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	successor_n	2,446	5	9.0199	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66454	An answer to sundry matters contain'd in Mr. Hunt's postscript to his argument for the bishops right in judging capital causes in Parliament ... whereunto is added a query to be put to the scrupulous and dissenting brotherhood : with an advertisement how usurpers of the crown ought to be dealt with / by Wa. Williams of the Middle Temple, a barrister at law.	Williams, Walter, of the Middle Temple.	1683 (1683)	Wing W2773A; ESTC R7863	19,108	36

you and I should make an Agreement in writeing that you should call at my House once a Year and afterwards by another Agreement Reciting the former Agreement whereby you were obliged to call once a Year we agree that for the future you shall not omit calling once in three Years Surely you would not think your self after this last Agreement obliged to call every Year Just so it is in the Kings case as to those Statutes of Edw. the 3d. for a Statute is but an Agreement between the King and His two Houses of Parliament and whereas by the Statute of the 4 Edw. 3. cap. 14. It is mentioned that it was Accorded that the Parliament should be holden every Year once and oftner if need be and by the Statute of 36. Ed. 3. cap. 10. to the like effect afterwards his now Majesty and both Houses of Parliament in the Sixteenth Year of His Reign come to a new Agreement touching Parliaments thereby Reciting the said Statutes of Edward the 3d. and do Agree that Parliaments shall not be discontinued above three Years Doubtless this last Statute and Agreement is by Implication of Law a Repeal of the Statutes of Edw. the 3d. as to calling Parliaments once a Year and is as much in effect as if it had been mentioned in the last Statute that notwithstanding the said Statutes of Edw. the 3d. it is sufficient if the King calls a Parliament once in three Years and moreover this last Statute that Parliaments should not be discontinued above three Years had been a vain Statute as to that particular if after this was made the King was still obliged to call a Parliament every year it is almost Sacriledge in some cases to think that the Parliament should offer any thing that 's vain to the King and by your pardon Sir there be other maximes in Law viz. Leges posteriores priores contraries abrogant later Laws differing from the former do make the former void and Lex nil frustra facit the Law or if you please the Legislative Authority doth nothing in vain which maximes I must tell you had been of better use in the Exposition of those Statutes of Edw. the 3d. than your notions of a firmatory Law for it had been in vain to have made a Statute that required Parliaments every three Years if they intended the other should be inforce And I conceive it may with better Reason be affirmed that a wilful publishing that the King hath neglected the Law especially when he hath not is a publishing of words to stir up the People to a dislike of His Majesties Person and Government and in my judgment affirms you an Offender within the Statute of 13 Ca. 2. cap. 1. though you very confidently like the rest of your Gang in the close of your darling Postscript say you were moved to what is there set down by nothing but a hearty Love and Affection to the King but I hope neither His Majesty nor any of His Loyal Subjects will believe you nor them any more To convince you further of your Error that the King hath not neglected those Laws of Edw the 3d. as to calling Parliaments for by the first of the Laws that is the 4. of Edw. the 3d. cap. 14. It is not absolutely required that a Parliament should be held once every Year but it is conditionally if need should require which you deceitfully omit to mention in the charge upon the King for you well knew it was the King was the judge when need required a Parliament and this may the better appear because from the next Year that Statute was made viz. that 5. of Edward the 3d. there was a discontinuance of Parliaments until the 9th and the other Act of the 36 of Edw. the 3d. cap. 10. sayes Parliaments shall be held once a Year as at another time was ordained that is under the same condition as the other Statute was but perhaps after all this you may be that Fool that though bray'd in a Morter would not forsake his folly The next thing I have taken notice of in your Postscript and which I suppose was the main matter and drift thereof and to maintain it you have used the best of your skill is another Conclusion of yours drawn I dare say for your Credit be it known only from your own mere natural parts and notions for I am sure it cannot be either from Divine Precept or Example Humane Experience of past Ages nor the present practice of any considerable part of the World of which I have taken some consideration and it is that which you set down in page the 43. of the Postscript line the 14. that the Succession of the Crown is Hereditary because the People so appointed it would have it so or consented to have it so yet as you say in a particular Case for saving the Nation forsooth when by the by it is in no danger the whole Line and Monarchy it self may be altered by the unlimited power of the Legislative Authority but Suppose the Nation were in such danger as you say which I shall manifest to the World it is not I hope no King of England which you your self admit to have a part in the Legislative Authority will ever make a Law though the Parliament should desire it either to alter the Government of Monarchy in this Kingdom nor the Succession thereof till they see the Nation cannot be saved without it or find greater Cause and better Reasons for it than the World ever yet produced though your Fools Bolt Sir is already shot but hath missed the mark you aimedat And I hope will ever do so In order to maintain your Assertions you inveigh extreamly against those that affirm Kingly Government to be of Divine Right and Institution for which I must say the World affords more Arguments and far more convincing than any you have Coyn'd against it However I will add my mite to the Mint and more than that I dare enter the Lists to maintain it against you that Kingly Government yea Hereditary Kingly Government is the only Government of Divine Institution in the World My Reasons for it shall follow but in the first place I will propose you are no Atheist and that you will not deny but that God is the Supream King and Governour of all things and that he takes some care of the World and knows best by what ways and methods to Govern it and that what he ordains is of Divine Institution for it is a maxim in Logick quod contra negantem Principium non est disputandum There 's no Reasoning with such as will not admit fundamental Truths no more than any buildings unless Castles in the Air can be raised without laying a foundation These premises being admitted which I know you will not gainsay whatever you think I would represent to your observation that when God had that great Work to do both to govern and deliver out of

