PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)

AN VNHAPPY GAME AT SCOTCH AND ENGLJSH. OR A Full Anſwer from England to the Pa­pers of Scotland.

Wherein their Scotch Miſts and their Fogs; their ſayings and gaine-ſayings; their Juglings, their windings and tur­nings; hither and thither, backwards and forwards, and forwards, and forwards & backwards again; Their breach of Covenant, Articles, & Treaty, their King-craft preſent deſign, againſt the two houſes of Parliament, & People of England, their plots and intents for Uſurpation and Government over us and our children detected, diſcovered, and preſented to the view of the World, as a dreadfull Omen, All-arme, and Warning to the Kingdome of England.

Ier. 5.4.

And although they ſay, the Lord liveth, ſurely they ſweare falſly.

Hoſea 10.3.

They have ſpoken Words, ſwearing falſely in making a Cove­nant: thus judgement ſpringeth up as Hemlocke in the furrowes of the field.

EDINBVRGH, Printed (as truly, as the Scotch papers were at London) by Evan Tyler, Printer to the Kings moſt Ex­cellent Majeſtie, and are to beſold at the moſt Solemn Signe of the Blew-Bonnet, right oppoſite to the two Houſes of Parliament. 1646.



Scotch Papers. Pag. 2.

THe Parliament of England, hath no more power to diſpoſe of the perſon of the King of Scotland, being in England,Scotland. then the Parliament of Scotland hath to diſ­poſe of the perſon of the King of Eng­land, if he were in Scotland.

Anſ. Brethren, you ſay very well: But the queſtion is,England. whether ſuch a diſpoſing may be either by the one or by the other? Whether the Armies of Scotland being in England, may diſpoſe of the King of England being in England or no, And ſo on the contrary? But indeed it needs not much to be diſputed, for in words you deny your ſelves of that power, when you tell us, (pag. ibid. ) that the Armies of Scotland have nothing to doe in the diſpoſe of the King of England, yet for all this, in deeds you do aſſume as much as that comes to, to your ſelves; for though you plead your Scotiſh in­tereſt in the King of Sotland to countenance the fact, yet be­hind the ſhadow of that Curtaine (thus drawn before our eyes) you keep the King of England from England, & ſo con­ſequently King it over England behind; which we are confi­dent2 would by your ſelves be condemned in us, in caſe you ſhould be ſo dealt withall by the Armies of England, for we cannot judge that the Armies of Scotland would count ilawfull for the armies of England, if they were in Scotland, for their aſſiſtance, to deny them the delivery of the King of Scotland: Becauſe being in England they refuſe to deliver him to England, according to the votes and deſires of the two Houſes of England. Therefore we judge, that Scotland would much more claime that priviledge in him, being in Scotland; for if they will claim it out of their bounds where they have no right of authority, they will much more claime it within the bounds of their dominions, where their power is in­tire to themſelves.

Therefore is is not well done of our deare brethren of Scotland, thus to caſt a Scotch miſt before the eyes of their Brethren of England: For though (as before) verbally they diſclaime all power in their armies, for his diſpoſall without the joynt conſent of the two Kingdomes, yet (as deare Bre­thren) their armies have received, entertained and kept him even in his perſon, and that before the joynt conſent of the two Kingdomes, and abſolutely againſt the will and deſires of ours. So that the King of England, and the King of Scot­land is diſpoſed of by the armies of Scotland, without the con­ſent or advice of either Kingdome. We hope our deare Bre­thren will not ſay, their armies received advice and direction for his entertainment from the Kingdom of Scotland; for that were a capitulation with him, without the privity and con­juncture of England, which by them pag. 6. is diſavowed.

But in caſe our brethren might receive him without the mu­tuall conſent of both Kingdomes, then why doe they ſtand for a mutuall conſent for his delivery, for by the Lord Lou­dou's own argument (pa. 25.) contrariorum contraria ſunt con­ſequentia, contraries have contrary conſequents.

Therefore if they may not part with him, without the con­ſent and advice of the two Kingdomes, then ought they not to have received him without that conſent. If our deare bre­thren ſhould urge, that parting with him were a diſpoſing of him, and that they may not do without breach of Covenant3 and Treaty: the like we retort by their owne rule of contra­ries, concerning theireceiving of him: for receiving is by the ſaid rule as much a diſpoſing as parting with him, ſo that if our deare brethren be men that are true to their owne rules and principles, we may conclude, that if they will not part with him without the conſent of the Kingdome of Scot­land, that then they had the conſent of the Kingdome of Scotland to receive him, before they did receive him, but our deare brethren doe affirme the one, pag. 8. therefore from the truth and fidelity of our brethren, we may well conclude the other.

Oh! what ſhall we ſay or think now of our brethren? are they not of divine Covenanters, become cheating Juglers. For let any man judge, whether the keeping the Kings perſon at New-Caſtle without our conſent, be not as abſolute a diſpo­ſall, as afterwards the ſending of his perſon to White-Hall, Richmond-Houſe, Hampton-Court, or elſe where, by the joynt advice and conſent of the two Kingdomes. They would dif­fer in manner indeed, but not in the nature of the thing, and the nature of the thing, is the matter in hand: The difference would be but in an Accident, nauely the addition of our con­ſent; it is now without it, it could then be but with it, and both's a diſpoſall: Yea, though it ſhould be without this con­ſent either of yours of ours: For an accident may be wanting and the ſubject remaine.

But to colour this diſpoſall from the cenſure of their act, our brethren doe tell us, that

He came voluntarily,
and continues voluntarily

Anſ. It ſeemes, from hence you would inferre that the Act of that diſpoſing of his perſon is by himſelfe,England. and not by you. But for anſwer thereto, conſider your own grounds: By the Covenant and Treaty you urge, that his perſon is ſolely and intirely to be diſpoſed of by the parliament of both King­domes, and not ſingly, or by a third, but by the joynt advice and conſent of both: Therefore from this grant of yours, your Armie neither had nor hath any power individually to4 make or medle with his perſon, or in the leaſt wiſe to diſpoſof it, no, not for a minute, in this place or that place, for this or for that, or till things ſhould be ſo or ſo, therefore your Act of entertainment of his comming, was (by the juſt ſe­quell of your owne ground) an actuall diſpoſing of his per­ſon, pro tempore, even as well, and as really, as if you ſhould diſpoſe of it for ever, for the difference would only be in the protract of time, not in the nature of the thing.

Further, the thing betwixt the two Kingdomes by the Co­nant and Treaty, is not what he might doe, but what the two Kingdomes thereby are mutually bound to doe, for the Covenant and Treaty was not made with him, but betwixt the two Kingdomes: So that his voluntary Act was nothing to your nationall duty and obligation, for his perſonall will was no wiſe included in the condition thereof: Then was neither his perſonall aſſent nor diſſent required to the making either of the one or the other.

So that his voluntary comming or ſtaying, is neither here not there to your act: for this receiving and retaining (though voluntary by him) is as well an actuall diſpoſing of yours (though not in that aggravation) as if you had fet him, and continued him by force, or conſtraint as you call it: And therefore the act of your receiving and keeping his perſon without our conſent, is that againſt which we except: It is not about the manner how, whether by his will, or by your force, that our difference is ſtated, but about the definitive matter of diſpoſition it ſelfe; although with your manner how and the like, you would delude us, and divert us from the ſtate of the queſtion, reaſoning from the manner, and ſo concluding againſt us in the matter, when indeed you ſhould reaſon from the matter, and then it would be otherwiſe. Therefore your receiving and continuing, is an abſolute poſſeſſion and diſpoſing thereof, and ſo it is your act.

