Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	day_n	parliament_n	session_n	3,425	5	10.6408	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B05024	Familiar letters. Vol. II. Containing thirty six letters, / by the Right Honourable John, late Earl of Rochester. Printed from his original papers. With letters and speeches, by the late Duke of Buckingham, the Honourable Henry Savile, Esq; Sir George Etherridge, to several persons of honour. And letters by several eminent hands.	Rochester, John Wilmot, Earl of, 1647-1680.; Savile, Henry, 1642-1687.; Brown, Thomas, 1663-1704.; Buckingham, George Villiers, Duke of, 1628-1687.	1699 (1699)	Wing R1748; ESTC R182833	66,393	222

he sent for them again which is a Dismission sine die Now if there were forty ways of dissolving Parliament if I can prove this Parliament has been dissolved by any one of them I suppose there is no great need of the other thirty nine Another thing which they most insist upon is That they have found a Precedent in Q. Elizabeth's Time when the Parliament was once prorogued three Days beyond a Year In which I cannot chuse but observe That it is a very great Confirmation of the Value and Esteem all People have had of the forementioned Acts of Edward the Third since from that time to this there can be but one Precedent found for the Prorogation of a Parliament above a Year and that was but three Days neither Besides my Lords this Precedent is of a very odd kind of Nature for it was in the Time of a very great Plague when every one of a sudden was forc'd to run away one from another and so being in hast had not leisure to calculate well the time of the Prorogation tho' the appointing of it to be within three Days after a Year is an Argument to me that their Design was to keep within the Bounds of the Acts of Parliament and if the Mistake had been taken notice of in Q. Elizabeth's Time I make no question but She would have given a lawful Remedy to it Now I beseech your Lordships what more can be drawn from the producing this Precedent but only because once upon a time a thing was done Illegally therefore your Lordships should do so again Now my Lords under Favour this of ours is a very different Case from theirs for as to this Precedent the Question was never made and all Lawyers will tell you That Precedent that passes sub Silentio is of no Validity at all and will never be admitted in any Judicial Court where it is pleaded Nay Judge Vaughan saith in his Reports That in Cases which depend upon Fundamental Principles from which Demonstrations may be drawn Millions of Precedents are to no purpose O but say they you must think prudentially of the Inconvenience that will follow it for if this be allowed all these Acts which are made in that Session of Parliament will be then void whether that be so or no I shall not now examine But this I will pretend to say That no Man ought to pass for a Prudential Person who only takes notice of the Inconveniences on one side it is the part of a wise Man to examine the Inconveniences on both to weigh which are the greatest and to be sure to avoid them and my Lords to this kind of due Examination I willingly submit this Cause for I presume it will be easie to your Lordships to judge which of these two will be of most dangerous Consequence to the Nation either to allow that the Statutes made in that particular Sessions in Queen Elizabeth's Time are void which may easily be confirm'd at any time by a lawful Parliament as to lay down for a Maxim That the Kings of England by a Titular Order of Theirs have Power to break all the Laws of England when they please And my Lords with all the Duty we owe to His Majesty it is no disrespect to Him to say That His Majesty is bound by the Laws of England for the Great King of Heaven and Earth GOD Almighty Himself is bound by His own Decrees and what is an Act of Parliament but a Decree of the King made in the most solemn manner It is possible for Him to make it that is with the Consent of the Lords and Commons It is plain then in my Opinion that we are no more a Parliament and I humbly conceive your Lordships ought to give GOD thanks for it since it has pleased Him thus by his Providence to take you out of a Condition wherein you must have been intirely useless to his Majesty to your selves and the whole Nation For I beseech your Lordships if nothing of this I have urged were true what honourable Excuse could be found for acting again with this House of Commons except we would pretend to such an exquisite Act of Forgetfulness as to avoid calling to mind all that passed last Sessions and unless we could also have a Faculty of teaching the same Art to the whole Nation What Opinion would they have of us if it should happen that the very same Men that were so earnest the last Sessions for having this House of Commons dissolv'd when there was no question of their lawful Sitting should now be willing to joyn with them again when without question they are dissolved Nothing can be more dangerous to a King or People than the