it and therefore sate in Parliament in no other capacity then as spirituall persons meerly who by their extraordinary knowledge in the word of God and in such other parts of learning as the world then knew were thought best able to direct and advise their Princes in points of judgement In which capacity and no other the Priors of the Cathedrall Churches of Canterbury Ely Winchester Coventry Bath Worcester Norwich and Durham the Deans of Exceter York Wells Salisbury and Lincoln the Officiall of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Dean of the Arches the Guardian of the Spiritualties of any Bishoprick when the See was vacant and the Vicars generall of such Bishops as were absent beyond the Seas r Selden Titles of hon part 2. c. 5. had sometimes place and suffrage in the house of Lords in the Ages following 7. But when the Norman Conqueror had possest the State then the case was altered The Prelates of the Church were no longer suffered to hold their Lands in Frankalmoigne as before they did or to be free from secular services and commands as before they were Although they kept their lands yet they changed their tenure and by the Conqueror were ordained to hold their Lands sub militari servitute Å¿ Maâ— Paris in Will 1. An. 1070. either in â—apite or by Baronage or some such military hold and thereby were compellable to aid the Kings in all times of war with Men Arms and Horses as the Lay-subjects of the same tenures were required to do Which though it were conceived to be a great disfranchisement at the first and an heavy burden to the Prelacy yet it conduced at last to their greater honor in giving them a further Title to their place in Parliament than that which formerly they could pretend to Before they claimed a place therein ratione Officii only by reason of their Offices or spiritual Dignities but after this by reason also of those antient Baronies which were annexed unto their Dignities en respect de lour possessions L'antient Baronies annexes a lour dignities t Stamfords Plâ—es l. 3 c. 1. as our Lawyers have it From this time forwards we must look upon them in the House of Parliament not as Bishops only but as Peers and Barons of the Realm also and so themselves affirmed to the Temporal Lords in the Parliament holden at Northampton under Henry 2. Non sedimus hic Episcopi sed Barones nos Barones ves Barones Pares hic sumus u Ap Selden titles of hon pâ— 2. c. 5. We fit not here say they as Bishoâ—ps only but as Barons We are Baroâ—s and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Which last is also verified in terminis by the words of a Statute or Act of Parliament wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to be Peers of the Land x Stat. 25 Edw. 3. c. 5. Now that the Bishops are a fundamental and essential part of the Parliament of England I shall endeavour to make good by two manner of proofs wherof the one shall be de jure the other de facto And first we shal begin with the proofs de jure and therin first with that which doth occur in the Laws of King Athelstan amongst the which there is a Chapter it is Cap. 11. entituled De officio Episcopi quid pertinet ad officium ejus and therein it is thus declared Episcopo jure pertinet omnem rectitudinem promovere dei scilicet seculi c. z Spelm. concil p. 402. et convenit ut per consilium testimonium ejus omne legis scitum Burgi mensura omne pondus sit secundum dictionem ejus institutum that is to say it belongeth of right unto the Bishop to promote justice in matters which concern both the Church and State and unto him it appertaineth that by his counsel and award all Laws Weights and Measures be ordained thorowout the Kingdom 2. Next we will have recourse to the old Record entituled Modus tenendi Parliamentum In which it is affirmed ad Parliamentum summoniri venire debere Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Pricres alios majores cleri qui tenent per Comitatum aut Baroniam ratione hujusmodi tenurae * modus tenendi Parliament that all the Arch-bishops Bishops Abbats Priors and other Prelates of the Church who hold their lands either by an Earls fee or a Barons fee were to be summoned and to come to Parliament in regard of their tenure 3. Next look we on the chartularies of King Henry the first recognized in full Parliament at Clarendon under Henry the 2d where they are called avitas consuetudines which declare it thus Archipiscopi Episcopi universae personae qui de Regetenent in Capite habeant possessiones suas de Rege ficut Baroniam c. sicut caeteri Barones debent interesse judiciis Curiae Regis cum Baronibus quousque perveniatur ad diminutionem membrorum vel ad mortem * Matth. Paris in Hen. 2. The meaning is in brief that Arch-bishops Bishops and all other ecclesiastical persons which hold in Capite of the King are to have and hold their lands in Barony and that they ought as Barons to be present in all Judgements with the other Barons in the Court of Parliament untill the very sentence of death or mutilation which was very common in those times was to be pronounced And then they commouly did use to withdraw themselves not out of any incapacity supposed to be in them by the Law of England but out of a restraint imposed upon them by the Canons of the Church of Rome 4. In the great Charter made by King John in the last of his reign we have the form of summoning a Parliament and calling those together who have votes therein thus expressed at large Ad habendum commune consilium Regni de auxilio assidendo c. de scutagiis assidendis faciemus summoneri Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbaâ—es Comites Majores Barones Regni sigillatim per liâ—eras nostras Et praeterea summoneri faciemus in generali per Vice-Cemites Ballivos nostros omnes alios qui in Capite tenent ad certum diem sc ad terminum 40 dierum ad minus et ad certum locum c. a Id. in Ioh. In which we have not only a most evident proof that the Bishops are of right to be called to Parliament for granting subsidies and Escuage and treating of the great affairs which concern the kingdom but that they are to be summoned by particular Letters as well as the Earls and Barons or either of them A former Copy of which summons issued in the time of the said King John is extant on Record and put in print of late in the b Pt. 2. c. 5. Titles of Honour And we have here I note this only by the way a brief intimation touching the form of summoning the Commons to attend in
or interrupted by any claim of right made in the behalf of the two Houses which is as sure a title as the Law can make the Houses have declared by a Act of Parliament a Sâ—at 7 Ed. 1. cap. 1. that of right it belongs unto the King streightly to defend that is prohibit all force of Arms and that the Parliament is bound to aid him in that prohibition Touching the Royal navy and the ports and forts the Kings prescription to them is so strong and binding that in the 3d. of Edward 3. Edw. 3. the House of Commons did disclaim the having cognisance of such matters as the guarding of the Seas and marches of the Kingdome which certainly they had not done had they pretended any title to the ports and navy As for suppressing tumults and providing for the safety of the Kingdom against sudden danger the Law commits it solely to the care of the King obliging every Subject by the duty of his allegeance to aid and assist him at all seasons when need shall require b 11 Henr. 7. c. 18. And for their power of declaring law in the House of Peers wherein they deliver their opinion in the point before them in true propriety of speech they have none at all c Case of our Affairs p. 4. And this is that which was affirmed by his Majesty at the end of the Parliament Anno 1628. saying that it belonged only to the Iudges under him to interpret laws and that none of the Houses of Parliament joynt or separate what new Doctrine soever might be raised had any power either to make or declare law without his consent d 3 Car. And if it be done with his consent it is not so properly the declaring and interpreting of an old law as the making rather of a new saith a learned Gentleman e Case of our affairs P. 5. 