Beſides, he could neither enter nor continue, without your conſent. For can a well fortifyed City be entered by a ſingle man, without force, or there be continued, except the Citi­zens pleaſe, and is not your armie equivolent thereto? There­fore it is the act of your pleaſure, though his be added therto5 the addition whereof nothing diminiſhing there-from for by how much the more his pleaſure and your pleaſure agrees without ours, by ſo much the more is it dangerous and ſuſpitious; but the concord & conjunction thereof is to ſuch an high meaſure aſpired, that you are not aſhamed to tell us, that you will not have him delivered or diſpoſed of contrary to his will, which muſt needs be his perſonall will, for were it his leagall will, he then would be aſſenting to the Orders and determinations of his great Counſell, the two Houſes of Parliament, his legall will, wee are ſure it cannot bee, except from the Parliament he carried with him the Soveraign power of the land, & it hath journeyed with him ever ſince; and now with him he hath brought it to our dear Brethren of Scotland: If it be ſo, then truly our Brethren have (all this while of their concurrance with us againſt him) been Traytors and Rebels thereto as well as our ſelves; yet ſure our dear Brethren (if it be but for their cre­dits) will not ſay ſo; and if they doe not, then what are our brethren now? It muſt needs be granted and concluded at firſt or at laſt: So that how to award our dear Brethren from Treaſon and Rebellion againſt the Soveraigne Power of this Land wee doe not ſee; therefore our dear Brethren might doe well with their next papers to ſend us a paire of Scotiſh-ſpectacles that are fit for our eyes, and their caractar, for by our Engliſh reading (printed by Evan Tyler at Lon­don) wee can read them no other as yet: Therefore in the meane time in our anſwer to the Will of the King, we muſt conſider that Will, as the Will of Charles Steuart, contrary to whoſe Will, you will not have him diſpoſed; ſo that in deed and in truth, you place the whole power of the diſpo­ſall of Charles Steuart, in the Will of Charles Steuart, and make that his perſonall Will, the Eſſence of that Diſpoſall; for the Will of Charles Steuart (if he muſt not be delivered without it) may contradict null, and make voide what­ever gaineſaies: So that the advice and conſent of the two Houſes, &c. (which you ſo oft talke of in your papers) is but a ſhaddow without a ſubſtance caſt before our eyes; a Nut without a kernell, that you have given us to crack; a6 Bore without marrow, that you have thrown in amongſt us So that we can judge little better of our brethren in this, then of ſuch as carry water in one hand, and fire in another.

Scotch Papers page 4.

Our Armies are not tyed to be ſubject to the reſolutions and directions of either Kingdome,Scotland. but of both joyntly.


If your Armies be ſo tyed and obliged,England. then how came they looſe and obſolved thereof in this your reception, and continuance of his perſon without their reſolutions? For as yet there hath been no joynt reſolve of both Kingdomes about it: and thus to put trickes upon us, you play faſt and looſe at your pleaſure.

When you plead for your ſelves,page. 2. you ſay, it is a funda­mentall right and liberty &c. that none can without con­ſent, impede or reſtraine your King from comming a­mongſt you to performe the duties of a King, and with this you would cover over the act of your admiſſion and re­ception of his perſon.

And when you reaſon againſt the two Houſes, in op­poſition to their Votes, you tell us it is one thing what the Parliament of England might have done in another cauſe, and warre before their engagements by Covenant, it is another thing what ought to be done after ſuch con­ditions and tyes impoſed &c. whereby you would deprive the two Houſes of that which before you urge for your ſelves; namely, fundamentall Rights &c. and utterly de­bar them in this difference from all retrogradation beyond the Covenant; yet your ſelves will run in infinitum beyond it you can urge your fundamentall Rights and liberties for you your ſelves, in your reception of the King of Scotland, but will not permit them upon any termes (becauſe of the Co­venant) from their fundamentall rights and liberties of the7 Kingdome of England, to Vote the diſpoſing of the King of England in England.

Therefore by your favour (dear Brethren of Scotland) ſince thus you play at boe-peepe with your Brethen of England, we will anſwer your firſt reaſon with your ſecond: It is one thing what you might have done before the Covenant, and another thing what you may doe after; but by the Covenant (even as your ſelves ſay) His perſon muſt be abſolutely, & wholy diſpoſed of by the joynt advice ctcon­ſent of both Parliaments, ſo that by your Covenant you are bound not to medle at all ſingly in his diſpoſall; eitherof ſo much as receiving or entertaining him.

But let us a little expoſtulate with our deare brethen of Scotland: is this your dealing with us as becomes brethen? Is this your bro­therly conference, to condemne that in us which you will allow in your ſelves, firſt to plead your fundamentall rights and freedomes &c. And then in the next page to tell us, wee doe not medle with any of our ſingle rights priviledges or Lawes of our Nation, &c. and a little after, unleſſe wee lay aſide the Covenant, Theaties, Declara­tions of both Kingdomes; and three yeares conjunction in this warre, neither the one Kingdome nor the other; muſt now look back what they might have done ſingly before ſuch a ſtrict union.

What ſhall wee thinke, or what ſhall wee eſteem of our deare brethren for this? Wee know not how to excuſe them of ly­ing; but however this will wee boldly affirme to our Brethren of Scotland, that this latter argument utterly cuts off our Brethren from the refuge of what ever our Brethren might have pleaded before the Covenant, and ſtrictly teſtraines all their arguments, concerning the intereſt of the Kingdome of Scotland in the King of Scotland, and about their fundament all rights and liberties &c. for they all were before the Covenant, and ſo in this matter are quite out of date, and comes not into the compaſſe or nature of the diſpute, even by your own bounds and limits by your ſelves thereto affixed: which conſiderations, may ſerve as an anſwer to one great part of the pa­pers: & therefore we may wel wonder at this your manner of reaſo­ning & cannot otherwiſe reaſonably judge, but it is to caſt a Scotiſh­miſt before the eyes of the free men of England, on purpoſe to delude them.


Scotiſh Pap. page 4.

Scotland. The ends of the Covenant are not to be proſecuted by the two Kingdomes, as they are two diſtinct bodies acting ſingly: but they were united by ſolemne Covenant made to Almighty God, & by league each to other, as one intire body, to proſecute the cauſe.

Anſwer. As by this argument, you were not to meddle at all in the leaſt kind about the diſpoſing of his Perſon, not ſo much as to give him entertainment (that being an actuall diſpoſing pro tempore as aforeſaid) without the mutuall conſent and Order of both King­domes proceeding: So by this argument alſo a ſecond is abſolutely excluded from this (Covenanted) diſpoſall: for hereby there is an union of two Kingdomes in one for one end; and an vnite admits not of a ſecond or third, for then it is no more one, but two or three: So that it is as cleere as the Sun, that this unity of conſent be­twixt the two Kingdomes admits of no addition or diviſion what­ſoever; for ſo the property of that Bi-unity were loſt: If another were added to that vnity, then were it a Tri-unity, and not a Bi-unity: and if that unity ſhould be devided, then were it no unity, for pura unitas eſt indiviſibilis: Why therefore you ſhould bring in the Kings conſent betwixt the two Kingdomes, wee ſee not; except you meane to play faſt and looſe, and ſet open a doore to all for­raigne Nations, to have a title to this conſent: for as well may you ſay, that France, Spaine, &c. muſt have their conſent in this bu­ſineſſe as well as Charles Steuart himſelfe; for the Queſtion is not, what Mr. Steuart would doe with his perſon, or what France or Spaine &c. would doe with it, but what the two Kingdomes by this Covenant are bound to doe; therefore the bringing in the Kings conſent and will into the bargaine, is a meere nullity (as concerning this matter) to the Covenant; So that your repairing to his Will and conſent, is an abſolute departure from the joynt intereſt of the two Kingdomes, and from the Covenant obliging there to: for you will not deliver him, or doe any thing with him without his conſent: Therefore why doe you at all talke of the Covenant, or the inte­reſt of the two Kingdomes? Tell us no more of ſuch blew ſhadowes and Sculcaps; but tell us of the Will of Charles Steuart: And if we muſt needs diſpute, let that be the queſtion, whether the will of Charles Steuart be the Law of all Lawes, whereto Parliaments Co­venants9 and Treates, Kingdoms muſt be ſubject? If you will deale with us upon that point, we ſhall not doubt but to make a reaſonable returne.

Scotiſh Papers, page 6.

Scotland: If the Scotch Army ſhould deliver up his Majeſties Perſon without his owne conſent &c. this act of the Army were not agreeable to the Oath of Allegeance, (obleiging them to defend his Majeſties Perſon from all harmes and prejudices) nor to the ſolemne League and Covenant, which was not intended to wea­ken but to ſtregthen our Allegeance &c.

