Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	king_n	parliament_n	sovereign_a	3,527	5	9.3552	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A60565	A brief abstract of the case concerning the letters patents for reprizals (hereunto annexed) against the States-General and their subjects whereupon Capt. Compton Gwyther, William Coates, Joseph Bullivant, John Baxter, Francis Wansell, Francis Martin, John Gibson, and William Jones, prisoners in the Marshalsea, are to be tryed for their lives, according to the common law of England, on the 18th of February instant, upon the Statute of 28 Henry 8. cap. 15 under the pretence of piracy, for taking a Galliot-Hoy (called the Love of Rotterdam) laden with 160 tun of wine, and prunes, on the 3d of December last, bound from Bourdeaux to Dort / faithfully recollected out of all the originals by Thomas Smith Gent. ; with some remarkable observations both upon the matters of fact, and the law in the whole case.	Smith, Thomas, Gent.	1681 (1681)	Wing S4228; ESTC R12870	9,089	8

under the Great Seal of England the highest Security of the Kingdom It is very observable That the Proprietors and Creditors which have waited with so much patience to a miracle do aver That since the King's Restauration they have not by the judicial and durable Grant for Reprizals nor by any other ways and means whatsoever gotten half their Expences and incident Charges concerning the Premises Wherefore they humbly hope in due time to repair and satisfie themselves their Debt Costs and Damages by force of their Letters Patents When the Grant passed to Carew who had the Right and Administration in Law to the Damages an Authority vested in him to compel the payment by force which he could not do before It is not a bare and ambulatory Authorit that passed as in every ordinary Commission but an Interest of 151612 l. coupled or joyned with an authority whereby the King binds himself to see it satisfied paid and the Reasons and Arguments why it should be so and not otherwise are unanswerable 1. It 's granted pro confesso there was a real Debt and Damages contracted by the States 2. There was a provision made in a publick Treaty An. 1662. for a full and intire satisfaction and reparation for it 3. That Carew upon passing the Patent was injoyned by the Lord Chancellor Hyde to release ten thousand Pounds due to him out of the Customs in discharge of Sir John Wostenholm's Debts contracted upon the late King's Accompt which were bona fide paid by Sir Edmund Turnor out of that individual Money his name being used only in trust in the said Patent for Carew and others 4. That several of Courten's Littleton's and Pyndar's Creditors gave up their Bonds and Securities for an assignment of a due proportion of the said Debt so secured by Patent with power to put the same in Execution when they see their own time and opportunity Yet notwithstanding the Ministers of State in this Age are not ashamed to wound the King's Honour and Reputation by their Arbitrary and Extrajudicial Orders of the Council-Table with a pretended Supersedeas and Proclamation as forms and ways of repealing recalling and revoking the said Letters Patents so solemnly obtained under those considerations that cannot be extinguished without satisfaction and reparations by one side or the other It would be a President of the most dangerous consequence in the world to all civil Society and Commerce if it should rest in the King's Power or the States to take away the Subjects right and remedy without a compensation The Law of England is possitive in it that there can be no other ways to repeal or make void the King's Letters Patents than by judicial proceedings either by Inquisition or a scire facias that the parties concerned may have liberty to plead and defend their own Right which they cannot do unto a White-Hall Supersedeas on Proclamation The Lord Coke in his Reports says that an Indictment is not to be concluded contra Regiam proclamationem but contra Leges Statuta c. for the King cannot create an offence by his Proclamation which was not an offence before for that would be to change the Law And in the fourth part of his Institutes cap. 8. p. 88. treating of the Jurisdiction and Office of the Lord High Chancellor of England and the Judgments concerning cancelling of Letters Patents by scire facias says Quod praedictae literae patentes dicti domini Regis revocentur cancellentur evacuentur adnullentur vacue invalidae pro nullo penitus habeantur teneantur ac etiam quod irrotulamentum eorundum cancelleter cassetur adnihiletur c. And all this is to be done judicially by hearing the parties and not by any Order of Council Supersedeas or Proclamation which the King or States may do by Scire facias when the Debt is paid recovered or compounded By the grand Charter of England confirmed by so many Acts of Parliament wherein the King is a party no man shall be disseised or destroyed but by legal tryal nor Iustice denied or delayed but right preserved by the Law of the Land And the King and his great Ministers of State are sworn to observe the same accordingly Admitting a Foreign Sovereign Prince granting Letters Patents for Reprizals to a Corporation of his Subjects against a Sovereign State that had spoiled them of their Ships and Goods to the value of a million of Rix Dollars under the same circumstances that the Grant should continue effectual in the Law until the Debt and Damages should be recovered Afterwards the said Prince and State treat togethere and settle a common Alliance upon a sum of Money given to the said Princ without mentioning the particular Grant to the said Corporation of his Subjects for the Rix-dollars and then becomes insolvent admitting the said Prince or his People are the Debtors And the Corporation unsatisfied puts in Execution against the said State the Letters Patents remaining inrolled in the Supreme Court of Judicature upon Record and takes Ships to the value of the Spoil and Damages mentioned in the Patent The Question is Whether it would not be deemed an act of Inhumanity against the Law of Nature in the State to prosecute any of the persons or their Agents they had formerly spoiled for their Lives as Pirates acting under the said Patent and coming under the Power of the said State Or whether it would not be an abomination and most horrid act in the Prince or his Ministers to prosecute those for Pirates that he himself or his People ought in Conscience Reason and Equity to satisfie No men can be safe in their Lives Liberties or Estates under a Government where there is a failer of Justice that the Subjects cannot be protected according to the Laws of God and their Country Fiat Justitia pereat mundus Actum per T. S. Feb. 12. 1680.