9. Others have found out a new way to invest the Parliament with the robes of Soveraignty not as superiour to the King but co-ordinate with him and this say they appears sufficiently in that the two Houses of Parliament have not only a power of consulting but of consenting and that too in the highest office of the Monarchy whereof they are a Coordinative part the making of Laws f Fuller Answer to D. F. p. 2. Which dangerous doctrin as it was built at first on that former error which makes the King to be one of the three Estates in Parliament so it is super-structed with some necessary consequents whether more treasonable or ridiculous it is hard to say For on these grounds the Author of the Fuller Answers hath presented us with these trim devises g Id. pag. 1. viz. that England is not a simple subordinate and absolute but a coordinative and mixt Monarchy that this mixt Monarchy is compounded of three coordinate Estates a King and two Houses of Parliament that these three make but one supreme but that one is a mixt one or else the Monarchy were not mizt and finally which needs must follow from the premises that although every Member of the Houses sâ—orsim taken severally may be called a Subject yet all collective in their houses are no Subjects Auditum admissi risum teneatis Can any man hear these serious follies and abstain from laughter or think a fellow who pretends both to wit and learning should talk thus of a Monarchy which every one that knoweth any thing in Greek know to imply the supreme government of one compounded of three coordinate Estates and those coordinate Estates consisting of no fewer than 600 persons Or that a man who can pretend but to so much use of reason as to distinguish him from a beast could fall on such a senselest Dotage as to make the same man at the same time to be a Subject and no Subject a Subject in the Streets and in his private House no Subject when he sits in Haberdashers Hall for advance of moneys or in either of the two Houses of Parliament And yet this senseless Doctrine is become so dangerous because so universally admired and hearkned to that the beginning and continuance of our long Disturbances may chiefly be ascribed unto this opinion to which they have seduced the poor ignorant people The rather in regard that some who have undertook the confutation of these brainless solies have most improvidently granted not only h As in the book called Conscience satisfied that the two Houses of Parliament are in a sort coordinate with the King ad aliquid to some Act or exercising of the supreme power that is to the making of Laws but that this coordination of the three Estates of which the King is yielded every where for one is fundamental and held by the two Houses on no worse a title than a fundamental Constitution which is as much as any reasonable Parliamentarian need desire to have Therefore in Answer to the Fuller not taking notice of his foolish and seditious inferences we will clear those points 1. That the two Houses of Parliament are not coordinate with the King but subordinate to him And 2. that the power of making laws is properly and legally in the King alone As for the first we had before a Recognition made by Act of Parliament by which the Kingdom of England is acknowledged to be an Empire governed by one supreme head and King to whom all sorts and degrees of people ought to bear next to God a natural and humble obedience i 24 H. 8. c. 12. which certainly the Lords and Commons had not made to the dethroning of themselves their heirs and successors from this coordinative part of Soveraignty if any such coordination had been then believed Or if it be supposed to excuse the matter that K. Henry the 8th being a severe and terrible Prince did wrest this Recognition from them which yet will hardly serve for a good defence what shall we say to the like recognition made in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign k 1 Eliz. c. 1. when she was green in State and her power unsetled and so less apt to work upon her people by threats and terrors Assuredly had the Houses dream't in those broken times of that coordinative Soveraignty which is now pretended they might have easily regained it and made up that breach which by the violent assaults of King Henry the 8th had been made upon them which was a point they never aimed at Besides if this coordinative mâ—jesty might be once admitted it musts needs follow that though the King hath no Superiour he hath many Equalls and where there is Equality there is no Subjection But Bracton tells us in plain terms not only that the King hath no Superiour in his Realm except God almighty but no Equal neither and the reason which he gives is exceeding strong Quia sic amitteret praeceptum cum par in Parem non habeat potestatem l Bracton de leg Aâ—gl
persisting in their former obstinacy excluso e Parliamento Clero Consilium Rex cum solis Baronibus populo habuit totumque statim Clerum protectione sua privavit d Antiqu. Brit. in R. Winchelsey the King saith the Historian excluding the Clergy out of the Parliament advised with his Barons and his people only what was best to be done by whose advise he put the Clergy out of his protection and thereby forced them to conform to his will and pleasure This is the summa totalis of the business and comes unto no more but this that a particular course was advised in Parliament on a particular displeasure taken by the King against the body of his Clergy then convened together for their particular refusal to contribute to his wants wars the better to reduce them to their natural duty Which makes not any thing at all against the right of Bishops in the House of Peers or for excluding them that House or for the validity of such Acts as are made in Parliament during the time of such exclusion especially considering that the King shortly after called his States together and did excuse himself for many extravagant Acts which he had committed e Walsingâ— in Edw. 1. anno 1297. against the liberties of the Subject whereof this was one laying the blame thereof on his great occasions and the necessities which the wars which he had abroad did impose upon him And so much as in Answer unto that Record supposing that the words thereof be rightly senced as I think they are not and that by Clerus there we are to understand Arch-bishops and Bishops as I think we be not there being no Record I dare boldly say it either of History or Law in which the word Clerus serves to signifie the Arch-bishops and Bishops exclusive of the other Clergy or any writing whatsoever wherein it doth not either signifie the whole Clergy generally or the inferiour Clergy only exclusive of the Arch-bishops Bishops and other Prelates Therefore in answer unto that so much applauded Cavil of Excluso Clero from what Record soever it either hath been hitherto or shall hereafter be produced I shall propose it to the consideration of the sober Reader whether by Clerus in that place or in any other of that kind and time we must not understand the inâ—eriour Clergy as they stand distinguished in the Laws from my Lords the Bishops For howsoever it be true that Clerus in the ecclesiastical notion of the word doth signifie the whole Clergy generally Arch-bishops Bishops Priests and Deacons yet in the legal notion of it it stands distinguished from the Prelates and signifieth only the inferiour Clergy Thus do we find the Ecclesiasticks of this Realm divided into Prelates men of Religion and other Clerks 3. Edw. 1. c. 1. the Seculars either into Prelates and Clerks 9 Edw. 2. c. 3. 1 Rich. 2. c. 3. or Prelates and Clerks beneficed 18 Edw. 3. c. 2. or generally into the Prelates and the Clergy 9 Edw. 2. c. 15. 14 Edw. 3. c. 1 3. 18 Edw. 3. 2. 7. 25 Edw. 3. 2. 4. 8 Hen. 6. c. 1. and in all acts and grants of Subsidies made by the Clergy to the Kings or Queens of England since the 32 of Henry 8. when the Clergy subsidies first began to be confirmed by act of Parliament So also in the Latin ideom which comes neerest home Nos Praelati Clerus in the submission of the Clergy to King Henry 8. f Regist Waâ—ham and in the sentence of divorce against Anne of Cleve g Regist Cranmer and in the instrument of the grant of the Clergy subsidies presented to the Kings of England ever since the 27 of Queen Elizabeth and in the form of the Certificates per h Statut. 