without any prejudice by the consent and authority of the Successor as of the Father And further the Act is also herein express that by no other way or means but by an Act of Parliament it shall be dissolved Which being it cannot be done by the dead King but may be done by the Successor it ought so to be dissolved or else it must and doth by vertue of this Act still remain legally in full being and authority Sixthly As to what may be objected concerning the dissolution of this Parliament by an Act when the secluded Members were lately admitted The Argument is so weak that I thought wholly to have omitted the least mention of it Yet in regard it is objected by some who seem to receive satisfaction by it and there to acquiesce I shall give this answer in brief to it First That at the best that was but an Act so called of the House of Commons and so consequently far short of the authority of an Act of Parliament or any legal pretence of it which only consists of King Lords and Commons And therefore by any such appellative Act this Parliament can no waies be dissolvable And further The utmost authority that the House of Commons hath given them by the foresaid Act for the continuation of this Parliament till they dissolve themselves by an Act is but to adjourn themselves by an Order of their own House as is express in the said Act. By which 't is evident they have no power to dissolve themselves much less by any Act they can do to dissolve the Parliament And here it is worth the observing before I pass over this Act of the House of Commons whereby it was endeavoured to dissolve the Parliament That in their judgements and consciences there was need of an Act to dissolve the Parliament And therefore by this Act of theirs they did implicitly grant that before the passing of the said Act the Parliament was not then dissolved and so consequently did acknowledge it not to be dissolved by the Kings Death which happened many years before and if not dissolved by the Kings Death then much less by the said Act of the House of Commons which carries not the least shadow of legal Authority with it as aforesaid for the dissolution of it and therefore by the judgement of the said House rightly understood 't is still legally in force and being But because some do Object that in regard the Lords spiritual to wit the Bishops were oured the House of Peers before the passing this Act for continuation of the Parliament whereby their Votes and Consents were never had in the Case that therefore it was an illegal Act and so fell void in it seâ—f I answer briefly That the Abbots and Priors 29. in number who were formerly Lords of Parliament and held per Baroniam from the King and had their Seats and Votes in the House of Peers as well as the Temporal Lords were dissolved in the Reign of King Henry the 8th And yet all Parliaments since with all their Acts have been held for Legal and Authentick without the least question or contradiction of their Authority and therefore is as little to be scrupled here in our present Case which is the same The Bishops Priviledge and right to sit in Parliament being also null and made void as well as theirs by Act of Parliament Whereunto much more might here be said to this purpose but that I would not be tedious Seventhly I have but one word more which answers most fully and unquestionably all Mr. Prins Objections at once or what else may be said for the dissolution of this Parliament by the Kings Death And that is taken from the supream legislative authority under God that the three Estates viz. King Lords and Commons legally called have over all persons and Causes in the whole Nation By vertue whereof they have power to do the highest actions the Nation is capable of though it be even to the dismembring of the Parliament it self and dissolving a considerable part of it or altering any other Fundamental Constitutions they please so they see it necessary for the publike good as particularly in the Case of the Bishops call'd the spiritual Lords and by some affirmed to be the third Estate in Parliament who nevertheless have been excluded by an Act of the King Lords and Commons from their ancient right of sitting and voting in Parliament when in their wisdoms their Session there appeared hurtful to Church and State For who may question or controul the Actions of a lawful Parliament while none in the Kingdom can so much as pretend to be above them And if their authority be of so large an extent even in matters of greatest weight and moment then much more in things of far inferiour and much less concernment as is the confirmation of a Parliament to continue after the Kings death who call'd it if the three Estates shall see good to pass an Act as now they have done to that purpose implicitely though not in express terms the King hapning to die before it hath been dissolved by an Act of Parliament as by the three Estates hath been firmly enacted it should be so dissolved and no otherwise By this time it may be hoped the legal being and Authority of the Long Parliament is sufficiently evident The truth whereof being so clearly proved both by Law and Reason how much doth it unfold to us the sad and dangerous estate of the Kingdom whilest under the Constitution of such powers as neither in Estate Liberty or Life though otherwise of good Inclinations to the Publick can give the Nation any legal security For though many excellent things have been done by the singular wisdome of this present Parliament now sitting that are of special tendency in themselves for the good and safety of the Nation through his Majesties most gracious condiscention for which we have infinite cause to bless God Yet herein the great unhappiness That whilest their Authority is not legally founded the Nation can promise themselves no assurance for the lasting enjoyment of those benefits and securities they have given it being 't is to be feared and too justly they fall void of themselves by vertue of the said Parliaments illegal Policy and Constitution Therefore how much were it to be wished that the Supream Legislative Authority of the Nation might again revert into that Channel by which the Peace and Settlement of the Nation through His Majesties most Gracious Influence might durably and without question be provided for and preserved In reference to which I shall humbly take the boldness to offer it as a weighty and serious consideration to this present Parliament now sitting whether they should not do well for their own safety as well as the Nations to advise his Majesty in this particular They only having the priviledge and opportunity now effectually to do it their case in point of safety or danger being the
