodwyn.  Then the question was whether of them were the member of the House, and the question was this: as many as would say that Sir Francis Goodwyn should be the member of the House say "Yea", and those that were of that mind that Sir John Fortescue was to be the member of the House to say "No", and the voice of the Yea carried it to Sir Francis Goodwyn, who was sworn and came into the House and took his place, and the Clerk of the Crown commanded to file the writ whereby he was returned Knight of the Shire.
         Then the cause concerning Daniel Tasse, of the guard, was brought in question, about his insolent and proud speech in calling some of the burgesses "good man burgess."  He was brought in by the Serjeant at Arms to the bar and upon his knees acknowledged his fault, desired pardon of the House, and it was granted of the grace of the House upon a speech used by the King in his behalf, and not for any good liking the House had of Daniel Tasse, who was a very tall proper man.
         Then it was moved in the behalf of one Chubbe, who was a burgess and a collector for this subsidy, a treasurer for the maimed soldiers, and something infirm in his body, that his appearance might be excused and a writ awarded for a new election in his place.  And likewise that such as were returned for 2 places, notice should be taken what place they served and new writs for new election to the other's place.
         Afterwards it was agreed that a habeas corpus should be awarded to the sheriffs of London to bring the body of Sir Thomas Sherley upon Monday next, and the Serjeant at Arms to bring in the serjeant who arrested him and the party who caused him to be arrested that the cause might be censured by the Court.
 [Margin]  Saturday 24 March
        Was moved an act concerning apparel, that all former acts touching apparel might be revocated, and order set down by the King's proclamation what apparel ought to be used by every sort of people.  And this bill was presently rejected by the House as unfit to be retained.
         Then was moved that the act of 32 Henry 8, ca. [blank], for limitation of prescription might be explained with some addition thereunto concerning rent charges and other things out of the statute.
         Then was moved to have committees for abrogating laws unnecessary and retaining of laws necessary for the commonwealth and common good for ordinary justice.
         Then was moved: the statutes against fugitives, to have it revived, and likewise the statute of primo Eliz. for the safety of her majesty's person, that the like might be for the king, these were moved by Mr. Serjeant Doddridge and thought fit to come in by way of bill.
         There was then moved that the statutes, in primo Marie concerning riots, routs, and unlawful assemblies might be revived, for that by primo Eliz. it was revived, but during her Majesty's life and to th'end of the next Parliament after, and for no longer time.
         Next was complaint made to the House of the abuse committed by certain pages upon a boy of one of the burgesses for drawing or hailing him to the tavern for wine and cakes taken at the house of one William Carter of Westm[inster], and by laying the boy's cloak to pawn for 2s. 6d. for the wine and cakes.  The vintner and one Brian Ashton, his man, were brought to the bar and the cause examined.  The vintner said he was not at home, and his man delivered to the custody of the Serjeant until Monday, then to be ordered as the committees should seem good.  And so the court, in regard the sermon was begun and Saturday, being the twenty fourth of March, was the day his Majesty began his reign and in the afternoon divers of the noblemen, knights and gentlemen showed themselves to the King and ran at tilt in the tiltyard at Whitehall.
 [Margin]  Monday 26 Marcii
        A report of the committees touching the wards was made by Mr. Bacon who spoke of sundry disputes touching wards, and that pro and contra.  First, it was moved by him how the King might be answered, what contentment to that which was to be propounded unto him: videlicet, an yearly rent or sum whatsoever, or in what manner soever, in respect of the wardship, when it should happen.  First, if the King should except against the thing propounded that the like was never offered to king in his state and government as King of England, beginning at the erection of tenures and continuing to this day.
         Then it was said that his Majesty might be very well answered that the cause of scutage was only invented to defend the King and this realm against the Scots, and now the realms being conjoined in descent and blood to his Majesty and his heirs the cause of the wards did cease, and so ought the effect which is the wardship, livery, and primer seisen.