Whom therefore our Armies cannot deliver, to be diſpoſed of by any others at pleaſure:


England: By this it ſeemes, that the Scotch Army, are obſolutely devoted to the will of his Perſon; for except he will, you ſay, that your Armies cannot (you might as wel have ſaid wil not) deliver him up to be diſpoſed of by any others; which ſaying excludes the whole world, except his Will: So that in effect by this you have as well ex­cluded the pleaſure of your own Parliament, as the pleaſure of ours or any others.

Sure our deare Brethren of Scotland are not themſelves, to ſpeake thus they cannot tell what; one while to urge the conſent of their Parliament, and then by and by to deny themſelves of it againe.

Well, but you ſay it is againſt the Oath of Allegeance, and the Covenant, for the Armies to deliver him up againſt his WILL. And why ſo (deare Brethren we beſeech you) is the Oath of Al­legeance and the Covenant confined to the dictates of his Perſonall Will? that what is contrary to his Will, is contrary thereto? For here you make his Will the very Axeltree upon which your argument turnes; and therefore by this your reaſoning, both Kingdomes are by the Oath of Allegeance and by the Covenant, obleiged and irre­vocably bound (it being made to Almighty God) to be ſubjected to his Will; yea, and as much as in you lyes, you have thereby concluded and conform'd a title upon him, even from Almighty God, to Rule by his Arbitrary pleaſure; and made both Kingdomes Vaſſales to his Will. Is this the affection and duty which becomes Brethren that〈1 page missing〉105.) you tell us, you were put in mind of; That after you had eſpouſed your Brethrens quarrell (page ibid. ) by that eſpouſall to contract your brethren to his Arbitrary pleaſure? But as you in another caſe, ſo ſay wee in this wee cannot but expect better things from our Brethren (page ibid) Sure it is not our deare Brethren of Scotland that thus write: hw ſhall ſuch a thing (as becommeth Brethren) enter into the hearts o•••r Brethren of Scotland? except ſince his Majeſties arrivall our deare Brethren are run quite beſides themſelves as aforeſaid,

Some indeed have ſtrange thoughts of our Brethren, and con­clude them m•••knaves then ſooles, and that little better ever wato be expected from them, ſeeing now they are not aſhamed only to tell us (pag 7.) that the Scotiſh Army came not into this Kingdome in the nature of Auxiliaries (or helpers) and indeed they have pro­ved as good as their words for what Auxiliaries or helpers have they been unto us, except to carry away our gudes, and to drive a­way our cattle &c) but alſo in plaine termes (to make all the blood that hath been ſhead but as water ſpilt upon the ground) to capi­tulate with us, about the Kings perſonall Will, whether his Will muſt rule the roaſt or no? By our conſent he ſhall firſt turne the ſpit, before his will ſhall rule the roaſt; our Lawes Lives and Liberlies are more pretious, then to be proſtitute to the exhorbitant boundleſſe will of any mortall Steuart under the Sun: And therefore both He and your revolted Armies may be content, for we will ſpend a little more of our blood before that come to paſſe; you may as well twerle up your Blew caps, and hurle them up at the Moone, as to expect Englands aſſent unto that: no, no, Deare Brethren, wee are neither ſuch foolnot ſuch cowards, or yet ſuch Traitors to our ſelves or to our poſte­rities, to our Lawes or to our Liberties, as after we by the blood of us and our children have gained a conqueſt over that Arbitrary faction ſo baſely to returne like Sowes to the mire, or Dogges to the vo­mit againe; no ſure deare Brethren wee have not been thromming of Caps all this while; and therefore that is not to be expected: wee are content that our Brethren of Scotland ſhould be our Brethren, but notonr Lords and our Kings, to ſnatch the Scepter of England out of our hands, and to make us their ſlaves and Uaſſailes: what care we for Charles Steuarts aſſurance thereof under his Hand and Seale: we will mainetaine our juſt Rights and Freedomes, in deſpite of Scot, King, or Key••r, though wee welter for it in our bloods; and be it11 knowne unto you, O yee men of Scotland, that the free-men of England ſcorne to be your ſlaves; and they have yet a reſerve of gallant blood in their veine, which they will freely ſpend for their freedom. But to returne to the Game in hand.

Further. From the words of the forementioned clauſe of your pa­pers, this you import, that you are by the Oath of Allegeance bound to keephis perſon from all harme, and therefore your Armies will not deli­ver up his perſon to be diſpoſed of, as the two Houſes ſhall thinke fit: As if the two Houſes by that their vote, had intended miſchiefe to his per­ſon, or elſe why ſhould you urge that in competition with their vote, if thereby you did not plainly conclude that their vote was an abſolute intent of harme unto his perſon: But (good brethren) let us tell you, that though the two Houſes of England have voted the diſpoſall of the King of England as they ſhall think fit, it doth not therefore follow, that there is abſolute harm to his perſon therby intended in their vote, but you make a ſurmiſe, then take it for granted, and forthwith there­on build the ſtructure of your defence: But we hope it doth not there­fore follow, becauſe our brethren ſurmiſe it, except the ſence of our Votes, our Orders and Ordinances of Parliament muſt follow the ſur­miſe of our brethren, that what ever their ſurmiſe is, that muſt be their Senſe and Intent and no other. And if as you ſay; you will not inforce any ſence or conſtruction upon their Votes, then why will not your armies deliver him upon their Votes for feare of harme to his perſon, as if they had plainly intended with Salomons ſword, by that their vo­ted diſpoſall to have divided the King of England from the King of Scotland, and ſo give each kingdome their juſt portion in his perſon.

But why ſhould our deare brethren reaſon thus ſophiſtically and deceitfully with us, and conclude thus inconſequently againſt us? Sure they have better Covenant Logick then this, for the antecedent of that Argument doth nothing at all prove the conſequent thereof: There­fore if our deare brethren pleaſe (for the better diſcovery of their fal­city) we ſhall caſt that their kind of Argument into a forme after its owne nature and kind, which is thus.

A Scotch Argument. The two Houſes of Parliament have voted the diſpoſall of the Kings perſon as they ſhall thinke fit.

Ergo. The Scotch Armies may not deliver up his perſon to the ſaid two Houſes, for feare of harme to his perſon.

Truly dear brethren, this Gear hangeth together like an old broken12 Pot Sheard: And wee deem, that you would be much diſpleaſed with your deare brethren of England, ſhould they returne the like reaſoning to their brethren of Scotland. But leaſt our deare brethren of Scotland ſhould judge us their brethren of England ingratefull, their brethren here ſend them a congratulatory pair of reaſons formed after the ſame or the like kind deſiring in their next papers, to be reſolved, whe­ther ſuch reaſoning with them, be faire dealing or no? to wit.

1. Argument. My gude Lord Leſley, came to Montrevill (Embaſſa­dor for France) reſiding at Southwell, there to commune with the King

Ergo. My gude Lord Leſley fell down on his knees, reſigned up his ſword, and laid it at the feet of the King, and then received it againe of the King.

2. Argument. My Lord of Northumberland, and Sebrant the French Agent looked through an hedge, and the one ſaw the other.

Ergo. They two are both nigh of a kindred.

Now having ſent you a paire of brave Scotified arguments, wee'l throw an Engliſh bone after them, for your armies to gnaw upon.

A ſcandalous perſon may chance to prove a good man.

But ſome of your armie, are full of Back-biters.

Ergo, your whole armie are ſcandalous perſons.

But now deare brethren, we cannot thinke that this will be judged faire reaſoning in us; but if you condemne it, then why doe you uſe it? untill you revoke, and renounce your errour therein: this our like reaſoning muſt not be condemned by you.

