Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	england_n	king_n	parliament_n	4,135	5	6.8614	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75416	An ansvver to a speech without doores: or, Animadversions upon an unsafe and dangerous answer to the Scotch-papers, printed under the name of Mr. Challener his speech, which while it offereth to reach a blow at the Scotch-papers, doth indeed strike at the honour of the Parliament, and interest of the kingdome of England.	Birkenhead, John, Sir, 1616-1679.	1646 (1646)	Wing A3351A; Thomason E362_9; ESTC R201213	4,567	7

AN ANSVVER TO A Speech without Doores OR ANIMADVERSIONS Upon an unsafe and dangerous Answer to the Scotch-Papers printed under the name of Mr. Challener his Speech which while it offereth to reach a blow at the Scotch-Papers doth indeed strike at the honour of the PARLIAMENT and interest of the Kingdome of ENGLAND PROV 28. 2. For the transgression of a Land many are the Princes thereof IF any shall aske Who art thou and what meanest thou I shall not make my Answer so wide as Di●g●nes did I am not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea I will yet take me to a narrower compasse I am one who have adhered to the Parliament all along from the very beginning of the war and I have served them faithfully in their lowest condition resolving still to be for them in that which is just and right against any person or Nation in the world And as to my meaning in this particular t is not to write in defence of the Scotch Papers let their Papers speake for themselves if they can and if they cannot I have nothing to say for them and however I will not ju●dre in illorum verb● but I write in defence of the Honour of the Parliament and of the Interest of England which have received a dangerous wound by this printed Paper which comes abroad as a Speech spoken by Mr Challenor in the House of Commons I doe not presume to examine or at all to intermeddle in any thing spoken within those wals I speake to the printed Paper which for any thing I know may be supposititious or at least different from the Originall Sure if I mis-heard not t is not printed as it was spoken in the House which yet is pretended in the Title Page else what is become of the Dog that is not worth the whistling after and what is become of that other passage concerning the debate at a Comedy in Oxford concerning the fittest place for erecting the Kings Throne the determination whereof was so difficult that some thought it best not to erect it at all Whatever was spoken in the House I suppose t is no Priviledge of a Member of Parliament to print what he list against the Honour of the Parliament and Interest of the Kingdome neither can it be a breach of the Priviledge of a Member and much lesse the breach of a Priviledge of Parliament to vindicate the Honour and Interest of Parliament which is my present worke and so I come to it without further prefacing My Animadversions upon the Paper are these ●irst of all it presenteth to the view of the world a champion coming forth Goliah-like for the Parliament but stumbling wofully in the very beginning of his dispute It draweth together three large sheets of the Scotch Papers into this syllogisme Wheresoever the Kingdome of Scotland hath an interest in their King there they may dispose of him But the Kingdome of Scotland hath an interest in their King he being in England Therefore in England they may dispose of him The Paper runnes along in answer to this Syllogisme and here is a man of straw set up to be buffeted I will concurre with Mr Challenor to denie this Argument but all this while the Scotch Paper escapeth scot-free there is no such Argument in their Paper neither for matter nor forme they doe not say that either this Kingdome or their owne may dispose of the King but that it belongeth to both Kingdomes to dispose of him And if there must needs be a Syllogisticall arguing and answering their Argument ought to have been stated thus Whatsoever is by Covenant Treaty and the very Law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdomes ought not to be disposed of but by the mutuall advice and consent of both Kingdomes for the good of both But the person of the King whether in England or Scotland is by Covenant Treaty and the very Law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdomes Therefore the Person of the King whether in England or Scotland ought not to be disposed of but by the mutuall advice and consent of both Kingdomes for the good of both This is the summe of what the Scotch Papers say as to this point which is there prosecuted and endeavoured to be proved by parts but whether it was for the Honour of the Parliament that one of their Members should Answer what the Scotch say not and not Answer what they say let rationall men judge To no better purpose is that distinction Pag. 4. 5. of the King in Abstracto and the King in Concreto which beside that it maketh Persona to be Concretum I know not by what rule of Logicke doth plainly begge from the Scotch what is in question For the Scotch Papers doe state the question as the Vote of the honourable Houses September 24. had done before them not upon the Authority Power and Office of the King but upon the Person of the King and to this very purpose are all their Arguments brought to prove a joynt and equall interest of both Kingdomes in the Person of the King which by Covenant they and we both are bound to defend and preserve as well as his Authority and just Power But this pretended Answer in stead of answering or confuting their Arguments denieth their Conclusion Was this now for the Honour of the Parliament Was it not I but saith the Paper Person● sequitur locum and his Person must be disposed of by the supreme Power of that Countrey wheresoever he shall happen to abide By this Principle forsooth the Person of the King of England if he were in Scotland must be disposed of by the supreme Power of that Countrey without the advice and consent of the Parliament of England And was not this well pleaded for the interest of the Parliament and Kingdome of England I thinke not Within a few lines after I finde it said That the Kingdome of England is as distinct in interests from Scotland as Spaine And is all our conjunction of interests in one Religion one Covenant one King one Cause one Warre turned in end to no more but this Then may Scotland make a Peace without the advice and consent of the Kingdome of England as well as Spaine may Then also may Scotland enter into a Confederacy with a Forain Kingdome without asking advice or consent from this Kingdome as well as Spaine may And was not this well provided for the interest of England was it or was it not I turne over to Pag. 6. where I read thus I shall take this as granted for good Law that let the Person of any Nation that were I confesse Persona Concreta under the sunne which is in amity with England happen to come into England that person is forthwith a Subject of England For he being protected by the Lawes of England he becomes thereby subject to those Lawes c. Then must any