         It was said by Sir Thomas Heskett, Attorney of the Courts of Wards and Liveries, that certain tenures were of the King by his grant to keep the castle of Dover and divers other castles which were not given as the former, which were knights' services, and demanded what should become of these.  Answer was made by the House that provision might be made as well for the one as the other.
         Then was moved the manner how to proceed in this action, for that if it were a matter of common justice that ought to be by bill, but this, being a matter of grace, it ought to be proceeded in to the King by way of petition, and that was the opinion of the Lower House.  And for most honorable way of proceeding herein, the Lower House sent to the Lords the Upper House to desire a conference touching this cause, which the Lords yielded unto.
         And from them were sent down in message to the Lower House, the Lord Chief Justice of England, namely Sir John Popham, Mr. Justice Yelverton, and Doctor Swayle, who reported to the House that the Lords were well contented to admit a conference, and delivered the number of the Lords to be thirty, and the Lower House appointed; their number three score to meet their Lordships the next morning at nine of the clock in the Withdrawing House near to the Higher House.  Then likewise in that conference the lords willed by their messengers that in that commitment speech might be had concerning purveyors for their abuses to the subjects, and also the payment of respite of homage which was a general charge to the subjects. Which was yielded unto by the Lower House, and the Lords likewise offered to have conference at any time touching of anything concerning the general good of the kingdom.  After this it was moved a relief of certain captains and officers to be had for their service in Ireland, being Englishmen there maimed and there hurt, which was committed to divers committees.
         Also it was moved that a declaration might be had generally what things are treason.
         Likewise for grants made to the King and by the King, what should and ought to be good and what not, and that reasonable confirmation might be had thereof.
         Then it was moved that Justices of Peace upon bills of indictment might, upon an ignoramus found, discharge the prisoner as justices of oyer and determiner, and to convey them to the place where they dwell if they have dwellings, else to the place where they were born as rogues according to the statute of 39 Eliz.
         Fourth, it was moved pro and contra touching a return made by the bailiffs and common council of Shrewsbury concerning their burgesses.  Mr. Sheriff would not accept it, and the[y] certified it under the town seal, and for their election by the bailiffs and common council the[y] vouched a particular act of parliament in 23 H 8.
         Moreover, there was moved a particular act concerning clothiers in the county of Surrey, but that received at this time interruption by the coming in of the Lord Chief Justice and others.
         Lastly was moved this day the cause of Sir Thomas Sherley, who was attended by the sheriffs of London and by them brought to the Parliament deferred to the next day, then to be brought in upon a new habeas corpus.
 [Margin]  27 Marcii Tuesday
        Was moved by Sir George More, an act for the relief of clothiers in Guilford, and that wool might be stayed and not so generally transported, but that convenient might be kept in the realm to set the subjects on work.  And to that was added another act to be made, that no cloth should be carried beyond the seas unbarbed, unrowed, nor unshorn.
         Next to this was Sir Thomas Sherley brought to the bar upon a habeas corpus by the sheriffs of London, being arrested in London, videlicet 15 Marcii last, where he was elected a burgess in Sussex the 14th of February before, and upon the habeas corpus was returned execucione patet in quadam scedula.  And by the scedula it appeared that he was arrested upon a [com]plaint in London at the suit of one Simpson, of £3,000 then upon an execution of £3,000, thirdly another [com]plaint of £3,000, another plaint of £2,000, and fifthly and lastly a plaint of £300 which Sir Thomas Sherley desired the privilege of the House, and whether he should have the privilege or not was the first question.  The second question was, admitting he should have his privilege, then whether Simpson did lose his execution and debt forever.
         One Mr. Wynche, a lawyer, said that it were good to advise whether he ought to have the privilege or not, for that if he had the privilege it might be matter in doubt whether the execution were gone, and the party without remedy.  And to the end he might have the privilege he took a diversity where he was discharged by the act of the party.  And where he was set at liberty by the act of law for being discharged by the act of the party, the execution was also discharged, but being privileged by the act in the law he was privileged of the arrest and for the execution was but suspended and not merely determyned, and by him it was said that this writ from the House was but a supersedeas for the time of the Parliament.