But by this we may plainly ſee, that you have ſome miſchievious deſigne againſt the two Houſes of Parliament, that you would inſinu­ate ſuch an opinion into the people of England, againſt their two Hou­ſes of Parliament. And that upon ſuch high tearmes of conteſtation, to wit, that for that reaſon (to wit, harme) you will not deliver them their King upon their Vote, what may we judge by this, but that you intend deſtruction to them, thus to ſet the hearts of their people againſt them by your ſcandalous and ſeditious ſurmiſes and iealouſies ſowen amongſt the people of England, for abſolute truths: for if you give it not forth as a truth, why will you urge an argument from thence? Sure our Holy Brethren of Scotland, are not ſo voide of Conſcience and grace, as to make a Lye a foundation of their practice.


We doe aſſert, that the King comming voluntarily to the Sco­tiſh Army, they cannot in duty deliver him againſt his will, to the two Houſes of Parliament, without conſent of the Kingdome of Scotland.

Anſ. Then it ſeemes if he had come againſt his will, you had been bound in duty to have delivered him againſt the ſame, to the two hou­ſes of Parliament, without the conſent of the Kingdome of Scotland, for if his voluntary comming be the reaſon of the one, then his unvo­luntary comming muſt needs be the reaſon of the other, for as your own paper Champion ſaith, contrariorum contraria ſunt conſequentia, therefore hereby you have brought the conſent of your own Parlia­ment to be inferiour and ſubject to his will, the which notwithſtanding the ſaid Champion told him, they ſhould be forced to ſettle things without, in caſe he ſhould not aſſent. pag. 19. The which reaſonings, if they be not pro and con, be you your ſelves Iudges: and let the world judge, whether it be fair dealing ſo to reaſon in a matter ſo neerely concerning, the weale of the two Kingdomes, the lives and ſtates of thouſands and ten thouſands.

Scotch Papers. Ibid

The place of the Kings veſidence is at his own Election in either of the Kingdomes, as the exigency of affaires ſhall require, and he ſhall thinke fit, or elſe muſt be determined by the mutuall advice and conſent of both Kingdomes.

Anſ. What, more faſt and looſe ſtill? Sometimes with your con­ſent, and ſometimes without your conſent, ſometimes with the joynt advice of both Kingdomes, and ſometimes without it, ſometimes with his perſonall will, and ſometimes without his perſonall will, and now to make all indifferent! What is the meaning of our brethren in this? are they not in their witts, thus to jumble and jump forward and backward, and backward and forward againe, and then to lye all along betwixt both? For by this clauſe it ſeemes, that the diſpoſall of his perſon is indifferent, either at his will, or at the ioynt advice of the two Kingdomes. Ʋtrum horum mavis accipe, one of the twain, chuſe you whether, ſo that if his perſon be either wiſe diſpoſed, yet by this clauſe it is juſtified, the one as well as the other being aſſerted in that clauſe:〈1 page missing〉14then againe to adde to the number of thoſe jugling Huſteron-Proteron trickes, by the poſition of their order, they make the will of the King predominant to the conſent of the two Kingdomes; for if by locall poſition, we may judge of preheminence, according to our nationall cuſtome, the greater to take the wall of the leſſe, then the will of the King is thereby preferred before the conſent of the two Kingdomes, for it hath the precedency therein: How ever by that clauſe they are made of equallity, for they are not urged by the way of diſparity, but by the way of equallity therein. Therefore by that clauſe there is not a pin to chuſe betwixt them: So that which is firſt gone forth, whe­ther his will, or the two Kingdomes conſent, that muſt ſtand irrevo­cable, and not to be moved by the other, for could it, then were it as nothing, a meere ſhadow without ſubſtance, for then the abſolute diſ­poſing were only in one, becauſe if one may depoſe what the other diſpoſes, then that which diſpoſeth is all in all; and the other hath no will, vote; choice or conſent in the thing, but is wholy dependant, and muſt be ſubject to the power of the other, which may conclude, order, revoake, and reverſe at its pleaſure. Therefore from this reaſoning of our deare brethren, it followes thus.

1. That this preſent diſpoſall of his perſon (being as your ſelves ſay voluntary) is irrevocable by either or both Kingdomes, becauſe his will for that diſpoſall was firſt paſt forth; which for that matter (as is alrea­dy proved) by this preſent ground of yours, is as unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes and Perſians: So that it is in vaine for the two Houſes of England to expect a delivery of the King of England from the Scotiſh Armies,; for by this (to make ſure worke of his perſon) they have put themſelves out of a capacitie of his delivery upon any tearmes whatſoever: And therefore we may bid our gude King, gude morrow my Leige for all the day, and for ever, Amen. Farewell froſt, if he never come more, nothing is loſt.

2. If by the ſentence and judgement of our dear brethren of Scotland, the Kings perſonall diſpoſall be at his owne Election and Will, and ſo inherent therein, then by the ſentence and judgement of our deare brethren of Scotland, the diſlocation of the Kings perſon by his perſo­nall will all this while from the two Houſes of Parliament of England, is juſtified, and our deare Brethren of Scotland thereby made confede­rate with him, in that act, and ſo conſequently guilty of all the rebelli­on made by his perſonall will againſt the two Houſes of Parliament and the People of England.


3. If by the Argument of our deare brethren of Scotland, the King according to the exegencie of affaires may diſpoſe of his perſon at his pleaſure, then by the Argument of our deare brethren of Scotland ac­cording to the exegencie of affaires, the King may depart from our deare brethren of Scotland at his pleaſure, when, or whether he plea­ſeth, although his pleaſure ſhould be never ſo pernitious or perilous to our deare brethren of Scotland: for his pleaſure may only be knowne to himſelfe, and not at all to our deare brethren of Scotland, no moe then it was foreknown (as our deare brethren would make us believe) at his comming to them. Therefore if our deare brethren of Scotland will have him according to the exigency of affaires to be diſpoſed of at his pleaſure, then according to the exigency of affaires, our deare brethren of Scotland muſt run the hazard of his pleaſure.

But for be better deciding of the matter about his will, it is to be queſtioned, 1. Whether ſince the Covenant and Treaties, either England or Scotland may aſſert that the place of the Kings reſidence is at his owne Election; the which as the caſe ſince hath ſtood, may in no wiſe be honourably granted, for thereby in all reaſon it muſt be concluded, that the two Kingdomes tooke upon them, the ſole diſpo­ſall of his perſon, without the leaſt relation or reſpect to his perſonall wil: For ſhould that not be concluded, then his arbitrary diſpoſal of his perſon, ſo many times in open and actuall hoſtility againſt the Parlia­ment and people of England were juſtifiable.

2. It is to be conſidered, that though before this his hoſtility againſt the Parliament and people, he might diſpoſe of his perſon from White-Hall, to Hampton Court or the like, without the joynt advice of the two Kingdomes, whether now the caſe be nor altered or no?

3. In regard he hath moſt properly leavied and made warre againſt the Parliament and People of England, and in regard the Scotch en­gagement was but in aſſiſtance of their brethren of England, Whe­ther his perſon thereupon, is not moſt properly due to the two Houſes of Parliament and thereupon they might properly vote the diſpoſall thereof, notwithſtanding his King-ſhip of Scotland; by reaſon the Offence was properly againſt them, and a maine end of the war, was to reduce and recover his perſon unto the Cuſtody and power of the two Houſes?

