Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	die_v	king_n	year_n	13,736	5	5.1327	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91283	A soveraign antidote to prevent, appease, and determine our unnaturall and destructive civill warres and dissentions. Wherein divers serious considerations tending to this purpose are propounded both to the King and subjects, the Parliaments and Sir Iohn Hothams proceedings at Hull and in the militia justified, Sr Iohn Hothams actions proved to be neither treason, felony, nor trespas, by the laws of the land, nor any just ground or cause at all for his Majestie to rayse an army, or a most unnaturall civill warre in his kingdome. With a most serious exhortation both to the King and subjects to embrace and preserve peace and abandon civill warres, with other matters worthy of consideration.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1642 (1642)	Wing P4086A; Thomason E239_6; ESTC R19412	26,708	37

may justly protect and defend themselves even as Souldiers Children Wives Servants may by the equity of all Laws lawfully by open force defend themselves against the bloody assaults and violence of their Generalls Parents Husbands Masters who seeke to take away their lives though in all lawfull things they ought to be subject and obedient to them If a King should causelesly run at a subject with a naked sword to kill him the subject may lawfully put by his thrust and defend his life which a King ha●h no power to take away * but upon just grounds after a legall triall and that in a legall not an extraordinary way Much more then may the whole Parliament and Kingdome withstand a Kings open causelesse hostility against them to preserve themselves and the Kingdome from destruction This is evident even by divine Authority as namely by the example of David who though a subject n tooke up Armes and raysed an Army to defend himselfe against King Saul his Soveraign who causelesly made Warre against him and sought his life and though he still avoyded Saul and twice refused to hurt or murther his Person when he was in his power because he was Gods anointed Yet no doubt had Saul assaulted him with his Armie he would have defended himselfe against him in Battel Nay this is manifest in an Higher Degree by that most Observable Passage in the 1 of Samuel 14. 39. to 46. Where when King Saul had made a Rash vow that whosoever had tasted any thing that day contrary to his command whiles he pursued the Philistines he should dye the death though it were Jonathan his Sonne who procured that Victory and the Lot fell upon Jonathan who did but tast a little Honey on the top of his Rod who said and lo I must dye for this Saul answered God do so and more also for thou shalt surely dye Jonathan the people thereupon said to Saul notwithstanding he were their King and had made two such solemne Oaths shall Jonathan die who hath wrought this great deliverance in Israell God forbid as the Lord liveth that shall not one haire of his head fal to the ground for he hath wrought with God this day so the people rescued Ionathan that he died not Here the people not only justly defend but rescue Jonathan being an Innocent from death not onlie contrarie to the resolution but vowes and Oaths of their owne King to put him to death and so doubtlesse they would have defended themselves by force in the like case There is a notable place to this purpose in the 1 of Kings 12 13. to 25. 2 Chron. 11. 1. to 5. Where when the ten Tribes through Rehoboams following of the rash Counsell of the young men revolted and rebelled against him being their lawfull King and made Ieroboam King over them Rehoboam as soon as he fled from them and came to Ierusalem assembled all the Tribe of Iudah and the House of Benjamin an hundred and fourscore thousand men which were Warriers to fight against the House of Israel who rebelled and revolted to bring the Kingdome againe to Rehoboam the Sonne of Solomon But the word of God came to Shemajah the man of God saying speake unto Rehoboam the King of Iudah and unto all the house of Judah and Benjamin and to the remnant of the people saying Thus saith the Lord You shall not go up to fight against your Brethren the Children of Israel though Rebells returne every man to his house for this thing is from me They hearkned therefore to the word of the Lord and returned to depart according to the word of the Lord from going against Ieroboam and their Brethren Here God himselfe prohibits both King and people to raise a Civill-warre against their Brethren though Rebells and Revol●ers in the highest degree and they both lay downe Armes hereupon for the present And when Rehoboam and Abijah his sonne afterwards made warre upon them they did lawfully resist and oppose them 1 Kings 14. 30. c. 15 6. 