L A 
a warrant from the fecret committee of tlie houfe of com¬ 
mons, came and feafched the archbilhop’s room for pa¬ 
pers, and even examined his pockets; taking away his 
ciiary, and private devotional competitions, as well as 
twenty-one bundles of papers which he had prepared for 
his defence. Prynne is laid to have promifed to return 
thefe papers within three or four days, but never to have 
brought back quite three bundles of them.. A few days 
after this, all the temporalties of the'archiepifcopal fee 
were fequeftered to the parliament, and the archbithop 
was fufpended from his office and benefice, and all juril- 
diftion whatfoever. He had now been a prifoner in the 
Tower nearly three years, without once petitioning for a 
trial, or putting in his anfwer to the articles preferred 
againll him; at length, in October 1643, he received a 
copy of ten additional articles, to which the lords ordered 
him to deliver his anfwer in three weeks. 
His trial, which was put off from time to time, com¬ 
menced on the 12th of March, 1643-4, and lafted twenty 
days ; and it mull be acknowledged, that fome of the 
charges againll him were very indifferently fupported, and 
that much of the evidence was trifling and infignificant. 
It fufficiently appeared, however, from what was produced, 
that he had laboured to extend the royal prerogative and 
the ecclefiaftical power toa degree that was utterly incon- 
fiftent with the liberties of the people; that he had been 
aftive in enforcing the illegal claim of (hip-money; that 
he had committed perfons to prifon, and punillied them, 
without law ; and that he had been guilty of many arbi¬ 
trary, illegal, and cruel, actions. He often pleaded, in¬ 
deed, that, as many of the things attributed to him were 
the afls of the privy-council, or the ftar-chamber and 
high-commiffion courts, of which he was only an indivi¬ 
dual member, it was unfair to endeavour to make him 
refponfible for what was the proceeding of the whole 
board. But, were fucb a plea admiffible, it would be im¬ 
practicable to bring a wicked minifter of Hate to juffice, 
tor any proceedings of the privy-council in which the 
other members concurred, however arbitrary, oppreffive, 
and illegal. And it may be obferved here, that it cer¬ 
tainly Would not be thought a proper juftincation of cri¬ 
minals of an inferior order, in any court of juffice, if 
they were to allege, that there were other perfons accom¬ 
plices with them in the crimes of which they were accufed. 
Archbiffiop Laud defended himfelf, during the whole 
of his trial, with uncommon eloquence, fpiiit, and acute- 
nefs, and with extraordinary prefence of mind; and the 
account which he has left behind him of what he (aid on 
every day’s hearing, difplays great addrefs and ability, 
mixed with the moll keen and fatirical refleftions upon 
his adverfaries. His counfel, who deferred what they had 
to fay on his behalf to the dole of the trial, then reduced 
the feveral articles preferred againll him .to three general 
charges, to which they made their replies. They then 
endeavoured to (how that, if thefe feveral charges were 
admitted to be true, they did not amount to treafon, by 
any eftablilhed law of the kingdom. This juftification of 
the archbiffiop by his counfel, as to the matter of law, 
has been generally eiteemed a good one ; and it certainly 
daggered the houfe of lords, who were not fatisfied with 
the reply of the managers for the houfe of commons. 
They had no doubt concerning the truth of the fads of 
which the prelate was accufed ; but, “whether any of 
them were treafon by the laws of the land,” this the 
judges very much queftioned ; and, therefore, the lords 
deferred giving judgment, till the commons thought lit 
to take another method to obtain it. Soon after this, to 
prevent all further delays, the houfe of commons ordered 
a bill of attainder to be brought in ; which was palled on 
the 16th of November, and immediately fent up to the 
lords. There its progrefs was flow; but at length it 
palled, on the 41b of January, 1644-5, > n a very thin houfe. 
To flop the confequence of this attainder, the archbiffiop 
produced the king’s pardon under the great feal ; but it 
was over-ruled by both houfes. By this bill of attainder. 
