Selected quad for the lemma: book_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A46956
|
A letter from a freeholder, to the rest of the freeholders of England, and all others, who have votes in the choice of Parliament-men
|
Johnson, Samuel, 1649-1703.
|
1680
(1680)
|
Wing J834; ESTC R2105
|
9,303
|
10
|
were in their Power But how comes it to be Treason to speak against a Religion which is itself High Treason and is Proscribed by so many Laws Why their Medium is this That Popery is the King's Religion and therefore by an Innuendo what is said against that is meant against him But is there any Law of England that Popery shall be the King's Religion Or is it Declared by any Law that Popery either is or can be his Religion On the other hand we are enabled by an Act in this very Reign to Pronounce Popery to be a False Religion and to Assert the Religion which is now Professed in the Church of England and Established by the Laws of this Realm to be the True Christian Religion Act for Building St. Anne's Church p. 133. But these Gentlemen it seems are for Hanging men without Law or against Law or any how and therefore we thank them again for being thus plain with us before-hand Now if they be thus Insolent when they are so very Obnoxious themselves and have Halters about their own Necks with what a Rod of Iron will they Rule us when they are our Masters What havock will they then make of the Nation when we already see Magdalen-Colledge which was lately a Flourishing Society of Protestants now made a Den of Iesuites and that done too in such a way as shakes all the PROPERTY in England Or who can be safe after our Laws are Repealed when Endeavours have been lately used to extract Sedition even out of Prayers and Tears and the Bishops Humble Petition was threatned to be made a Treasonable Libel But here the Dissenters have a plausible Excuse for themselves For say they We have now an opportunity of getting the Laws which are against us Repealed which is clear Gain and as for our refusing to Repeal the Laws against Popery there is nothing gotten by that either to us or to any body else for they are already as good as Repealed by the Dispensing Power and therefore such Discourse as this only advises us to stand in our own light without doing any good to the Nation at all for there will be Popish Justices Sheriffs Judges and Juries whether we will or no for whatsoever we refuse to do the Dispensing Power will supply To which I Answer Do you keep your hands off from Repealing the Laws let who will Contravene or Transgress them for then you are free from the Bloud of all Men you have no share in the Guilt of those Mischiefs which befal your Country which would sooner or later be a heavy Burden and a dead Weight upon the Conscience of any Protestant But besides let the Laws alone and they will defend both themselves and us too For if the Law says That a Papist shall not nor cannot have an Office then he shall not nor cannot For who can speak Louder than the LAWS As for a Dispensing Power inherent in the King which can set aside as many of the Laws of the Land as he pleases and Suspend the Force and Obligation of them which has been lately held forth by many False and Unlawful Pamphlets the Dissenters know very well that there is no such thing but that no body may pretend Ignorance I shall here prove in very few words That by the Established Laws of the Land the King cannot have such a Dispensing Power unless Dispensing with the Laws and Executing the Laws be the same thing and unless both keeping the Laws himself and causing them to be kept by all others be the English of Dispensing with them For in the Statute of Provisors 25th Edw. 3. c. 25. we have this laid down for Law That the King is bound to Execute those Statutes which are Unrepealed and to cause them to be kept as the Law of the Realm the words are these speaking of a Statute made in the time of Edward the First Which Statute holdeth always his Force and was never Defeated or Annulled in any point And by somuch our Soveraign Lord the King is bound by his Oath to do the same to be kept as the Law of this Realm although by Sufferance and Negligence it hath since been attempted to the contrary So that the Coronation Oath and the Dispensing Power are here by King Edward the Third and his Parliament Declared to be utterly Inconsistent Now the Coronation Oath is a Fundamental Law of this Kingdom for it is antecedent to the Oath of Allegiance Accordingly if you look upon the Coronation Oath in the Parliament Rowl 1st Hen. 4th you shall there find that in the third Branch of it the King Grants and Promises upon his Oath That the Laws shall be Kept and Protected by him secundum Vires suas to the utmost of his Power and therefore he has no Power left him to Dispense withal By which it appears that those men are the wretched Enemies both of the King and Kingdom who would fain perswade the King that he has this Dispensing Power because therein they endeavour to perswade him that Perjury is his Prerogative Heretofore in Tresilian's time some of the Oracles of the Law were consulted Whether it could stand with the Law of the Kingdom that the King might Obviate and Withstand the Ordinances concerning the King and the Kingdom which were made in the last Parliament by the Peers and Commons of the Realm with the King's Assent though as the Courtiers said forced in that behalf And they made Answer That the King might Annul such Ordinances and Change them at his pleasure into a better fashion because he was above the Laws Knyghton Col. 2693. Now this was very False Law as those Judges found afterwards to their Cost and it was grounded on the worst Reason that could be For they must needs know from all their Books and from the Mirror in particular p. 282. That the first and Soveraign Abusion of the Law that is the chief Contrariety and Repugnancy to it is for the King to be above the Law whereas he ought to be Subject to it as is contained in his Oath Neither could they be ignorant of that Argument which the Peers used to shew the Absurdity of such a supposition it is Recorded in the Annals of Barton set forth as I take it by Mr. Obadiah Walker Si Rex est supra Legem tunc est extra Legem Num Rex Angliae est Exlex If the King be above the Law then he is without the Law. What! is the King of England an Outlaw And as for the words of Bracton they were too plain either to need a Comment or Translation Rex habet Superiorem Deum item Legem per quam factus est Rex item Curiam suam scil Comites Barones As likewise those other words of his Ubi Voluntas Imperat non Lex ibi non est Rex Where he makes it the very Essence of our King to Govern according to Law. Having therefore shewn that the Laws are always