Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	king_n	place_n	2,822	5	4.2630	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96413	The rights of the people concerning impositions, stated in a learned argument; with a remonstrance presented to the Kings most excellent Majesty, by the Honorable House of Commons, in the Parliament, An. Dom. 1610. Annoq; Regis Jac. 7. / By a late eminent judge of this nation.	Whitelocke, James, Sir, 1570-1632.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1659 (1659)	Wing W1995C; Thomason E1647_3; Thomason E2143_3	49,868	133

adjourn it thither again where it gave occasion of a good Law to be made to prevent the like Grants and to make them void notwithstanding any Judgment given upon them and to make such Judgments also void The Statute is 9 E. 3. c. 1. And in the Parliament Rolls 9. E. 3. c. 1. Every Alien and Denizen may carry his Merchandise where it pleaseth him notwithstanding any Charter granted or Judgment thereupon 16 17. R. 2. 2 H. 4. num 109. we finde a notable Record which gives warrant for the proceeding in Parliament in this manner as hath been in this Case notwithstanding the Judgment in the Exchequer and declares to the Kingdom that notwithstanding the great wonder made by some men nothing hath been done in this business by those that serve in the Parliament but in imitation of their worthy Predecessors in the like case In the second year of H. 4. the Commons shew that in the time of R. 2. by the means of John Waltham Bishop of Salisbury Treasurer of England wrongfully without authority of Parliament and by reason of a Judgement given in the Exchequer 16 17. R. 2. by the Barons there against certain Merchants of Bristol and other places passage had been taken for Wines otherwise then in ancient times had been and therefore they prayed they might pay their prise Wines in the manner they had used to pay notwithstanding any Judgment given in the Exchequer or other Ordinance made by the said Treasurer contrary to the antient usage which Petition the King granted and the Judgment thereupon became void and the prisage Wine hath been paid contrary to the Judgment ever since In 1. El. Dier 165. 1. El. Dier 265. upon the complaint made by the Merchants of the impositions set upon Cloth by Queen Mary by her absolute power without assent of Parliament The Cause was thought too weighty to be decided in any one Court but as it appeareth in the Book it was referred to all the Judges of England who divers times had conference about it So it may well be there is nothing against it in our year Books for there is nothing of it Another Objection was this which was made in the last argument viz. That Custom is originally due by the Common Law of England it can then have no other ground or cause but meerly by the Kings royal Prerogative as a right and duty originally belonging to his Crown which if it be it must necessarily follow he may impose for that is but the exercising of that right To prove this was alleadged the case 39. 39 E. 3.13 E. 3.13 by which case it appeareth that King John had a Custom of eight pence on a Tun of Wine in the Port of Southampton but the Book doth not tell you that the King had it by prerogative and he might have it as well otherwise as by prescription or convention which shall rather be intended by reason of the certainty of the sum paied for if it were by prerogative he might take sometimes more sometimes less at his will the right being indefinite and the quantity limited onely by his own discretion A common person may have such a custom certain as 18. El Dier 352. The Mayor of London hath the twentieth part of Salt brought into the City by Aliens 18 El. Dier 352 which is a great Imposition but is good by prescription originally and hath received greater strength since by Acts of Parliament made for the confirmation of the Liberties and Customs of the City of London So it appeareth that John of Britain had Custom of the ships that arrived at his Port of Little Yarmouth Dier 43. worth twenty pounds per annum And these instances do inefer that a Custom may be otherwise then by prerogative and therefore it is no good argument to conclude the King had such a custom Therefore he had it by Prerogative The Book in 30. H. 8. Dier 43. 30 Hen. 8 Dier 43. was much pressed on this point which saith that Custom belonged to the King at Common Law and doth instance in Wooll Wooll-fells and Leather begun at the Common Law but abridged by the Statute of 14 E. 3. ca 21. stat 1. 14 Ed. 3. c. 21. stat but this appeareth to be a great error and mistaking in the Book for we do finde that that Custom of Woolls Wooll-fells and Leather was begun by a Grant in Parliament as appeareth in Statute 15 E. 1. cap. 7. The words be granted to us by the Commonalty aforesaid and the last mention before was that the King had granted to the Bishops Earls Barons and all the Commonalty of the Land c. Novemb. 3. Ed. 1. The Kingrecited in his Letter Patents That Prelati magnates ac tota communitas mercatorum Regni granted this new Custom And so the ground and motive of that opinion being false all grounded upon that must needs be erroneous It was objected That the King holdeth at this day the encrease of four pence in the pound over due Custom paid by Merchants Aliens according to the purport of the Charta mercatoria 31 E. Rot. char 31. E. 1. num 42. in Turri 1. by meer right of Prerogative at the Common Law for by that Grant of the Merchants he cannot hold it they being no Body Politick at the time of the Grant and therefore the Grant is meerly void to binde in succession and yet the Merchants Aliens do pay it at this day It is agreed That by the Common Law a contract with a number not incorporate bindeth not succession but we must take notice that they by whom that Grant was made of the augmentation of Custom by three pence in the pound and other encreases 31. E. 1. were Merchants Aliens who by the Law of Merchants and Nations may contract to bind their successors in matters of Traffick For their contracts are not ruled by the Common Law of the Land but by the Law of Nations per legem Mercatoriam as the Book case is 3. Ed. 4.10 and there was a good consideration given them by the King for this encrease of Custom as discharge of prise Wines for two shillings the Tun and other Immunities which all Merchants Aliens hold and enjoy at this day by force of that contract made 31 E. 1. For a stranger paieth now but two shillings the Tun for prisage whereas it standeth an Englishman in much more so as the rule of commutative Justice maketh the contract available to the King against the Merchants because he parteth with part of his prisage to the Merchant and maketh it available to the Merchant against the King because he giveth him encrease of Custom above that is due by Law But the Statute of 27 E. 3. cap. 26. 27 E. 3. cap. 26. heretofore cited doth make this point clear without scruple which confirmeth the Charter of 31. E. 1. entirely and by that the encrease of Custom by three