2 Chron 12 15. and chap. 13. throughout So the men on Tirzah being beseiged by King Omri to take Zimri lawfully defended themselves for a time 1 Kings 16 17 18. and thus did those of Bethmaachan against Ioab 1 Sam. 20 14. to 23. To passe from Scripture presidents Infinite are the examples in histories of subjects who by the very dictate law of natur wch instructeth every creature to defend it selfe against unjust violence defended themselves in all ages against the assaults oppressions and groundlesse Warres of their unnaturall Princes But the many late examples of this kinde of the Protestants in France Germany and Bohemia who have by open force defended their persons estates Religion against those Popish Kings and Governours who have causelesly levyed Warre against them which act of theirs all Protestants affirme to be lawfull both by the lawes of nature God and man and our owne domesticke examples of the long continued Barons Warres both in King Iohns o King Henry the thirds Edward the seconds and Richard the seconds Reignes who took up Armes against these Princes for the just defence preservation and establishment of the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdome which these Princes contended to subvert even in times of Popery which act of theirs by the Prelates Clergy and people of those times and by all succeeding Ages since was and hath been resolved not onely lawfull but p honest just and honourable and worthy eternal Encomiums by meanes whereof our Kingdome hath quietly enjoyed those Lawes and Liberties which they contended for ever since which otherwise had been long agone utterly lost and the Kingdome with them will aboundantly suffice to cleare and ratifie this conclusion beyond all contradiction or excep●ion of any malignant Spirits Fifthly that it is lawfull and necessary for the Parliament for the preservation of the Kingdomes peace and safety its necessary defence and the better prevention of Civill-warres to settle the Militia and secure the Magazines of the Realme by such meanes as may most effectually advance and accomplish this great much opposed worke since His Majestie hath refused to passe a Bill to accomplish it Neither is this way of setling the Militia a Novelty but the most ancient practice and custome of this Kingdome for it appeares by King * Edwards Lawes that in his and former ages the Lievtenants and supream Commanders of the Mlitia in every County were elected per commune Concilium pro communi v●ilitate regni per provincias et patrias vniversas et per singulas Comitatus in ●leno Fulkemots by the Common-counsell for the common utility of the Realm through every Province Countrey and County in a full Falkmoth or County Court by the Freeholders of the County And if the Freeholders in ancient times did thus in every County elect their Lievtenants and Captaines of their Militia to Train and Order them yea and the high Sheriffs too who had the

truth worthy consideration when ignorance and incredulity hath lately occasioned many grand inconveniences and mistakes This is most apparant by this familiar demonstration for as much as the King hath no right or interest in these Forts Towns or Magazines as he is a private person but only in right of his Crowne as he is King of England and the publique Minister or Servant of the Kingdom to provide for its security and tranquility in times of warre or danger and its prosperity in times of peace Wee all know that by the Law of the Land the King cannot sell or alien the Lands or Revenues of the Crowne yea our Law-books and Judges have resolved ſ that the King by his will cannot demise any of his Lands t That though the King make a will and give Legacies of his own private goods which hee hath yet he cannot demise the Iewells Plate Coronets and goods of the Crowne And if the u King hath the body of a Ward the temporalities of a Bishop by way of sequestration in his possession or right to present to a Church that is void and make his executors and dye his Executors shall not have the Ward temp●●●lties or presentation though chattles as a common persons executors shall have but the succeeding King So if Subsidies be granted and the King dye before they are l●vyed his Executors shall not enjoy them though a chattle but his Successor So the successor King not the Kings Executors shall have all his Ships Ordinance Powder Armes and Ammuni●ion though chattles because they are not the Kings but Kingdomes and purchased with the Kingdomes money 1 Eliz. x cap. 19. 