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	law_n	nature_n	1,115	5	5.3946	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94764	Touching the fundamentall lawes, or politique constitution of this kingdome, the Kings negative voice, and the power of Parliaments. To which is annexed the priviledge and power of the Parliament touching the militia.		1643 (1643)	Wing T1956; Thomason E90_21; ESTC R21308	11,820	15

without detainment of their freedome by the exercise of an illegall usurped and unconsented power whereunto Kings especially in hereditary Monarchies are very prone which cannot be suspected by a Parliament which is representatively the Publike intrusted for it which is like to partake and share with the Publick being but so many private men put into authority protempore by common consent for common good Nor is the Parliament hereby guilty of an Arbitrary Government or is it destructive to the Petition of Right when as in providing for publick weale it observes not the letter of the law first because as aforesaid that law was not made betwéene Parliament and people but by the people in Parliament betwéene the King and them as appears by the whole ten●ur of it both in the complaining and praying parts which wholly relate to the King Secondly because of the common consent that in the representative Body the Parliament is given thereunto wherein England in her Polity imitates Nature in her Instincts who is wont to violate particular principles for publique preservation as when light things descend and heavy ascend to prevent a vacuum and thirdly because of the equitable power which is inherent in a Parliament and for publique good is to be acted above and against any particular Statute or all of them and fourthly because the end of making that Law to wit the publique preservation is sulfild in the breaking of it which is lawfull in a Parliament that is chosen by the whole for the whole and are themselves also of the body though not in a king for therein the Law saith Better a mischeife then an inconuenience But it may be objected though it be not Arbitrary for the Parliament to goe against written law yet is it not so when they go against the Kings consent which the law even the fundamentall law supposeth in Parliamentary proceedings This hath beene answered that the King is juridically and according to the intention of the law in his Courts so that what the Parliament consults for the publick good That by oath and the duty of his office and nature of this polity he is to consent unto and in case he do deny it yet in the construction of the fundamentall law and constitution of this Kingdom he is conceived to grant it supprosing the head not to be so unnaturall to the body that hath chosen it for good and not for evill But it will be answered where is the Kings Negative Voice if the Parliament may proceed without his consent I answer That there is no known nor written law that gives him any and things of that nature are willingly beleeved till they be abused or with too much violence claimed That his Majesty hath fundamentally a right of consent to the enacting of laws is true which as aforesaid is part of that honourable trust constituted in him And that this royall ascent is an act of honoer and not of absolute and negative power orprerogative appeares by these following reasons First by his oath at the Coronation mentioned in one of the Parliaments Declarations where he doth or should sweare to confirme and grant all such good lawes as his people shall choose to be observed not hath chosen for first The word concedis in that oath were then unnecessary the lawes formerly enacted being allready granted by foregoing Kings and so they need no more concession or confirmation else we must run upon this shelfe that all our laws die with the old King and receive their being a new by the new Kings consent Secondly Hereby the first and second clause in that interrogatory viz. Concedis iustas leges permittas prot●gendas are confounded and doe but idem repetere Thirdly Quas vulgus elegerit implies onely the act of the people in a disjunctive sence from the act or consent of the King but laws allready made have more then quas vulgus elegerit they have also the royall consent too so that that phrase cannot meane them wherein the act or consent of the King is allready involved Secondly by the practise of requiring the royall ascent even unto those very acts of subsidies which are granted to himselfe and for his owne use which it is supposed he will accept of and yet Honoris gratia is his roiall ascent craved and contributed thereunto Thirdly by the Kings not sitting in Parliament to debate and consult lawes nor are they at all offered him by the Parliament to consider of but to consent to which yet are transmitted from one house to another as well to consult as consent to shewing thereby he hath no part in the consultory part of them for that it belongs onely to the people in Parliament to discerne and consult their own good but he comes onely at the time of enacting bringing his Royall Authority with him as it were to set the seale thereof to the Indenture allready prepared by the people for the King is head of the Parliament in regard of his authority not in regard of his reason or judgement as if it were to be opposed to the reason or judgement of both houses which is the reason both of King and Kingdome and therefore do they as consult so also interpret lawes without him supposing him to be a person replenished with honour and royall authority not skilled in lawes nor to receive information either of law or councell in Parliamentary affaires from any saving from that supreame court and highest councell of the King and Kingdome which admits no counterpoize being intrusted both as the wisest Councell and justest judicature Fourthly either the choise of the people in Parliament is to be the ground and rule of the Kings assent or nothing but his pleasure and so all Bills though never so necessary for publique good and preservation and after never so much paines and consultation of both houses may be reiected and so they made meere cyphers and we brought to that passe as either to have no lawes or such onely as come immediately from the King who oft is a man of pleasure and little séene in publicke affaires to be able to judge and so the Kingdomes great councell must be subordinated either to his meere will and then what difference between a free Monarchy and an absolvte saving that the one rules without Councell and the other against it or at the best but to a cabinet councell consisting commonly of men of private interests but certainly of no publicke trust Ob. But if the King must consent to such laws as the Parliament shall chuse eo nomine they may then propound unreasonable things to h●m as to consent to his own deposing or to the lessning his own revenew c. Ans So that the issue is whether it be fitter to trust the wisdome and integrity of our Parliament or the will and pleasure of the King in this case of so great and publicke concernment In a word the King being made the fountaine of justice and

