who had now remained almost two years a prisoner in
the Tower, presented a petition to the house of lords, praying that his
imprisonment might not be indefinite. Some of the tory lords affirmed
that the impeachment was destroyed and determined by the prorogation of
parliament, which superseded the whole proceedings; but the contrary was
voted by a considerable majority. The thirteenth day of June was fixed
for the trial; and the house of commons made acquainted with this
determination. The commons appointed a committee to inquire into the
state of the earl's impeachment; and, in consequence of their report,
sent a message to the lords demanding longer time to prepare for trial.
Accordingly the day was prolonged to the twenty-fourth of June; and the
commons appointed the committee, with four other members, to be managers
for making good the articles of impeachment. At the appointed time
the peers repaired to the court in Westminster-hall, where lord Cowper
presided as lord steward. The commons were assembled as a committee of
the whole house; the king, the rest of the royal family, and the foreign
ministers, assisted at the solemnity; the earl of Oxford was brought
from the Tower; the articles of impeachment were read, with his answers,
and the replication of the commons. Sir Joseph Jekyll standing up to
make good the first article, lord Har-court signified to their lordships
that he had a motion to make, and they adjourned to their own house.
There he represented that a great deal of time would be unnecessarily
consumed in going through all the articles of the impeachment; that if
the commons would make good the two articles for high treason, the earl
of Oxford would forfeit both life and estate, and there would be an end
of the matter; whereas to proceed on the method proposed by the commons,
would draw the trial on to a prodigious length. He therefore moved that
the commons might not be permitted to proceed until judgment should be
first given upon the articles of high treason. He was supported by the
earls of Anglesea and Nottingham, the lord Trevor, and a considerable
number of both parties; and though opposed by the earl of Sunderland,
the lords Coningsby and Parker, the motion was carried in the
affirmative. It produced a dispute between the two houses. The commons,
at a conference, delivered a paper containing their reasons for
asserting it as their undoubted right to impeach a peer either for
treason, or for high