Selected quad for the lemma: death_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A25843
|
The armies vindication ... in reply to Mr. William Sedgwick / published for the kingdomes satisfaction by Eleutherius Philodemius.
|
Philodemius, Eleutherius.
|
1649
(1649)
|
Wing A3718; ESTC R21791
|
60,305
|
74
|
and good for them better then their Kings who are their publick ministers and thus concluding itaque majorum rerum potestas jure populo tribuitur Therefore power of the greater things is by right the peoples 4. This may also appear by the histories and records of all Kingdoms in the world where Tyrants forc't not in by conquest and held not possession afterwards by force In the Romane state both under their Kings and Emperors the chief power in all things of highest concernment was alwayes in the Senate and people and so much Bodin grants That the people hadt he chief Soveraign power of enacting and confirming Lawes the Senates decrees being of no validity unlesse the people ratified them and if any of their Kings Consuls Emperors or Generals did things without their consent as making war concluding peace c. it did not bind but was meerly voyd unlesse the Senate and people together in a great assembly ratified the same by a publick Law But to let passe forreign examples our ancestors in this Kingdome which shewes what power was invested in the whole body of the people have not only constrained our Kings by threats yea force of armes to summon and continue Parliament but likewise compelled them to give their royal assents to Magna Charta Charta de Foresta Confirmatio Chartarum Articuli super Chart as with sundry other publick statutes of right and justice for common good and the subjects safety and to ratify them with their hands seales oathes proclamations against their will and liking which forced assents have been afterward justified and held good in law to bind these kings and their followers to the due observation thereof for where the lawes are convenient necessary or essentiall for the Kingdomes welfare the Subjects just liberty and safety and such as the King by duty and oath is bound to assent to there if they compel the King to give his assent in case of denyal the assent is binding and shall not be voyd by Duresse because the King doth no more then he is obliged by oath law and duty to condiscend unto and the people whose power is above him may justly require 5. And now in answer to Mr. Sedgwick affirming the Crown to be the Kings birth-right a thing which I utterly deny and have clear reasons against it For 1. Howsoever here in England the Crown hath gon often by discent yet never was it granted absolute successive and heretary but arbitrary and elective Hence many of our Kings have come to the crown without any hereditary title by the peoples free election and afterward obeyed as lawful Kings Thus Anno. 975. after Edgars disease not Ethelred the heir to the former King but Edward crowned So Edmund heir to King Ethelred refused and Canutus a stranger elected and crowned So Edmund and Alfred both heirs set a side and Harald and Hardiknute elected and crowned Kings I might also shew how upon the death of King Harald it was enacted by the English Nobility That none of the Danish blood should any more reign after them So after William the first not Robert the elder brother but Rufus the younger brother chosen So after the desease of Richard the first John Earl of Morton was crowned and Arthur the right heir refused The like might be manifested of other nations how their kings did not reign heretarily and by succession from father to sonne but those were chosen Kings amongst them which were held worthy which election was made by the people and revokable by them at any time and whensoever the Crown went now and then by succession it was by usurpation rather than right From humane Histories we might come to the holy Scriptures and shew that the original creation and constitution of the Isralites Kingdoms proceeded only from the authority and power of the people and that solely by Divine permission rather than institution as is apparant by Deut. 11.14 15. And howsoever the Lord did somtimes immediatly nominate the persons of those that should reign over them as Saul David Jehu Jeroboam c. yet the people did constantly confirme and make them Kings and gave them their royal authority none being made Kings by Divine appointment but such as they willingly accepted approved and confirmed to be kings Gods previous designation being but a preparative to their voluntary and free election Moreover It is very cleer that the kings of Judah and Israel were subordinate in power to the people and not only counselled but usually over-rul'd by them in al matters of publick concernment for though they asked a king yet they reserved sufficient authority to themselves to restrain him and to order and dispose of the publick affairs as they thought good But these things we have reserved to a larger treatise 2. Howsoever Bodin contrary to Aristotle Tacitus Lipsius Toloso Machavel Kirchnerus and the greatest Polititions prefers succession before election of Kings and instanceth several nations to be heretary yet this I say quo jure from the beginning it was not so for every heretary Crown is through custom not of right howsoever people have let it passe and admitted them in such a way yet this hath been still in the people a free act and it was in their liberty and power to have chosen any other 3. Whereas some Kings require an oath of their subjects that their heirs and successors shall enjoy the Crown after them and the grounds of taking this oath is upon an opinion that the Crown goes by succession from father to child so that in their understanding they give not any thing away from themselves but only acknowledg what they conceive the person already is Now this oath being given and taken upon a false ground cannot bind in point of conscience because if they knew it was not the others right they would not swear neither meant they in the least to pass away any thing of their own right for they thought it was the others properly before And here by the way observe how vain and groundlesse that common question pro and con is amongst Polititians Statists Civilians and some Divines whether succession or election be the better as if truly and rightly there were some such thing as succession whereas it is neither so nor so I confesse after a Kings desease the people may elect and crown the son and his sons son but that any such thing can be claimed or chalenged as a birth-right it is altogether untrue there is no Kingdom in the world where the crown descends from the father to the son by any true and proper succession the most that can be is not simple succession but a succession limitable and conditional that is a promise on the peoples part for some considerable causes that the son shall be crowned after the fathers death if he be fit to govern and they see it is for their good But that any people should absolutely bind themselves to have the son reign over
