Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	duke_n	france_n	king_n	8,145	5	4.2048	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44227	Vindiciæ Carolinæ, or, A defence of Eikon basilikē, the portraicture of His Sacred Majesty in his solitudes and sufferings in reply to a book intituled Eikonoklastes, written by Mr. Milton, and lately re-printed at Amsterdam.	Hollingworth, Richard, 1639?-1701.; Wilson, John, 1626-1696.	1692 (1692)	Wing H2505; ESTC R13578	84,704	160

what the Memorandum further says That King Charles the Second and the Duke of York did assure him it was none of the said King 's compiling c. An Earl it is said wrote it and I dispute it not but this I say That neither the King nor the Duke could speak it of their own knowledge but as by report from others because the King then Prince of Wales from his Expedition into the West with General Ruthien from whence he went off to France could not have seen His Father in near four Years before His death and therefore it seems improbable that the King should have shewn him a Letter To the Prince of Wales and at the same time told him it was not of his own compiling when yet the Letter says Id. I●●n 221. Son if these Papers come to your hands c. and concludes Farewel till we meet if not on Earth yet in Heaven And if the King did not tell him so then what he assured the Earl could not be of his own knowledge And for the Duke of York he was under Thirteen at the Surrender of Oxford from whence he was brought to St. James's where he made his Escape for Dort so that except when he saw his Royal Father at Hampton-Court which could not be often he could not have seen him in two Years and an half before his Death Nor seems it probable that the King should communicate his Thoughts with a Person of those Years albeit a Prince and his Son but not his next Heir But on the contrary more probable for both that what they so spake was but by report which young Princes are but too apt to take up from those who to cover their own Ignorance perswade them it smells too strong of the Pedant for a King to take up a Pen when yet the greatest of former Ages are oftner remmembred by their Pens than their Swords Caesar yet lives in his Commentaries M. Aurelius in his Philosophy and we may read Trajan by his Epistles to Pliny But to come nearer home Our Henry the first is as well known by the Name of Beauclerke as of King of England Henry the Eighth's Pen not his Sword gave him the Title of Defender of the Faith And this the Royal Portraict of our murther'd Sovereign shall outlast every thing but it self and Time Lastly And if there yet want some living credible Testimony of that time or matter of Record since Sir William Dugdate an indefatigable Searcher of our English Antiquities and perfect Master of the Transactions of his own Time gives us this gradual account viz. That these Meditations had been begun by His Majesty in Oxford long before he went from Oxford to the Scots under the Title of Suspiria Regalia That the Manuscript it self written with his own Hand being lost at Naseby was restored to him at Hampton-Court by Major Huntington who had obtain'd it from Fairfax That Mr. Thomas Herbert who waited on His Majesty in his Bed-Chamber in the Isle of Wight and Mr. William Levett a Page of the Back-stairs frequently saw it there and not only read several parts of it but saw the King divers times writing farther on it And that that very Copy was by his Majesty's direction to Bishop Duppa sent to Mr. R. Royston a Bookseller at the Angel in Ivy-Lane the 23d of December 1648. who made such Expedition that the Impression was finish'd before that dismal 30th of January on which the King was bereft of his Life As may be better read from himself Sir W. Dugd●●●'s Short View c. p. 380 381. in his Short View of the late Troubles in England And this further I speak of my own Knowledge That the very next Morning after that horrid Act I saw one of them and read part of it under the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which it now bears And for matter of Record and that the World may the more undeniably be convinc'd that both King Charles the Second and King James the Second did believe this Book was written by their Royal Father let him that doubts it but look upon Reliquiae Sacrae Carolinae Printed it the Year 1662 or any Impression of this Book since that time and he will find prefix'd to them a Privilege or Patent of King Charl● the Second to the said Mr. Royston his Executors c. for the sole Printing and Publishing the Book intituled Reliquiae c. and all other the Works of his said Royal Father and mo● especially mentions these most excellent Meditation and Soliioquies by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it so happening that most of that Impression in 1662. coming to be lost in the Fire of London whereby the Book became very dear an● scarce to be had King James the Second upon his coming to the Crown reciting those former Letters Patent grants him the like Privilege