8 Eliz. c. 17. ever since Praelatâ—s Clerum returned by every Bishop to the Lord High Treasurer and finally Nos Episcopi Clerus Cantuariensis Provinciae in hac Synodo more nostro solito dum Regni Parliamentum celebratur congregati i Stat. 1 Phil. Mar. c. 8. in the petition to K. K. Phillip and Mary about the confirmation of the Abby lands to the Patentees So that though many Statutes have been made in these later times excluso Clero the Clergy that is to say the inferiour Clergy being quite shut out and utterly excluded from those publick Counsails yet this proves nothing to the point that auy act of Parliament hath been counted good to which the Bishops were not called or at the making of which Act they either were shut out by force or excluded by cunning As for Kilbancies book which that Author speaks of k Prerâ—g pract of Paâ—l p. 38. in which the Justices are made to say 7 H. 8. that our Soveraign Lord the King may well hold his Parliament by him and his Temporal Lords and by the Commons also without the Spiritual Lords for that the Spiritual Lords have not any place in the Parliament chamber by reason of their Spiritualties but by reason of their Temporal possessions besides that it is only the opinion of a privat man of no authority or credit in the Common wealth and contrary to the practice in the Saxon times in which the Bishops sate in Parliament as Spiritual persons not as Barons the reason for ought I can see will serve as well to pretermit all or any of the Temporal Lords as it can serve to pretermit or exclude the Bishops the Temporal Lords being called to Parliament on no other ground than for the Temporal possessions which they hold by Barony 9. If it be said that my second answer to the argument of Excluso Clero supposeth that the inferiour â—lergy had some place in Parliament which being not to be supposed makes the Answer void I shall crave leave to offer some few observations unto the consideration of the sober and impartial Reader by which I hope to make that supposition probable and perhaps demonstrative First then we have that famous Parliament call it Concilium magnum or Concilium commune or by what other name soever the old writers called it summoned by King Ethelbert anno 605. which my l Concil Hen. Spelm. Author calleth Commune concilium tam Cleri quam Populi where Clerus comprehendeth the body of the Clergy generally aswell the Presbyters as the Bishops as the word populus doth the lay-subject generally as well Lords as Commons or else the Lords and Commons one of the two must be needs left out And in this sense we are to understand these words in the latter times as where we read that Clerus m Matth. Paris in Hen. 1. Angliae populus Vniversus were summoned to appear at Westminster at the Coronation of King Henry the first where divers Laws were made and declared subscribed by the Arch-bishops Bishops and others of the principal persons that were there assembled that Clero populo
Titles of hon part 2. cap. 5. to give the King their best advice in his great affairs So that the Prelates and Nobility conveened in Parliament made the Kings great Counsel and were called thither to that end What then belonged unto the Commons 1. No more than did belong to the Clergy also that is to say the giving of their consent to such Laws and Statutes as should there be made VVhich notwithstanding in tract of time gave them such a sway and stroak in the course of Parliaments that no law could be made nor no tax imposed without their liking and allowance And this is that which is expressed in the last clause of the said writ by which the Knights and Burgesses are to come prepared g Form a Brevis c. ad faciendum et consentiendum iis quae tune ibidem de consilio dicti Regni nostri super negotiis antedictis contigerint ordinari VVhich is the very same which you had before in the writ directed to the Bishops for summoning the Clergie of their several Diocesses and that here is a faciendum which the other had not A word which if you mark it well hath no operation in the Construction of the text except it be in paying subsidies or doing such things as are appointed to be done by that great Counsel of the Kingdom VVhich clause though it be cunningly left out that I may say no worse in the recital of the writ by the Author of the Book entituled the Prerogative and practice of Parliaments is most ingenuously acknowledged in the Declaration of the Lords and Commons assembled at Oxon h Declaration of the treaty P. 15. where it is said that the writs of summons the foundation of all power in Parliament are directed to the Lords in expresse termes to treat and advise with the King and the rest of the Peers of the Kingdom of England and to the Commons to do and consent to those things which by that Common councell of England should be ordained And thus it stands as with the Common people generally in most states of Christendom so with the Commons antiently in most states of Greece of which Plutarch telleth us i Plutarch in Lyeurgo that when the people were assembled in Counsell it was not lawful for any of them to put forth matters to the Counsel to be determined neither might any of them deliver his opinion what he thought of any thing but the people had only authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give their assent unto such things as either the Senators or their Kings do propound unto them 10. But against this it is objected first that it is not to be found at what time the Clergie lost their place and vote in Parliament and therefore it may reasonably be presumed that they had never any there and 2ly that if they had been called ad consentiendum though no more than so we should have found more frequent mention of their consent unto the Acts Statutes in our printed Books For answer unto which it may first be said that to suppose the Clergie had no voice in Parliament because it is not to be found when they lost that Privilege is such a kind of Argument if it be an argument as is made by Bellarmine k Bellarm. de Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 5. to prove that many of the controverted Tenets of the Church of Rome are neither terroneous nor new because we cannot say expressely quo tempore quo autore when and by whose promoting they first crept in And though we cannot say expressely when the inferiour Clergy lost their place in Parliament in regard it might be lost by discontinuance or non-usage or that the clause was pretermitted for some space of time the better to disuse them from it or that they might neglect the service in regard of their attendance in the Convocation which gave them power and reputation both with the Common people yet I have reason to beleeve that this pretermission and disuse did chiefly happen under the government of the Kings of the house of Lancaster who being the true heirs and successours of Iohn of Gaunt cast many a longing eye on the Church revenues and hardly were perswaded to abstain from that height of sacrilege which Henry the 8 did aftercome to And this I am induced to beleeve the rather in regard that in the confirmation of the Churches rights so solemnly confirmed and ratified in all former Parliaments there was a clog put to or added in these times which shaked the Fabrick the confirmation being first of such rights and liberties as were not repealed 3. Hen. 5. cap. 1. 