have done had not the people power to hinder censure and depose them for their sins It is said of Amaziah King of Judah 2 King 14.19 That they made a conspiracie against him in Jerusalem and he fled to Lachish but they sent after him to Lachish and slew him there not privatly but openly as acted by publick authority for his great impiety as having broken his oath and covenant whereupon we reade not of any complaint inquisition proceeding or punishment inflicted on those that slew him after his death either by the people or his children as there was upon those that slew king Ammnon but being slaine they to wit the persons who had put him to death brought him on horses and he was buried in Jerusalem and all the people of Judah made Ahaziah King in his stead Which plainly shews that what was formerly done by the greater part of the States at Jerusalem was afterwards confirmed by common consent and executed by command of those which might lawfully do it Fourthly For examples all histories are full nothing more frequent than to reade how people having the supream power would judiciously convent censure depose yea and judge their kings to death for their evil and wicked courses Thus amongst the Romans the Senate and people together proceeded against Nero Julianus Vitellius Maximinius Heliogabulus c. I speak not of Traquin the proud expelled the kingdome by the people So other Emperours likewise being found unfit unable to govern the kingdom have been deposed and others elected and crowned in their stead as Cbilderiek Charles the third Justinus the second Wenceslaus all put off and Pepin Arnolph Fiberius and Rupert Count Palatine of Rhine chosen and set in the Empire The Cumaen State usually arraigned and punished their Kings juditially if they saw cause Thus the French by authority of a publick Councel through the prudent care of the officers of the Realm deposed Childerick the first Sigebert Theodorick and Childerick the third So Gyl for his grievous taxes and other miscarriages they chased into Soysons Theoduricus because he vexed and oppressed the people was by the authority of the State deprived of all dignity Touching the Kings of Spain we shall finde in Histories and good Authors that frequently for their tyrranny and misgovernment they were deposed by their subjects as Theo-discle the tenth Vttiza and other Gotish Kings as infamous monsters were chased from their thrones So Don Pedro the first Ordogno Alphonso the great Astronomer kings of Castile for their cruelties murders and treacheries all rejected and deprived of their Realms Ramir of Leon and Garcia King of Gallieia both deposed for their vitious and base doings In Hungaria Peter the second and Solomon the first to omit some others for their great insolencies and injustice were both deposed the first afterwards banished and the other kept in prison till he died So the Bohemians deposed and banished Boleslaus Rufus Berzinogius Sobeislaus Vladislaus and twise imprisoned Wenceslaus for his drunkennesse neglegence and cruelty In Poland the people have deposed imprisoned or expelled out of the kingdom many of their Kings for their oppressions and injustice as amongst others Miesco their second King Boleslaus his son Myoslaus Henrie c. Neither have the Swedish Kings been used otherwise but for their cruelty treachery and tyranny have been thrust out of their thrones and Realm by the people as Halsten Aminander Burgerius Magnus Henry Christierne the first and second and others elected and crowned in their stead So in Denmark Humbus Ericus Christierne father and son censured and deposed by the State for their licenciousnesse and misgovernment Not to mention Canutus Magnus Suano put to death by the people I passe over Canades King of Persia Dionysius the younger King of Sicile Timocrates of Cyrene Andronicus Emperour of Constantinople by the people rejected upon just cause For Scotland If George Bucanan and others of their own Historians write truth as there hath seldom ever bin good King thereof so very few of them begin with this mans father and so go up that ever died an natural death But touching the point in hand how frequently the Parliaments and Nobles there have questioned their Kings imprisoned deposed yea judicially censured them for their tyrannies oppressions whoredoms murders falshood and evil adminstration you may see at large in the aforesaid Bucanan some I have taken out of him as Durstus and his sons so Dardan Luctack Conarus Ramack Fereuhard Euginius Constantine Ethus Donald Lugrac Megal Edward Baliol James the third all these have been sentenced rejected I mention not such though he doth many whom the common people for their intollerable basenes murdered and put to death To which I might adde this mans Grandmother whom they imprisoned and caused to abjure and resign her Interest in the Crown and kingdom to her Infant son and at last was solemnly arraigned and condemned to death by the Parliament of England and beheaded at Fatheringham Castle all which proceedings against her as her Deposition Imprisonment ahd Execution hath hitherto been justified as lawful To come now to our own nation many examples we have upon record in our Chronicles concerning the matter in hand I shall at this time but only touch things in a brief way King Vortigen after six years raign for his negligence and evil government was deposed from his crown by his subjects and his son Vortimer chosen and crowned in his stead Speed Chron. pag. 207.266.267 Sigehert King of the sumptuous using exactions and cruelties upon his subjects was put by his place and Kenwolfe made King in his steed Speed hist. pag. 229. So Ofred King of Northumberland for his ill government was expelled by his subjects and deprived of all Kingly authority Speed pag. 245.246 Ethelred the son of Mollo so far offended his subjects that they tooke up armes against him and slew him at Cobre Beornerd King of Mercia because governed the people not by just Laws but by Tyranny was expelled the kingdom and Offa chosen and crowned Mat. Westm. pa. 275. The like was Edwins case King of Mercia and Northumberland for his misgovernment tyranny and oppression and following vaine base and wicked Councellors was removed from all kingly dignity in whose place Edgar was elected King I might have mentioned Archigallo one of our ancient Brittish Kings in times of Gentilisme for some misorders was deposed by the people when he had reigned almost five yeers and his brother Elidurus chosen in his room So Emerian another old British King deprived of all kingly honor and dignity and Yowally promoted to the crown Fabian par 2. chap. 49. p. 30.31 chap. 46. p. 34. Since the conquest as they call it King John disavowed by his Lords and Commons for wasting burning and spoyling the kingdome like an enemy electing Lewes of France for their King Speed p. 585. Edward the second for his misgovernment put down and Edward his son elected and crowned Walsing. hist.