John Lilburne, quoting the Bible

Political firebrand who began his career as a martyr for Puritan doctrine, became a champion of the Levellers and political democracy, and ended his days as a Quaker and pacifist.

http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/lilburne.htm

“...If the World was emptied of all but John Lilburne, Lilburne would quarrel with John, and John with Lilburne...”           http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/lilburne.htm

John Lilburne, c.1615-1657:  John Lilburne was born in Sunderland, the third son of a minor country gentleman. After attending schools in Bishop Auckland and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, he was apprenticed to Thomas Hewson, a London clothier and Puritan. He remained with Hewson from around 1630 to 1636. During his apprenticeship, Lilburne immersed himself in the Bible, Foxe's Book of Martyrs and the writings of the Puritan divines. In 1636, he was introduced to the Puritan physician John Bastwick, an active pamphleteer against episcopacy who, with William Prynne and Henry Burton, was persecuted by Archbishop Laud in a famous case in 1637.  From:  British Civil Wars, Commonwealth and Protectorate 1638-60 

http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/lilburne.htm

John Lilburne: The First English Libertarian:  He became known to his contemporaries as "Freeborn John." He described himself as "a lover of his country and sufferer for the common liberty." His biographer Pauline Gregg concluded: He could be called the first English Radical — a great-hearted Liberal — a militant Christian — even if the spirit of his teaching were taken fully into account, the first English democrat. But it is better to leave him without a label, enshrined in the words he spoke for his party: "And posterity we doubt not shall reap the benefit of our endeavours, what ever shall become of us."  His courageous campaigns for liberty resulted in him spending much of his life in prisons. These included Fleet prison in London, Oxford Castle, the notorious Newgate prison also in London, the Tower of London, Mount Orgueil Castle in Jersey, and Dover Castle.  When Lilburne was brought before the court of Star Chamber, he refused to take the oath. "It is this trial that has been cited by constitutional jurists and scholars in the United States of America as being the historical foundation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is also cited within the 1966 majority opinion of Miranda v Arizona by the U.S. Supreme Court."  The late United States Supreme Court Judge Hugo Black, who often cited the works of John Lilburne in his opinions, wrote in an article for Encyclopaedia Britannica that he believed John Lilburne's constitutional work of 1649 was the basis for the basic rights contained in the U.S. Constitution.  By: Peter Richards at  http://mises.org/story/2861

The Levellers:  The Levellers were a group of political activists in the 17th century, who campaigned for radical change, by writing and distributing pamphlets, petitions and manifestos; and by arranging meetings in taverns to spread their ideas. Among their leading writers and pamphleteers, besides John Lilburne, were Richard Overton, William Walwyn, Thomas Prince, and John Wildman.  Probably the most famous document compiled by the Levellers is one entitled  An Agreement of the People.  http://www.constitution.org/lev/eng_lev_07.htm  The demands listed included regular elections, religious freedom, equality before the law, an end to conscription for war service, equal electoral districts according to population, and universal manhood suffrage. By: Peter Richards at  http://mises.org/story/2861

Selected Works of the Levellers:   The Levellers were a group of English reformers mainly active during the period from 1645 through 1649, who originated many of the ideas that eventually became provisions of the U.S. Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. Inspired by the Petition of Right of 1628, and led by John Lilburne, beginning as a lieutenant of Oliver Cromwell, they initially supported the Protectorate, but then turned against it when Cromwell failed to make the reforms they demanded. The response was the prosecution of most of its leaders, who were either imprisoned or executed. Their proposals continued, however, to inspire political philosophers and future generations of reformers. They appear to have influenced their contemporary, Thomas Hobbes, and later writers such as James Harrington and John Locke. Their proposals were revived during the Revolution of 1688 to produce the English Bill of Rights in 1689, which led to the Whig party in Britain that supported many of the reforms for Britain sought by the Americans during the War of Independence. During the period of their greatest activity, the Levellers produced a number of political documents, which have been gathered and published by various editors. We present several of those collections here, which have some overlap in their contents.  http://www.constitution.org/lev/levellers.htm

“Agreement of the Free people of England”:  This manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we cherish today: universal vote, the right to silence in the dock, equal parliamentary constituencies, everyone being equal under the law, the right not to be conscripted into the army, and many others. This particular version was smuggled out of the Tower of London, where Lilburne and the others were being held captive. All Leveller soldiers, and they were the majority in many regiments, carried this agreement proudly tucked into their hat-band.  http://www.constitution.org/eng/agreepeo.htm