But now whereas you urge his voluntary comming, as if it were on­ly voluntary in him, and not like voluntary in you (which by Cove­nant16 compact and treatie, was not upon any termes or in any wiſe without our conſent to have been by you.) It is a plaine caſe, that there was a voluntary concurrance betwixt you, even of the Kingdome of Scotland with the King of England, before he had laid downe Arms taken up in Rebellion againſt the Soveraigne power of his Throne, the two Houſes of Parliament, and againſt the Free-People of Eng­land, and that abſolutely by you, without the joynt advice and conſent of the ſaid Houſes and Kingdome; for you foreknew of his intent, and were fore acquainted with his comming, before his arrivall at your Armie, and this is not only to be proved from the ſecret and traytorous Treatie betwixt you and the King, from the latter end of March laſt, 1646. Managed by the intervention of Montrevill the French Ambaſſador, and deſigned in France, but alſo by what was-open, ma­nifeſt and undenyable. For to omit his foot-ſteps from Oxford, he came publickly into Southwell, foure miles diſtant from your Armie, and there was entertained by the ſaid Montrevill, who was deputed and provided to receive him, and forthwith he ſent unto your Armie, to informe you that he was come thither, then Leſley your Generall (Metrapolitan over all the Blew-Caps of Scotland) repaired unto him and with him entertained a Treatie; and ſo he came voluntary to your armie, and there voluntarily ever ſince doth continue, as you your ſelves doe confeſſe. Now let any reaſonable man judge, whether here were not a mutuall concurrence of voluntary conſent, before his enterance into your Armie without all advice and conſent of ours. And whether it is reaſonable to imagine, that the King ſhould caſt his perſon volun­tarily into the hands of thoſe which were the firſt commoters and rai­ſer of troubles and warres, entring his dominions of England with open Hoſtillity, for which he proclaimed them Traitors and Rebells, and now againſtand Traytors and Rebells by his Proclamations and Declarations, and which are ſtill in Armes againſt him; and by ſo­lemne League and Covenant contracted and aſpouſed to the two Hou­ſes of England, in their war-fare againſt him; without the fore knowledge conſent, compact & aſſurance of your armie and Kingdom; truly for our parts, conſidering all his politick, ſubtile, and craſty plots and proceedings, in all his Millitary deſignes, we cannot imagine him ſo inconſiderate and madas to run his perſon without all aſſu­rance, on ſuch a perillous hazard, or play ſuch a card as that at a ven­sure amongſt you, without a full fore ſurety from you, and a compact17 betwixt you under hand and ſeale, for his entertainment and ſucceſſe with you, and if we may judge the tree by its fruits, we are ſure it can be no other.

Beſides, had you not been concurrent in will with him (contrary to our privitie and conſent) he could not have entred, much leſſe continu­ed in your armie, without your conſent and whether you would or no. So that indeed and in truth as the matter now ſtands, betwixt you and us, his comming muſt needs be reputed and concluded your ſingle act, and neither may we, nor can we eſteem it otherwiſe, for his will or his Action is nothing to the ſtate of the queſtion or difference betwixt Eng­land and Scotland in this matter; for you your ſelves ſay, (pag. 9.) that, it is cleere from the third Article of the Treaty, that the Scotiſh armie is to receive the directions of both Kingdomes, or of their Committees in ALL THINGS, which may concerne the purſuance of the ends of the Covenant and Treaty, whether in relation to PEACE or WARRE. In the eight Article, no ceſſation, pacification, or agree­ment for peace WHATSOEVER is to be made by either Kingdom or the armie of either Kingdome, without the advice and conſent of both Kingdomes. Now deare brethren, by theſe very words of the Treaty thus cited by your ſelves, you are by your ſelves exempted and denyed of all power of intermedling about any thing whatſoever con­cerning peace or warre, without the advice and conſent of the two Kingdomes: If ſo, then why have you attempted this act of reception and detaining of his perſon without the mutuall concurrent advice and conſent of the two Kingdomes, which ſo mightily concerneth our weale or our woe, our peace or our warre, for this your ſeaſure of his perſon in this manner, is of as high and great concernment about the matter of warre, as can be imagined, for it openly and apparently threatneth diviſion and warre betwixt the two Kingdomes; and there­by you your ſelves are the deviders and threatners, contrary to your old and preſent aſſeverations and abjurations: in your booke of for­mer Intentions, thus you aſſert of your ſelves, we could iudge our ſelves the unworthieſt of all men,See intenti­ons of the Ar­mie of Scot­land, pag. 3. and could looks for no leſſe then vengeance from the Righteous God, if we ſhould move hand or foot against that Nation, ſo comfortably repreſented to us, in that honourable meeting And pag. 10. Let them be accurſed, that ſhall not ſeeke the preſervati­tion of their neighbour Nation: and in your former Informations, Declarations and Remonſtrances, you have curſed all Nationall Inva­ſions,18 and Treacherie: And now in the Papers you cry, God forbid, that the wayes of ſeparating intereſts of the Kingdomes, ſhould now be ſtudied, pag. 5. And in the Lord Loudouns ſpeech in the Painted Chamber. pag. 21. That no man hath conſcience and honour, who will not remember our Solemne League and Covenant, as the ſtrongeſt bond under Heaven, between God and man, and between Nation and Nation, &c. Yet theſe aſſeverations and execrations, are now made as nothing, and theſe your ſtrongeſt bonds between God and man as you call them, are but as Sampſons cords to be burſt aſunder at your plea­ſure, but God will deliver up your ſtrength, if by your timely repen­cance you doe not prevent the vengeance of Heaven which hangs over your head. For why will you thus fairly profeſſe with your tongnes unto us, and deale ſo treacherouſly with us in your hearts, why ſhould you receive and entertaine the King and yet proteſt againſt all ſole diſ­poſall of his perſon? and why ſhould you tell us, that his Majeſties com­ming to your armie, is a more probable and hopefull way to preſerve the union of the two Kingdomes; when as your ſelves ſee, that it is the moſt unluckieſt meanes of diviſion, and of fomenting a war betwixt the two Nations, as Hell could broach: and though the Lord Londoun breath out your menaces about that diſpoſall, and openly thretneth us with forces from Scotland and Ireland, and with the aſſiiſtance of for­raign Princes, yet all this you would make us beleeve, (were we but as the Horſe and the Mule, which have no underſtanding) is for the ſtri­cter and firmer union betwixt the two Kingdomes; but deare brethren we are not ſo undiſcerning and ſottiſh, ſo to be poſſeſſed and deluded. But further in the ſaid pag. you ſay, becauſe you came into England, for proſecuting of the ends of the Covenant, whereof one is to defend. His Majeſties perſon, you thinke it a ſtrange thing, that your being in England ſhould be urged as an argument, why you ſhould deliver up the perſon of the King, to be diſpoſed of, as the two Houſes ſhould thinke fit.

Anſ. For the matter of your being in England, we ſhall for the pre­ſent referre you to Mr. Chalenros ſpeech: and only conſider the reaſon of this clauſe, which we conceive to be on this wiſe, that becauſe you are by the Covenant bound to defend His Majeſties perſon, that there­fore you will not deliver up his perſon, to be diſpoſed of, as the two Houſes ſhall think fit: which is as much as to ſay, becauſe you are to defend his perſon, that therefore the two Houſes of Parliament are his19 enemies: which manner of reaſoning is as if we ſhould ſay, becauſe ther were dayly ſeecret whiſperings and wiſhings at our Queens Court in France, that the King might but get ſafe to the Scotts, and becauſe the day of his ſetting forth out of Oxford towards them was fore-known at her Court; That therefore Sehrant the French agent ran up into the Earle of Northumberlands Bed-Chamber, in the morning before he was up, and ſurreptitiouſly ſurpriſed in his Chamber window; a packet of Letters, (incloſed in a blanke paper ſuperſcribed (forſooth for their better conveyance to the Earle) and breake the ſame open, and ſaid they were his, and ſo the one peep'd at the other, and ſaw one another and away hied Sebrant as faſt as he could, and carryed with him the whole plat-forme of your you know what!

Now Brethren, how like you your owne kind of reaſoning? Is not this a prittie, kind of Argument thinke you, neatly formed after that moſt hallowed pattern received from the Angel at Le font blu?

And therefore ſeeing our Brethren have ſo far diſcharged their truſt, as (after all their Proteſtations, Covenants and Oaths to Almighty God, their Solemne League, and Treaty with their Neigh­bour Nation of England) thus in the field to meet us in this free and brotherly conference with ſuch Solemn Covenant-Logick, we may have doubtleſs great boldneſs & confidence, with our dear brethren of Scot­land, to pay them in their owne coyne, for current and good Silver, eſpeci­ally conſidering whoſe Image and ſuperſcription it bereth: So that upon the point (we wiſh it be not of the ſword) we are agreed with our gude Lord Loudoun, to give unto Caeſar the things that are Caeſars, &c pag 26.

But now ſince our brethren take upon them in their armies to defend his perſon, we deſire of our deare brethren to tell u, againſt whom is this their defence? If againſt us and our armies, then weely, that if your Covenant now bind you thereto, then why did you not by this Covenant joyne armies with them before, in all his. H•••iity a­gainſt the two Houſes, for by our ſ•••tility his perſon was endange­red and ſubject to the cau••ity and execution of warre, himſelfe in perſon and in armes appearing againſtu••?