be no other than the next of Kin to the deceased King and the joyning of Successors to Heirs is capable of or at leastwise in the common sense and understanding thereof which is the sense it ought to be taken there can have no other construction but that the Kings Heirs shall be his Successors for ever and that we shall pay the same Allegiance to the Kings Heirs in their turns as we do to them but you say the unlimited power of the Legislative Authority can do any thing alter Succession yea Monarchy it self even at the very day that you wrote the Postscript without Controversie the power of the Legislative Authority is very great but I must distinguish between what may be done and what may be justly done If Monarchy or the Succession thereof should be altered by the Legislative power as it was by a Part of the Legislative Authority in dismal 48. and as is apparent some wish it should again It doth not therefore follow that it should be just to do so any more for whatsoever is contrary to the Eternal Law of God though commanded by the Legislative Authority is unjust and though the Legislative Authority may be of that power and force as to compel Obedience to their Laws yet they can never make Vice a Vertue or give Sanctity to a thing that is malum in se evil in it's very nature and essence By the Oath of Allegiance we declare that we do plainly and sincerely swear according to the express words there set down and according to the plain and common sense and understanding of these words If so by Heirs there must be meant the same that is meant thereby according to the common sense in common discourse and according to that sense then by Heirs is meant the next of Kin for when we enquire who is such a mans Heir we mean who is next of Kin to him But oh say you and the new-true Protestants the Succession of the Crown was not intended to be so absolutely limited to the Heirs but that if the Parliament thought fit to appoint another that is not the real Heir he must be the man This is a very vain idle and empty Hypothesis and a meer groundless supposition for the Oath it self restrains the meaning of the words to their common sense and understanding and renounces all manner of mental evasion or reservation whatsoever so here 's no reservation for an objection against the Heir neither as to his Religion or Person Here I have shewed you Gods Example of Establishing an Hereditary Monarchy and his precepts to obey it in no place in Divinity do I find a power given from God to the people to alter it at pleasure or when they think fit upon any pretence whatsoever here 's also an Oath of Obedience required by Act of Parliament from all people to stand to and defend the Hereditary Succession of the Crown here 's also in that Oath a Renuntiation of all Pardons and Absolutions from that Oath and an Explanation that it is to be understood according to the common sense and meaning of the words and this Oath is on ought to be taken by all people in the Kingdom How justifiable then would it be in the Legislative power to Act Counter to all these and having once required us to swear fidelity to an Hereditary Successor and to renounce all Absolutions from that Oath yet after wards to compel us to swear fidelity to one that is not the Hereditary Successor Dic quibus in terris eris mihi magnus Apollo from such Legislative power as despise Gods Example Reject his Providence and will engage a whole Nation to forswear themselves rather than use other means to Restrain even a Popish Successor Good Lord deliver me As to this point of Succession I shall add what I find Recommended by Mr. Prin in his Preface to Cottons Records fol. 10. Observe 14 Kings says he Created and set up merely by Parliaments and their own power in them without any true Hereditary Title have seldom answered the Lords and Commons Expectations in the preservation of their just Laws Liberties and Answers to Petitions yea themselves branded at last for Tyrants Traytors Murderers such another Doom as the ambitious Tower-Builders had confusion of Tongues yea and Senses to And as to the Scrupulous Brotherhood Recommend me to them and let them know that I dare affirm their Teachers are most of them Jesuits the true Papists in Masquerade who instead of Preaching Peace incite the people by a side-wind to Rebellion and let them know also That I desire to know of those seeming tender Conscienced Dissenters what Answer they will make at the great Tribunal when it shall be askt them why they occasioned the Murthering of their King put three Nations together by the Ears made them suck each others Hearts blood out Rob Ravish and Burn for that hath once been the consequence of their Scrupulosity and may be so again if they be not prevented Do you and they think it will be a sufficient excuse to say we could not hear a man Preach in white sleeves we had more kindness for one in a little round Cloak we could not look upon the Minister making the sign of the Cross in Baptism or we were loth lest we should spoil our silk Stockings to kneel at the Sacrament for our Consciences told us he was the finer man that Pray'd and Preach'd without Book by the help of the Spirit whither good or bad than he that well weighed and considered what he should say before he spoke though we are commanded not to be hasty to utter any thing before God Sure these reasons will never excuse them the rather for that they themselves acknowledge that they are but indifferent things in their own nature wherein they dissent from the Government and being so they are the more to blame that dissent and there is greater reason that they should comply with the Government than that the Government should truckle to every Humorist You say well in that you say there is nothing more exposeth the Authority of Government to contempt than a publick and open neglect of its Injunctions therefore I do heartliy wish our Magistrates would use civil force and power as far as by Law they may to enforce Obedience to the Laws both in Church and State and like good wise Parents give their stubborn Children the Rod of Correction in due time before they grow too head-strong I had almost omitted to say any thing touching Usurpers which I conceive may be very material for it is not enough to know who hath right to the Crown at the Decease of a King but it behoves us also to know how to prevent or remove Usurpers in case any such should happen and for that purpose I cannot but inform you that in my reading I find mention made of two sorts of Tyrannical Monarchs one sort of Tyrant is he who of his own