British History Online:   This searchable database provides full text access to the proceedings and documents of the House of Lords and Commons during the time of John Lilburne’s trials.  Search :  John Lilburne

Journal of the House of Lords:  Volumes 4 – 10, 1629-1649

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/subject.aspx?subject=6&gid=44

Journal of the House of Commons:  Volumes 1 – 12, 1547-1699

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/subject.aspx?subject=6&gid=43

Star-Chamber  February, 1637:  “Information was preferred in Star-Chamber by the King's Attorney-General, against John Lilburne and John Warton, for the unlawful Printing and Publishing of Libellous and Seditious Books, Entituled News from Ipswich, &c. they were brought up to the Office, and there refused to take an Oath to answer Interrogatories, saying it was the Oath ex Officio, and that no free-born English man ought to take it, not being bound by the Law to accuse himself, (whence ever after he was called Free-born John ) his offence was aggravated, in that he printed these Libellous and Seditious Books, contrary to a Decree in Star-Chamber, prohibiting printing without License: which Decree was made this Year in the Month of July, and was to this effect.”

From: 'Historical Collections: 1637 (3 of 5)', Historical Collections of Private Passages of State: Volume 2: 1629-38 (1721), pp. 461-481.

 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=74904&strquery=john lilburne

 
Star Chamber ‘Condigne Punishment’ of John Lilburne – 1637:  

“Ordered ye 18th Touching Lilburne Prison[e]r in the Fleete: Where as John Lilburne Prison[e]r in the Fleet by Sentence in Starr Chamber did this day suffer condigne Punishment for his sev[er]all offences, by whipping at a cart and standing in the pillory and as their Lo[rdshi]pps were this day informed, during the time that his Body was under the said execution, audatiously and wickedly not only utter sundry scandalous and seditious speeches, but likewise scattered sundry Copies of seditious Bookes amongst the people that beheld the said execut[i]on for w[hi]ch very thing amongst other offences of like nature hee had beene censured in the said co[u]rt by the foresaid Sentence It was thereupon ordered by their Lo[rdshi]pps That the said Lilburne should bee Layed alone w[i]th Irons on his hands and Leggs in the wardes of the Fleete, where the basest and meanest sorte of Prison[e]rs are used to bee putt, And that the Warden of the Fleete take especiall care to hinder resort of any p[er]son whatsoever unto him, and p[ar]ticularly that hee bee not supplyed w[i]th any hand, And that hee take especiall notice of all L[ette]res Writings and Books brought unto him, and seaze and deliver the same unto their Lo[rdshi]pps, And take notice from time to time, who they bee that resort to the said Prison to vissitt the said Lilburne or to speake w[i]th him, and informe the Board. And it was lastly ordered, that hereafter all p[er]sons that shalbee p[ro]duced to receave Corporall punishm[en]t according to Sentence of that Court or by order of the Board, shall have their Garment[e]s searched before they bee brought forth, and neither writing nor other Thing suffered to bee about them, and their hands likewise to bee bound during the time they are under punishm[en]t, whereof (together w[i]th the other p[re]mises) the said Warden of the Fleete, is hereby required to take notice and to have especiall care, that this their Lo[rdshi]pps order bee accordingly observed.”  http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/transcripts/star_chamber.htm

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/docs/star_chamber.htm

Lilburn's Judgement by the House of Lords 1646:.  "It is to be remembered, that, the Tenth Day of July, in the Two and Twentieth Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King Charles, Sir Nathaniell Finch Knight, His Majesty's Serjeant at Law, did deliver in, before the Lords assembled in Parliament at Westm'r, certain Articles against Lieutenant Colonel John Lilburne, for High Crimes and Misdemeanors done and committed by him, together with certain Books and Papers thereunto annexed; which Articles, and the said Books and Papers thereunto annexed, are filed among the Records of Parliament; the Tenor of which Articles followeth, in these Words:

"It was then and there, (that is to say,) the said Tenth Day of July, by their Lordships Ordered, That the said John Lilbourne be brought to the Bar of this House the 11th Day of the said July, to answer the said Articles, that thereupon their Lordships might proceed therein according as to Justice should appertain; at which Day, scilicet, the 11th Day of July, Anno Domini 1646, the said John Lilburne, according to the said Order, was brought before the Peers then assembled and sitting in Parliament, to answer the said Articles; and the said John Lilburne being thereupon required, by the said Peers in Parliament, to kneel at the Bar of the said House, as is used in such Cases, and to hear his said Charge read, to the End that he might be enabled to make Defence thereunto, the said John Lilburne, in Contempt and Scorn of the said High Court, did not only refuse to kneel at the said Bar, but did also, in a contemptuous Manner, then and there, at the open Bar of the said House, openly and contemptuously refuse to hear the said Articles read, and used divers contemptuous Words, in high Derogation of the Justice, Dignity, and Power of the said Court; and the said Charge being nevertheless then and there read, the said John Lilburne was then and there, by the said Lords assembled in Parliament, demanded what Answer or Defence he would make thereunto; the said John Lilburne, persisting in his obstinate and contemptuous Behaviour, did peremptorily and absolutely refuse to make any Defence or Answer to the said Articles; and did then and there, in high Contempt of the said Court, and of the Peers there assembled, at the open Bar of the said House of Peers, affirm, "That they were Usurpers and unrighteous Judges, and that he would not answer the said Articles;" and used divers other insolent and contemptuous Speeches against their Lordships and that High Court: Whereupon the Lords assembled in Parliament, taking into their serious Consideration the said contemptuous Carriage and Words of the said John Lilburne, to the great Affront and Contempt of this High and Honourable Court, and the Justice, Authority, and Dignity thereof; it is therefore, this present 11th Day of July, Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords assembled in Parliament, That the said John Lilburne be fined, and the said John Lilburne by the Lords assembled in Parliament, for his said Contempt, is fined, to the King's Majesty, in the Sum of Two Thousand Pounds: And it is further Ordered and Adjudged, by the said Lords assembled in Parliament, That the said John Lilburne, for his said Contempts, be and stand committed to The Tower of London, during the Pleasure of this House: And further the said Lords assembled in Parliament, taking into Consideration the said contemptuous Refusal of the said John Lilburne to make any Defence or Answer to the said Articles, did Declare, That the said John Lilburne ought not thereby to escape the Justice of this House; but the said Articles, and the Offences thereby charged to have been committed by the said John Lilburne, ought thereupon to be taken as confessed: Therefore the Lords assembled in Parliament, taking the Premises into Consideration, and for that it appears by the said Articles that the said John Lilburne hath not only maliciously published several scandalous and libelous Passages of a very high Nature against the Peers of this Parliament therein particularly named, and against the Peerage of this Realm in general, but contrived, and contemptuously published, and openly at the Bar of the House delivered, certain scandalous Papers, to the high Contempt and Scandal of the Dignity, Power, and Authority of this House: All which Offences, by the peremptory Refusal of the said John Lilburne to answer or make any Defence to the said Articles, stand confessed by the said Lilburne as they are in the said Articles charged:

"It is, therefore, the said Day and Year last abovementioned, further Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords assembled in Parliament, upon the whole Matter in the said Articles contained,

"1. That the said John Lilburne be sined to the King's Majesty in the Sum of Two Thousand Pounds.

"2. And, That he stand and be imprisoned in The Tower of London, by the Space of Seven Years next ensuing.

"3. And further, That he, the said John Lilburne, from henceforth stand and be uncapable to bear any Office or Place, in Military or in Civil Government, in Church or Commonwealth, during his Life."

From: 'House of Lords Journal Volume 8: 17 September 1646', Journal of the House of Lords: volume 8: 1645-1647 (1802), pp. 493-494.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=34103&strquery=john lilburne 

Lilburne on Trial for High Treason:  On the October 24, Lieutenant Colonel John Lilburne was charged under the Treason Acts of May 14 and July 17, 1649 — acts passed no doubt with the express purpose of charging Lilburne with high treason. The trial began early on the morning of October 25, after the members of the Extraordinary Commission of Oyer and Terminer, consisting of 40 dignitaries led by the lord mayor, took their places in the Guildhall in London to preside over the case. The courtroom was packed with Lilburne's friends and supporters. Lilburne contested point after point and when the prosecution read out extracts from Lilburne's pamphlets, the public often applauded. After the indictment was read out, Lilburne requested more time to prepare his defense and gather witnesses. He was granted an afternoon's respite only. The court reconvened at 7 AM the following morning. After a long day of listening to Lilburne being subjected to intense questioning, the jury finally retired at 5 PM. Within an hour they reached their verdict: not guilty of all charges. Cheers rang out in the courtroom and celebrations continued all evening. Church bells tolled throughout London, bonfires were lit and feasting was enjoyed by John's many supporters. A special medal was struck to commemorate the occasion, with John's portrait on one side and the names of the members of the jury on the other. John Lilburne was returned to the Tower, his release being delayed until November 8, when his fellow prisoners Walwyn, Overton, and Prince were also discharged. The Levellers held a great feast at the King's Head Tavern in Fish Street to celebrate the occasion. http://mises.org/story/2861#part27

