Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	king_n	law_n	word_n	3,134	5	4.2980	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26069	The royal apology, or, An answer to the rebels plea wherein the most noted anti-monarchial tenents, first, published by Doleman the Jesuite, to promote a bill of exclusion against King James, secondly, practised by Bradshaw and the regicides in the actual murder of King Charles the 1st, thirdly, republished by Sidney and the associators to depose and murder His present Majesty, are distinctly consider'd : with a parallel between Doleman, Bradshaw, Sidney and other of the true-Protestant party.	Assheton, William, 1641-1711.	1684 (1684)	Wing A4038; ESTC R648	26,293	69

with outward Pomp doth naturally make Impressions of awe and reverence towards his Person Secondly The Oath which he then takes may expel all jealous Fears disposing his Subjects chearfully to submit to his future Government For when the King who is not responsible to them for any of his Actions shall condescend thus publickly to promise his People in the Presence of that God who gave him his Trust and to whom alone he must render an Account for the management of it That he will govern his Subjects according to Law That he will preserve Religion from Heresy and Schism defend their Persons from wrong and violence secure their Estates from Fraud and Rapine Such assurance as this must needs enlarge their Affections to their Prince make their submission more hearty their Obedience more chearful since under his Government if it is not their own Fault they may rationally expect to live a quiet and peaceable Life in all Godliness and Honesty It appears I hope from these Premises notwithstanding this or any other Objection to the contrary That the Kings Power in respect of it's Original is Absolute i. e. He received it from none but God Neither from the Pope nor any other Forraign Prince much less from his own People But now when we speak of the Kings Authority with respect to the Execution and Administration of it the Case is very different For the Kings of England out of their abundant Grace and Favour and to make their Government more easie and acceptable to their Subjects have suffer'd themselves to be so limited in the Exercise of their Power That they can neither make Laws nor raise Taxes but in Parliament much less can they pretend to take away the Life or dispose of the Estate of the meanest of their Subjects but by due course of Law And therefore in this second Consideration of his Authority viz. the Execution and Administration of it The King of England is not an Absolute but a limited Monarch And indeed if these Republicans were not much more forward to remind the King of his Duty than to discharge their own these things did not need to be repeated For the King hath very often most gratiously promised That he will govern by and according to the Laws of the Land and not otherwise And that he will use the Power Trust and Office committed to him for the good and benefit of the People and for the preservation of their Rights and Liberties All this is readily granted in the very words of the Objectors Only this Phrase That he will govern according to the Laws and not otherwise for the avoiding of mistakes must be a little explained There are some Men either through Ignorance or Malice who have fancied because the King is obliged to govern by Law that therefore he must always act according to the Letter of it So as that it shall not be in his Power for instance especially when it is their Interest to restrain him either to Pardon Capital Offenders to Change the manner of their Death or to mitigate the rigour of the Law on any other occasion And in fine these confident Reformers who trade in Post-scripts more than Bracton do talk of the Kings Prerogative at such a rate as if it were an Arbitrary Illegal Encroachment and are so extravagant as to fancy That by diminishing the Kings Prerogative they advance the Laws and that to oppose the King is to defend the Kingdom In charity therefore to these men and to rectify their mistakes I shall briefly lay down the nature of the Kings Prerogative What it is how it comes to be Establish'd And whether as is pretended it be destructive to the Liberty of the Subject The Word (a) Jurecons hac voce varie utuntur modo pro authoritate eminentia quadam modo pro jure quodam praecipuo speciali seu privilegio Gal. Lex Jurid verb Praerogat Prerogative to omit other Significations Foreign to our purpose doth properly denote some special peculiar Priviledg or Preheminence granted