         Serjeant Hubbard said that Sir Thomas ought to have privilege veinende et redeundo and that the execution was suspended and not determined nor discharged for ever.
         Mr. Recorder of London moved two points: first, whether the privilege were to be granted af[ter] the execution; secondly, if the privilege were granted, then whether the said Sir Thomas was discharged and likewise the sheriffs of London.
         Serjeant Doddendige urged that conference might be had with the judges whether that by the privilege granted the execution were not discharged, for he seemed in opinion to bend to that side that the execution was discharged and then Simpson lost his debt.
         Serjeant Tanfield moved to know whether Simpson had notice or intelligence that the said Sir Thomas was elected a burgess which, if he had, and then arrested him, he said that then Sir Thomas ought to have his privilege and the debt discharged.
         Bacon doubted whether if he had privilege whether the debt was gone or not, and therefore wished the House to suspend their judgment in regard of the execution, and to proceed to censure the judgment against Simpson and Boucher, the creditors who procured it and against Watkins the serjeant who arrested him.
         Dyatt said that the verbal information of Sir Thomas as to say that he was a burgess was not sufficient to surcease the arrest, but the return of record and that the arrest [2 words illegible] was the contempt and further said that the execution was but suspended by authority of law, and yet if that authority did err the execution was gone.
         Serjeant Swigge prayed that the court would be advised, and he cited this case: that if one were indebted to divers and afterwards procured himself to be indicted of felony and had his book that he is not discharged of the debt.  Likewise he said that if Sir Thomas procured himself extraordinarily to be a burgess he ought not to have his privilege.
         Yelverton, jr. said that the provisionment was not yet ripe for the parties for that it was yet questionable whether Sir Thomas was a member of the House or not.
         The king's solicitor said that there was not any book to warrant his enlargement and therefore good to advise before any act done.
         Heskett, the attorney of the Court of Wards, moved that 12 lawyers of the House and 12 gentlemen of the House might consider of this cause by a commitment and hear  the counsel on both sides, which was yielded, and the day Friday next, the Inner temple hall, in the afternoon and the counsel on both sides to attend the committees.
         Next after was delivered to the House by Mr. Bacon what had passed between the Lords of the higher House and the committees of the Lower House touching a conference concerning wards and the propositions which the lower house propounded for their griefs were these.  The things taken and seised in present, the marriages of wards against their likings or else mighty sums of money for the same hardly ever after to be recovered.
         These former griefs to be reduced into an yearly payment or yearly revenue.  The King's officer to be considered.  An offer of themselves in time of service.  The manner to attain by way of petition.
         Thus delivered, it seemed, by the reporter that the Lords did entertain it as with a willingness to join with the Lower House so that it might be done in modesty, plainness, and order.
         But afterward the Lords sent a message to the Lower House by Sir Edward Coke, his majesty's attorney, accompanied with three others, wishing of the Lower House that there might be a conference between the Lords of the higher House and the nether House, that the nether House might show cause why they had admitted Sir Francis Goodwyn into the House as a member thereof and refused Sir John Fortescue, the said Sir Francis Goodwyn being man outlawed at the time of the election.  And so by a second writ entered to the Sheriff commanding him to proceed to a new election, which the Sheriff did, and choice was made of new, and Sir John Fortescue elected by the second writ, and returned, yet not admitted but rejected.