4 Hen. 5. cap. 1. and afterwards of such as by the Common law were not repealeable 2 Hen. 6. cap. 1. which might go very far indeed And secondly I find that in the 8 of Henry the 6. an Act of Parliament was passed that all the Clergy called to Convocation by the Kings writ and their servants and Family shall for ever hereafter fully use and enjoy such liberty and defence in comming tarrying and returning as the great men and Comminalty of the Realm of England called to the Kings Parliament do enjoy l 8 Hen. 6. cap. 1. c. Which being an unnecessary care or caution when the Clergie had their voice in Parliament and very necessary to be taken formerly if they had never had such voice makes me conceive that it was much about this time that they lost that privilege But this I leave as a conjecture and no more than so For answer to the second argument that if they had been called of old ad consentiendum we should have found more frequent mention of their consent unto the Acts and Statutes of the former times besides that it is a negative proof and so non concludent it strikes as much against the presence and consent of the Knights and Burgesses in the elder Parliaments as it can do against the Clergie For in the elder Parliaments under K. Henry 3. and K. Edward the first there is no mention of the Commons made at all either as present or consenting nor much almost in all the Parliaments till K. Henry 7. but that they did petition for redresse of greivances and that upon their special instance and request m In the Proem to the several Sessions several laws were made for the behoof and benefit of the Commonwealth which part the Clergie also acted in some former Parliaments as before was shewed So that this negative Argument must conclude against both or neither But secondly I answer that in these elder times in which the Proctors for the Clergy had their place in Parliament they are included generally in the name of the Commons And this I say on the authority of the old modus tenendi Parliamentum in which the Commons are divided in the Spiritualty and the Temporalty and where it is expressely said that the Proctors for
the Clergie the Knights the Citizens and the Burgesses did represent the whole Comminalty of the Realm of England a Cap. ult And this holds good in law for ought I find unto the contrary to this very day Certain I am that Crompton in his book of the Iurisdiction of Courts where he fpeakes of Parliaments doth tell us that the Knights Citizens Burgesses and Barons of the Cinque ports b Grompton Iurisd des Courts caâ— ove le Clergie qu' eux assemble au Pawles represent le corps de tout le Comminalty Dengliterre together with the Clergie which assembled at S. Pauls doe represent the body of the whole Comminalty of England So then the Clergie were not only called but were present also according to that clause in the writ of Summons which before I spake of directed to their several and respective Bishops as the Kings spiritual Sheriffs if I may so say inabled by the Laws to that end and purpose Which some endeavouring to avoid have at last found out that the clause before recited out of the Writ to the Bishops is not a calling of the Clergy to attend in Parliament but to command them to attend in the Convocation which I have heard much pressed by those who pretend unto some knowledge in the course of things Which though it be a gross mistake and inconsistent with the words and circumstances of the VVrit it self which relates meerly to the Parliament and business of a Parllamentarie nature yet for the clearing of the point and undeceiving such as have been deceived they may please to know that besides this VVrit by which the Clergy are commanded to appear in Parliament there is another writ and another form of calling them unto the service of the Convocation which is briefly this The King sends out his VVrit or Mandat to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury requiring him super quibusdam arduis urgentibus negotiis c. n Regist Warham for divers great and weighty reasons concerning the Kings honour the Churches safety and the publick peace of his dominions to summon all the Bishops Deans and Chapters Arch-deacons and the whole Clergy of his Province to meet in Convocation at a day and place appointed On the reception of which Writ the Arch-bishop sendeth out his Monitory to the Bishop of London who by his place is Dean of the Episcopal College o Antiqu. Britan. in initio and to disperse the Mandates of the Metropolitan requiring him to appear himself in person and to send out his warrant unto every Bishop of the Province to appear there also and to take order that the Deans of the Cathedrals and Arch-deacons personally the Chapter by one Procurator the Clergy of the Diocese by two whom we usually call Clerks of the Convocation do attend that service p b Regist Warham VVhich comming to the hands of each several Bishop they do accordingly give intimation to their Deans and Chapters to their Arch-deacons and the Clergy and they accordingly prepare themselves to obey the Monitory and to return Certificate of their doings in it The like proceeding is observed also for the Province of York So that the calling of the Clergy to the Convocation being by a different VVrit and another form which hath no reference to nor dependance on the writs directed by the K. to each several Bishop for their attendance in the Parliament it must needs be as I conceive it that by that clause remaining in the VVrits aforesaid the Clergy have good right and title to a voice in Parliament though they have lost their jus in re the benefit the use and possession of it 11. But I speak this as once the Apostle said in another case not by commandement but by permission For I perswade my self the Clergy do not aim so high at the recovery of a right so long antiquated and disused but would be well enough content with the restitution of the Bishops to their vote in Parliament of which they stood possessed by so strong a Title as the very constitution of the Parliament and the fundamental laws of the English government could confer upon them For though the Bishops sate in Parliament in their own personal capacities and not as the representative body of the Clergy yet the poor Clergy found it some respect unto them to be thus honoured in their heads and were the more obliged to obey such Acts as were established in that Court wherein these heads had opportunity of interceding if perhaps any thing were propounded which might be grievous to the Clergy and many times a power of hindering and diverting if not by voice and numbers yet by strength of reasons They were not altogether Slaves and Bond-men whilest the Church held that remnant of her antient rights for whilest the heads retained that honor the body could not choose but rejoyce in it and be cherished by it But since they have been stripped of that by what unworthy Acts the world knows too well they are become of such condition that the most despicable Tradesman in a Corporate Town is more considerable in the eye of the State and hath a greater interesse in the affairs thereof than the greatest Prelate and to say truth than all the Clergy of the Realm For being there are three Ingredients which make up a Freeman as S. Francis Bacon well observed in his speech concerning the Post-nati that is to say 1. jus Civitatis which did inable a man to buy and sell and to take Inheritances 2. jus suffragii a voice in the passing of Laws and Election of Officers and 3. jus honoris a capability of such offices and honors as the State could give him the Clergy by this means are limited to the first right only utterly excluded from the other two and therby put into a worse condition than the meanest Freeman in the Kingdome Insomuch that whereas every needy Artizan if he be free of any Corporate Town or City every Cottager that dwelleth in an antient Burrough and every Clown which can lay claim to sorty shillings per Annum of free hold either for life or of inheritance hath a voyce in Parliament either in person or by Proxie and is not bound by any law but what himself consents to in his Representatives the Clergy only of this Realm as the case now stands being one of the greatest States of this Kingdom as is acknowledged expresly in terminis by Act of Parliament p 8 Eliz. c. 1. are neither capable of place there in their personal capacities nor suffered to be there in their Procuratours as of old they were nor have so much as any voice in choosing of the Knights and Burgesses which represent the body of the people generally I know it hath been said in reply to this that the Clergy may give voices at the election of the Knights and Burgesses and that it is their own neglect if they do it not But I know too