and foundation of encouragement for the Credit which was to be given in order to the raising of the said monies and did accordingly effect it Secondly The Parliament could not without this be in any secure condition to make provision for the repayment of the said money so to be raised in regard that through defect of such an Act the Parliament might be in continual danger to be untimely dissolved and by the clear scope of the Act 't is accounted an untimely dissolution if dissolved before the said provision be made therefore the dissolution of the said Parliament before such provision made for repayment of the said monies which is not yet done is expresly contrary to the true meaning and intention of this Act. And if this Act were made purposely to prevent the untimely dissolution of the Parliament as it stands express in the Title then it cannot but have respect to the Kings Death as well as to any other means of untimely dissolution The Parliament well knowing the Kings life was as uncertain yea in some respects more uncertain than the life of other men And therefore could not choose but so understand it if they intended this Act to be any security for the monies borrowed or to be borrowed upon their Credit Secondly In the substance and body of the Act 't is delivered in express terms That this present Parliament shall not be dissolved but by an Act of Parliament Whence it follows that if not dissolvable unless by an Act of Parliament then it is exclusive to all other waies and means of dissolution as the interruption by armed violence the forcible omission of daies of adjournment the violent or natural death of the King or whatsoever else might be done or have happened legally to dissolve it had not this Act been made or constituted Thirdly and lastly To make all clear without any exception in the close of the said Act it is expressed That all and every thing and things whatsoever done or to be done for the adjourning proroguing or dissolving of this present Parliament contrary to this Act shall be utterly void and of none effect Which clause you see looks backward and forwards in reference to whatsoever had a legal power and tendency before this Act to dissolve the Parliament Against which this Act hath now fully provided that neither what hath been done for the time past nor whatsoever shall be done for time to come shall dissolve this Parliament excepting an Act of the said Parliament Whence I argue That all those things that otherwise legally would or might have dissolved this Parliament had not this Act been made have no force or efficacy to dissolve this but only an Act of this present Parliament All other Parliaments having no legal capacity till this be legally dissolved unless it be granted that two Parliaments may have both of them legal capacity at one and the same time Which I beleeve there are none so absurd as to aver no more then that two Kings may have a legal capacity at one time in the same Kingdom But because there are divers objections that seem to oppose the premises and the legal being and capacity of the said Parliament I shall endeavour to answer them as strongly and yet as briefly as I may to every ordinary Readers understanding The first and grand Objection of all is the death of the late King that summoned this Parliament in the year 1640. and is argued by Mr. Wil. Prin. Because saith he it hath been frequently resolved by Parliaments themselves the reverend Judges and our Law Books by King Charles his own Declaration and his Judges and Council that the deposition and death of the King doth actually dissolve the Parliament c. To which I answer by way of Concession that the Death of the King doth legally or according to Custome dissolve a Parliament that is only call'd and constituted by the Kings Writ but not a Parliament constituted and confirmed by an Act of the three Estates Let Mr. Prin or any other Lawyer shew me any Law or president to that purpose and I will presently yield the Cause If Mr. Prin would have spoken home to this Case he should have made it appear where or when it had been resolved by Parliament the Judges and our Law Books c. that in case of an Act of Parliament made for the Session and continuance of a Parliament till they should dissolve themselves by an Act that such a Parliament hath been or shall nevertheless be dissolved by the Kings death which it is believed he will find a very hard task to prove Secondly He objects the Parliament is no standing Court sitting at certain seasons by positive Laws but summoned and constituted by the Kings Writ of Summons and Royal Prerogative when and where he pleaseth and adjourned prorogued and dissolved by his Writ alone in point of Law c. I answer again by way of Concession that Parliaments according to their wonted and by-past Customes were no certain Courts sitting at certain seasons by positive Laws But yet may be made such by Act of the three Estates Witness the Triennial Parliament And further By an extraordinary grant of his late Majesty this Parliament was made a standing Court to sit constantly by a positive Law till they should please to dissolve themselves He having been pleased by the said grant for the better security of his Subjects to wave his Royal Prerogative and power of dissolution and to give his consent for the nulling of all other means tending thereunto And for what Mr. Prin intimates further in the said Objection That because all Writs