1 ●ac c 25. because the King hath not only his Lands but even these very Chattles in right of his Crown as King not as a private person for the benefit of the Kingdome When King Iohn most unworthily with the consent of some of his Barons resigned his Crowne and Kingdome of England to the Pope P●●lip the French King though his enemy declared this Act void y Because no Ki●g nor Prince can give away the Kingdome which is the Common-wealths and all the Noblemen of France there present begun to cry with one voyce that they would sta●d to this truth even to death This matter of this Kings grant made to the Pope being proposed and discussed in full Parliament in the 40 yeare of Edward the third z Vpon full deliberation the Prelates Dukes Earles Barons and Commons answered and resolved with one accord That neither the said King John nor any other can put him nor his Re●lme nor his people under such subjection without their assent and as by many evidences it appeareth if it were done it was done without the ra●●●nt and contrary to his owne Oath at his Coronation And besides this the Dukes Earles Barons Gentlemen and 〈…〉 accord and agree that in case t●e Pope shall enforce or attempt by Proc●s or by any other manner of d●ing t● constraine the King or his subiects to performe this as it is said hee will these parties wi●● resist wi●● all their puissance So that by the Resolution of this whole Parliament the King cannot grant away his whole Kingdome without his p●oples consent in Parli●ment and by the selfe same reason not any part parceil Towne or Fort thereto belongi●g th●y being the Kingdomes not the Kings owne right The Civilians of forraign parts disputing of the pretended Donation of Constantine the great of Rome Italy and Supreame jurisdiction there to the Pope resolve this a Donation void because the Emperou● by Law cannot give away any of his Empire it being contrary to his Coronation Oath wherein hee sweares b to maintain the Dignities and Rights belonging to the Empire that he 〈◊〉 impa●re the goods and state of the Empire but keepe inviolable the Rights of his Kingdome and the honour of his imperiall Crowne By vertue of which Oath they hold the Emperour strictly obliged in duty both to God and the Empire to take to themselves not onely all those large and faire Territories which the Pope hath taken either by force or fraud inv●ded decking himselfe with the Eagles plumes but specially they ought to resume that Dominion in those very Lands which the Pope now challengeth as his owne by force of this forged grant c Baldus a learned Civilian writes That the Doctors of the Law determine That Constantines pretended Donation neither is nor possibly can be of force to passe away either the propriety or supreame Dominion in these Territories or the Imperiall jurisdiction over them For to say that the Emperour would by his Donation mutilate or cut away the Members of the Empire is a kinde of folly d Arctine not onely assents to Baldus but much commends his judgment therein Baldus saith he doth elegently teach that the Emperour cannot give away any quotient neither a third nor 4th part nor halfe of his Empire Whereby Baldus meanes that the Empire being an intire and universall power the Emperour by giving ought ceaseth not to be universall Lord of all belonging to the Empire e Lucas de Penna is very pregnant in this point The Royalties of the Empire writes he cannot be alienated from the Emperour Yea though the Emperour should sweare that hee would not revoke such Royalties as were alienated to the preiudice of his Crowne and Dignity yet notwithstanding this his Oath hee might recall such alienations because the Emperour sweares at his Coronation to keepe safe the honours and rights of his Kingdome ●ut by alienating his demaines and Territories he doth not preserve but impaire the Imperiall Rights f Albericus de Rosate is copious in this case Let us see saith he whether Constantines Donation could be of force to pre●udice his Successors Accu●stus holds it could not so doth John de Parisiis And he gives this reason thereof Because none deputed to an office may do ought against his own office But it is against the office deputed to the Emperour to impaire his Empire or cut or take away any part from it For by the same reason that he cuts away one part he may cut away also another and so may his successors and so the Empire at last should be b●ought to nothing and utterly destroyed which is against the publique good and the end why the Empire is ordained Whereupon I doe believe that the foresaid Donation by law cannot be of ●orce to prejudice the Empire or the Successors The same Doctrine is delivered for Law by Boetius Epon Herric qu. qu. 3. nu 43. quest 5. nu 19. 27. 34. by Didacas Coverrumius Practic qu. c. 4. nu 1. by Franc. Vargas De Author Pontifi Axiom 1 Num. 2. Gulielmus Benedictus Caralus Degrossatus Felinus with others All which I have cited to shew the concurrence of the Civill with our common law in this particular and to resolve all opposites in this point who scruple at