be imputed to the three Estates convened in Parliament or to any power or Act of theirs but only praefervido Scotorum ingenio z Rivet cont tenuit as one pleads it for them unto the natural disposition of that fierce and head-strong people yet easilier made subject unto rule and government The three Estates assembled in the Court of Parliament when in the judgement of our Author they are most fit to undertake the business have for the most part had no hand in those desperate courses 7. And now at last we ate come to England where since we came no sooner we will stay the longer and here we shall behold the King established in an absolute Monarchy from whom the meeting of the three Estates in Parliament detracteth nothing of his power and authority Royal. Bodin as great a Politick as any of his time in the Realm of France hath ranked our Kings amongst the absolute Monarch of these Western parts a Bodin de Rep. l. 1. c. 8. And Camden as renowned an Antiquary as any of the Age he lived in hath told us of the King of England supremam potestatem merum imperium habere b Camden in Britan. descript that he hath supreme power and absolute command in his dominions and that he neither holds his Crown in vassallage nor receiveth his investisture of any other nor acknowledgeth any Superiour but God alone To prove this last he cites these memorable words from Bracton an old English Lawyer omnis quidem sub Rege ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub deo that every man is under the King but the King under none saving only God But Bracton tells us more than this and affirms expresly that the King hath supreme power and jurisdiction over all causes and persons in this his Majesties Realm of England that all jurisdictions are vested in him and are issued from him and that he hath jus gladii or the right of the sword for the better governance of his people This is the substance of his words but the words are these c Bracton de leg Aâ—gl l. 2. c. 24. Sciendum est saith he quod ipse dominus Rex ordinariam habet jurisdictionem dignitatem potestatem super omnes qui in regno suo sunt Habet enim omnia jura in manu sua quae ad coronam laicalem pertinent potestatem materialem gladium qui pertinet ad Regni gubernandum c. He addes yet surther Habet item in potestate sua leges constitutiones d Id. l. 2. c. 16. that the Laws and constitutions of the Realm are in the power of the King by which words whether he meaneth that the Legislative power is in the King and whether the Legislative power be in him and in him alone we shall see anon But sure I am that he ascribes unto the King the power of interpreting the Law in all doubtfull cases in dubiis obscuris domini Regis expectanda interpretatio voluntas which is plain enough For though he speaketh only de chartis Regiis factis Regum of the Kings deeds and charters only as the words seem to import yet considering the times in which he lived being Chief Justice in the time of King Henry the 3d. wherein there was but little written Law more than what was comprehended in the Kings Grants and Charters he may be understood of all Laws whatever And so much is collected out of Bractons words by the L. Chancellor Egerton of whom it may be said without envy that he was as grave and learned a Lawyer as ever sat upon that Bench. Who gathereth out of Bracton that all cases not determined for want of foresight are in the King to whom belongs the right of interpretation not in plain and evident cases but only in new questions and emergent doubts and that the King hath as much right by the constitutions of this Kingdom as the Civil law gave the Roman Emperors where it is said Rex solus judicat de causa a jure non definita e Case of the Post-nati p. 107 108. And though the Kings make not any Laws without the counsel and consent of his Lords and Commons whereof we shall speak more in the following Section yet in such cases where the Laws do provide no remedy and in such matters as concern the politick administration of his Kingdoms he may and doth take order by his Proclamations He also hath authority by his Prerogative Royal to dispense with the rigour of the Laws and sometimes to pass by a Statute with a non obstante as in the Statute 1 Henr. 4. cap. 6. touching the value to be specified of such lands offices or annuities c as by the King are granted in his Letters patents But these will better come within the compasse of those jura Majestatis or rights of Soveraignty which our Lawyers call sacra individua f Camden in Bâ—it sacred by reason they are not to be pryed into with irreverent eyes and individual or inseparable because they cannot be communicated unto any other Of which kind are the levying of Arms g Case of our Assairs p. 3. suppressing of tumults and rebellions providing for the present safety of his Kingdom against sudden dangers convoking of Parliaments and dissolving them making of Peers granting liberty of sending Burgesses to Towns and Cities treating with forein States making war leagues and peace granting safe conduct and protection indenizing giving of honor rewarding pardoning coyning printing and the like to these But what need these particulars have been looked into to prove the absoluteness and soveraignty of the Kings of England when the whole body of the Realm hath affirmed the same and solemnly declared it in their Acts of Parliament In one of which is affirmed h 16 Rich. 2. c. 5. that the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no earthly subjection but immediatly to God in all things touching the regality of the said Crown and to none other And in another Act that the Realm of England is an Empire governed by one supreme head and King having the Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same unto whom a Body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of people divided in terms and by names of Spiritualty and Temporalty been bounden and ought to bear next to God a natural and humble obedience i 24 Henr. 8. c. 12. And more than so that the King being the supreme head of this Body Politick is instituted and furnished by the goodness and sufferance of Almighty God with plenary whole and entire power preheminence authority prerogative and jurisdiction to render and yield justice and final determination to all manner of Subjects within this Realm and in all causes whatsoever Nor was this any new Opinion invented only to comply with the Princes humour but such as is
trusted or at least supposed to be intrusted with sufficient power as well to regulate his authority as to controll his actions If Calvin be allowed to have common sense and to have wit and words enough to expresse his meaning as even his greatest Adversaries do confesse he had it must be granted that he did not take the King of what Realm soever to be any of the three Estates or if he did he would have thought of other means to restrain his insolencies than by leaving him in his own hands to his own correction Either then Calvin is mistaken in the three Estates if he be mistaken in designing the men he aims at may he not be mistaken in the power he gives them or else the King is noâ—e indeed can be none of the three Estates qui primarios conventus peragunt who usually convene in Parliament for those ends and purposes before remembred But not to trust to him alone though questionlesse he be ideoneus testis in the present case Let us behold the Assembly of the three Estates or Conventus Ordinum in France from whence it is conceived that all Assemblies of this kind had their first Original and we shall find a very full description of them in the Assemblie des Estats at Bloys under Henry 3. Anno 1577. of which thus Thuanus f Thuanus in histor sui temp l. 63. Rex insublimi loco sub uranisco sedebat c. The King saith he sate on an high erected Throne under the Canopy of State the Queen-mother and the Queen his wife and all the Cardinals Princes Peers upon either hand And then it followeth Transtris infra dispositis ad dextram suam sacri Ordinis Delegati ad laevam Nobilitas infra plebetus ordo sedebat that on some lower forms there sate the Delegates