by Law Hence the Kings Prerogative is very fitly styled by Sir H. (b) Spelm. Gloss Praerog verb. SPELMAN Lex Regiae Dignitatis which in (c) 1 Instit cap. 5. sect 125. p. 90. Sir Edw. Cooks words may be thus Translated The Royal Prerogative legally extends to all Powers Preheminences and Priviledges which the Law giveth to the Crown And Littleton saith our Author speaketh of the Kings Prerogative but twice in all his Books viz. § 125 128. and in both places as part of the Laws of England From whence our new Politicians may please to observe That the Kings Prerogative is established by Law and his Majesty hath as good Law for his Royal Prerogatives viz. The descent of the Crown to the next in Blood The Power of Calling and Dissolving Parliaments The Negative Voice The Power of the Militia Pardoning Offenders c. I say His Majesty hath as good Law for these and all other his Prerogatives as any Subject hath for his Paternal Estate Whoever therefore shall presume to dispute these Priviledges of the Crown he must not think me uncharitable whilst I tell him He is an Enemy to the fundamental Laws of England and a Betrayer of the Rights of the Kingdom If the Case be thus may some say If these Royal Prerogatives are so sacred as not to be touch'd it would then be a very suitable undertaking to enlarge your c. and to acquaint us more distinctly what they are and where we may find them In answer to which Demand we are thus instructed by that Loyal Judge JENKINS (a) Jenk Rediv. p. 136. The Kings Prerogative and the Subjects Liberty are determined and bounded and admeasured by the written Law what they are We do not hold the King to have any more Power neither doth his Majesty claim any other but what the Law gives him The right method therefore to be inform'd in this matter is to search the written Laws with the learned Interpretations upon them For though these Statutes are not Constitutive of the Royal Prerogatives All (b) Jenk Rediv. p. 4. Kings had them the said Powers have no beginning i. e. They are so antient we cannot trace their Original yet they are Declaratory of them I say though these Priviledges of the Crown are most of them antecedent to our Acts of Parliament and the written determined Cases of our Laws and consequently are not primarily established by them yet they are so often either explained confirm'd or otherwise there mention'd that he who is conversant in those publick Writings must needs know what they are But since every one hath not the Leisure or the Ability for so laborious a Task those therefore who shall desire Compendio sapere they may please to peruse a little Treatise called Jura Coronae or His Majesties Royal Rights and Prerogatives Asserted And amongst several others there mentioned and explained they will find this Prerogative That the

turn to the Office for the 5th of November In the Preface of which he thus reads A Form of Prayer with Thanksgiving for the happy Deliverance of the King and the Three Estates of the Realm And in the Collect before the Epistle We acknowledg the Power Wisdom and Goodness of God in preserving the King and the Three Estates of this Realm assembled in Parliament It thus evidently appearing That the King is not One of the Three Estates and consequently that his Anthority is not limited or restrain'd by the Coordinate Power of the other Two we may with better assurance proceed to examin the Truth of their next Suggestion viz. That the King of England is not an Absolute Monarch In which Inquiry least I should diminish the Kings just Right and Prerogative on the one hand or encroach upon the Subjects Freedom and Liberty on the other I must neither affirm nor deny without due Distinction Now the Kings Power and Authority doth admit of a Twofold Consideration For either we may observe it 's efficient Cause the Spring and Fountain from whence it flows or else may take notice of the Execution and Administration of it As to the First of these If the Question should be asked whence hath the King this Power to Rule and Govern these Nations Who gave him this Authority To this a just Answer may be suggested from His Majesties Royal Motto DIEU ET MON DROIT God and my Birth-right have given me these Kingdoms If it further be demanded How Birth-right doth Entitle to a Crown 'T is then truly replyed That it is a Fundamental Law of England That the Crown doth descend to the next in Blood England being not an Elective but an Hereditary Kingdom And from hence we are occasionally instructed how to understand that Controverted Place in Bracton which I therefore mention because