goods therefore he may suffer them not to pass but sub modo paying such an Imposition for his sufferance as he shall set upon them For the grounds and propositions laid in this objection I shall not be much against any one of them others of them must be qualified ere they be confessed but the inference and argument made upon them I utterly deny for in it there is mutatio hypothesis and a transition from a thing of one nature to a thing of another As the premises are of a power in the King onely fiduciary and in point of trust and government the conclusion infers a right of interest and gain Admit the King had Custodiam portuum yet he hath but the custody which is trust and not Dominium utile he hath power to open and shut upon consideration of publike good to the people and State but not to make gain and benefit by it the one is protection the other is expilation The Ports in their own nature are publike Portus sunt Publici free for all to go in and out yet for the common good this liberty is restrainable by the wisdom and policy of the Prince who is put in trust to discern the times when this natural liberty shall be restrained In 1. H. 7. fol. 1. H. 7.10 10 in the case of the Florentines for their Allome the Lord Chief Justice Hujsey doth write a Case that in the time of E. 4. a Legate from the Pope being at Calice to come into England it was resolved in full Council as the Book saith before the Lords and Judges that he should not have licence to come into England unless he would take an Oath at Calice that he would bring nothing with him that should be prejudicial to the King and his Crown The King by the Common Law may send his Writ Ne exeas regnum to any Subject of the Realm but the surmise of the Writ is Quia datum est nohis intelligi quod tu versus partes exteras absque licentia nostra clam destinas te divertere quam plurima nobis coronae nostrae prejudicia prosequi Fitzh N. B. 85. b. Fitzh N. B 15. ●b So in point of Government and common good of the Realm he may restrain the person But to conclude therefore he may take money not to restrain is to sell Government trust and common Justice and most unworthy the divine Office of a King But let us compare this power of the King in foraign affairs with the like power he hath in Domestick Government There is no question but that the King hath the custody of the gates of all the Towns and Cities in England as well as all the Ports and Havens and upon consideration of the Weal publike may open and shut them at his pleasure as if the infection of the sickness be dangerous in places vicine to the City of London the King may command that none from those places shall come into the City May he therefore set an Imposition upon those that he suffereth to come into the City So if by reason of infection he forbid the bringing of Wares and Merchandizes from some Cities or Towns in this Kingdom to any great Fare or Mart shall he therefore restrain the bringing of Goods thither unless money be given him by way of Imposition The King in his discretion in point of equity and for qualifying the rigor of the Law may enjoyn any of his Subjects by his Chancellor from suing in his Court of Common Law May he therefore make a benefit by restraining all from suit in his Courts unless they pay him an Imposition upon their Suits 2. E. 3.7 In 2. E. 3. in the case of the Earl of Richmond before-cited the King had granted unto the men of great Yarmouth that all the Ships that arrived at the Port of Yarmouth which consisted of three several Ports Great Yarmouth Little Yarmouth and Gerneston should arrive all at Great Yarmouth and at no other place within that Port. The lawfulness of this Patent being in question in the Kings Court it was reasoned in the Kings behalf for the upholding of the grant as it is now that the King had the custody of the Port he might restrain Merchants fron landing at all in his Kingdom Therefore out of the same power might appoint where and in what Haven they should land and no other The Patent was demurred on in the Kings Bench as being granted against the Law but the Case depending was adjourned into Parliament for the weight and consequence of it and there the Patent was condemned 9. E. 3. cap. 1. and a Law made against such and the like grants The Presidents that were vouched for maintenance of this power of restraint in the King were four produced almost in so many hundred years Rot. Par. 2. E. 1. n. 16. Rot. fin 2. E. 1. n. 17. Ro. claus 10. E. 3. dor 31. Ro. claus 17. H. 6. in dors whereof two were in the second year of E. 1. one in the tenth year of E. 3. another in the seventeenth year of H. 6. since which time we hear of none but by Act of Parliament as they had been usually and regularly before To these I will give answer out of themselves out of the common Law out of divers Statutes and out of the practice of the Commonwealth The restaint in the time of E. 1. the one of them was to forbid the carrying of Wooll out of the Realm the other was to forbid all Traffick with the Flemings That of 10. E. 3. was to restrain the exportation of Ship-timber out of the Realm That of 17. H. 6. to prohibite Traffique with the Subjects of the Duke of Burgundy These presidents are rare yet they have in them inducements out of publique respects to the Common-wealth for the rule of Common Law in this case I take it to be as the reverend Judge Sir Anthony Fitzherbert holds in his Writ of Ne exeas regnum in Nat. Fitzh N. B. 85. Br. that by the Common Law any man may go out of the Kingdom but the King may upon causes touching the good of the Commonwealth restrain any man from going by his Writ or Proclamation and if he then go it is a contempt This opinion of his is confirmed by the Book 1. Eliz. fol. 165. Dier 12. Dier 1. El. 165. Dier 13. El. 296. 13. Eliz. Dier 296. In like manner if a Subject of England be beyond sea and the King send to him to repair home if he do it not his Lands and goods shall be seised for the contempt and this was the case of William de Britain Earl of Richmond 19. E. 2. He was sent by the King into Gascoyne on a message 19. E. 2. and refused to return for which contempt his Goods Chattels Lands and Tenements were seised into the Kings hands 2 3. P. M. Dier 128 The Record is cited 2