of the Clergy towards the right hand of the King the Nobility towards the left and the Commissioners for the Commons in the space below We may conjecture at the rest by the view of this Of those in Spain by those Conventions of the States which before we spoke of at Burgos Monson Toledo and in other places in which the King is alwaies mentioned as a different person who called them and dissolved them as he saw occasion For Scotland it is ordinary in the stile of Parliaments to say the King and the Estates do ordain and constitute g Statutes of Scotland for which I do refer you to the Book of Statutes which clearly makes the K. to be a different person from the Estates of that Kingdome And as for England besides what may be gathered from the former Chapter we read in the History of Titus Livius touching the Reign and Acts of K. Henry the 5th that when his Funerals were ended the three Estates of the Realm of England did assemble together and declared his Son K. Henry the 6. being an Infant of 8 months old to be their Soveraign Lord h Tit. Liv. M. S. in Bibl. Bodl. as his Heir and Successor And in the Parliament Rolls of K. Richard the 3d. there is mention of a Bill or Parchment presented to that Prince being then Duke of Glocester on the behalf and in the name of the three Estates of this Realm of England that is to wit of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Commons by name which forasmuch as neither the said three Estates nor the persons which delivered it on their behalf were then assembled in form of Parliament was afterwards in the first Parliament of that King by the same three Estates assembled in this present Parliament I speak the very words of the Act it self and by authority of the same enrolled recorded and approved i Ap Speed in K. Rich. 3â— And at the request and by the assent of the three Estates of this Realm that is to say the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of this Land assembled in this present Parliament and by authority of the same it be pronounced decreed and declared that our said Soveraign Lord the King was and is the very and undoubted heir of this Realm of England c. And so it is acknowledged in a k 1 Eliz. cap. 3. Statute of 1 Eliz. ca. 3. where the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in that Parliament assembled being said expresly and in terminis to represent the three Estates of the Realm of England did recognize the Queens Majesty to be their true lawfull and undoubted Soveraign Liege Lady and Queen This makes it evident that the King was not accounted in the times before for one of the three Estates of Parliament nor can be so accounted in the present times For considering that the Lords and Commons do most confessedly make two of the three Estates and that the Clergy in an other Act of Parliament of the said Queens time are confessed to be one of the greatest States of the Realm l Statut. 8 Eliz. cap. 1. which Statute being still in force doth clearly make the Clergy to be the third either there must be more than three Estates in this Kingdome which is against the Doctrine of the present times or else the King is none of the Estates as indeed he is not which was the matter to be proved But I spend too much time in confuting that which hath so little ground to stand on more than the dangerous consequences which are covered under it For if the King be granted once to be no more than one of the three Estates how can it choose but follow from so sad a Principle that he is of no more power and consideration in the time of Parliament than the House of Peers which sometimes hath consisted of three Lords no more or than the House of Commons only which hath many times consisted of no more than 80 or an hundred Gentlemen but of far lesse consideration to all intents and purposes in the Law whatever than both the Houses joyned together What else can follow hereupon but that the King must be co-ordinate with his two Houses of Parliament and if co-ordinate then to be over-ruled by their Joynt concurrence bound to conform unto their Acts and confirm their Ordinances or upon case of inconformity and non-complyance to see them put in execution against his liking and consents to his foul reproach And what at last will be the issue of this dangerous consequence but that the Lords content themselves to come down to the Commons and the King be no otherwise esteemed of than the chief of the Lords the Princeps Senatus if you will or the Duke of Venice at the best no more which if Sir Edward Dering may be credited as I think he may in this particular seems to have been the main design of some of the most popular and powerfull Members then sitting with him for which I do refer the Reader to his book of Speeches Which dangerous consequents whether they were observed at
there be a body of Laws in use amongst them partly made up of some old Gothish Laws and Constitutions and partly of some parts of the Law imperial yet for the explanation of the Laws in force if any doubt arise about them or for supplying such defects which in the best colllection of the Laws may occur sometimes the Magistrates and Judges are to have recourse to the King alone and to conform to such instructions as he gives them in it And this is it which was ordained by Alfonso the tenth qui etiam magistratus ac judices Principem adire jussit quoties patrio jure nihil de proposita causa scriptum esset p Bodin de Rep. lib. 1. cap. 8. as Bodinus hath it 'T is true that for the raising of supplies of mony and the imposing of extraordinary taxes upon the subject the Kings of Spain must be beholden to the three Estates without whose consent it cannot legally be done But then it is as true withall that there are customary tributes called Servitia q Id. ibid. p. 90. which the King raiseth of his own authority without such consent And their consenting to the extraordinary is a thing of course the Spanish Nation being so well affected naturally to the power and greatness of their Kings whom they desire to make considerable if not formidable in the opinion of their Neighbours that the Kings seldome fail of monies if the Subjects have it Finally that we may perceive how absolute this Monarch is over all the Courts or Curias of his whole dominions take this along according as it stands verbatim Å¿ Spanish hist 67. by Tyrannell in the Spanish Historie The King of Spain as he is a potent Prince and Lord of many Countries so hath he many Counsels for the managing of their affairs distinctly and apart without any confusion every Counsel treating only of those matters which concern their Jurisdiction and charges with which Counsels and with the Presidents thereof being men of chief note the King doth usually confer touching matters belonging to the good Government preservation and increase of his Estates and having heard every mans opinion he commands that to be executed which he holds most fit and convenient .. 