         This message delivered, Mr. Attorney and they who accompanied him went out of the Lower House to the Withdrawing House until the House had  considered of an answer.  And consideration had, the House said that the like had never been before heard or seen that the[y] should deliver a reason unto the Lords why they did it, but it was said by the House that  they were judges in the Parliament, though not judges of the law, and their judgment being past it ought not to be called into question, so that then they were not minded to yield to the Lords any reason what moved them to do it, yet in all humbleness they would attend the king at his appointment and yield him their reasons why they did it.  And then Mr. Attorney and the others with him were brought in again to the House and received  an answer by the mouth of Mr. Speaker to the effect aforesaid, and so departed.  And at Mr. Attorney's coming in, the House did not know that it was the King's pleasure that the Lords should move the Lower House to the effect aforesaid.  But afterwards they did understand that it was the King's pleasure, and therefore the House sent Sir John Stanhope and Sir John Herbert to the King about the said cause, who returned not to the House.  And after three of the clock in the afternoon the House rose and met Sir John Stanhope and Sir John Herbert who returned answer that it  was his Majesty's pleasure to have Mr. Speaker with threescore of the House to be before his Majesty at Whitehall on Wednesday the next day following, by eight of the clock in the morning; yet before the House did rise the said 27th day of March there w[as] a read a bill touching the  preservation of manors and copyholds,  also another bill for costs  in physicians.
         Another touching brewers in London and the suburbs and within two miles of the same to be within the survey of the brewers of London, and that no foreigner should be permitted unless he was free.  This bill was thrown out at the first reading as not fit to be retained.
 [Margin]  28 Marcii, Wednesday
        Mr. Speaker and the Lower House assembled early, and it was determined by the House which threescore of the House should accompany Mr. Speaker to the King to deliver to his Majesty the causes and reasons that moved the House to accept of Sir Francis Goodwyn to be their member, and then to meet the next morning at the Lower House again.
 [Margin]  29 Marcii, Thursday
        A bill was read that the liberties given to the Commons of this Kingdom by the ancient charter of Magna Carta might be confirmed.
         Then was moved by Mr. Speaker that there had been delivered to him an information by one Bryan Brydger, a minister, which Mr. Speaker termed rather to be a libel, the effect whereof consisted of three points: (1) first, that all bishops of this kingdom that urged men to subscribe to ceremonies of religion were antichrists; (2) secondly, that all bishops that take upon them to rule as justices in temporal causes are imitators of antichristi; (3) thirdly, that the last year the Kingdom was infected with such like bishops.  The said Bryan was brought to the bar, though before that he came in it was alleged he was not sound memory.  Upon his coming in he was examined by Mr. Speaker who writ that information.  He answered, himself; he was asked who was of counsel with him, and what were their names.  He said he might not tell that for that if he did he thought murder might ensue.  He answered every question to him propounded very substantially, that no imperfection could be thought to be in him but that the information was upon mature deliberation by the help and assistance of others.  He said he writ it in a Scrivener's House in Westminster and was prisoner in the White Lion in Southwark.  The scrivener and keeper of the Lion were sent for to be examined before the committees.  The cause with him was that six of the House committees for that purpose should examine him and that he should be sent to the Tower by warrant from the House.
         After this and next unto it the Speaker began to make relation to the House of his message delivered by him from the House to the King, and of the answer of the King and of the judges.  First he alleged the motives of the House, secondly precedents, thirdly judgments.
         Motives.  That there was either one member too many or else one member wanting.  The causes that moved them was the King's right and the election by indenture, and so satisfied and therefore the election good by the statute of 7 of H. 4.
          That the outlawries against him were one of them in 31 Eliz. regina for 60£. at the suit of one Johnson.  The debt before the outlawry discharged by Johnson as appeared by his acquittance.  The second outlawry was 39 Eliz. regina, ad sect., Packer for 16£. which was also satisfied as appeared by Packer's acquittance.  Then he served in 39 Eliz. and in 43 Eliz. and admitted a member, and that now at his election no outlawry was spoken of; and the outlawry was laid in London.
         For precedents.  That this was not done of the House as merely of themselves without regard, but by precedents: one in 39 H. 6, the like in anno primo Eliz. regina, another in 23 Eliz. regina.  Then one Fludd's case, and had his privilege.  ln 35 Eliz. regina the 3 precedents, one of them Fitzherbert's case, the second one Killigrew's case against whom there were fifty-two outlawries.  The third, Sir Walter Harecourt's case, against who there was 18 outlawries.
