Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	judge_n	king_n	law_n	5,155	5	5.2571	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38977	An Examination of severall votes of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament concerning such as take up armes against the Parl. of England or assist in such war wherein is declared that all such persons are traitors by the fundementall lawes of this Kingdome and ought to suffer accordingly.		1648 (1648)	Wing E3723; ESTC R29796	9,053	10

and belongs not to any Court or Counsell and the two Houses can claime no more then belongs to a Court or Counsell The House of Commons have Ordered the printing of these Votes and t is like they expect Obedience as if it were an Act of Parliament though without the King and Lords Never did one or both Houses of Parliament presume to print before this and we may as well believe they had this Priviledge by the fundamentall Lawes which was never known before these seven yeares last past as that the Lords and Commons are the whole Parliament or that a War made by the King can be Treason But come now to the Votes The first Vote that it appears that the King seduced by Wicked Councell intends to make War against the Parliament who in all their consultations and actions have proposed no other end unto themselves but the care of Kingdomes and the performance of all duty and loyalty to His Person It seemes these men had taken such pleasure in their power of judging that they fell to judiciall Astrologie and would tell fortunes for they adventure to tell the intentions of their King though Solomon saith the Kings heart is unsearchable doubtlesse in point of Duty Subjects ought not to pry into it and we may surely conclude that as they may be deceived in their conjectures of His intentions so they have certainly broken their Loyalty by making such a Vote and run into certaine Rebellion upon certaine suspitions but their case is worse for they had resolved before this pretence on their violence against the King and had in a great part Acted it raising Tumults against Him Threatning Him with popular furies unlesse He consented to mischievous Lawes of their contriving They had Levied an Army for the guarding of Persons against an Accusation of Treason they had caused diverse Members of both Houses of Parliament to be assaulted menaced whereby they were enforced to leave the Houses they had seized the Navy disposed the Militia fortified Townes and now to blear the eyes of the poor multitude tell them the King intends to make War upon the Parliament never King had greater cause to right himselfe nor ever people lesse cause to make war on him They would perswade the people that if their war be defensive against their King its lawfull and if that they say it s so it s then out of question If selfe defence be lawfull in Subjects against Supreame power then they are not bound to assist their King against Malefactors or Rebels unlesse they first know the cause whereby all Government is at an end and obedience must follow private perswasion not publique Authority and the King doth in vaine proclaime an enemy abroad or Rebels at home and then he cannot hope long to weare a Crowne and if Subjects adhere to an enemy the King may not make War upon them but first send for a Judge to Indite them and a Malefactor may as well use force against the sentence of the Judge upon pretence of Injustice as Subjects against their King upon pretence of want of just cause of making of War it being as essentiall to Supreame power which these men sweare to be in the King as civill decisions to any Judicatory and if it were not as most certainly it is the foundation of all Government yet by Law and practice most undeniably in the King of England we cannot hope to find modesty where we see disloyalty and Rebellion and in these mens reiterated Remonstrances they take it for a ground in Law that the King cannot doe evill and if the Law will not suppose he can doe evill can there be any Law to make Warre upon Him upon pretence of doing evill and if by the policy and constitution of any Kindgome the Supreame Governor be exempt from punishment by Law as of necessity He must it is a most absurd opinion that He should be subject to private violence and if the Members of Parliament be corrupt and entertaine negotiations with foraigne Princes their Kings enemies and adhere to them as is more then possible and the King declare a Warre against such persons may they take Armes against Him to defend themselves then all Rebellions will be selfe defences and none that have force will submit to Law and so it must follow that if any commit Treason the force that the King useth for His owne preservation or their punishment shall be called War against the Parliament or War against the Subject but when ordinary wayes of Justice are shut up by force the King hath recourse to His Regall power and if His Counsell in such a case should not advise Him to make War upon such persons it might well be judged of them that they were an unfaithfull and wicked Counsell and though the King had taken no resolution of War notwithstanding the great violence offfered Him as He made appeare by many witnesses reasons yet these men reproch Him to his face with these Trayterous Votes and adde that the King seduced by wicked Counsellors so odious an expression in the mouths and pens of Subjects as cannot consist with duty and Loyalty and their professions of their care of the Kingdomes and performance of all duty and Loyalty to His Majesties Person so contradictory to these Votes can get no beliefe but were devised to give colour only to their courses being no part of their purposes and these Houses consisting of a great number who for age education or parts being no way qualified to judge of Counsels and being seduced by wicked counsels to reproach their King and seeke His ruine are no more to be trusted for their care of the Kingdome which they have brought to shame impotency and beggery then for performance of their duty to their King whom they have abused with all immaginable contumelies deposed from Government shut up in Prison and out of horror of their guile and fear of punishment have plotted how they may take away his life by poyson or assassination and these shamelesse wretches would have it believed that making War upon Him attempts to kill and depose Him imprisoning of Him and offering of violence to His Person are no Treason but that endeavouring to defend Him free Him from Imprisonment preserve His life are Treason Prodigious impudence and they might as well Vote He were no King and that England never had a King by Law That whensoever the King maketh War upon the Parliament it is a breach of the trust reposed in Him upon His people contrary to His Oath and tending to the dissolution of this Government It s apparent that the King may justly make War upon all or any Members of Parliament for Disloyall and Traiterous Acts when ordinary justice is shut up and that it is neither breach of trust reposed in Him by His people contrary to His Oath nor tending to the dissolution of this Government and if the King charge either any or all of them with