for the Printing and Publishing the said Book as it had been in the Year 1662. And now what shall an honest Man do in such a Case s●a● he give Credit to a bare Memorandum of what another said and as 't is most probable by report only or say the Circumstances before were not of weight to two Records For my part I take the King's Certificate to be of high nature yet I should hardly believe th● King himself against any one single Record against which the Law of England admits no Averrment and therefore I think no Man ought to make more of a Posthumous Memorandum than what the Law makes of it In a word these Pathetick Meditations no sooner came abroad than the Nation was undeceiv'd concerning the Author the Scales were fallen from their Eyes and they religiously look'd on Him whom in the simplicity of their Hearts they had pierced These our Pharisees saw and confest it themselves but said they if we let it alone the Romans will come and take away our City And therefore finding they could not suppress them they made it their Eusiness what in them lay to blot them Nay to that impudence they were arrived that and I saw it my self this Icon was exposed to Sale bound up with the Alcoran III. What end I proposed to my self in making this Reply And that 's easily shown nor is it forbidden any Man to burn Incense where the Air 's infected That this Royal Martyr has been calumniated is but too visible but how justly I am coming to examine In which I have this advantage to my hand That Time the Mother of Truth has justified her Daughter concerning Him and might have stopt the Rancour of his most inveterate Enemies but that nothing how evident soever can affect those that have a secret against blushing To be short my end is to vindicate this Good this Just however Unfortunate Prince to blow off that Froth that has been thrown on his Memory and according to my strength deliver him to the World as he was A great if not the only steddy

of a King A King of England of whose Predecessors the Parliament of England had declar'd That they could not assent to any thing that tended to the dis-inherison of the King and his Crown Sir Ed. Coke 4 Inst 14. whereunto they were Sworn But what could the wisest of Men say to it when the Parliament and the Rabble were both of a side And whether they were so or not witness those Tumultuary Routs from the Men of Essex Colchester Devon Somerset Middlesex Hartford Sir W Dagdale's Short View Fol. ●5 London Apprentices Seamen nay the very Women and all for putting the Kingdom into a Posture c On which follow'd those several Associations for suppressing the Popish Malignant Party though in truth it was to pursue the King with all vehemence Id. Dagd 113. for such are the Words of Essex's Letter to the Houses near that time Nor were the Black Cloaks less wanting to their Parts they could blow the Bellows well enough tho' they car'd not how little they wrought at the Forge And therefore seeing the Reverence of his Government was lost with the People and the Great Ones moving at another rate quam ut Imperantium meminissent 〈◊〉 As it was no less than time for His Majesty to retire and pray for fair Weather so our Answerer instead of snarling and catching at his Words might have suffer'd him to depart in Peace But to go on with him I am saith the King not further bound to agree with the Votes of both Houses than I see them agree with the Will of God my Rights as a King and the general good of my People And better for me to die enjoying this Empire of my Soul which subjects me only to God than live with the Title of a King if it carry such a Vassallage with it as not to suffer me to use my Reason and Conscience in which I declare as a King to like or dislike An use of Reason saith our Answerer If he thereby means his Negative Voice most reasonless and unconscionable and the utmost that any Tyrant ever pretended over his Vassals For if the King be only set up to execute the Law which is indeed the highest of his Office he can no more reject a Law offer'd him by the Common than he can new-make a Law which they reject And yet as reasonless and unconscionable as he pretends to make it this Negative Voice is and ever has been the undoubted Right of the Kings of England For besides what I had the occasion to speak to this matter before it is no Statute if the King assent not to it Because if it were all those Bills that have passed both Houses and for want of the Royal Assent lie buried in Oblivion might as occasion serv'd be trump'd up for Laws And if he may dis-assent it is a sufficient Proof of this Negative Voice and that he may refuse or ratifie as he sees cause And withal shews where this Legislation lies though the use of it be restrained to the consent of both Houses whose Rogation which is exclusive of all co-ordinate Power preceeds the Kings Ratification Then for his if the King be only set up c. If this if be false his whole matter falls with it And that it is so I thus prove it The Parliament-Roll 1 Edw. I. n. 8. says That upon the