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	void_a	3,949	5	9.2539	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48169	A letter to a friend in ansvver to the enquiry into the present state of affairs		1690 (1690)	Wing L1647; ESTC R218607	6,921	4

diminution of the Regal Authority imposed upon the King as the condition upon which only he can be admitted is as real a breach of the Oath of Allegiance as a total shaking him off p. 10. But not so great a breach by his favour Now since we can have no legal Parliament without swearing first the Oath of Allegiance to the King it is a scorn put on God and Religion if one swear this Oath to the King after he is reduced to that naked state to which these Treaters pretend to bring him p. 11. But now suppose these Treaters do not intend to reduce the King to such a naked state nor to diminish his Legal Authority I hope there is no hurt in it then and yet this is all they desire not to strip the Crown of any Legal Authority but to reduce the King within the bounds of Law and to have security from him that he shall not exceed these bounds 3. This you 'll say were somewhat indeed but that is the great Objection of all That the King can give no security to govern by Law p. 8 9. His Promises and Oaths are very insignificant when Popery is in the other Scale Then to please him we won't take Oaths and Promises for security well but no Limitation by Law will do neither witness the Test Act which was broke through by a Dispensing Power But if this Power of Dispensing be regulated or condemned by Act of Parliament I hope that Objection is gone but all such Limitations must be a disherison of the Crown which are null and void of themselves It may be that as it has been applied is as good Law as the Dispensing Power and may have the same fate with it but if you take away no Legal Authority there can be no disherison of the Crown how to do this I won't pretend to direct the Wisdom of a Parliament will easily find that out and if such Laws may be made as will secure us and execute themselves I think we are safe In short the sum of this Argument is that a Parliament it self can do nothing for our security without deposing the King and yet the whole Nation thought they could and desired no greater security than a Parliament that had free Liberty to make Laws could give them and the Prince himself thought this would do and therefore desires no more in his Declaration And yet he is at this again particularly with reference to the Tryal of the Prince of Wales which he thinks cannot be done by a Parliament if we treat with the King but the Prince was contented to leave that also to a Parliament and all his Arguments against it are only so many scandalous Libels against one of the most August Assemblies in the World p. 12 13. And it is a hard case that a King must be first Deposed that they may afterwards try the Cause for which they Depose him 4. Another Argument against Treating with the King is That the Nation can have no Security by Law either for what is done or for what may remain yet to be done but by Acts passed by King Lords and Commons and it is unmerciful to keep Men in suspence so long for a Pardon that is The King must be Deposed without Treating that he may have no power ever to hurt but for his comfort I can tell him the King's Pardon under the Broad Seal is good in Law at least against himself or any one else but a Parliament and when a Parliament sits this may be passed into an Act and to be sure will be since the Nation is so much concerned and the Prince present to see it done and if this will not satisfie our Enquirer yet I think few besides him will think it an Objection Some other things he says which are not worth notice Sometimes he is afraid that after all their Talk of Treating with the King they should bring him in without Terms p. 8 9. which is well guessed when so many Men are concerned to have terms and the Prince is here to demand them At other times he is afraid that while Men talk of a Treaty Peoples minds should alter and they should be in good earnest for bringing back the King and let him lear on by my consent I do not desire to answer that Argument but the vilest Insinuation is as if the Talk of a Treaty were only a Ceremony and Complement to part with the King more decently and says well That it is more sutable to the Dignity and Wisdom of the Nation to act frankly and above-board than to think to varnish it over with some outward Appearances and I am very much of his mind upon this Supposition but hope the Treaters are honester Men. In his Conclusion he gives a Bit and a Knock to some great Men of our Church commends them for their Zeal against Popery but thinks it a blemish to them that they are so obstinate in their Loyalty I believe they take it for no great Complement to be commended at the end of such a Pamphlet and as much as he thinks Nature prevails over them not to own an Error I dare undertake for those of them I know for I can easily guess whom he means that they will be ready to recant all they have writ for Submission to Princes when he can answer half of it I am SIR YOURS