Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	according_a	king_n	law_n	1,830	5	4.8875	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90962	The city-remonstrance remonstrated. Or An answer to Colonell John Bellamy, his Vindication thereof, in justification of The moderate reply to the city-remonstrance. / By I.P.	Price, John, Citizen of London.	1646 (1646)	Wing P3339; Thomason E345_18; ESTC R200996	24,101	36

a Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons in Parliament of the second of Novem. 1642. to these words wee did and doe say that the Soveraigne power doth reside in the King and both Houses of Parliament Here you thinke you have given the Replyer a faire fall and therefore insult over him ever and anon upon this point but forbeare Mr. Bellamy turpe insultare jacenti for however you thinke you have given the Replyer such a full and ample satisfaction yet all the world cannot so easily be satisfied and therefore though for my part I was never yet a Common Counsell man and therefore cannot so possitively speak to such deep states businesse yet since you are so willing to satisfy the ignorant what I shall say herein shall be by way of quere First then I quere Mr. Bellamy What meane you by three Estates I have heard the tearme once by the Bishops friends when they were a falling and they concluded that there were three Estates in this Kingdome viz. the King and the Lords temporall were the first Lords spirituall were the second the Commons the third Estate and they gave this reason that the King and the Lords were but one Estate because the King made the Lords but though the King conferr'd the Honours and profits of Bishops yet did not make the Bishops themselves they as Bishops were jure divino you determine it otherwise I pray you Sir a little more satisfaction to that point 2. What meane you by fundamentall you say the King Lords and Commons are the three Estates of which the fundamentall constitution of this Kingdome is made up are there three fundamentals I confesse I have not understood so much I ever thought there had been but one and that I took to be the Commons and these reasons made me think so First because I ever thought that the Commons made the King and the King made the Lords and s● the Commons were the Prime foundation Secondly I ever took this for a truth likewise that both the King and the Lords were advanced for the benefit quiet and welfare of the Commons and not the Commons made for them and if I was deceived the Common maxim of salu●-populi suprema lex deceived me You see my doubt you see my reason a little satisfaction here also Mr. Bellamy Thirdly I quere whether upon this supposition that the Kingdome is made up three Estates as you say and so wee must not understand the Parliament consisting of so many men but of three Estates distinct quatenus estates apart by themselves those are your termes I quere I say whether that the King and suppose the major part of the Lords which make up two Estates doe agree together suppose it be to set up absolute prerogative and the Commons will not assent here unto whether the major part of Estates must not conclude the minor the two conclude the third and so as for the Commons will they nil they slaves they must be and slaves they shall be your judgment here likewise good Mr. Bellamy Fourthly Whereas you say the King is present in Parliament viz. in his Kingly power though absent in person I quere whether he is present with them as a distinct Estate I know Sir hee is present in power in all his inferiour Courts of justice as well as in the parliament but is he present as a distinct estate If so if one distinct Estate may be present in power quatenus an estate and absent in person may not a second Estate be so present though absent in body yea a third Estate so present and yet absent in body and so we shall have three Estates in Parliament and not a man amongst them this is a Riddle indeed Mr. Bellamy I pray you unfould this also Fiftly The Replyer observing the Remonstrants ascribing only a share of the Supreame power to the House of Commons proposeth this question to them will not you allow so much power to the Kingdome Representative in reference to the Kingdom as to the representative City in reference to London see page 13. And so do I quere wil not the Cōmons of London yeild of ascribe unto the Commons of England as the Cōmons of London to thmselves wil ascribe Therefore Mr. Bellamy to make your absurdities the better appeare in your paralel between the Kingdome Representative and the City Representative I come upon you thus First you grant that the Common-councell is the City Representative page the 2. of your Vindication Secondly You grant that the House of Commons in Parliament assembled is the Kingdome Representative in the same page Thirdly You say the City Representative hath power to make a Law for those whom it Represents in the 12. page of your plea for the Cmonalty of London Fourthly I desire to know whether you allow the Kingdome Representative the same power to make a Law for those whom it represents if so then let us examine your argument May wee reason after your Logick Mr. Bellamy see your Sillogisme Sir in the said book called a plea for the Comonalty of London I think I hit the right name of it though the Replyer was mistaken before in the 12. page it stands thus That Court which hath a power to make a Law and by that Law to conferre a power upon the Lord Major and Aldermen which as Lord Major and Aldermen the● had not befor● must needs be quoad hoc unto the making of a Law above the Lord Major and Aldermen But this Court of Common-councell hath c. Ergo this Court of Common-councell so farre as to the making of a Law must needs be above the Lord Major and Aldermen Now Sir I quere only for I cannot presume such skill may not I reason thus after your patterne That Court that hath a power to make a law and by that law to conferre that power upon the King and Lords which as king and Lords they had not before must needs be quoad hoc unto the making of a Law above the King and Lords But the House of Commons which say you is the Kingdome R●presentative even as the Common-councell is the City Representative upon your supposition hath a power c. Ergo the House of Commons so farre as unto the making of a Law c. May I not reason thus likewise according to your example from your owne supposition still that Court which hath a power to make or repeale what lawes they judge meet for the Common wealth and whereunto the King himselfe is bound by his oath and therefore ought in duty to consent must needs be quoad hoc unto the making and repealing Lawes the Supream Court But the House of Commons which say you is the Kingdome Representative as the Common-conncell is of the City of London upon your supposi●ion hath such a power c. therefore Or may I not reason thus for I doe not conclude any thing I doe but as a Pupill to his Tuter propound queres to