5 Howell's State Trials 411-412, (1649) Statement of John Lilburne:  ‘For certainly it cannot be denied, but if he be really an offender, he is such by the breach of some law, made and published before the fact, and ought by due process of law, and verdict of 12 men, to be thereof convict, and found guilty of such crime; unto which the law also hath prescribed such a punishment agreeable to that our fundamental liberty; which enjoineth that no freeman of England should be adjudged of life, limb, liberty, or estate, but by Juries; a freedom which parliaments in all ages contended to preserve from violation; as the birthright and chief inheritance of the people, as may appear most remarkably in the Petition of Right, which you have stiled that most excellent law.‘And therefore we trust upon second thoughts, being the parliament of England, you will be so far from bereaving us, who have never forfeited our right, of this our native right, and way of Trials by Juries, (for what is done unto any one, may be done unto every one), that you will preserve them entire to us, and to posterity, from the encroachments of any that would innovate upon them * * *.‘And it is believed, that * * * had (the cause) at any time either at first or last been admitted to a trial at law, and had passed any way by verdict of twelve sworn men: all the trouble and inconveniences arising thereupon and been prevented: the way of determination by major votes of committees, being neither so certain nor so satisfactory in any case as by way of Juries, the benefit of challenges and exceptions, and unanimous consent, being all essential privileges in the latter; whereas committees are tied to no such rules, but are at liberty to be present or absent at pleasure. Besides, Juries being birthright, and the other but new and temporary, men do not, nor, as we humbly conceive, ever will acquiesce in the one as in the other; from whence it is not altogether so much to be wondered at, if upon dissatisfactions, there have been such frequent printing of men's cases, and dealings of Committees, as there have been; and such harsh and inordinate heats and expressions between parties interested, such sudden and importunate appeals to your authority, being indeed all alike out of the true English road, and leading into nothing but trouble and perlexity, breeding hatred and enmities between worthy families, affronts and disgust between persons of the same public affection and interest, and to the rejoicing of none but public adversaries. All which, and many more inconveniences, can only be avoided, by referring all such cases to the usual Trials and final determinations of law.’

John Lilburne - Leveller leader:  On 26 October 1649, amid tumultuous scenes at Westminster, a high-profile political trial ended in chaos. A jury had acquitted John Lilburne, the charismatic leader of the Levellers, of a charge of high treason against the recently formed English Republic. Within days a commemorative medal had been struck, bearing Lilburne's image and the names of the jury. This dramatic episode and the media frenzy with which it was surrounded encapsulate the romance of the Leveller movement and the potency of the threat which Lilburne was perceived to represent to the political establishment.  Although he was acquitted in 1649, Lilburne became a marked man. He was soon exiled to the Continent and then, upon his illegal return in 1653, was subjected to another set-piece trial and further imprisonment. The Levellers, with Lilburne broken in body and spirit, disintegrated as a political force, and Lilburne himself died a Quaker in 1657. However, Leveller ideas would resurface in different forms over the ensuing centuries; and 'Lilburnism', a dramatic new form of political activism, never disappeared. From the National Archives:  http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/leveller.htm

Judgment against Lilburne, 1652:   According to former Order, Lieutenant Colonel John Lilburne was this Day brought to the Bar in the Parliamenthouse, to receive the Judgment given against him by the Parliament: And, being at the Bar, he was commanded to kneel; but he obstinately denied to kneel at the Bar; and thereupon was commanded to withdraw.

From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 7: 20 January 1652', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 7: 1651-1660 (1802), pp. 74-75.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=23935&strquery=john lilburne 

 
An Intercepted Letter 1653:  “The last weeke John Lilbourne was five times at his triall at the sessions-house, where he most couragiously defended himselfe from Mr. Steele the recorder his violent assaults, with his old buckler, magna charta; soe that they have let him alone, although he be not yeat quitted. Cromwell thought this fellow soe considerable, that during the time of his triall he kept three regiments continually in armes about St. James. There were many tickets throwne about with these words;

And what, shall then honest John Lilbourn die?

Threescore thousand will know the reason why.