6. Next let us take a view of Scotland and we shall find it there no otherwise I mean in reference to the point which is now in question than in France or Spain For besides that Bodinus makes it one of those absolute Monarchies ubi Reges sine controversia omnia jura Majestatis habent per sese t Bodin de Repub. l. 2. c. 7. in which the Kings have clearly all the rights of Majesty inherent in their own persons only it is declared in the Records of that very Kingdome that the King is directus totius dominus u Camden n Britan. deicript â— the Soveraign Lord of the whole State and hath all authority and jurisdiction over all estates and degrees aswel Ecclesiastical as lay or temporal And as for those Estates and Degrees convened in Parliament we may conjecture at their power by that which is delivered of the form or order which they held it in which is briefly this x Form of holding the Parl. in Scotl. Assoon as the Kings writ is issued out for summoning the Estates to meet in Parliament he maketh choyse of eight of the Spiritual Lords such on whose wisdom and integrity he may most rely which eight do choose as many of the Temporal Lords and they together nominate eight more out of the Commissioners for the Counties and as many out of the Commissioners for the Towns or Burroughs These 32 thus chosen are called Domini pro Articulis Lords of the Articles and they together with the Chancellor Treasurer Keeper of the Privy Seal and Principal Secretaries of state and the Master of the Rolls whom they call Clerk Register do admit or reject every bill but not before they have been shewn unto the King if they pass there they are presented afterwards to the whole Assembly where being thorowly weighed and examined put unto the votes of the house such of them as are carried by the major part of the Voices for the Lords and Commons sit together in the same house there are on the last day of the Sessions exhibited to the King who by touching them with his Scepter pronounceth that he either ratifieth and approveth them or that he doth disable them and make them void But if the business be disliked by the Lords of the Articles it proceeds no further and never comes unto the consideration of the Parliament or if the King dislikes of any thing in it when they shew it to him it either is razed out or mended before it be presented to the publick view King James of blessed memory who very well understood his own power and the forms of that Parliament describes it much to the same purpose in his Speech made at Whitehall March 31. Anno 1607. About twenty daies saith he before the Parliament Proclamation is made throughout the Kingdom to deliver unto the Kings Clerk of Register all Bils to be exhibited that Session before a certain day Then are they brought unto the King and perused and considered by him and only such as he alloweth of are put into the Chancellors hands to be propounded to the Parliament and none others And if any other man in Parliament speak of any other matter than is in this sort first allowed by the King the Chancellor telleth him that the King hath allowed of no such Bill Besides when they have passed them for Laws they are presented to the King and he with his Scepter put into his hands by the Chancellor must say I ratifie and approve all things done in this present Parliament And if there be any thing that he disliketh it is razed out before So the eldest Parliament-man as he said himself at that time in Scotland This was the form of holding Parliaments in Scotland which whosoever doth consider with a serious eye may perceive most plainly that it is wholly in the Kings power to frame the Parliament to his own will or at the least to hinder it from doing any thing to the prejudice of his Royal Crown and Dignity in that the nominating of the Lords of the Articles did in a manner totally depend on him Which being observed by the Scots they took the opportunity when they were in Arms to pass an Act during the Presidency of the Lord Burley Anno 1640. y Acts of Parliaments 16 Carol. for the abolition of this Order and for reducing of that Parliament to the forms of England as being thought more advantagious to their purposes than the former was So that the violent disloyalty of the Scotish Subjects their Insurrections against their Kings and murdering them sometimes when their heels were up which makes that Nation so ill spoke of in the Stories of Christendom are not to
l. 1. c. 8 because he could not have an Equal but with the losse of his Authority and Regal Dignity considering that one Equal hath no power to command an other Now lest the Fuller should object as perhaps he may that this is spoken of the King out of times of Parliament and of the Members of the Houses seorsim taken severally as particular persons but when they are convened in Parliament then they are Soveraigns and no Subjects first he must know that by the Statute of Queen Elizabeth all of the House of Commons are to take the oath before remembred for the defending of all preheminences and authorities united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and for bearing faith and true allegiance to the King his Heirs and lawfull Successours and that if any of them do refuse this Oath he is to have no voice in Parliament m Stat. 5 Eâ—iz 1. 2. He cannot choose but know that even sedente Parliamento both the Lords and Commons use to address themselves to his sacred Majesty in the way of supplication and petition and certainly it is not the course for men of equal rank to send Petitions unto one another and that in those Petitions they do stile themselves his Majesties most humble and obedient Subjects Which is not only used as the common Complement which the hypocrisie of these times hath taken up though possibly it might be no otherwise meant in some late addresses but is the very phrase in some Acts of Parliament n â—25 Hen. 8. c. 22. c. as in the Acts at large doth at full appear 3. They may be pleased to know how happy a thing it was for the Realm of England that this Fuller did not live in former times For had he broached this Doctrine some Ages since he would have made an end of Parliaments Princes are very jealous of the smallest points of Soveraignty and love to reign alone without any Rivals their Souls being equally made up of Pompeys and Caesars and can as little broke an Equul as endure a Superiour And lastly I must let him know what Bodinus saith who telleth us this Legum ac edictorum probatio aut publicatio quae in Curia vel Senatu fieri solet non arguit imperii majestatem in Senatu vel Curia inesse o Bodin de Rep. l. 1. c. 8. viz. That the publishing and approbation of Laws and Edicts which is made ordinarily in the Court or Parliament proves not the Majesty of the State to be in the said Court or Parliament And therefore if the power of confirmation or rejecting be of a greater trust and more high concernment than that of consulting and consenting as no doubt it is the power of consulting and consenting which the Fuller doth ascribe to the two Houses of Parliament will give them but a sory Title to Co-ordinative soveraignty 10. This leads me on unto the power of making Laws which as before I said is properly and legally in the King alone tanquam in proprio Subjecto as in the true and adequate subject of that power And for the proof thereof I shall thus proceed When the Norman Conqueror first came in as he wonne the Kingdom by the sword so did he govern it by his power His Sword was then the Scepter and his will the Law There was no need on his part of an Act of Parliament much less of calling all the Estates together to know of them after what form and by what Laws they would be governed It might as well be said of him as in the flourish and best times of the Roman Emperors p Justin Institut l. 1. c. Quod Principi placuerit legis habet vigorem that whatsoever the King willed it did pass for Law This King and some of his Successours being then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and having a despotical power on the lives and fortunes of their Subjects which they disposed of for the benefit of their friends and followers Normans French and Flemangs as to them seemed best But as the Subjects found the yoke to be too heavy and insupportable so they addressed themselves in their Petitions to the Kings their Soveraigns to have that yoke made easier and the burden lighter especially in such particulars of which they were most sensible at the present time By this means they obtained first to have the Laws of Edward the Confessor contain'd for the most part in the great Charter afterwards and by this means that is to say by powring out their prayers and desires unto them did they obtain most of the Laws and Statutes which are now remaining of the time of King Henry the 3d. and King Edward the first Many of which as they were issued at the first either in form of Charters under the Great Seal or else as Proclamations of Grace and favour so do they carry still this mark of their first procuring the King willeth the King commandeth the King ordaineth the King provideth the King grants c. And when the Kings were pleased to call their Estates together it was not out of an opinion that they could not give away their power or dispence their favours or abate any thing of the severity of their former government