Scotch Papers Pag. 9

And whereas it is affirmed by the Treaty the Scotch Armie ought to doe nothing without a joynt reſolution of both Kingmdomes20 or their Committees; there is no ſuch clauſe in the Treaty, but they are to be ſubject to ſuch reſolutions as are and ſhall be agreed upon, and concluded mutually between the Kingdomes and their Com­mittees.

Anſ. By thit we may ſee how willing our brethren are to get a creep hole, and how they ſhufle and cut to ſtrugle themſelves out of the Bty­ers: But gude brother Jockie be content to ſtick here a while, for if to their Reſolutions (as you ſay) you muſt be ſubject, then you muſt not be ſubject to that which is contrary to their reſolutions: But your armies retaining of his perſon is contrary to the joynt advice and conſent of both Kingdomes, for as yet both parties are not agreed. Therefore this is a manifeſt breach of the Treaty; ſo that (if you wou'd have done as becommeth brethren) you ſhould have ſtayed firſt to have heard the joynt advice or conſent of both Kingdomes, before you had given him entertainment. For indeed, had there not been miſchiefe deſigned in the thing and intended againſt this Kingdome, the King (knowing the mutuall obligation, and ſolemne Vnion be­twixt the two Kingdomes, and the mutuall relation he had to them both, and each mutually to him) would (if he had intended to lay down armes againſt this Kingdome) rather (in this emergency of War) have dſipoſed of his perſon (honoured by both Kingdomes with the title of the King of both Kingdomes) to the Committee of both Kingdomes, wherein the joynt military intereſt of both Kingdomes is repreſented, conferd and united, and both thereby incorporated into one deputative body, and as it were both made fleſh of each others fleſh, and bone of each others bone, that ſo in that, one act and at one time both Kingdomes equaliy and reſpectively would have received their King of each Kingdome, though preſented in one perſon, even Eng­land and Scotland have received and kept the King of England, and the King of Scotland in that their entertainment of his perſon for the bet­er diſpoſall thereof by the Parliaments and Eſtates of both Kingdoms (being conquered by the mutuall force & conjunction of their armies) for then neither Parliament, Kingdome nor Armie had acted ſingly or divided, but it would been abſolutely an act of both Kingdomes: This we ſay, he rather would have done, then in this factions divided neture to have thrown himſelfe upon one Kingdome unknown to the other, and without the others advice and conſent, had it not21 been on ſet purpoſe to have caſt a bone of diviſion betwixt them; that both He and your ſelves by joynt occaſioned faire opportunity might compaſſe your deſignes to ſubjugate the neckes of the Free­men of England to your Scotch Monarchicall Yoake of Bondage (in gendering ſtrife.) And you your ſelves, had your intentions to wards us been upright; ſhould rather have referred him to the ſaid Com­mittee of both Kingdomes, then thus to have attempted the re­ceivall of him by your own millitary power, which was a deſperate thing; however in caſe unawares he were received, yet you might ere this, knowing the mutuall and joynt intereſt of the two King­domes ſo well as you doe, and ſeeing it raiſeth-ſuch jealouſies, and is likely to occaſion ſuch a deſperate and bloody diviſion betwixt us, you might ere this have delivered, or at leaſt propoſed the reſign­ment of His perſon, if not to the two Houſes, yet to the cuſtody of the ſaid Committee; to whom indeed naturally and properly (as the caſe now ſtandes betwixt the two Kingdomes, he belongeth) (no joynt power of the two Kingdomes but that being extant) to be by them retained till the joynt conſent and determination of both Kingdomes.

You tell us that at the hearing of the martch of Sir Thomas Fair­fax his Army marching Northward, you removed yours into York-ſhire, for preventing miſtakes or new troubles between the Kingdomes (page 9.) but were you ſo cautious thereofs you pre­tend, you would not have thus highly erred in the maine, and then face us with trifles: brethren, we have been a little to much acquainted and cheated with ſuch guilded pretences as to reſt content with a flap in the mouth with a Fox-tayle: It is not youcandor freedome and plainneſſe as becomes brethren which you tell us of (page 1.) in words what will ſatisfie us, if in deeds you deny us; Wee know you tell us he came valuntarily and continues vluntarily, and you ae not hinder him from comming to doe the duty of a King amongſt you: which words in­deed deed beare a ſpetious ſhew; but Brethren we are not ſo undecerning and ignorant as to conclude all is gold that gliſters; but theſe your ſerpentine deluſions, puts us in mind of the trick you put upon us a­bout Mr Aſhburnhams eſcape; for in a paper from the Commiſſia­ners dated 25, of May 1645 the Lords of the Committee of New-Caſtle tell us, that directly, nor indirectly they had no hand in Mr. Aſhburnhames eſcape; which by interpretation is as much as to ſay,22 that directly you had no hand in it, but indirectly you had; for after our Engliſh Ottography two negatives make an affirmative, and Nor and No are two negatives cupled to one verb, and therefore muſt needs make it affirmative: but we will returne from this quirke to the matter in hand.

Now though you ſay, there was not any ſuch reſolution be­tween the Kingdomes or their Committees, as, that the Scotiſh Ar­mie ſhould not receive the King if he came unto them: Our anſwer is, that it doth not therefore follow, that therein you may doe ſingly as you liſt; for you were obleiged in all things, whether in relation unto peace, or to warre, not to make any ceſſation, pacification, or agreement for peace whatſoever, without the advice and conſent of both Kingdomes: And you your ſelves ſay, your Armies are to be ſubject to ſuch reſolutions, as ARE and SHALL BE agreed and concluded upon mutually between the two Kingdomes and their Committees. So that although neither pre­ſent or future reſolutions concerning unknowne matters to come be expreſſed (as indeed are impoſſible) yet therefore you have not the liberty to doe what you list, or to anticipate their reſolutions with yours, for then Agrement, compact, and Treaty, were to no purpoſe at all; but you were ſtrictly bound upon penalty of breach of Articles, firſt, to have knowne the joynt advice and conſent of the two King­domes, or their Committees in all things whatſoever, whether for peoce or for warre; eſpecially in a thing of ſo great and ſo high con­cernment, as to Treate with, Receive, and entertaine the Kings Perſon, though notwithſtanding he ſhould come voluntarily to you, for the matter is all one in the nature thereof, whether he come to you, or you goe to him: treating with, recieving and entertaining, with­out a joynt advice and conſent (let it by what other meanes ſoever it be) is the maine thing which thoſe Articles reſpect: for indeed that is, as abſolute treating, ceſſation, and pacification with the King on your behalfe as can poſſible be: and therefore whereas you ſay, that you were not to impede, or reſtraine the perſon of the King from comming and doing the duty of a King amongst you, and thereupon have anſwe­rably received him; thereby you hold forth, and confeſſe a compact and concluſion of peace with him: for if you receive him to doe the duties of a King amongſt you, and that without the joynt advice and conſent of the two Kingdomes or their Committees; what is this other then to pacificate with him without their joynt advice & conſent? but more of this by and by.


Beſides if you will make an exception, becauſe it is un-expreſſed in the Treaty [that you ſhould not receive the Kings Perſon if he ſhould come voluntarily to you] then may you as well except againſt all the reſolves and reſults of the two King­domes and of their Committees, that therein are not expreſſed; and ſo confine all to the very letter of the Treaty, and utterly take away all liberty and power from the two Kingdomes and their Committees, of further adviſing, conſenting, oreſolving.

Scotch papers page 10.

Scotland: The Scotch Army neither hath nor will take upon them to diſpoſe of the King, he came unto them without capitu­lation or Treaty: his reſidence with them is voluntary and free, and they doe nothing which may hinder him to come to the two Houſes of Parliament.


