Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	act_n	king_n	parliament_n	3,554	5	6.8839	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78413	Another word to purpose against The long Parliament revived. By C. C. of Grays-Inne, Esq;	Drake, William, Sir.	1660 (1660)	Wing C16; Thomason E1053_5; ESTC R207979	10,311	21

Prerogative for which I now labour whereby we have sorely felt and dearly undergone these unmatchable miseries wherewith these three Kingdoms have been so long and tediously exercised which is Argument enough to satisfie any reasonable and sober mind against the unreasonableness of it and to perswade them in their conscience That such an unheard of President should not innovate so much upon prerogative as to bind up the Kings Hands which should defend and preserve himself and his people and to make him stand still while his Loyal Subjects are Murdered before his face his own Throat cut before his Palace and the most horrid confusions that ever was heard of brought upon a Land before that time the most flourishing that ever was seen and all this fell out upon supposition of that Act being in force which the King might have waved for in the case of Ship-money though it was the better opinion that the King could not raise moneys but by Parliament generally yet in case of apparent danger to the Kingdom it was agreed by all the Judges of England that he might But then admitting it binding in its Creation the second thing is its duration how long it binds and for that its clear it can bind him no longer then he lives For that thus The intent of the Law-makers is to be observed in the exposition of the Laws Now we know full well that the makers of that Act never thought of the Kings death especially his Murder at the time of the making of that Act but that which was the moving cause of that Act from the Houses was the remembrance of the Kings breaking up of severall Parliaments before whereby some of the Members were prevented to vent their malicious and cruel designs upon some of the Kings loyal Favorites whom for their preferment they emulated as before on Buckingham and after upon incomparable Strafford by the Vanes Father and Son and this was under the notion of bringing Delinquents to punishment Others indeed more sober might have an eye to substantial grievances to be redressed and therefore desired that the King would not dissolve them till they were redressed But good reason for the Kings actions therein for he was advised of two Evils to chuse the least rather to dissolve twenty Parliaments and leave some particular Delinquents unpunished some particular grievances unredressed then by preserving one Parliament or more to dissolve the foundations of the Kingdom He was advised of the Jesuits plot which had been so long upon the Anvil against him which made him loath to consent to this fatal act which rendred him supposedly obnoxious to the fatal Axe so that though he was compelled in prudence to himself and policy to his Kingdoms to break up those Parliaments yet the profanum vulgus the ruder people and heady Commons would not understand it right but indeavoured to bind him up as sure as they could and that was by this Act which is the chief design signified in the preamble of that Act. What is mentioned beside in the same preamble is of no weight for his Majesties Army there spoken of ceased to be his by their rebellion his Majesties urgent occasions there mentioned were never intended to be satisfied and as for the credit of raising money surely an Act of Parliament might have raised money without borrowing or giving their security every one being thereby security for himself as well as by ingaging of their Publick Faith and that Act would have continued not onely after dissolution but after the Kings death without the help of this specious Act and that might have been made in as short a time as this so that the necessity of that Act which our Author mentions is like that of Don van Dosme who told the Workmen of a necessity of removing the Chimney because the fire burnt his shinns And as to the Conclusion of the Preamble that it might not be dissolved before sufficient provision was raised for repayment of the money borrowed if this should give a determination sure it were at an end before now there having been moneys enough to do that raised by that desperate piece of Sacriledge the Sale of Crown and Church-Lands Customes Excise and abominable Taxes But further to the Act it selfe There is another rule Ad ea quae frequentius accidunt jura adaptantur Laws are made for relief of Common and obvious Grievances and to prevent the most probable and frequent accidents such was then that of breaking up Parliaments before mentioned And it cannot be intended that an Act of Parliament should provide against a thing at such distance should be introductory of a new Law should confound prerogative destroy the King and undo the people and all this by dubious and implicite words by a strange and novel construction the effects and consequents whereof are so incomparably dangerous and fatal to the Kingdome as has been before shewn and seen Lastly admitting further That the Kings death was intended by that Act yet was the Act void as to that and that upon this account If an impossibility be Enacted or if a thing which is possible at the time of the making of the Act become impossible by the act of God the Act ceases to be of force as to that And therefore as to the first If they had Enacted That at the time of the making of the same Act there was no King in England that had been void because impossible to be true that that should be an Act and that the King should not be at that time King whereas his being at that time King made that an Act. As to the other is our case admitting it possible that the Kings hands might be bound up yet the hands of the Law can't be bound up for the operation of Law upon the death of the King makes that impossible which before was supposed possible and therefore I am of opinion with clearness that if the Act had been That the Lords and Commons should be a Parliament to make Acts after the Kings death that it had been void and nonsence for they might as well have Enacted that Pauls Steeple should be Charing-Cross for its impossible that an Act should be without the Kings Royal assent and his consent cannot be after his death and there is no Clause that pretends to oblige his Successor to confirm or consent which our Pamphleter would have our King to do voluntarily and therefore tells out of my Lord Cooks 3d which should be his 4th Institutes That the King sits in Parliament in his Politick Capacity and in that capacity never dyes which is all true for he never dyes as to succession to avoid an Interregnum c. But as to continuances of Writs and Commissions c. which by his death are determined he dyes The King sits in the Court called the Kings Bench in his Politick Capacity yet by his death not onely the Judges Commissions in that Court but all proceedings there were