U D. 291 
the archbiffiop was condemned to fuffer death, as in'cafes 
of high treafon; and all the favour which he could ob¬ 
tain upon bis petitioning was, to have his fentence altered 
from hanging to beheading. He met his death with great 
firmnefs, on a fcalfold erected upon Tower-hill, on the 
loth of January, being then in the feventy-fecond year of 
his age. 
Archbiffiop Laud was low in ftature, but well and 
llrongly made, and of a ruddy and cheerful countenance. 
His temper was warm, paffionate, and vindictive; his 
fpirit ambitious, aflive, and reftlefs. Hence his conduct 
was often ralh and precipitate; for, according to Dr. Hey- 
lin, he attempted more alterations of the church in one 
year, than a prudent man would have done in a great 
many. His panegyrifts have bellowed great praife on his 
piety ; which, however, his diary (hows to have been 
mixed with an abundant portion of fuperftition. Speak¬ 
ing of his learning and morals, Hume oblerves, that “he 
was virtuous, if feverity of manners alone, and abllinence 
from pleafure, could deferve that name, lie was learned, 
if polemical knowledge could entitle him to that praife.” 
His (Indies, indeed, appear to have been chiefly confined 
to the canon-law, and the writings of the fathers. As to 
his religious principles, though he was an avowed protef- 
tant according to the conffitution of the church of Eng¬ 
land, yet, as the hiftorian juff mentioned truly fays, “the 
genius of his religion was, though in a lefs degree, the 
fame with that of the Romilh. The fame profound re- 
fpecl was demanded to the facerdotal character, the fame 
lubmiffion required to the creeds and decrees of lynods 
and councils, the fame pomp and ceremony was alfeCled 
in vvorlhip, and the fame fuperftitious regard todays, pof- 
tures, meats, and veltments. No wonder, therefore, that 
this prelate was, every where, among the puritans, re¬ 
garded with horror, as the forerunner of antichrift.” 
In his government of the church, he difplayed a total 
want of charity towards thofe who had made the lead op- 
pofition to the doctrines and ceremonies eltablilhed by 
authority; and, under his countenance, the liar-chamber 
wore all the horrors, and exercifed all the cruelties, of an 
inquifition. In ftate-aftairs, his counfels were high and 
arbitrary, and he was extremely active in promoting thofe 
defpotic menfures and illegal projects, which ultimately 
proved the ruin of the king and conffitution. We have 
already lpoken of his generofity and munificence towards 
the univerfity of Oxford, as difplayed in tlie many noble 
buildings which he ereCled, and the, expenfive collection 
of books and manuferipts which he prefented to it. We 
ought not to omit adding, that lie alio founded an Arabic 
lecture in this univerfity, which began to be read in 1636. 
Oxford, likevvife, owed to his influence a large charter, 
to confirm its ancient, and inveff it with new, privileges. 
He obtained the advowfon of St. Lawrence in Reading 
for St. John’s college; and he procured a charter for that 
town, and founded an liofpital in it, which he endowed 
with a revenue of aool. per ann. The archbifliop pub- 
lilhed feven fingle fermons, preached on public occafions, 
which after his death were reprinted in an oClavo volume, 
in 1651. He alfo printed, in 1573, in folio, an account 
of “the Conference between him and Fififer the Jefuit,” 
which has palled through feveral editions, and has been 
greatly commended. In 1695, Mr. Henry Wharton pub- 
Iidled his “Diary,” which had before been imperfeClly 
publiffied by Prynne, together with the hiftory of his 
troubles and trial, written by himfelf, in one volume 
folio. And, in 1700, was alio publiffied, in folio, “An 
liiftorical Account of all material TranfaClions relating to 
the Univerfity of Oxford, from Archbiffiop Laud’s being 
eleCled Chancellor to his Refignation of that Office,” writ¬ 
ten by himfelf. About eighteen of his Letters, to Ge¬ 
rard John Vofllus, were printed by Colomefius, in his 
collection of G. I. Vofiii-et clar. Vir. ad esm Epiff. Lond. 
1690, folio; and fome others may be feen at the end of Dr. 
Parr’s Life of Archbiffiop Uffier, and in Dr. Twell’sLife 
of Dr. Pococke, prefixed to that author’s theological works. 
LAUDj 
» 