England: Whither now Jockie? Hoyt Hoe Haufe Ree Gee Hoe Jockie: What? neither backwards nor forwards, one ſide nor the other! Riddle me, Riddle me, what's this? You'l nether have him, nor be without him; neither keep him, nor deliver him: a pritty paredox! for you will not take upon you to diſ­poſe of him, and yet you will keep him nor will hinder his comming to the two hou­ſes of Parliament, and yet will not deliver Him: for his will in this matter of keeping and delivery is not at all reſpected in the Treaty and compact betwixt the two Kingdomes, but only the Act or Acts of the two Ringdomes, Therefore, what is this elſe but to ſay, you will, and you will not? you will neither receive him, nor will refuſe him; you will not deliver him, nor will you keep him.

Now whereas (as you ſay) you are ſo willing that he ſhould come of his own accord to the two Houſes, and you would not hinder him: Wee pray you tell us whe­ther you would ſuffer him, provided his intent were unknown unto you? Or whe­ther you would judge it ſutable to the intereſt of Scotland, that the two Houſes or their Armie ſhould receive him upon ſuch termes? Doubtleſſe you would hinder the one and condemne the other; for no reaſonable man can judge otherwiſe by your preſent practice and papers, you have received him without the conſent of the two Houſes and (as you would make's beleeve) without any fore knowledge of his in­tent at his comming, therefore are not your ſelves condemned by your ſelves? even juſtifyers of that in your ſelves, which you would condemne in others?

But you ſay, he came to you without capitulation: If ſo deare Brethren, then why did Montrevill goe before hand to Leſley's Army to take order for his recepti­on there? And how came the King to have the faith and honour of the Scots enga­ged to him in the buſineſſe of the Militia? How came the information of Thomas Hanmer, June 12. 1646. (at the Committee for the Army, and after reported to the Houſe of Commons) ſince by experience to have been confirmed in the moſt per­ticulers thereof? wee could be much more inquiſitive with our Brethren about this matter, but it may be they have learned of Lieutenant Col. John Lilburne and Mr. Overton the two prerogative Archers of England, and of ſome others, not to an­ſwer24 to interrogatories concerning themſelves, and therfore we ſhall forbear at this time further to queſtion the faith and ſincerity of our Brethren in this particular, only wee ſhall deſire (becauſe our Brethren in their papers are verbally ſo tender over the Harraſed, oppreſſed, plundered North) wherefore beſides the extraordinary loſſes and charges thereof, their ordinary ceſſements where the forces are quartered are levied and paied after the rate of about 140000 pounds a month upon the whole County, which is twenty times ſo much as they ought to leary by the Ordinance of Parliament, as appeares by a Letter June 26. 1646. from ſundry of the Commit­tee of Yorke to the Commicee of the Lords and Commons? Wee will aſſure you Brethren, that this dealing together with your ſeverall rapes, murthers, oppreſſions & abuſes which hath bin & are dayly acted upon the welaffcted in thoſe parts, are farre from the firſt profeſſed intentions of the Scots Army at their firſt comming in­to England 1640. Where page 11. you doe declare that you would not take from jour friends and Brethren of England from a thread even to a ſhooe-latchet, ſo that our Brethren are not the ſame, or elſe they are much changed, for from the begin­ning it was not ſo; however, this will we ſay of our Brethern, that as (they tell〈◊〉page 6) that the Oath communicated to them for the diſpoſall of the Kings Perſon by the two Houſes may ſuffer a benigne interpretation, and be underſtood of the diſ­poſing of the Kings perſon favourably and Honourably; yet as the words ſtands, they are comprehenſive and capatious of more then is fit to be expreſſed; ſo anſwer we our Brethren, that though their unreaſonable ceſſements, their dayly rapes and mur­thers, robberies, oppreſſions & inſufferable abuſes upon their dear Brethren and ſiſters in the North may out of a Brotherly conſtruction receive a benigne interpretation, and be underſtood but as eſcapes of their Armis, yet as the deeds ſo ſtand, they are comprehenſive and capatious of more then is fit to be done.

And therefore deare Brethren, we cannot but juſtly wonder why you ſhould be ſo unbrotherly and unkind to your Brethren of England, notwithſtanding theſ••great oppreſſions of yours upon them, now to capitulate with them for ſuch vaſt ſommes of money, and that upon ſuch high termes as not to ſurrender their Gari­ſons and quit their Kingdome of your Armies, without, 200000. pound downe in your hands: Indeed Brethren let us tell you, wee can judge it as yet, little beter then invaſion upon our Land, to capitulate with us upon termes, before you will reſigne us poſſeſſion of our owne Gariſons, Forts, Caſtles Countrys &c. for upon no termes whatſoever have you any right or property unto any of the Forts, Caſtles, Gari­ſons, or Countries of the Kingdome of England, or in any wiſe to attempt poſſeſſion therof, or upon any termes to refuſe there fignment thereof: for ſo long and ſo much are you invadors of our Land; for not an hare breadth of England nor a minute poſſeſſion thereof is yours by any legall, equall, or National Right, except you will ſay, that you our Brethren of Scotland are now become Kings of England; and in­deed your actions and uſurpations are equivolent thereto, for as well, as to doe what you doe, you may poſſeſſe it for ever, and make invaſion upon the reſt of our Land, for protraction of time and increaſe of quantity cannot alter the equity of your title, it being as much to the whole Kingdome as to a part, and as well for ever as for a minute: But indeed and in truth it is neither in the one or yet in the other.

But you tell us, pag. 16. Reaſonable ſatisfaction muſt be firſt given to your Armies for their paines and charges, before you will ſurrender: Why, brethren, muſt you therefore take poſſeſſion of our Garriſons, Caſtles, &c. Becauſe in equity wee are bound to give reaſonable ſatisfaction to you, for your mercenary aſſiſtance? Our25 Garriſons, Caſtles, Forts, Countries, &c. were not put into the bargaine, neither were they ever as yet ſet over to you, as a pledge for your paiment, but notwithſtan­ding Covenant, Treaty, or any other obligation whatſoever betwixt us, they are ſtill the abſolute intereſt and propertie of England, which by this your refuſall, to quit them, is abſolutely invaded and uſurped: and your continuance of their poſſeſſion upon thoſe tearm••, is a continuance of be••tile invaſion and incurſion upon England. And is as much as if you had entred by force, (for Dolus an virtus quts in hoſte re­quirit?) it is all one to the nature of the thing, whether by force or by politick de­cept, for both can be but poſſeſſion, ſo that this your poſſesſion of our Countries, Caſtles, &c. under the colour of expectation of pay before you depart, is in the na­ture of the thing as abſolute invaſion and incurſion, as if you had entred and over run thoſe places by force of Armes. For though we be bound to give you reaſonable ſatis­faction, yet by that obligation, we are not bound to forfeit our Garriſons, Caſtles, Countries, &c. into your hands, till it be given: We will grant you that reaſonable ſa­tisfaction is due; but what is that? whether a certain ſumme of money, or elſe our Garriſons, Caſtles, Countries, & c? Your ſelves only make claime to the firſt, and therefore, and in reſpect of our owne incereſt, we will be ſo bold as not to diſclaime and yeeld up our right in the ſecond upon any pretence whaſoever. And in caſe rea­ſonable ſatisfaction ſhould be denyed, it could be but a falſitie and breach of faith, it would not therefore follow, that our Garriſons, Caſtles, Countries, &c were become forfeit into the hand of our brethren the Scotts: Or becauſe we ſhould doe evill, it doth not therefore follow that they ſhould doe evill for evill againe: for that were contrary to ſound doctrine and the power of Godlineſſe, a clauſe of the ſecond Ar­ticle in the Covenane from which our brethren tell us, that no perſuaſion, terror, plot, ſugiſtion nor combination, ſhall never directly nor indirectly with draw them: and in this Covenant there is no ſuch clauſe expreſſed, intended or implyed, that in caſe we ſhould not give them ſatisfaction according to agreement, that then our Garriſons, Caſtles and Countries ſhould be forfeit to our brethren of Scotland. Therefore if you would but deale friendly and as becommeth brethren (whereof you make ſuch profeſſion) with us, you would not take advantage at your brethrens ne­cesſitys, to deale thus unkindly and unbrotherly with them (as if they had entertai­ned ſo many Turkes, Pagans and Infidells into their boſomes in ſtead of brethren) as to ſeaſe upon their poſſesſions, their Garriſons, Forts, Caſtles, Countries, &c. becauſe this reaſonable ſatisfaction cannot be provided as ſoon as you would have it, and as they deſire and endeavour it. This is not a doing as you would be done to, this is no brotherly bearing of one anothers infirmities, or of one anothers burthens; but in ſtead of a brotherly eaſing, this is aunfriendly oppreſſing, beſides the great ſtan­dell it caſteth upon your brother Nation of England, as it the Parliament and Peo­ple thereof, were ſo unfaithfull, unnaturall and falſe hearted, not to be truſted upon their faith and honour with their brethren of Scotland (with whom there is ſuch ob­ligations of unity and brother-hood) for the palment of the ſaid ſum of money, with their utmoſt expedition, doubtleſſe we ſhould never have been ſo ungratefull and unfaithfull with our brethren as to have dealt unjuſtly with them therein.