I find it repeated with great Triumph in several Pamphlets Lex facit Regem the Law makes the King Lib. 1. c. 7. f. 5. and Lib. 3. c. 9. f. 107. The Law i. e. The Law of Succession In which Sense doubtless my Lord Cook as I have somewhere read told King James That the Law set the Crown upon his Head And it is the same Law that set the Crown upon the Head of His Present Majesty For though His Majesties personal Qualifications deserve a Crown yet it was not any Acceptance or Consent of the People express'd at his Coronation or otherwise but it was his Birth-right only which made him King because Son and Heir apparent of King Charles the First This is the full Import and Meaning of that saying of Bracton But now from hence to infer as some canting Polititians have done That because The Law in this Sense as now explain'd makes the King therefore the Law is Superior to the King therefore the Law hath a Coercive Power over the King therefore If the King shall neglect to Discharge his Trust the Parliament of England who are not only the highest Expounders but the sole Makers of Bradshaw's Harangue at the Kings Tryal the Law can by that Law which made him King censure and condemn him for his Neglect I say thus to infer is not only false and explosive in it self but Treasonable to the King and Destructive to the Kingdom But of this God willing more fully in it's proper Place It may suffice at present to observe that the Crown of England is an Imperial Crown i. e. Such a Crown which as to the Coercive part is not subject to any human Tribunal or Judicature whatsoever as most plainly appears from our Law-Books and Statutes It was asserted in our Laws in the Time 16 R. 2. c. 5. of King Richard the Second That the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no EARTHLY SUBJECTION BUT IMMEDIATELY SUBJECT TO GOD in all things touching the Regalty of the same Crown and to none other And in 24 H. 8. it was declared in Parliament 24 H. 8. c. 22. That this Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the World govern'd by one Supreme Head and King having the Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same unto whom a Body Politick of Spiritualty and Temporalty been bounden and owen to bear NEXT TO GOD a natural and humble Obedience And 25 H. 8. It is Declared That 25 H. 8. c. 21. This Realm recognizing NO SUPERIOR UNDER GOD BUT ONLY THE KING hath been and is free from Subjection to any man's Laws but only to such as have been devized within the same V. 1 Eliz. cap. 3. 1 Jac. c. 1. which are very pertinent to be perused in confirmation of these preceding Statutes And if private Authorities may not seem superfluous after the recital of such Authentick Records I might largely confirm this Supreme Independent Power of the King by the repeated Testimonies of our most eminent and noted Writers But because I would not be too tedious I shall mention none but the forecited Bracton Lord Chief Justice under Henry the 3 d. And I the rather take notice of Him because some passages in his Works have been perverted and abused by the IGNORANCE or MALICE of ill designing Men. From this Learned and Judicious Author we are thus instructed (a) Omnis quidem sub eo ipso sub nullo nisi tantum sub Deo Parem autem non habet in Regno suo quia sic amitteret preceptum All Ranks and Degrees of Men are subject to the King but the King himself is under none but God There is none equal to him or coordinate with him in the Kingdom such a fancy being wholly inconsistent with his Kingly Power (b) Si autem ab ro petatur cum brevo non currat contra ipsum locus erit supplicationi quod factum suum corrigat emendet quod quidem si non fecerit satis sufficet ei ad paenam quod Dominum expectet ultorem Nemo quidem de factis suis praesumat disputare multe fortius contra factum suum venire Vid Bracton de Leg. Ang. Lib. 1. cap. 8. Sect. 5. fol 5. And if any Man hath occasion to implead the King since no Writ can be taken out against him he must then proceed by way of Petition But if the King shall still refuse to do him right it will be sufficient punishment for him to expect the Lord as an Avenger Doubtless no man should presume to question the Kings Actions much less to oppose them by force And in his 5th Book de Defaltis Cap. 3. Sect. 3. he speaks the same Language For having put the Case That if the King being Petition'd to redress the Grievances of his Subjects should yet neglect to grant them Justice what further course the Subject might take for his Relief He Rules it thus (c) Quo casu cum Dominus Rex super hoc fuerit interpellatus in eadem