decease of King Richard the Second 9 Edw. 4. Fol. ● 6 the Crown by Law Custom and Conscience descended and belonged to Edmund Earl of March under whom King Edward the Fourth claimed And Henry the Fourth who had usurp'd upon King Richard the Second makes no other Title but as Inheritor to King Henry the Third Sir J. Hayward's 1st year of ●●n 4. So the Parliament of the first of King James the First Recognize as say they we are bound by the Law of God and Man the Realm of England and the Imperial Crown thereof doth belong to him by Inherent Birthright and lawful and undoubted Succession The same also for Queen Elizabeth 1 Eliz ● 1. as to her Which shews that Kings are neither set up by the People nor have the Titles to their Crowns from the two Houses but by Inherent Birthright Which needs no setting up And so I think what depends upon this if sinks with it though I shall have a further occasion to speak to it in his next Paragraph And here he taxes the King for saying He thinks not the Majesty of the Crown of England to be bound by any Coronation Oath in a blind and brutish formality to consent to whatever its Subjects in Parliament shall require But where does the Law of England say the King is so bound Tho' yet out Answerer is pleas'd to say What Tyrant could presume to say more when he meant to ki●● down all Law Government and Bond of Oath Least considering what his Majesty subjoyns viz. I think my Oath fully discharg'd is that Point by my Governing only by such Laws as my People with the House of Peers have chosen and my self consented to Nor did the Coronation Promise See the Oath in every Hist of his Reign or Oath oblige him to more than To hold and keep the Laws and rightful Customs which the Commonalty of this his Kingdom have and to defend and uphold them to the Honour of God so much as in him lay Whereas had there been any Obligation upon him to have consented to whatever the Parliament shall require it is not to be doubted but it would have been expressed in the Oath as it is not And yet our Answerer less doubts to say That that Negative Voice to deny the passing of any Law which the Commons chuse is both against the Oath of his Coronation and his Kingly Office in that he makes himself Superiour to his whole Kingdom which our standing Laws gainsay as hath been cited to him in Remonstrances That the King hath two Superiors the Law and his Court of Parliament An excellent Proof in the mean time But we 'll examine it a little The Common-Law saith Omnis sub Rege Sir E. Coke 1 Inst 1. c. Every Man is under the King and he under none but God And to the same purpose Bracton Lib. ● Ed. 55. 2 Inst 496. from whom he quotes it His Prerogative is a part of the Law of the Land All offences are said to be against the Peace of our Sovereign Lord the King c. The Laws of England are call'd the King's Laws The Parliament as is confess'd to my hand his Parliament And therein also the King is sole Judge 22 Ed III. 3. the rest but Advisers His is the power of Calling Proroguing and Dissolving them 4 Inst 46. Id. Inst 3. And by his Death they are dissolv'd of course And why all this but that the King is Principium Caput c. The beginning the head and end of a Parliament As he is also the Head of

That all Kings are the Lord 's Anointed it were yet absurd to think that the Anointment of God should be as it were a Charm against Law I know not what he means by that all Kings Saul was David was and particularly laments the fall of Saul As if he had not been anointed with Oil. 2 Sam. 1.11 And I never found any reason to doubt but that all Christian Hereditary Kings are the same too and consequently exempt from the Law forasmuch as concerneth the coactive force of the Law though not forasmuch as concerneth the directive Power of the Law Lord ●le●me●'s post ●●ti 106. Subjects are bound to fullfil the Law by necessity of Compulsion but the Prince only by his own Will in regard of the common good For seeing the Law is but a kind of Organ or Instrument of the Power that governeth Hist of the World 29● it seems saith Sir Walter Rawleigh that it cannot extend it self to bind any one whom no humane power can controul or lay hold of And therefore till I find better Authority for this his Iustice than he has yet given I shall look upon it as I do on the rest of his Book a thing meerly stuffed out to deceive the People If Subjects also by the Law of the Church so much approv'd by this King be invested with a Power of Judicature both without and against their King it will be firm and valid against him though pretending and by them acknowledg'd next and immediately under Christ Supream Head and Governour But what King or Queen of England besides Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth and Queen Mary for her two first Years ever us'd that word Head Or in what Age was it that the Church of England ever pretended a power of Judicature both without and against their Kings He says if they are invested with such a Power but shews not that they are and instead