Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n authority_n king_n kingdom_n 1,417 5 5.6187 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A44185 The case stated of the jurisdiction of the House of Lords in the point of impositions Holles, Denzil Holles, Baron, 1599-1680. 1676 (1676) Wing H2453; ESTC R20018 41,330 118

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Customes and a Subsidy of Tunnage and Poundage The Customes he saith are the Kings inheritance and due to him by the Common Law and therefore the first Statute that mentions Customes 14 E. 3. he saith doth not grant any thing but abridges the Kings power that he shall not take more than half a mark for a Sack of Wooll and half a mark for a last of Leather But the Subsidy is a Tax assessed by Parliament and Granted to the King by the Commons for his life onely for defence of the Seas The one is Inheritance the other is a Grant but to define and describe what kinde of Grant and in what manner granted whether by one or both Houses with all the circumstances of it was certainly not at all in that Reverend Judges thought This then is no such Judicial determination of the Question as they would make it From thence they come to the Provisoes in the Bill of 1 H. 8. in which as in the Bill it self and their conclusion upon it viz. That they are of no force unless it be against the Lords there is certainly a great mistake They say that by the Lords Journal the Case is this That the Bill did not pass till the 3 of H. 8. That the Lords assented to it the 43d day of the Parliament That the 45th day two provisoes came in one touching the Merchants of the Hans Towns the other touching the Merchants of the Staple at Calais both signed by the King And that the Chancellor and Bishop of Winton did declare that the signing of those Provisoes by the Kings own hand was enough without the consent of either House Then they give reasons why they prove nothing 1. For that they were signed by the King 2. For that they were brought in against all course of Parliaments after the Bill passed 3. That the Provisoes were nothing but a saving of former rights 4. That the Journal declares that the King without those Provisoes might have done the same thing by his Prerogative This is the Narrative which they gave us The truth is this In the first place the Lords did not cite nor insist upon two Provisoes but onely upon one that which concerned the Merchants of the Staple which Proviso was added then by the House of Lords who meddled not with that which concerned the Hans Towns which was a Proviso sent up with the Bill from the House of Commons The progress of this Bill was thus all of it in the Parliament of 1 H. 8. for that which was said at the Conference that the Bill it self passed not till the 3 H. 8. is a gross mistake That was another Bill of Subsidy which was given that Parliament 3 H. 8. and it is true wee find in the Journal that the 45th day of that Parliament of 3 tio the Chancellor and Bishop of Winchester did declare such a thing concerning the Merchants of the Hans Towns in these words Et dictum decretum est per Dominum Cancellarium Episcopum Winton quoad Provis pro Mercatoribus de Hansa quod Provis pro ipsis per ipsum Regem signatum sufficiet eis absque assensu Dominorum Domus Communis These were strangers with whom the Parliament had nothing to doe so such a Declaration might be concerning them But the Provisoe insisted upon by the Lords was concerning the Merchants of the Staple natural borne Subjects And besides that which the House of Commons went upon at the Conference was clean another thing a Provisoe relating to an other Bill and passed in an other Parliament For 1 H. 8. 23d day of the Parliament and 16th of Febr. upon a Saturday this Bill which is now in question came up to the Lords from the House of Commons cum Proviso pro Mercatoribus de la Hansa Theutonicorum at the head of this Proviso are these words Soit baille aux Seigneurs and at the foot these Les Seigneurs ont assentus Then the 27th day of the Parliament which was Thursday the 21 of Febr. the Lords passed the Provisoe for the Merchants of the Staple which had begun in their House the words are Item Proviso pro Mercatoribus Stapule de Calais lecta est secundo tertio missa in Domum inferiorem per Clericum Coronae and these words at the top of it Soit baille aux Communs and at the foot these A Cette provision les Côes sont assentus Then the 29th day which was the last day of the Parliament the Bill with the two Provisoes annexed were delivered to Sir Thomas Lovel at the Bar Actus Subsidii cum duabus Provis annex liberati Thomae Lovel militi cum Sociis ad Barram saith the Journal This bare relation justifies enough the Lords citing of that Proviso by which the Merchants of Calais are excepted from their being lyable to any of the payments imposed by that Bill of Subsidy of 1 mo H 8. To say it was but a Saving of former rights signifies nothing for no question the Lords would not have done it without good cause for it nor will they at any time make any abatement but for good cause but still they saved to the Merchants of England their right which the Commons had taken away And then here was nothing against the course of Parliaments the Proviso regularly added by the Lords and sent down to the House of Commons in due manner and afterwards passed by the King with the Bill Then for the Kings signing it which the Manager of the Conference made to be so great a matter if he would have perused the Records of H. 8. he would have seen that in those times the King still signed all the Bills he passed and all the Provisoes annexed he signed likewise with his own hand only Bills of Subsidy he signed not But the Provisoes annexed to Bills of Subsidy which were to ease and discharge any persons those he also signed and therefore the other Provisoe concerning the Hans-Towns which was annexed to the Bill when it came up from the House of Commons was likewise signed by the King So as the Kings signing this Provisoe concerning the Merchants of Calais cited by the Lords alters not the Case and makes nothing against its proving an inherent Power and Authority to be in the House of Peers of adding such Provisoes or making abatements in Bills of Subsidy whensoever they see cause for it As they did 1 Eliz. when they gave respite to the Counties of Wales and the County Palatine of Chester for paying the Subsidy given that Parliament a year after all the rest of the Kingdom which was an easing of them for that time And for what is said of the Grant 1 H. 8. that it was of the Commons alone it was as many other Grants then were The Commons by the assent of the Lords c. which expression is sometimes used as signifying the same thing with the other We the Lords and Commons do grant c.