without the approbation and consent of their people but out of just fear lest any one of the three Estates I mean the Clergy the Nobility and the Commons should insist on any thing which might be prejudicial to the other two The Commons being alwaies on the craving part and suffering as much perhaps from their immediate Lords as from their King might possibly have asked some things which were as much derogatory to the Lords under whom they held as of their Soveraign Liege the King the chief Lord of all In this respect the Counsel and consent as well of the Prelates as the Temporal Lords was accounted necessary in passing of all Acts of Grace and Favour to the people because that having many Royalties and large immunities of their own a more near relation to the person and a greater interesse in the honour of their Lord the King nothing should passe unto the prejudice and diminution of their own Estates or the disabling of the King to support his Soveraignty And this for long time was the Stile of the following Parliaments viz. q Preface an 1 Ed. 3. To the honour of God and of holy Church and to the redresse of the oppressions of the people our Soveraign Lord the King c. at the request of the Commonalty of his Realm by their Petition made before him and his Counsel in the Parliament by the Assent of the Prelates Earls Barons and other great men assembled in the said Parliament hath granted for him and his Heirs c. To this effect but with some little and but a very little variation of the words was the usual Stile in all the Prefaces or Preambles of the Acts of Parliament from the
made in Parliament the King passed a Law to this effect viz. r 4 Hâ—n 8. c. 8. That ull sutes condemnations executions charges and impositions put or hereafter to be put upon Richard Strode and every of his Complices that be of this Parliament or aâ—y other hereafter for any Bill speaking or reasoning of any thing concerning the Parliament to be communed and treated of shall be void and null but neither any reparation was allowed to Strode nor any punishment inflicted upon those that sued him for ought appears upon Record And for the Houses joyned together which is the last capacity they can claim it in they are so far from having the supreme authority that as it is observed by a learned Gentleman they cannot so unite or conjoyn as to be an entire Court either of Soveraign or Ministerial jurisdiction no otherwise co-operating than by concurrence of Votes in their several Houses for preparing matters in order to an Act of Parliament s Case of our Affairs p. 9. Which when they have done they are so far from having any legal authority in the State as that in Law there is no stile nor form of their joynt Acts nor doth the Law so much as take notice of them until they have the Royal Assent So that considering that the two Houses alone do no way make an entire Body or Court and that there is no known stile nor form of any Law or Edict by the Votes of the two Houses only nor any notice taken of them by the Law it is apparent that there is no Soveraignty in their two Votes alone How far the practise of the Lords Commons which remaind at Westminster after so many of both Houses had tepaired to the King c. may create Precedents unto posterity I am not able to determine but sure I am they have no Precedent to shew from the former Ages But let us go a little further and suppose for granted that the Houses either joynt or separate be capable of the Soveraignty were it given unto them I would fain know whether they claim it from the King or the people only Not from the King for he confers upon them no further power than to debate and treat of his great Affairs to have access unto his person freedome of Speech as long as they contein themselves within the bounds of Loyalty authority over their own Members which being custumarily desired t Hakewell of passing bils in Parliament and of course obtained as it relates into the Commons shews plainly that these vulgar privileges are nothing more the rights of Parliament than the favours of Princes but yet such favours as impart not the least power of Soveraignty Nor doth the calling of a Parliament ex opere operato as you know who phrase it either denude the King of the poorest robe of all his Royalty or confer the same upon the Houses or on either of them whether the King intend so by his call or otherwise For Bodin whom Mr. Prynne hath honored with the title of a grand Politician u Pryn of Parliam par 2. p. 45. doth affirm expresly Principis majestatem nec Comitorum convocatione nec Senatus populique praesentia minui x Bodin de Repub. that the majesty or Soveraignty of the King is not a jot diminished either by the calling of a Parliament or Conventus Ordinum or by the frequency and presence of his Lords and Commons Nay to say truth the Majesty of Soveraign Princes is never so transcendent and conspicuous as when they sit in Parliament with their States about them the King then standing in his highest Estate as was once said by Henry 8. who knew as well as any of the Kings of England how to keep up the majesty of the Crown Imperial Nor can they claim it from the people who have none to give for nemo dat quod non habet as the saying is The King as hath been proved before doth hold his Royal Crown immediately from God himself not from the contract of the people He writes not populi clementia but Dei gratia not by the favour of the people but by the grace of God The consent and approbation of the people used and not used before the day of coronation is reckoned only as a part of the solemn pomps which are then accustomably used The King is actually King to all intents and purposes in the Law whatever immediately on the death of his Predecessor Nor ever was it otherwise objected in the Realm of England till Clark and Watson pleaded it at their arraignment in the first year of King James y Speeds History in K. James Or grant we that the Majesty of this Kingdom was first originally in the people and by them devolved upon the King by their joynt consent yet having given away that power by their said consent and setled it upon the King by an Act of State confirmed by Oaths and all solemnities which that Act requires they cannot so retract that grant or make void that gift as to pass a new conveyance of it and settle it upon their Representees in the House of Commons Or if they could yet this would utterly exclude all the Lords from having the least share or portion in this new found Soveraignty in that they represent not the common people but sit there only in their own personal capacities and therefore must submit at last to these new made Soveraigns who carry both the Purse Sword at their own girdles So then the people cannot give the Soveraignty and if they have no power to give it the Lords and Commons have no claim thereunto de jure See we next therefore how much of this Soveraignty they or their Predecessors rather have enjoyed de facto in peaceable and regular times fit to be drawn into example in the Ages following The chief particulars in which the Soveraignty consists we have seen before and will now see whether that any of them been exercised and injoyed in peaceable and regular times by both or either of the two Houses of Parliament And first for calling and dissolving Parliaments making of Peers granting of liberty to Towns and Cities to make choyse of Burgesses which antiently had no such liberty treating with forein States denouncing war or making Leagues or Peace after war commenced granting safe conduct and protection indenizing of Aliens giving of honors unto eminent and deserving persons rewarding pardoning coyning printing making of corporations and dispensing with the Laws in force they are such points which never Parliament did pretend to till these later times wherein every thing almost is lawfull I am sure more lawâ—ull than to fear God and honor the King Nor do I find that Mr. Prynne hath laboured to entitle them to these particulars For levying of Arms and the command of the Militia besides that the Kings of England have ever been in possession of it and that possession never disturbed