Selected quad for the lemma: enemy_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A60479
|
Salmasius his buckler, or, A royal apology for King Charles the martyr dedicated to Charles the Second, King of Great Brittain.
|
Bonde, Cimelgus.
|
1662
(1662)
|
Wing S411; ESTC R40633
|
209,944
|
452
|
lesson he can learn by which he will see the error of the times and what changes the wicked have wrought amongst us Therefore since several Parliaments have made Statutes That the King can commit no Treason nor no Treason be committed but against the King Ex ore tuo te Judicabo we may conclude from their own mouths that by no Law but against all Laws they murthered their King the meekest and justest of all men For whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the Law for sin is the trangression of the Law 1 John 3.4 Then how could the King sin when there was no Law for him to transgress By the common Law as I have already shewed he could not be an offender neither could he by any Statutes For at that very time when the Parliament the peoples representatives charged the King with Treason they had made many Statutes That those things which they themselves acted against the King should be high Treason against the King But they had made no Law whereby the King might become a Traytor against them Therefore the King could not offend against that Law which was not Adam had not sinned in eating the forhidden fruit had he not been first forbidden Neither had St. Paul known lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not sin Rom. 7.7 And for the King to commit Treason when there is no Law which maketh any offence in the King whatsoever Treason but all laws both Common and Statute both Divine and Humane resolve the contrary is such a Chimaera which passeth the understanding of every reasonable creature But forsooth our new upstart pragmatical Lawyers as they call them such as Cook was witness his King Charls his case fol. 22. A Cook but rather a Scullion I am sure of no affinity in judgement nor comparable in learning with our great Master and Oracle of the law Sir Edward Cook do say and profess that they have a Law written in their hearts whereby they are enabled and authorized to kill the King if he offend But I wonder holy David had not this Law written in his heart to kill wicked King Saul when it lay in his power so to do The question is easily answered for God said that David was a man after Gods own heart and therefore could not do so great a villany But I am sure if the Scripture be true Neither God nor man will say that these men are men either after Gods heart or any honest mans heart And divide the Kingdom and you will finde a thousand for one in whose hearts this law was never written Therefore if it be written in some few mens hearts yet since it is not written in the hearts of the Major part according to their own tenets that law is not binding You may read in 1 Sam. 24.6 and cap. 26.11 That it was in Davids power and he was admonished to kill his enemy wicked King Saul once in the Cave where he cut off the Kings skirt indeed but his heart smote him as if he had committed Crimen laesae Majestatis high Treason against the King And then in the Trench where Saul lay sleeping 1 Sam. 26.7 So David and Abishai came to the people by night and behold Saul lay sleeping within the Trench and his Spear stook in the ground at his Bolster But Abner and the people lay round about him Then said Abishai to David God hath delivered thine Enemy into thine hand this day Now therefore let me smite him I pray thee with the Spear even to the earth at once and I will not smite him the second time And David said to Abishai Destroy him not For who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords anointed and be guiltless David said furthermore As the Lord liveth the Lord shall smite him or his day shall come to dye or he shall descend into battel and perish The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the Lords anointed but I pray thee take thou now the Spear that is at his bolster and the Cruse of Water and let us go Here you may see how greivous a thing it is to lay hands upon the King though he be wicked and persecute you For by holy Davids own confession no man can do it without committing an high and wofull offence Therefore better it is for all men with King David to commit the punishment of their King to God who most assuredly will punish the King aswell as the Beggar for his offences and not violently oppose or stretch forth their hands against him for none can do that and be guiltless It is true the law of England in many particulars is lex non scripta and when our law books are silent we must repair to the law of Nature and Reason But when a law is established by the law of God declared by many Statutes and reported by multitudes of reverend Judges in their Reports as it is that the King can commit no offence so great as to be punished by the people Then sit liber Judex We must Judge according to the written Law though it do not agree with our own private reason If the King before the descent of the Crown be attainted of Treason felony or any other offence yet by the descent of the Crown The Attainder eo instante is void as it fell out in the case of Henry the seventh 1 H. 7.4 Jnst 1.16 Then if the Coronation of the King prohibiteth the punishment of those offences which he committed before he was King only because he is King and so not punishable by any earthly power how can he commit any offence after his Coronation for which the people may call him in question It being a Maxim in Law That the King can do no wrong that is no wrong for which the people may punish him And to say that the King is an Officer of trust placed by the people is a meer foppery and against the express letter of a principle in Law viz. That the King is not capable of an office to use but to grant Co. Jnst 1.3 But why should I speak of Law to those who God and all the World knows Act all things against law For is there any Law which maketh it high Treason in the King if he commit such or such an offence or is there any law to enable the people to call their King to an account I appeal to the whole World and even to the Consciences of our wicked Folarchical upstarts Whether they ever read any such Law in the old or new Testament in the Statutes or Reports of the laws of our Realm or whether they ever heard of any such law in any Kingdom or Nation under the Sun No they did not The Devil brought it if any there be out of the infernal pit whither it will bring them all unless God most high prevent not can a posteriour Law make that an offence which was lawful at the Commitment without doubt it cannot