 Lilbourne encountred Prideaux with soe many opprobrious termes, that he caused him absolutely to quit the field. Titus was one of Lilbourne's accusers, and the duke of Buckingham's name is much used therein. Sir, I had almost forgot to acquaint you, that that arch-villaine Bampfield hath bin lately with Cromwell; but as for the particulars of his business I shall deferr untill another my next, not having time to enquire it out throughly, especially since I keepe my chamber, being in some seare of the vertigo. I believe you have senn the new declarion of the representative, otherwise you should have receaved it from, For Mr. Edwards theise are. Sir, your ever faithfull and obedient servant, Peter Richardson.”

From: 'State Papers, 1653: July (4 of 5)', A collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, volume 1: 1638-1653 (1742), pp. 363-376.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55265
 

Resolved, by the Parliament, Nov. 1653, That the Lieutenant of the Tower of London be enjoined and required to detain and keep the Body of Lieutenant John Lilburne in safe Custody, in the Tower of London, and not to remove or carry him from thence, notwithstanding any Habeas Corpus granted, or to be granted, for that Purpose, by the Court of Upper-Bench, or any other Court, until the Parliament take further Order.

From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 7: 26 November 1653', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 7: 1651-1660 (1802), pp. 358.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=24321&strquery=john lilburne
 

From The Dutch ambassadors at London to the States General 1653.

High and mighty Lords... we do presume that the government here hath had some notice of some secret correspondence and designs for king Charles; for which several persons of quality are put into the tower. Lieutenant col. Lilburne was likewise put there; but since he is sent to the islands of Man, Guernsey, or Sorlings, there to evaporate his turbulent humours; whereof he is full, as they say here. 'Tis believed, that the twelve sworn jury-men, who did clear and discharge him, will not escape unpunished either in bodies or estates. The fleet of this state, which is said to be an hundred sail strong, or thereabouts, are most of them at sea although others do assure us of the contrary. We were glad to receive your lordships resolutions concerning the poor prisoners here, and we shall govern ourselves therein for the best advantage of the state. My lords, Westminster, 12/2 Sept. 1653.  your lordships humble servant.

From: 'State Papers, 1653: September (1 of 6)', A collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, volume 1: 1638-1653 (1742), pp. 445-455.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55272&strquery=john lilburne
 

The Just Defense of John Lilburne 1653 : Written while on trial for his life. An activist for nearly twenty years, and advocate for radical legal reforms, John Lilburne was accused of treason and tried in a hugely important trial. (When the jury refused to convict, he was re-arrested and imprisoned on the Isle of Jersey, out of reach of habeas corpus protections – shades of Guantanamo after 9/11.) http://www.strecorsoc.org/docs/defence1.html
 

Fear of Public Reaction to Lilburne’s Trial 1653:    “The business of lieutenant col. Lilburne hath been for these three days continually upon hearing, and after a pleading of twelve or sixteen hours long, was the day before yesterday ended in the night, and pronounced to his advantage and discharge, without being released out of prison: notwithstanding it is thought, that they will not leave him so, but bring him before a high court of Justice, and there accuse him of treason and other crimes; yea it is very certain, that many of the parliament are very bitter against him, and irritated the more by his book written in prison, wherein he doth grosly exclaim against them and their government.

Out of fear of insurrections and commotions, three regiments of foote and one of horse were sent for to town, who marcht through the city on Saturday last; and here were some libells scattered up and down not long since, that if Lilburne doe suffer death, there are twenty thousand, that will die with him. What further will be done with him, shall be advised to your excellency by the next.”

From: 'State Papers, 1653: August (5 of 5)', A collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, volume 1: 1638-1653 (1742), pp. 435-445.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55271&strquery=john lilburne  

Lilburne Cleared by Jury 1653:

My lord.....L. co1. John Lilburn is cleared by a jury. There were six or seven hundred men at his trial with swords, pistolls, bills, daggers, and other instruments, that in case they had not cleared him, they would have imployed in his defence. The joy and acclamation was so great after he was cleared, that the shout was heard an English mile, as is said; but he is not yet released out of prison, and it is thought they will try him at a high court of Justice.

Westminster, 26 Aug./5 Sept. 1653.

From: 'State Papers, 1653: August (5 of 5)', A collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, volume 1: 1638-1653 (1742), pp. 435-445.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55271&strquery=john lilburne 
 

Retrial Likely 1653:  My lord; ..... The proceedings against Lilburne Saturday last after a pleading of sixteen hours were determined, and he declared not guilty of any crime worthy of death. Since the twelve jurymen have been called to account before the council, to give an account of their verdict; and in the mean time he remaineth a prisoner. It seems, they will charge him with further crimes of treason, and will judge him by a high court of justice. There are two or three others of quality put into the tower about some plot for the service of the king; and that they should have held correspondence with the said Lilburn. I could with I could find more matter to entertain your lordship. My lord, Westminster, 26 Aug/5 Sept. 1653.