Bute are afraid, that this money demand, was but a forraign invention to catch us upon the lurch, ſuppoſing by reaſon of the unreaſonableneſſe of the matter, and the invaſive manner thereof, the two Houſes would not aſſent thereunto and ſo by ſuch meanacing provoking rearmes, as the detaining of our Garriſons under the pretence of acquiring reaſonable ſatisfaction, to pick a quarrel with us, or elſe you would not thes have demanded the ſame upon ſuch high provokating termes nor detaining of our Garriſons, Caſtles,26 Countries, &c. for to deliver them unto us, you will not till you have money.

Yea, you tell us, that if the 5000. l. at Nottingham already accounted unto you with ſome other competent portion of money be not ſent unto your Armie, you〈◊〉be forced (forſooth) to enlarge your Quarters for the eaſe of the countrie, ſo that we plainly ſee by this liberty of enlargement which you uſurp unto your ſelves,〈◊〉you intend that your inlargement of your Quarters ſhall be as large as our Bo•••in the caſe of procraſtination, and all under the colout (for ſooth) of eaſing the Coun­try: Indeed brethren by that meanes you would eaſe us of all. But if in your heart you be intended to eaſe us, then why doe you not rather tell us that you will enlarge homewards, to your owne native Country, for that were indeed an eaſement, this〈◊〉but a further inlargement of our burthen, but we know your meaning by your gp•••Gude brethren doe not thus take advantage at your brethrens necesſities; as〈◊◊〉brethren we tell you, it doth not become you to deale thus unkindly with you brethren: for it is an unnaturall, unbrotherly part, to make a prey of their extremi•••Yet here is not all they ſay of this matter, for they menacingly tell us, that in caſe,〈◊〉Thomas Fairfaxs Armie ſhall march Northwards, that their Scottiſh Armie ſhall en•••their Quarters Southward, whereby (they ſay) it is eaſily to be ſeen, that thoſe King­domes may unhappily be againe embroyled in new•••d greater troubles then yet〈◊〉have been. Now how can we judge this otherwiſe, but as a ſhaking of the ſword〈◊〉our heads? a dare, a threat even as much as to ſay to our Armies, come Norwa••••you dare. And if you doe, we will advance Southward, and then you may ex••••greater broyles and troubles then ever: but brethren, for the love of God, and〈◊〉peace of the Kingdomes, forbeare ſuch threatning language for the future, that〈◊〉may live together as brethren in love, peace and tranquillity: For brethren we〈◊〉aſſure you, that evill words corrupts good manners, tread on a worme and it will〈◊〉againe, and ſurely Engliſhmn have as much courages wormes.

And now that you ſee that the two Houſes have conditioned to your demands you enter into diſpute with us about the diſpoſall of the perſon of the King, in ſuch a manner as is not posſibe in honour and juſtice for this Kingdome to accept off, and you propoſe wayes and meanes of delayes and protraction of time, as〈…〉commiſſioners againe unto the King in the name of both Kingdomes, with power to〈◊〉his deſires and the like, when as indeed the matter belongeth to them joydy to••­viſe determine and conclude how they will diſpoſe of him, and what they will co­pell him to doe, being conquered and fallen into their hands, therefore ſending〈◊〉, or treating with him now, is beſide the matter in hand, ſo that thoſe various devi••of yours, give us great cauſe of ſuſpition and jealouſies of you, that theſe, are but wayes to beare us in hand for the better facilitation of your deſign. But we ſhould be glad to heare of your innocency of thoſe things, and ſhould be willing〈◊〉judge better of our brethren, but they muſt excuſe us if we judge the tree by its〈◊〉and may rather blame themſelves for bringing forth ſuch fruit, then us, for〈◊〉judging, when it is brought forth. Therefore to remove all ſcruple end different from betwixt us, we deſire them to let their good workes ſo ſhine before men that we may iuſtly ſay that God is in them indeed, and that they are our faithfull〈◊〉and friends who are reſolved to live and dye with us in the better ſenſe, th••gh•••are now iuſtly afraid of the Worſt.


Errata, pag. 6. for you your ſelves, read your ſelves, p. 7. l 8. for〈◊〉conſents r. and ouſent. p. 8. l. 10. for proceeding r. preceeding, p. 9. for and treaties r. treaties and p. 62. for my Lord of Northumber land, r. Genney with the wiſ, p. 6. in ſome〈◊〉, for ſome of your armie, r ſome Regiments in your armie, Of theſe and moy other〈◊〉〈…〉the Author deſires the Readers favourable correction and conſtruction

About this transcription

TextAn vnhappy game at Scotch and English. Or A full answer from England to the papers of Scotland. Wherein their Scotch mists and their fogs; their sayings and gaine-sayings; their juglings, their windings and turnings; hither and thither, backwards and forwards, and forwards & backwards again; their breach of Covenant, Articles, & treaty, their King-craft present design, against the two houses of Parliament, & people of England, their plots and intents for usurpation and government over us and our children detected, discovered, and presented to the view of the world, as a dreadfull omen, all-arme, and warning to the kingdome of England.
AuthorLilburne, John, 1614?-1657,, ; Overton, Richard, fl. 1646,.
Extent Approx. 74 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 15 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
SeriesEarly English books online.
Additional notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A88266)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 113914)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 58:E364[3])

About the source text

Bibliographic informationAn vnhappy game at Scotch and English. Or A full answer from England to the papers of Scotland. Wherein their Scotch mists and their fogs; their sayings and gaine-sayings; their juglings, their windings and turnings; hither and thither, backwards and forwards, and forwards & backwards again; their breach of Covenant, Articles, & treaty, their King-craft present design, against the two houses of Parliament, & people of England, their plots and intents for usurpation and government over us and our children detected, discovered, and presented to the view of the world, as a dreadfull omen, all-arme, and warning to the kingdome of England. Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657,, Overton, Richard, fl. 1646,. [2], 26 p. Printed (as truly, as the Scotch papers were at London) by Evan Tyler, printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie, and are to be sold at the most solemn signe of the Blew-Bonnet, right opposite to the two Houses of Parliament.,Edinburgh [i.e. London?] :1646.. (Attributed to Richard Overton and to John Lilburne.) ("The imprint is false"--Thomason Catalogue; probably printed at London.) ("The book was ordered by the House of Commons, on the day of its publication, to be suppressed and publicly burnt on the 2nd December; the Committee for Complaints were ordered to endeavour to find the printer"--Thomason Catalogue.) (Annotation on Thomason copy: "Nou: 30th".) (Reproduction of the original in the British Library.)
  • Charles -- I, -- King of England, 1600-1649 -- Early works to 1800.
  • Great Britain -- Foreign relations -- Scotland -- Early works to 1800.
  • Scotland -- Foreign relations -- England -- Early works to 1800.
  • Great Britain -- History -- Civil War, 1642-1649 -- Early works to 1800.

Editorial statement

About the encoding

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial principles

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database ( The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

Publication information

  • Text Creation Partnership,
ImprintAnn Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2011-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2).
  • DLPS A88266
  • STC Wing L2195
  • STC Thomason E364_3
  • STC ESTC R201238
  • EEBO-CITATION 99861769
  • PROQUEST 99861769
  • VID 113914

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.