protection to his people by the fundementall lawes or constitution of this Kingdome he is therefore to give life to such acts and things as tend thereunto which acts depend not upon his pleasure but though they are to receive their greater vigour from him yet are they not to be suspended at pleasure by him for that which at first was intended by the kingdome for an honourable way of subsistence and administration must not be wrested contrary to the nature of this Polity which is a free and mixt Monarchy and not an absolute to its destruction and confusion so that in case the King in his person should decline his duty the King in his courts are bound to performe it where his authority properly resides for if he refuse that honour which the republicke by its fundamentall constitution hath conferred upon him and will not put forth the acts of it for the end it was given him viz. for the justice and safety of his people this hinders not but that they who have as fundamentally reserved a power of being wellbeing in their own handes by the concurrence of Parliamentary authority to the royall dignity may thereby provide for their own subsistence wherein is acted the Kings juridicall authority though his personall pleasure be withheld for his legall and juridicall power is included and supposed in the very being and consequently in the acts of Courts of justice whose being he may as well suspend as their power of acting for that without this is but a cypher and therefore neither their being nor their acting so depend upon him as not to be able to act and execute common justice and protection without him in case he deny to act with them and yet both so depend upon him as that he is bound both in duty and honour by the constitution of this polity to act in them and they from him so that according to that axiome in law the King can doe no wrong because his iuridicall power and authority is allwayes to controle his personall miscarriages Se Defendendo GOd and nature hath ordained Government for the preservation of the governed This is a truth so undeniable as that none will gainsay it saving in practice which therefore being taken for granted it must needs follow that to what end Government was ordained it must bee maintained for that it is not in the power of particular persons or communities of men to depart with selfe preservation by any covenant whatsoever nor ought it to bee exacted by any superiours from their inferiours either by oath or edict because neither oathes nor statutes are obligatory further then they agree with the righteous Laws of God and nature further then so they ought neither to be made nor kept Let it be supposed then for argument sake that the Militia of the Kingdom is in the power of the King yet now as the case stands it is lawfull for the Parliament to reassume it because though they passed it into his hands for the peoples preservation yet it was never intended that by it he might compasse their destruction contrary to the Law of nature whereby every man yea every thing is bound to preserve it selfe And thusmuch in effect is confessed at unawares by the Author of the Reply to the Answer of the London Petition who affirmeth saying The King is invested with the sole power of Training Arraying and Mustering and then gives the reason because it is most consonant to reason as well as grounded on Law That he wich is bound to protect should be able to compasse that end Which reason overthrows both his position and intention 1. His position for this is no reason why the sole power of the Militia should be in the hands of the King because he is bound to protect except he were bound solely to protect that is without the counsel and advice of Parliament but it hath beene resolved that He is not sole judge of necessity and therefore not sole protector against it but together with His Parliament who consequently shares in the power of the Militia 2. It overthrows His intention which is so to put the power of the Militia into the hands of the King as to enable him to do what he wil with it whenas yet he himself cannot but affirm it is his to protect withall for hat when he ceaseth to use it to its end it ceaseth to be in his power or else let the man speake plain and say it is His to destroy as well as to protect Ob. But the Militia is passed to the King absolutely without any condition of revocation expressed or of limitation to circumscribe the use whereunto it ought to be imployed 1. Ans Laws of God and nature neither are nor need to be expressed in contracts or edicts for they are ever supposed to be supreme to humane ordinances and to chalenge obedience in the first place and other Laws so far onely as they are consonant to them though these laws be further backed with Oathes and Protestations As for instance I give a man a sword and sweare I will never take it from him yet if he actually assault me or it manifestly appeare he intends to cut my throat or take my purse with it I may lawfully possesse my selfe of it again if opportunity serve because in such agreements betwixt man man the laws of nature neither are nor can be exempted but are necessarily implyed still to be of force because no bonds can lawfully invalid them and id solum possumus quod jure possumus But it may be asked how it appeares that the King intends to imploy the Militia to the destruction of his people Why first because He hath refused to hearken to the wholsome counsel of His Parliament the representative body and the highest Court and Counsel of the Kingdom 2 Because è contrario he hearkens to the councels of notorious Papists and Malignants men engaged against the publike good and welfare of this Kingdome in a diametrall opposition so that if they perish it prospereth and if it prosper they perish 3. Because hee hath had a deepe hand in contriving and plotting the ruine and extirpation of the Parliament by secret and open violence and in them of the whole Kingdome of whom they are the Epitome and as the King is the head so they are the heart But further it may be replied that the King hath promised to maintain Parliaments and governe by Law Ans That is so far as he knowes his own heart and as he can be master of himselfe He sware the same at His Coronation and promised as much when he granted the Petition of Right but how they have beene kept God knowes and we are not ignorant It may be His Majesty may meane as he speakes but 1. Temptations may change his minde as it hath done too often and as it did his that said to the Prophet Is thy servant a dog that he should do such things and