such offences they must not stand upon their Guard but submit to legall Triall It s a known truth they ought to be Tryed by the ordinary Courts of Law and their owne Votes to the contrary have neither weight nor credit being against all Law which alloweth not a Malefactor to be his own judge or to testifie in his own cause It s one of the usuall frauds of these men to weakon the opinion and duty of the people of and towards their King to tax Him with a breach of Trust reposed by the People in the King If they should expresse the time when this Trust was reposed their answer is that it must be supposed so when the Monarchy was first constituted and they speak as if all hereditary Monarchies were no other then elective and every of them came in upon trust A perfidious piece of Sophistry No doubt all Kings have a duty to performe and all Subjects hope and pray for their Kings performance of it but the constitution of hereditary Monarchies includes no trust but in the frame and constitution of that forme of Government and they in the beginning could not but foresee that there might come evill Kings yet they resolyed not to break the order but depended rather on Gods providence then open a way to faction and domestick broyles which they esteemed worse then the accidentall evill of a single Prince and which states of another constitution often finde by sad experience and their imaginary trust hath no more ground then the prosecution of Traytors by the King hath to be a breach of it or a War against the Parliament There are duties of parents to children but they are not trusts and in hereditary Monarchies the King is Rex natus non datus and the people cannot upon pretence of any crime precedent refuse their admission of Him much lesse can they withdraw their obedience for any crime subsequent and as the Kings making War against all or any Members of Parliament is no War against the Parliament so were it applicable to such a sence it were not contrary to any title of His Oath when he hath such cause as was formerly exprest For the dissolution of Government Warre by Princes against Rebels is necessary to preserve it but Rebellion against the King dissolves all Government for thereby the KING is made a Subject all His Power despised His Subjects Governed by another Power the submission whereunto is of no lesse guilt then to any forrain Power for it 's as destructive to that of the KING' 's and we now see apparently all Law Liberty and Property is lost and all is arbitrary at the will of Power and no man by Law or Conscience bound to submit to any Magistrate whose power is derived from the KING and it is an odious usurpation to use a pretended derived Power when they suppresse the supreme and the exercise of the Soveraigne power by the two Houses making Commissions in the KING'S Name is all one as if it were their owne and if it be Murder to judge to death by Commissions in their Names is it lesse when they make a Commission in the KING'S They cannot pretend to have any such Power derived to them nor can the Kingly power be possibly in the two Houses for they may differ in Vote which is a condition the Kingdome cnnnot endure nor any Law or Reason allow and if these men had any thought of that misery that comes by dissolution of Government they would not have cut assunder all the ligaments of it striving to get the King's consent to establish such a confusion in this poor Kingdome as may never be set in order in any Generations to come seeking to distract the Subjects and pretend that obedience to them is loyalty to their KING though it be against Him and to make Warre for the KING equally penall to warre against Him Such as make these Votes and such as practice such a Power are guilty of the breach of Trust reposed in them by their Countries and Townes that sent them of the Oath of Alleagiance and Supremacy taken at their entrance into the House of all the bloud and miseries that have insued from that damnable position and practice 3. That whosoever shall serve or assist Him in such Warre are Traytors by the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome and have been so adjudged by two Acts of Parliament and ought to suffer as Traytors 11 Ric. 2.1 Hen. 4. And why doe they not expresse against whom it is Treason to assist the KING they know there is no Treason but against the King and if they had told all it must cut the throat of their Votes That Warre by the KING is Treason against the KING which is legible onely by these bloudy Votes for if the KING have power to make Warre He may judge of the cause of it and if He erre in the justice of the cause such as assist Him cannot be punished for doing their duty which is to assist Him in any War within the Kingdome 11 Hen. 7. But these men should have done well to have told what or where these fundamentall Lawes were that men might see them and not be mistaken If the Statute of the 25 Edw. 3. be a fundamentall Law this is no Treason within that Statute And if 1 Mar. be a fundamentall Law nothing is Treason but what is mentioned in that Statute of 25 Edw. 3. so as if there had been such judgment as they pretend the force is wholly taken away We may not imagine that many of these that made these Votes understood the disserence of fundamentall and not fundamentall Lawes nor that any of them knew such fundamentall Lawes as they herein suppose but it was the perfidious contrivance of some of the Leaders of this rout to invent words of an unknown known sense that they might stile any actions crimes against imaginary Laws that were done by any Persons that they had a mind to destroy and have thereby made the Land guilty of bloud judging by Laws they know not and crimes they understand not Martyn Lilburne and others will have fundamentall Law right reason and no reason right but their owne and it s most probable the first Inventers of this terme now in Parliament had that reserve to their owne reason for none of the Judges or men learned could ever yet find what they meant by fundamentall Laws But they say it hath been so judged by two Acts of Parliament the first is 11 of Rich. 2. It hath hapned to Parliaments in England as is incident to all Assemblies to have some whose actions are not for imitation There are Records of disorderly and trayterous Assemblies in Parliament and of wicked Decrees made by them and no honest man will think the Judgements or Acts of Parliament in the time of Hen. 8. touching His Wives and Children and the many sad Executions of Innocent persons are of Authority and these men have declared in this