         Judgments.  First, the statute of 7 H. 4, fully performed by the election and return.  Then that the sheriff's return as to the outlawry was negation [word unclear] and surplus. Then that the second writ was without warrant, the first not discharged by surplus.  Then the statute of 31 Eliz. regina, that if there were no writ of proclamation into the shire where the party dwelt the outlawry should be void.  Then the two general pardons, the one in 39 Eliz. regina, the other in 43 Eliz. regina. Then that the outlawry in 31 Eliz. regina was Goodwyn, ar[miger], in 39 Eliz. regina was Francis Goodwyn, generosus. Whether this in law should be intended the same man.
         The answer of his Majesty was delivered by Mr. Speaker to be full of grace and favor, wit and wisdom, that he could not so amply deliver it as his Majesty had done and desired pardon therein, yet to the best of his remembrance he would so near as he could make report of it.
         First his Majesty began, saying that he should be very loath to alter his former term of love in so high a degree to any of his subjects bringing it now into any contestation, finding in them no dislike of loyalty but only for mistaking the law, saying further, nay, he must say as God said, though he punished the Israelites yet he loved them. Alleging that that he did was by his Council and judges, and that the House had done rashly without calling his Council thereunto, or the judges.  For by the election his Majesty said that an ancient councillor of estate, not of his bringing in but such as he found had been a councilor long before and by him approved and allowed, was disgraced and yet indifferent to his Majesty which of them had served, regard having been had that none should have been [illegible]. And whether he were capable of that place, his matter desired for matter of law the advise of his Council and of the judges, and thereupon their opinions were that he was not capable, and so his Majesty awarded the new writ.
         To that, that the said Sir Francis had served twice since, to that, his Majesty's answer was, that his offense was the greater for that he was not outlawed for the debt but for his contempt against the law. Also his Majesty said that Sir Francis was out of the protection of the law which was dishonorable, and then no reason why such an honorable House should have a dishonorable member. And as to the privileges that came to the House, his Majesty said that they came from the Crown, and so admitted the House wherein the time they came in was to be respected, as whether the time of an infant or of a tyrant or usurper.
         Then the last point consisting of law his Majesty willed might be delivered by the judges, and for that cause the judges made election of the Lord Chief Justice of England to be the mouth of them all.
         Which Lord Chief Justice was charged by the King upon his loyalty to him and [oa]th of a judge to deliver the law for his opinion and the others, whose answer was that he would do it willingly and according to the law.
         Then first he began with the writ that was first awarded and the return thereof, alleging that the House had not to meddle with the return for the return was made to his Majesty into his court of Chancery.  Then no man had to do with the return but the King, to whom it was returned.
         Next, he raid that the opinion delivered by the said Lord Chief Justice for him and the other judges war that the return of the sheriff was sufficient to reject Sir Francis.
         Also the said Lord Chief Justice cited a case in 35 Henry 6, that one outlawed was refused to be a member of the Parliament.
         Also he cited the book of 1 Henry 7, where divers in the time of the Parliament of R. 3, who were withdrawn from the House until a bill was made to restore them, and they were restored, and then came in and so was the record.  Further, that the resolution of the judges in 35 Eliz. regina among them was that a person outlawed was not "idoneus." And touching the two general pardons in 39 and 43 Eliz. regina, that by law he still stood a person outlawed against all men until he had sued his scire facias against the party in the actions.
         And by the statute of 1 H. 4 he granted the statute to be so, and that yet by another statute he should have forfeited one hundred pounds if he knew him to be outlawed and did not return him outlawed.
         Then the King demanded how it should be known Sir Francis to be the man outlawed.  It was answered, by the return of the sheriff to be comendem franiscum.
         The King also asked whether it were not void for want of a proclamation.
         It was answered that that must be by judgment of the Court declaratory and not otherwise void.
         Then it was said by the King that he heard say that some other judge or judges were of that opinion that the outlawry was void by the two general pardons and it was Mr. Justice Williams who answered and said that he did hold that opinion formerly, but having better deliberated upon the matter upon the view of his books and consideration of the said pardons, was of the mind of my Lord Chief Justice and the other judges.
