Selected quad for the lemma: act_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A40058
|
Four questions debated with an answer to the objection that the convention will not have the power of a Parliament.
|
|
1689
(1689)
|
Wing F1668; ESTC R26140
|
5,677
|
14
|
instead thereof he invites others to destroy 'em the exercise of Government is subverted and the Trust reposed in the King forfeited as if a Keeper of a Park Pulls down the Pales which should keep in the Deer he forfeits his Office. If it is said He 's King and accountable to none but God and Subjects must not rebel nor resist but suffer and pray I Answer his being King makes the Crime the greater for 't is not so great a wickedness for a forreign King to destroy us as for our own for 't is no breach of Trust in the one as 't is plainly in the other and what Junius Brutus say's in his vindiciae contra Tyrannos when he compares a Tyrant King to a Shepherd destroying the Sheep does he say I am Shepherd therefore I may destroy them Junius says Major lupus quia pastor major tyrannusquia Rex the greater Wolf because a Shepherd and the greater Tyrant because a King. Q. 2. Admitting the Exercise of Government dissolved whether the Power of Setling the Exercise of Government is in the People Affirm THo some have said the present case to be the Demise of the King that I deny the Demise of the King being but a soft expression of his death and is onely properly so when the King dies and King James the Second being alive to call it a Demise of the King is a contradiction Then I argue thus either the exercise of the Government is in King James the Second or in some other person or the power of setling it in the People but it is not in Kings James the Second for the reasons before given and some other which follow nor is it in any other person Therefore it is in the power of the People to settle it If any can say it is in any other person let him assign that person which he can't because there can he no claim by descent during his life for Non est haeres viventis there must be the death of the Ancestor before the Heir can claim any right Then if there is none to claim any right there must be a sort of reverter to the people who first chose the King as is plainly proved or a greater absurdity must follow which is that a People must remain without Government which I think no man will say especially in England where many hold Monarchy Jure divino tho I understand not that or any specifical Government to be so for then the Israelites Government would not as to the species of it have been so often changed but Government in general may be said of divine right as of necessity then if no person living can claim a legal right they must consent to the People to chuse Representatives to settle the exercise of the Government Q. 3. Whether as the Case stands it is best to Settle the Exercise of the Government in the Person who would be next by Lineal Descent if King James the Second was Actually dead I Answer Negatively BEfore I speak to this Question I must say Her Royal Highness the Princess of Orange by what I have heard concerning her eminent zeal for God and being an extraordinary exemplary Pattern of Morality true is the proverb of Solomon Many daughters have done vertuously but she excelleth them all this looks like flattery but if Universal report is true her great humility and wisdom leave no room for such a vanity I shall therefore plainly give my reasons for my opinion 1. The first is ab inconvenienti the inconveniences which may follow at this time 1. the dispute of the pretended Prince of Wales 2. If the two Princesses dye without issue the Government will go to Papists viz. to Spain c. 3. Desert is the best cause of reward and who has deserved most ought to have most given 't is plain who has recovered England and the consequence is as plain 4. The Princess has more advantage than she or her Sister could expect for the life of the King and the claim of a Prince and Children that may be of the King make them at a more remote distance than if he who recovered them and the people be let in for his life which is no more than the Law gives to a Husband by the Courtesie of England 5. He is next Heir Male tho' not by Males 6. A Princess not so able to make War the great end of Israels choosing a King was to fight their Battles which a Woman can't do 7. The Allies engaged with the Prince to defend the Protestant Religion is very considerable and if his Power should cease by the death of another it would be dangerous 8. Great ingratitude to put him in possibility of being worse than if he had never come for if the Princess dyes he has no longer power to proceed 9. 'T is ungrateful to make him a subject in that Kingdom for which he has done more than all the Kings of England ever did 10. As his Power dyes so his person may not be safe if a subject for he maybe indicted by any man. 11. May be in more hazard of Assassination 12. The Lords and a great number of the Commons who were legally chosen in former Parliaments thought fit the publique administration should be in the Prince I know some are of opinion to have the Prince and Princess King and Queen to which I only say that such joint-power in governing never was in England and the consequences are difficult if possible to judge and tho some say the administration may be in the Prince only during the joint lives of the Prince and Princess I answer if the Princess is Queen Regal Power is inseparable from her person as was said by some and not denied by any of the Judges in the case of Ship-mony and it was said to be a proprium quarto modo which a King or Queen as such must have and then to have joint-power will make both equal and if they should differ what should be done Q. 4. Whether 't is consistent with the Prince's Honour to accept of the Government especially considering his Declaration was to Redress Matters by a Free Parliament I Answer taking it for granted which I need not that at the Princes coming he could not yet what the King did since his coming readers it clear and plain viz. 1. The Kings own Judgment against himself for issuing Writs to Elect proves he thought a Parliament of necessity and then destroying most of them takes away the only remedy and he which does so to a desperately sick man murthers him as sure as he who stabbs him to the heart 2. Then the taking the great Seal and carrying it no man knows whither stayes the Spring of Justice so that no Originals out of the Chancery can be filed for the Subject to have relief in any real Action nor in many personal Actions where Original Writs are requisite 3. His going with Sir Edward Hales a person notorious being set up to maintain the Arbitrary Dispensing Power justifies his Dispensing Power still by these he has brought the power into the people whose Representatives have the right of setling the Government as in wisdom shall be thought fit for though some object it cannot be for want of a Writ to call them yet upon long Debate in the House of Commons when this Objection was started the Lord Chief Justice Hales said That though he would not maintain the Commons called according to Form by Writ yet they being met were a good House of Commons for the Parliament is not the Kings c. but the Parliament of England and they being duly chosen by the People were the Legal Representatives of the People to Act as a Parliament and to say the Convention has Power to settle the Government if self as to the Exercise and not to have the force of a Parliament seems strange besides no man can say but this Convention will be a Supream Power and for the Supream Power to have any thing Legal to be above their reach is to say they are Supream yet there is something above their Power cujus est dare ejus est disponere if they have Power to give the Exercise of the Government it self which is the highest Act and not to be able to make Laws for the Establishing and the manner of Exercise opposes that plain Maxim. To conclude The extraordinary Providence of God whose Wonders His Highness has seen in preserving Him and the Fleet in the Deeps and what we have heard and seen since he came on Shore makes it apparent that the Lord hath sent him and it would make a Heathen like Nebuchadnezzar confess it because no other God can deliver after this sort and the works of God being all perfect it is to be hoped that there are yet greater things to be done by him for the refining and reforming Matters in Church and State. England had Lucius the first Christian King as most say Constantine the first Christian Emperor was Born here the first Reformation began here and who knows but what is remaining viz. the refining of all things which the best want may be accomplish'd here to the Glory of God and the honour of him who he has sent I wish he may put him upon whose Shoulders the Government of all things in Heaven and Earth is laid into the possession of his inheritance to the uttermost ends of the Earth FINIS