Laws should be made by an Assembly of which there can be doubt whether they have a Power to make Laws or no and it would be in us so much the more inexcusable if we should overlook this Danger since there is for it so easie a Remedy a Remedy which the Law requires and which all the Nation longs for the Calling a New Parliament It is that can only put his Majesty into a possibility of receiving Supplies that can secure your Lordships the Honour of Sitting in this House of Peers and of being Serviceable to the King and Country and that can restore to all the People of England their undoubted Rights of choosing Men frequently to represent their Grievances in Parliament without this all we can do is in vain the Nation might languish a while but must perish at last we should become a Burthen to Our selves and a Prey to our Neighbours My Motion to your Lordships therefore shall be That we humbly address Our selves to His Majesty and beg of Him for His own Sake as well as for all the People's sake to give us speedily a New Parliament that so we may unanimously before it is too late use Our utmost Endeavours for His Majesty's Service and for the Safety Welfare and Glory of the English Nation THE Emperor of Morocco's LETTER TO CHARLES the Second WHEN these Our Letters shall be so happy as to come to Your Majesty's Sight I wish the Spirit of the Righteous God may so direct Your Mind that You may joyfully embrace the Message I send The Regal Power allotted to Us makes Us first Common Servants to Our Creator then of those People whom we Govern So that observing the Duties we owe to God we deliver Blessings to the World In providing for the Publick Good of Our Estates we magnifie the Honour of God like the Celestial Bodies which tho' they have much Veneration yet serve only to the Benefit of the World It is the Excellency of Our Office to be Instruments whereby Happiness is delivered to Nations Pardon Me Sir this is not to Instruct for I know I speak to One of a more clear and quick Sight than My self but I speak this because God hath pleased to grant me a happy Victory over some part

Parliament is Dissolved And if in this Opinion I have the Misfortune to be mistaken I have another Misfortune joyned in it I Desire to maintain the Argument with all the Judges and Lawyers in England and leave it afterwards for your Lordships to decide whether I am in the right or no. This my Lords I speak not out of Arrogance but in my own Justification because if I were not thoroughly convinced that what I have now to urge were grounded upon the Fundamental Laws of England and that the not pressing it at this time might prove to be of a most dangerous Consequence both to his Majesty and the whole Nation I should have been loth to start a Motion which perhaps may not be very agreeable to some People And yet my Lords when I consider where I am whom I now speak to and what was spoken in this Place about the time of the last Prorogation I can hardly believe that what I have to say will be distasteful to your Lordships I remember very well how your Lordships were then disposed with the House of Commons and remember too as well what Reasons they gave to be so It is not so long since but that I suppose your Lordships may easily call to mind that after several odd Passages between Us your Lordships were so incensed that a Motion was made here for an Address to his Majesty about the Dissolution of this Parliament and tho' it fail'd of being carried in the Affirmative by two or three Voices yet this in the Debate was remarkable the Cit prevail'd much with the Major part of your Lordships that were here present and were only over-power'd by the Proxies of those Lords who never heard the Argument What change there hath been since either in their behaving or in the state of our Affairs that should make your Lordships change your Opinions I have not heard and therefore if I can make it appear as I presume I shall that by Law the Parliament is dissolv'd I hope your Lordships ought not to be offended at me for it I have often wondred how it should come to pass that this House of Commons in which there are so many honest and so many worthy Gentlemen should be less respectful to your Lordships as certainly they have been than any House of Commons that ever were chosen in England and yet if the matter be a little enquir'd into the Reason of it will plainly appear For my Lords the very Nature of the House of Commons is changed they do not think now they are an Assembly that are to return to their Houses and become as private Men again as by the Laws of the Land and the Ancient Constitution of Parliament they ought to do but they look upon themselves as a standing Senate and as a Company of Men pick'd out to be Legislators for the rest of their whole Lives and if that be the cause my Lords they have reason to believe themselves our Equals But my Lords it is a dangerous thing to try new Experiments in Government Men do not foresee the ill Consequences that must happen when they go about to alter those