         And upon this hearing and deliberation the King required four things to be considered: some course, a resolution, a conference and upon the conference to deliver their opinion to the lords of his Council, and so at that time no more of that.
         Then afterwards there came a message from the higher House to Lower House by the Lord thief Justice, Mr. Baron Clerk, Mr. Justice Fenner, Sir John Croke and Mr. Attorney General, which was a most joyful bill of recognition of the succession of the crown to be in the King's Majesty by right and descent of inheritance,  which bill was thrice read that day.
         Afterwards another message from the Upper House to the lower house by Mr. Doctor Carewe and Mr. Doctor Stanhope.
         A bill of restitution in blood of the Eal of Southampon, another for three of the children of the Earl of Essex, another for the restoring in blood of the Earl of Arundel.
[Margin:] Friday 30 Marcii
        One Mr. Johnson made a motion alehouse keepers to be deprived, upon disorder by them to be committed and afterwards never to be admitted.
         Next to this Sir Robert Wingfield entered into discourse of the reasons of the House delivered to the King why they retained Sir Francis Goodwyn and disallowed of sir John Fortescue and delivered his mind that the House had first considered of the return, then advised, and after resolved, and the judgment given, which he thought might not nor ought not to be altered, and the matter thus having been handled no reason now to impugn it.  And though that the judges were judges of the law, yet they were judges of the Parliament.  Further, he said that it was childish to conclude one day and revoke the same another day, and how farre this and how far this trenched and wrought into the privilege of the House he wished every good member thereof to have some consideration of the future time as well as of the present; and alleged further that it should be dishonorable that law books should be printed and delivered one way, and the roll to be another way; and that it was as dangerous that men might not be assured of the law as it is delivered out in books in print, but that the construction thereof should merely depend or rest in the heart of the judge; and as though it should be as it should please him to expound, and therefore was not of that opinion to have any conference with the judges, but to resolve what answer to make to the privy council to satisfy the King.
         Sir George Moore said that he thought a conference fit to be had. It could not do any hurt, but good might ensue and used in his speech that it was more safe to go after than afore to break the ice, and as the former thought not fit he was of that kind.
 [Ma:rgin] Sir Francis Bacon
         He thought it fit a conference upon two points, one for the satisfaction of the King, the other for the privileges of the House whereby either might be well performed and the King fully satisfied.
 [Margin] Sir John Mallory
         Against any conference respecting it was a thing done already not to be reversed respecting the ancient privileges of the House; and the advised course and resolution of [blank] the House had formerly taken.
 [Margin]  Sir Francis More
         Respect chiefly to be had how far we were driven into, and therefore substance of the matter chiefly to be considered of, the other no great matters.  The substance by him seemed to be the return of the first writ, the other the outlawry.  For the return it was not until the first day of the Parliament.  Secondly, the outlawry, and the like precedent had been allowed.  A conference with the judges he thought fit.
 [Margin] Mr. Martin
         That a commitment might be, whether this house may take notice of the return before the House be fully set.  Then whether the person outlawed may be received, and therefore cited the book that he might be an executor for the good of another, and so a good member by that reason.  Thirdly, the teste of the second writ before the first writ returnable.
 [Margin] Mr. Yelverton
         Thought fit neither to have commitment nor conference for if there were it showed both levity, cruelty and cowardness.  Levity: too much this day a member, tomorrow none.  Cruelty to take away any perfect member, as the hand to tear the flesh were cruelty.  Cowardness in leaving to persevere in any such good act which yielded unto were the Hay to have a quo warranto brought for the rest.  Further he said that the return ought not to be before the day, for then all the knights and burgesses' [writs] were in the petty bag until that day, and then upon suggestions new writs, and then when will the court come to perfectness, many other insertions he used. Neither to have commitment nor conference.
