Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 06.pdf/561

 522

THE COURT OF STAR CHAMBER. By John D. Lindsay. IX. DRYNN'S answer was an attack upon the hierarchy, and in the same style as his books. Burton's set forth the substance of his sermon touching the innovations in the church. Bastwick's was the most aggres sive and defiant. It termed the prelates "invaders of the King's prerogative, con temners of the Scriptures, advancers of popery, superstition, idolatry, profaneness, oppression of the King's subjects, in the impious performance of which they showed neither wit nor honesty; enemies of God and the King, and servants of the Devil." The following day the court assembled, and the defendants were brought to the bar to receive sentence. Sir John Finch, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, looked earnestly toward Prynn, and said : " I had thought Mr. Prynn had no ears, but methinks he hath ears." This directed general attention to Prynn, and for the satisfaction of the court the usher was directed to turn up Prynn's hair and show his ears, which being done, " the lords were displeased there had been former ly no more cut off, and cast out some dis graceful words of him." Prynn humbly replied : " My Lords, there is never a one of your honors but would be sorry to have your ears as mine are." " In good faith, he is somewhat saucy," said Lord Coventry. " I hope your Honors will not be offended. Pray God give you ears to hear," replied Prynn. Prynn renewed his application for per mission to file his cross bill, which was again refused. He also asked that the prelates among the members of the court be dismissed from any voice in the censure

of the court, "as being no way agreeable with equity or reason, that they who are our adversaries should be our judges." "In good faith, it is a sweet motion, is it not! " observed Lord Coventry. " Herein you are become libellers. And if you should thus libel all the lords and reverend judges, as you do the most reverend pre lates by this your plea, you would have none to pass sentence upon you for your libelling, because they are parties." Prynn argued that the case was not in point, as there were but one or two members of the court who, it was claimed, had been libelled, and he referred to a case where the Lord Keeper had absented himself from the hear ing because a party. But this availed him nothing, and a further motion to file his answer without his counsel was also denied. The information was then read, and each of the King's counsel was given one of the books annexed thereto (of which there were five), and proceeded to speak in turn upon their character and unlawfulness. Lord Coventry then told the defendants that lest they should afterwards claim they had not had liberty to speak for themselves the court proposed to give them leave to say what they had to say; provided they spoke within the bounds of modesty, and that their speeches were not libellous. The defendants all answered that they hoped to deliver their speeches within the bounds prescribed. "Then speak, in God's name," said the Lord Keeper, "and show cause why the court should not proceed to censure." Prynn proceeded to point out the hard ship of his situation. "The court ordered me to put in my answer under counsel's hands. I endeavored it; they refused to