thereof tells us that St. Ambrose excommunicated Theodosius the Emperour which he calls a Spiritual putting to death The like did St. German by Vortiger And two other Kings of Wales excommunicated by their respective Bishops Subjects of those Kings And admitting it I never heard that any of those Bishops ever perswaded the People that it was lawful to Murther those Kings or how does it make out this his Iustice against the King 'T is a shrewd sign a Man is sinking when he takes hold of Twigs Then he comes up with the particular Laws and Acts of Greece Athens Sparta Rome c. But what 's that to England must we be govern'd as they were Their Laws were for it the Laws of England directly against it Nor is there any Country whatever but has its particular Laws or Customs If a Man steal an Oxe or a Horse in the Isle of Man it is no Felony 4 Inst 285. for having no Woods the Offender cannot hide them but if he steal a Capon or a Pig he shall be hang'd for it But what need we saith he search after the Laws of other Lands for what is so fully and so plainly set down lawful in our own Where antient Books tell us Bracton Fleta and others that the King is under the Law and inferiour to his Parliament As for Bracton the Words that he means may be perhaps these Rex habet Superiorem Deum scilicet Item Legem per quam factus est Rex Item curiam suam viz. Comites Barones The King hath a Superiour to wit God But doth not say Superiours in the Plural Number Also a Law by which he is made King i. e. He hath a Law but says not a word of Punishment Also his Court to wit his Earls and Barons Not a Court as if it were of some others Constitution but a Court of his own Where the word habet in Propriety of Latin is necessarily understood 1 Inst 1. Or otherwise he would be contradictory to himself when he saith Omnis sub Rege Bra. l. 4. c. 24. S. 5. c. Every Man is under the King and he is under none but God He is not inferiour to his Subjects and hath no Peer in his Realm But saith no where that he is under the Law and inferiour to his Parliament which word his sufficiently denotes where the Superiority lies And for Fleta he saith Lib. 1. c. 17. f. 16. None can judge in Temporal Matters but only the King and his Substitutes Id. F. 66. And he hath his Court in his Council in his Parliaments c. And for the Mirrour of Justice a Book written in Edward the First 's time that says Mir● 232. Jurisdiction is the chief Dignity that appertains to the King And for what concerns the King's Oath it has been several times altered since that And what this King's Oath was I have particularly shewn before Chap. 6 Those objected Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy we swore not to his Person but as it was invested with his Authority The same said the Spencers in Edward the Second's time but it was condemned for Treason by two Acts of Parliament 7 Coke 11 12. And Sir Edw. Coke calls it a damnable detestable and execrable Treason For Corps natural le Roy politique sont un Corps Plowd 213.234.242 and are inseparable and indivisible for both make but one King 4 Inst 46. The death of the King dissolve● a Parliament Now if this referr'd only to his politick Capacity the Parliament would continue after his Death because a Body Politick never dies And now as the Covenant once help'd the Houses at a dead lift it must do our Accuser the like Job at parting or this his Iustice will be little beholding to it Certainly no discreet Person can imagine it should bind us to him in any stricter Sense than those Oaths formerly And truly I must approve him when he deals ingenuously no certainly it did not for they broke all three The intent of the Covenant as it was to extirpate Prelacy to preserve the Rights of Parliament and the Liberties of the Kingdom so they intended so far as it might consist with these to preserve the King's Person and Authority but not otherwise for that had been to swear us into Labirynths and Repugnancies We vow'd farther to bring Delinquents to open Tryal and condign Punishment So that to have done so by the King hath not broke the Covenant but it would have broke the Covenant to have sav'd him the chief Actor as they thought him at the time of taking that Covenant Ye have heard what he says and I leave it to every Man to apply it as he pleases But because this matter has already taken up a whole Chapter between us I referr my Reader to what I have there said Chap. 14 And now to close all and if there be any Man has a Mind to learn how to break Oaths by Providence and forswear himself to the Glory of God To say Grace to the action be it never so ungodly and give Thanks for the Success be it never so wicked To carry on a Design under the name of Publick Good and make the slavery of a Nation the liberty of the People Or in a word to hold forth any useful though notorious Untruth with convenient Obstinacy until he believes it himself and so renders it no Sin let him read this Book of Mr. Milton's and if he does not improve upon it he may thank God for it FINIS