 [Margin] Mr. Thomas Crew
         Thought fit that the judgment ought not to be reversed neither could it, being done.  And first he alleged the matter was performed which was the King's commandment by the writ.  The other matter was the person outlawed for the contempt, which contempt was pardoned as to the King, for the contempt was to the King for his non-appearance.  He incited much upon the awarding of the second writ before the day of the return of the first, and so was against any conference with the judges, but wished a consideration had of the matter to be delivered to the lords of the Council for the satisfaction of the King.
 [Margin] Mr. Dyott
         First, a full resolution of this court; if not, then a conference of this House for resolution and then to deliver the resolution to the lords of the Privy Council.
 [Margin] Sir Francis Hastings
         Said that he should be sorry to have it termed to be any difference between the King and this house, yet hold it fit to speak with the judges.
 [Margin] Headly, lawyer
         He said that the question was merely upon the return and who should confer and judge of the return.
 [Margin] Sir Robert Wroth
         Said that he was sorry that any such bone should be thrown into the House and was of that opinion that no speech should be had with the judges.
 [Margin] Mr. Hext
         That it was fit that speech might be had with the judges.
 [Margin] Sir Edward Holy
         Repeated his Majesty's words to confer what to resolve, and if we did resolve then not to go to the judges but to acquaint his Majesty's council with it.
 [Margin] Sir Francis Barrington
         To have the House to resolve and then to determine of some answer to be made to his Majesty's Council.
 [Margin] Mr. Wiseman
         When we be resolved then to give the resolution the lords of the Council.
 [Margin] Mr. Lawrence Hyde
         No conference with the judges, but to determine of a resolution and to give the same to the lords of the Council  in writing.
 [Margin] Mr. Fuller
         Fit to be a conference with the judges.
 [Margin] Mr. Recorder of London
         No conference with the judges, but to determine and resolve and therewith to acquaint the lords of his majesty's Council.
        And thereafters the question was propounded to the House, and the House did determine and resolve that the judgment given could not be altered, and appointed a commitment [sic] whereof the gentlemen that before had spoken were committees, and ten more added unto them to consult of the resolution for the answer to the lords of the Council., This day, in the afternoon, to meet in the Exchequer Chamber and the next morning to relate to the House that the House may give their contents.
[Margin] 31 Marcii Saturday
        Was read a bill concerning the restitution of the Earl of Southampton. Next a bill for the restitution of Robert, son of the late Earl of Essex, and of Frances and Dorothy, daughters of the late Earl of Essex, their father.  Also an act for the restitution of Thomas Howard, the only child of Philip, late Earl of Arundel, his father, to the earldom of Arundel and Surrey.  Also an act for the exchange of certain lands, rejected at the first reading.  An act to disable from henceforth any person from being a member of the House, being outlawed or in execution the first day of the Parliament.  An act against transporting wool and clothes unwrought beyond the seas thereby to set poor men on work.
         Four several bills concerning ale houses.  An act against purveyors and cart takers.  An act for the naturalizing of Margaret, Countess of Nottingham and of her children and to [blank] her to have dower.  An act for the true making of hats.  An act for the taking away of clergy from hem that stab others.
[Margin] Secundo die Aprilis
        An act against the purveyors.  An act for the restraining of frivolous actions.  An act concerning extortion.  An act for the better execution of penal laws.  An act against pluralities of benefices.  An act to take away clergy from stealers of cattle and sheep.  An act for the relief of prisoners.  An act for the continuance of the making of caps.  An act concerning laborers.  An act concerning tanning of leather.
[Margin] Tertio Aprilis
        An act concerning process and pleading in the Exchequer. A proviso to the bill of the naturalizing of the Countess of Nottingham.  An act against depopulation, and restraining of enclosures, and converting of tillage into pasture.  An act for the preservation of records of leets and of court barons, cast out of the court.