of Summons are actually abated by the Kings death as well as all other Commissions and Patents of all Judges Justices c. That therefore this Parliament must needs be dissolved I answer That doth not at all follow till he can make it appear that there is no more validity in an Act of Parliament of the three Estates than there is in a meer Writ of Summons or a Commission or Patent granted only by the King For though this Parliament was summoned by the King Writ yet 't is manifest its continuance and confirmation did not at all depend upon that for then he might still have dissolved it when he pleâ—sed but upon the Act of the three Estates who had established it by Law and so was now no more dissolvable by the Kings Death than any other Statute Law or Act of Parliament whatsoever And therefore is not depending on so fickle a thing as a Writ of Summons or a Patent or Commission given the Judges and which the King may take away and repeal again at his own pleasure And to illustrate this more by an instance I shall desire to aske Mr. Prin this Question Put case that there are certain urgent necessities as before specified in the Act that the Parliament hath of great Sums of Money for preserving the Peace of the
is not call'd by any Writs of the Kings at all But only by Writs as aforesaid in the name of the Keepers of the Liberties of England and by those Writs none but the Commons with whom they are summoned to consult too about the businesses of a Common-wealth which these times have sufficiently taught us the meaning of and not with the King about the arduous businesses of His Kingdom These premised illegalities considered in reference to this present Parliament the legal being and capacity as premised of the Long Parliament being supposed to be here totally waved Whether is this a lawful Parliament and capable to make legal and binding Acts Or having been declared a lawful Parliament by an Act by themselves made since their Session with the Kings consent Whether can the Kings consent make them such though otherwise unlawful in their Call Principle and Foundation For I would put the case the King should have come in while Oliver or Richards Parliaments had been sitting to which the Lords as now should have presented themselves without Writs of Summons and his Majesty under that constitution should have consented to a Bill to grant them a lawful Parliament Would that at all have made them so under such a Constitution Can that which is unlawful in it self and contrary to the Fundamental Constitutions of the Nation be made lawful barely by the Kings Consent Which if it shall be pleaded in the affirmative though I very much question whether any understanding Lawyer will venture his reputation on it I shall desire then to be instructed in a better Argument to make good the lawful being and authority of the Long Parliament For surely if a Parliament be lawful meerly because of the Kings consent passing an Act to that purpose though otherwise utterly unlawful in its Call and Foundation Then doubtless that Parliament is much more lawful and in its legal being that was founded upon a lawful Call and had the Kings consent to an Act to authorize it to continue till they dissolve themselves by an Act. And if that be still a lawful Parliament then I am sure upon that account this can be none nor no other till that be legally dissolved To which there is this further to be added concerning the intentions generally of the whole Nation in reference to this Parl. by the best information I can gather That it was never in the least meant that these should sit to pass Acts as a lawful Parl. w ch was only like to prove a snare to the people as other Parl. of the like nature so call'd have done through the disputableness unwarrantableness of their Authority But only that for the present necessity they might bear the face of Parliamentary Authority for preserving the Peace of the Nation till his Royal Majesty that now is might be happily restored the Kingdom panting after him as their only means of settlement and so soon as that was effected then to dissolve in order to the sending forth his Majesties Royal Writs of Summons for calling a Parliament according to the ancient Custome and Fundamental Constitution the old Parliament being first legally dissolved that so all things might return again into a legal and uncontrovertible way of proceedings to the quiet of all mens minds and satisfaction of the whole Kingdom who are sufficiently weary of the mischiefs of irregular actings by illegal Authorities Conclusion IF the power of the Sword or other arbitrary proceedings do not interpose to interrupt free debates and the course of Law and Justice which the Author hopes there is now no cause to fear as formerly all Estates and Degrees in the Nation having sufficiently seen the inconvenience and tasted the smart of such unrighteous actings he doubts not upon a serious consideration of the foregoing Arguments if men will lay aside passion and self Interest but that right foundations will shortly again be restored that knowing our ground-work to be sure and unquestionable the Subjects of all sorts in the Kingdom may with all safety and cheerfulness submit too and act under the lawful powers in being every one sitting in Peace under his own Vine and Fig-tree blessing the God of his Salvation Which is daily the Authors earnest and most hearty prayer FINIS See his true and perfect narrative of what was done and spoken by and between Mr. Prin and the old and newly forcibly secluded members beginning fol. 24. and so forwards Printed in the year 1659. See Sir Edw. Cook in his third part of Instit of the High Court of Parliament how the Lords give their Voyces Pa 35. See Sir Edw. Cook the third part of his Institutes of the Hâ—gh Court of Parl. of the power and Jurisdict of the Parl. fol. 36. who saith That the Power and jurisdiction of the Parl. for making of Laws in proceeding by Bill is so transcendent and absolute as it cannot be confined either for causes or persons within any bounds c. Vide Postscript