nowledged
no judges but that province, and was ready to justify all he had done.
He maintained that the States General had no jurisdiction over him, and
consequently could not nominate his Judges. He alledged also the
privilege of the citizens of Rotterdam and demanded permission to set
forth his reasons before the States of Holland and the States General;
and that the validity of his objections might be determined by Judges of
Holland. All these things were denied him. They insisted that he should
plead: he protested against this violence; but this did not hinder them
from proceeding against him, in contempt of all forms. He had been
allowed the use of pen and ink[95], but, after his first examination,
they were taken away.

The rigour and injustice, with which he and the other prisoners were
treated, are scarce conceivable. He tells us, that when they knew they
were bad, they chose that time to examine them; that they did not give
them liberty to defend themselves; that they threatened, and teazed them
to give immediate answers; and that they would not read over to them
their examinations. Grotius having asked leave to write his defence,
they allowed him for that purpose only five hours, and one sheet of
paper. He was always persuaded, that if he would own he had
transgressed, and ask pardon, they would set him at liberty: but as he
had nothing to reproach himself with, he would never take any step that
might infer consciousness of guilt. His wife, his father, brother, and
friends approved of this resolution[96].

On the 18th of May, 1619, the Commissioners pronounced sentence against
him, which we shall give at length.

"Whereas[97] Hugo Grotius, who was Pensionary of the Magistrates of
Rotterdam, and at present a prisoner before the Commissaries appointed
by the States General to try him, has acknowledged without being put to
the torture.

That he ventured to endeavour to overturn religion, to oppress and
afflict the Church of God, and for that end advanced heinous things
pernicious to the Republic, particularly, that each Province has singly
a right to decree in matters of religion, and that the others ought not
to take cognizance of the disputes which arise on this subject in a
particular province; that against order, and the custom of the reformed
churches, he endeavoured to get opinions received which are contrary to
the doctrine of those churches, without being sufficiently examined;
that he opposed the co