         Griffin Payne, a burgess of the borough of Wallingford in Berkshire, who was mayor of the town, in the act against purveyors used a speech for their defense, for that he was a purveyor, and in the end of his speech he taxed the whole House in dealing very hardly, first in dishonoring of the King, secondly in disgrace against the Council, thirdly in disgrace of the judges, lastly that the House went about to hang some of his servants. And therefore he was brought to the bar to answer his misdemeanors against the House.  1. To the first point, in that the King by a second writ had commanded a new election, and by the second election Sir John Fortescue was rejected and Sir Francis Goodwyn received, so the King thereby dishonored.  2..Secondly, he said that in regard Sir John Fortescue had not the place, therefore he being of the honorable Privy Council was disgraced. Thirdly, for that the judges had delivered their opinions that the law was that one outlawed was not capable of the place and that the House had given him admittance, therefore he thought the judges disgraced.  4. Fourthly, he confessed rashness in saying that the House went about to hang some of his servants in that he did see the vehemency of the House against purveyors.  After his answer given, he war taken from the bar by the serjeant at arms.  Being withdrawn, the House consulted and did determine that if he stood upon his defense, then to censure him in the discretion of our Speaker, which we would ratify, and if he confessed his faults, then the House would show mercy.  Being brought in again to the bar by the serjeant he acknowledged his faults in all the propositions against him and had mercy; and yet because the principal officer of the town, he was censured to be sequestered from the House, and yet his allegation to the contrary was that the foot might as well choose the head as the head the foot; but he still standeth sequestered, and the opinion of the greatest sort in the House was that he might not be returned; yet regarding it might concern divers other members in the House, there is no judgment set down but a sequestration of him.
         After this then was entered into speech, the great matter concerning the House and the members thereof, now brought into question in the cause between Sir John Fortescue and Sir Francis Goodwyn, wherein were divers gentlemen that spake boldly and confidently, wherein were touched whether according to the King's speech, the House had power to examine the return of knight[s] and burgesses.  Then his Majesty's speech that the House had done it by too much precipitation.  Then in admitting of outlaws, fourthly the return of the sheriff [torn] [Good]wyn fuit utlagatur, etc.  Every of these points were disputed in the House, and the House resolved of their determination to the answer of the King, which for that if it were by verbal delivery there might be misprison, and therefore upon many consults in the end to the great hindrance of other great business, it was set down in writing, and this third day of April delivered to the lords of the Council as the resolution of the Lower House; and all the circumstances that induced them to admit Sir Francis Goodwyn and to refuse Sir John Fortescue.  And the messenger from the House was Sir Francis Bacon with fourscore knights and gentlemen.  The matter of writing is entered of record, and is extant to be had for money.
         Next to this was read a bill of restitution in blood of Sir Thomas Lucas, Knight, for murdering and killing of Sir William Brooke.  Then an act for the restitution of William Pagett, Esquire, the only son of Thomas, late Lord Pagett.
[Margin] Quarto Aprilis
        An act against the transportation of any ordnance and gun metal and shot from ordnance from mine and from ore. Then an act against transporting of clothes unwrought.  An act for apparel, against wearing of cloth of silver and of gold and gold lace, and of lace mixed of gold and silver. Then an act concerning recusancy and the debt thereby growing to the King upon the statutes of 23 and 29 Eliz. R.
[Margin] 5 Aprilis
        Mr. Speaker came to the House after nine of the clock and there was a second time read a bill concerning extortion, which done Mr. Speaker propounded 2 things.  One, his absence so long, which was by way of his Majesty's commandment to attend; the other, a message from the King.  The message was, to my remembrance, that his Majesty said he had received a parchment by the Lords of his seasonable counsel, sent as a [two words illegible] whether as a resolution of the house or, as reasons er motives for a conference which things he could not tell.  And Mr. Speaker first delivered, as I took it, that the King did not protest only as by the word of a King but of his faith to God that he meant not any abridgement of any privilege, and so likewise would not that the House should detract anything from him, and therefore willed that a conference might be had between the judges and the Lower House in the afternoon at Whitehall before the Lords of the Council at three of the clock.  And for that occasion the House appointed 30 lawyers and gentlemen to meet there.
[Margin] 6 Aprilis
        And this day I heard his Majesty was at the hearing of the case and hath attended it and ordered that a new election shall be out, neither of them to have the place.