Essential parts of it upon which the whole Frame of the Government depends as now in our Fall the Customs and Constitutions of Parliaments for all Governments are artificial things and every part of them has a Dependance one upon another As in Clocks and Watches if you should put great Wheels in the room of little ones and little ones in the place of great ones all the Fabrick would stand still So you cannot alter any one part of the Government without prejudicing the Motions of the whole If this my Lords were well considered People would be more cautious how they went out of the old English Way and Method of Proceedings But it is not my business to find fault and therefore if your Lordships will give me leave I shall go on to shew you why in my Opinion we are at this time no Parliament The ground of this Opinion of mine is taken from the ancient and unquestionable State of this Realm And give me leave to tell your Lordships by the way that Statutes are not like Women for they are not one jot the worse for being Old The first Statute that I shall take notice of is That in the Fourth Year of Edward the Third Cap. 14. and it is thus set down in the Printed Book Item It is accorded that a Parliament shall be holden every Year once and more often if need be Now these Words be as plain as a Pike-staff and that no Man living that is not a Scholar could possibly mistake the meaning of them It is the Grammarians of those Days did make a shift to explain that the Words If need be did relate as well to the Words Every Year once as to the Words More often And so by this Grammatical Whimsey of theirs had made this Statute to signifie just nothing at all For this Reason my Lords in the 36th Year of the same King's Reign a new Act of Parliament was made in which those unfortunate Words If need be are left out and that Act of Parliament is Printed thus relating to Magna Charta and other Statutes made for the Publick Good Item For maintainance of these Articles and Statutes and the Redress of divers Mischiefs and Grievances which daily happen a Parliament shall be holden every Year as at other time was ordained by another Here now my Lords there is not left the least Colour or Shadow for any further Mistake for it is plainly declared That the King of England must call a Parliament once within a Year And the Reasons why they are bound to do so are as plainly set down namely For the Maintenance of Magna Charta and other Statutes of the same Importance and for the preventing the Mischiefs and Grievances which daily happen The Question then remains Whether these Statutes have been since repealed by any other Statutes or no The only Statutes I ever heard mention'd for that are the two Triennial Bills the one made in the last King's the other made in this King's Reign The Triennial Bill in the last King's Reign was made for the Confirmation of the two Statutes of Edward the Third before-mention'd For Parliaments having been omitted every Year according to these Statutes a Statute was made in the last King's Reign to this purpose That if the King should fail of Calling a Parliament according to these Statutes of Edward the Third then the third Year the People should Meet of Themselves without any Writs at all and choose their Parliament-men of Themselves This being thought disrespectful to the King a Statute was made by this last Parliament which repealed the Triennial Bill but after the Repealing Clause which took notice only of the Triennial Bill made in the last King's Reign there was then in this Statute a Paragraph to this purpose That because the ancient Statutes of the Realm

made in Edward the Third's Reign Parliaments were to be holden very often it should be Enacted That within three Years after the Determination of that present Parliament Parliaments should not be discontinued above three Years at most and should be holden oftner if need required These have been several false kind of Arguments drawn out of these Triennial Bills against the Statutes of Edward the Third which I confess I could never remember nor indeed those that urged them to me ever durst own for they always laid their Faults upon Some-body else Like ugly aufish Children which because of their Deformity and want of Wit the Parents are ashamed of and so turn them out to the Parish But my Lords let the Argument be what it will I will have this short Answer to all that can be wrested out of the Triennial Bills That the first Triennial Bill was repeal'd before the matter now disputed of was in question and the last Triennial Bill will not be of force till the Question be decided that is till the Parliament be Dissolved The whole matter therefore my Lords is reduced to this short Dilemma Either the Kings of England are bound by the Acts mentioned of Edward the Third or else the whole Government of England by Parliament and by Law is absolutely at an end For if the Kings of England have Power by an Order of theirs to invalidate an Act made for the Maintenance of Magna Charta they have also a Power by an Order