From: 'State Papers, 1653: August (5 of 5)', A collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, volume 1: 1638-1653 (1742), pp. 435-445.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=55271&strquery=john lilburne

“The Resurrection” of John Lilburne 1655, Now a Prisoner in Dover-Castle:  Two letters by John Lilburne (one to his wife, Elizabeth, quoting a scrap of hers) and biblical analysis, written from prison and published on his instruction to explain to his friends and supporters that he had become a Quaker. Lilburne became a Friend during what was to be his final stay in prison, declaring that "by the spirit and power of life from God, that now aloud again speaks within me ... I am at present become dead to my former busling actings in the world, and now stand ready... to hear and obey all things that the lively voice of God speaking in my soul require of me."   http://www.strecorsoc.org/docs/resurrection1.html
 

Supreme Court of the United States: References to John Lilburne:

Gannett Co. v. DePasquale: 443 U.S. 368 (1979).  Sixth amendment right to a public trial.  “the first fundamental liberty of an Englishman” The Trial of John Lilburne”  4 How. St. Tr. 1270. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=443&page=368

Jenkins v. McKeithen: 395 U.S. 411 (1969). Due process right to a public trial.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=395&page=411

Talley v. California: 362 U.S. 60 (1960) re: anonymous pamphlets and press licensing.  “John Lilburne was whipped, pilloried and fined for refusing to answer questions designed to get evidence to convist him or someone else for the secret distribution of books in England.”  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=362&page=60

Barenblatt v. United States: 360 U.S. 109 (1959) re: the House Un-American Activities Committee.  “The memory of one of these, John Lilburne – banished and disgraced by a parliamentary committee on penalty of death if he returned to the country – was particularly vivid when our Constitution was written.  His attack on trials by such committees and his warning that ‘what is done unto any one may be done unto every one’ were part of thehistory of the times.”  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=360&page=109

In re Oliver:  333 U.S. 257 (1948)  “In 1649, a few years after the Long Parliament abolished the Court of Star Chamber, an accused charged with high treason before a Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer claimed the right to public trial and apparently was given such a trial. Trial of John Lilburne, 4 How.St.Tr. 1270, 1274. ‘By immemorial usage, wherever the common law prevails, all trials are in open court, to which spectators are admitted.’ 2 Bishop, New Criminal Procedure s 957 (2d Ed.1913).”
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=333&page=257

Other Readings:

H.N. Brailsford, The Levellers and the English Revolution, Spokesman, Nottingham, 1983.

Joseph Frank, The Levellers; a history of the writings of three seventeenth-century social democrats: John Lilburne, Richard Overton and William Walwyn, Russell & Russell, New York, 1969.

Samuel R. Gardiner, The History of the Great Civil War: 1642–1649, Longmans, Green and Co., London, 1891.

Mildred Ann Gibb, John Lilburne, the Leveller, a Christian Democrat, L. Drummond, London, 1947.

Pauline Gregg, Free-born John, Phoenix Press, London, 2000.

Roderick Moore, The Levellers: A Chronology and Bibliography, Study Guide No.4, Libertarian Alliance, London.

A.L. Morton (editor), Freedom in Arms: A Selection of Leveller Writings, Lawrence and  Wishart, London, 1975.

Dianne Purkiss, The English Civil War: A People's History, Harper Perennial, London, 2007.

Nicholas Reed, John Lilburne: Campaigner for Democracy, Lilburne Press, Folkestone, 2004.

Andrew Sharp ed., The English Levellers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.

David Starkey, Monarchy: From the Middle Ages to Modernity, Harper Press, London, 2006.

A.S.P. Woodhouse (editor), Puritanism and Liberty, J. M. Dent and Sons Ltd, London, 1938.

Austin Woolrych, Britain in Revolution: 1625–1660, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002.

Signature of John Lilburne:    "John Lilburne his booke" inscribed on a fragment of printed waste bound as a fly-leaf in a volume of eleven tracts. These concern the radical Leveller leader's imprisonment, firstly in Newgate, and then in the Tower of London, in 1646 for producing tracts attacking the House of Lords, one of which, The freemans freedome vindicated, appears in this collection.  St. Johns College, University of Cambridge.  http://www.joh.cam.ac.uk/library/special_collections/early_books/pix/provenance/lilburne/lilburne.htm