Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A83662
|
The debates in the House of Commons assembled at Oxford March the 21st. 1680.
|
England and Wales. House of Commons.
|
1681
(1681)
|
Wing E2546A; ESTC R212952
|
32,268
|
29
|
't is much more to take it from Court Parliaments formerly upon any extraordinary matter staid and sent their Members to consult with those who sent them I am not subjugated when I am here to what the Country does propose I am as much against a Republick as he that fears it but I am a Protestant I say I know Sir T. Litt. to be of that Experience and Reason that if he go away satisfied in this matter he will do all the good he can in the post he is in But to keep close to this question It being allowed by Law That an Exclusion of the D. from the Crown may be the next thing is to consider the Expedient of the Regency proposed The same Authority that can make a Descent of the Crown may mod fie it He argued to shew that the Regency would make the Duke insignificant in the Administration of the Government Now the Question is which is the most parcticable We Lawyers are aptest to go on the strongest side and to call every thing Prerogative I 'l put you a case in King James's time the Sheriff of there was an exceptation in his Commission that he should not keep the County Court of but should have all other Exercises of his Office But the Judges resolved he was Sheriff to all intents and purposes and that he could not be hindred keeping the County-Court An Act of Parliament against common sence is void To make a man King and not suffer him to exercise Kingly power is a contradiction Some clauses formerly in Acts of Parliament were flattering clauses to satisfie the people and not let them have the thing Should this of the Expedient be an Act 't is nonsense and may be said hereafter the House of Commons were outwitted I owe the Duke obedience if he be King but if he be King and have no power to govern he is the King and no King I have urged this to shew that this is no Expedient it blears only peoples Eyes and is no solid security To say the Duke values his Estate which he may forfeit c. He loves a Crown too very well therefore you are not to arm your self in point of Consequence but in point of Reason The last Parliament I did see by the management of the Papists and the Ministers that without this Bill of Exclusion our ruine is irresistable If the Duke come to the Crown He brings with his Religion Merum Imperium and that made me fond of the Bill but if by Law the Duke never was King there is no case of Conscience lyes upon us in his Exclusion I will only make this observation of the Kings Speech in relation to this Question And if it be practicable the ridding of our selves quite of that Party c. and not to lay so much weight upon one Expedient as to determine all others are ineffectual vide Speech The two main points it seems the King doubts himself and all this delivered by the King in great wisdom is clipt off to this Expedient of the Regency You see now we come to Expedients the Ministers have had two Parliaments to consider it and now we are come to this Expedient of the Regency I find no security in Law by this Expedient you take away nothing by this Expedient and therefore I hope the Bill of Exclusion will pass I hope that reason and not great Offices will take men off from their Nemine contradicente I speak this as if I were a dying man and Humbly Move for the Bill c. H. B. I have it in command from my Country That they apprehend no Expedient to secure us from Popery but that the Remedy will be worse than the Disease unless this Bill I have heard as yet no Reason given against it But there is an aliquid latet If the D. be not set aside I am sure the Government will be and therefore I am for the Bill of Exclusion c. Sir T. M. I know not how far Sir Fr. W. Argument may be prest what Bill soever we may have Pray let us have the Law on our sides that if the King should dye we may know whether we are to go I think the K. s ' Speech is penned as it ought to be penned and should a King speak positively to what Laws He would have we are an Irish Parliament and not an English but the Kings words are tender words The thing lies fairly before you if any Expedient can be thought of not to destroy the Monarchy and if the next presented be not the best not to refuse the next E. V. You have had an Expedient offerd you of a Regency c. instead of the Bill of Exclusion c. Pray consider what this Regency is 'T is the whole Office of a King to appoint Judges call Parliaments c. This Power they would take away from the Duke But if by Law they will reserve the name of King to the Duke 't is to bring a War upon us and to bring the Duke in by force This Regency must he supported by War as well as the Bill of Exclusion By the 13 Eliz. the Crown is not alienable by the King but may be alienated by King Lords and Commons And when that Statute was made no Successour was named to keep King James in awe which I conceive was the Reason why none was named in the last Bill of Exclusion Though we have bin frighted out from that Bill by Prorogations and Dissolutions yet 't will not frighten them whose Reasons go along with it And I am for that Bill because all men are for it and have sent up the same Parliament again that past it But if you lead people into uncertainties in the Government as this project of Regency undoubtedly will do the Court and the Country will be of a mind to lay aside Parliaments because they are useless Sir H. C. Peoples eyes are now enlightned and all the world over they are an informed people The Papists care not who is King if he be a Papist And so he proceeded much to the same purpose in several Speeches in the last Parliament Col. G. L. I would not have spoke so much out of duty to my Master but for the duty I owe to my Country I owe a new Obligation to the King for I am the D's Servant from the King My Father was a Servant to the late King and this and I have my protection under him I was bred in England and for his Service at Sea I know my own weakness not being bred to the Law but by enquiry I find that the Doctrine of disposing a Kingdom from the Right Heir is Damnable and 't is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome I have heard that in the 24 E. 3 the King demanded Advice of the Parliament in matters relating to the Crown The Answer was by the whole Parliament They could not advise in any thing relating to the Crown nor of disinheriting