of theirs to invalidate Magna Charta it self and if they have Power by an Order of theirs to invalidate an Act made for the Maintenance of the Statute De Talligio non concedendo they have also a Power when they please by an Order of theirs to invalidate the Statute it self and they may not only without the Help of Parliament raise what Money they please but also take away any Man's Estate when they please and deprive one of his Liberty and Life if they please This my Lords is a Power I think that no Judge or Lawyer will pretend the Kings of England have and yet this Power must be allowed them or else we that are met here this Day cannot act as a Parliament for we are not met by vertue of the last Prorogation then Prorogation is an Order of the King 's and a point-blank Contrary to the two Acts of Edward the Third For the Acts say That a Parliament shall be holden within a Year And the Prorogation says That Parliaments shall not be held within a Year but some Months after This I conceive is a plain Contradiction and consequently that the Prorogation is void Now if we cannot act as a Parliament by vertue of the last Prorogation I beseech your Lordships by vertue of what else can we act Shall we act by vertue of the King's Proclamation Pray my Lords how so Is a Proclamation of more force than a Prorogation Or if any thing that has been ordered a first time be not valued does the ordering it a second time make it good in Law I have heard indeed That two Negatives make an Affirmative But I never heard before That two Nothings ever made Any-thing Well but how then do we meet Is it by our own Adjournment I hope that No-body has the Confidence to say so Which way then is it we do meet here By an Accident That I think may be granted But an accidental Meeting can no more make a Parliament than an Accidental Clapping of a Crown on a Man's Head can make a King There is a great deal of Ceremony required to give a Matter of that Moment a Legal Sanction The Laws have repos'd so great Trust and Power in the Hands of the Parliament that every Circumstance relating to the manner of their Electing Meeting and Proceeding is lookt after with the most Circumspection imaginable For this Reason the King's Writs about the Summons of Parliament are to be issued out verbatim according to the Form Prescribed by the Laws or else the Parliament is void and nulled For the same Reason that a Parliament is summoned by the King's Writs does not meet at the very same Day it 's summoned to meet at that Parliament is void and nulled and by the same Reason if a Parliament be not legally Adjourned de die in diem these Parliaments must also be void and nulled O but some say there is nothing in the two Acts of Edward the Third to take away the King's Power in Prorogation therefore Prorogation is good My Lords under Favour it is a very gross Mistake For pray examine the Words of the Acts and the Acts say Parliaments shall be holden Once a Year Now to whom can these Words be directed but to them that are to call a Parliament And who are they but the Kings of England It is very true this does not take away the King's Power of Proroguing Parliaments but it most certainly limits it to be within a Year Well then it is said again If the Proroguing be null and void then things are just as they were before And therefore the Parliament is still in being My Lords I confess there would be some weight in this but for one thing which is That not one word is true for if when the King had prorogued we had taken no notice of his prorogation but had gone on like a Parliament and had adjourn'd our selves the die in diem then I confess things had been just as they were before but since upon the Prorogation we went away and took no care our selves for our Meeting again if we cannot meet and act again by virtue of the Prorogations here is an Impossibility of our Meeting and Acting any other way and one may as probably say that a Man who is killed by Assault is still alive because the Assault was unlawful The next Arguments that those are reduced to who would maintain to be yet a Parliament is That the Parliament is prorogued sine die and therefore a King may call them by Proclamation To the first part of the Proposition I shall not only agree with them but also do them the Favour to prove that it is so in the Eye of the Law which I have never heard they have yet done For the Statutes say A Parliament shall be had once within a Year And that Prorogation having put them off till a Day without the Year and consequently excepted against by the Law that Day in the Eye of the Law is no Day at all that is sine die and the Prorogation might as well have put them off till so many Days after Doomsday and then I think No-body would have doubted but that had been a very sufficient Dissolution Besides my Lords I shall desire your Lordships to take notice That in former time the usual way of Dissolving Parliament was to dismiss them sine die for the King when he used to dissolve them said no more but desired them to go Home till