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
A96414	A learned and necessary argument to prove that each subject hath a propriety in his goods shewing also the extent of the kings prerogative in impositions upon the goods of merchants exported and imported out of and into this kingdome : together with a remonstrance presented to the Kings Most Excellent Majesty by the Honourable House of Commons in the Parliament holden anno dom. 1610, annoq[ue] regis Jacobi, 7 / by a late learned judge of this kingdome.	Whitelocke, James, Sir, 1570-1632.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1641 (1641)	Wing W1995aA; ESTC R42765	49,132	72

carry his Merchandise where it pleased him notwithstanding any Charter granted or judgment thereupon 16. 〈◊〉 Re● 1. And in the Parliament rolles 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 judgement in the Exchequer and declares to the Kingdome that notwithstanding the great wonder made by some men nothing hath been done in this businesse by those that serve in the Parliament but in imitation of their worthy predecessors in the very like case In the second yeere of H. 4. the Commons shew that in the time of R. 2. by the meanes 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 certaine Merchants of Bristow and other places passage had been taken for wines otherwise than 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 judgement given in the Exchequer or other ordinance made by the said Treasurer contrary to the ancient usage which petition the King granted and the judgement thereupon became voyde and the prisage wine hath been paid contrary to the judgement ever since In 1. 1. El. Dier 165. El. Dier 165. upon the complaint made by the Merchants of the impositions set upon cloth by Queene Mary by her absolute power without assent of Parliament the cause was thought too weighty to bee 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 yeere books for there is nothing of it Another objection was this which was made in the last argument viz. That Custome is originally due by the common Law of England It can then have no other ground or cause but meerly by the Kings royall prerogative as a right and duty originally belonging to his Crowne which if it be it must necessarily follow he may impose for that is but the exercising of that right To prove this was alledged the case 39. 39 E. 3.13 E. 3.13 by which case it appeareth that King Iohn had a custome of eight pence on a tonn of wine in the part of South-hampton but the book doth not tell you that the King had it by prerogative and he might have it aswell otherwise as by prescription or convention which shall rather be intended by reason of the certainty of the summe paied for if it were by prerogative he might take sometimes more sometimes lesse at his will the right being indefinite and the quantity limitted onely by his owne Discretion 18. El Dier 352. A common person may have such a custome certaine as 18. El. Dier 352. the Maior of London hath the twentieth part of salt brought into the City by Aliens 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 customes of the City of London So it appeareth Dier 43. that Iohn of Britaine had Custome of the ships that arrived at his port of little Yarmouth worth twenty pounds per an And these instances doe inferre that a Custome may bee otherwise then by prerogative and therefore it is no good argument to conclude the King had such a custome Therefore he had it by prerogative The booke in 30. H. 8. Dier 43. 30. Hen. 8. Dier 43. was much pressed on this point which sayeth that custome belonged to the King at Common Law and doth instance in wooll woll fells and leather begun at the Common Law but abridged by the Satute of 14. E. 3. ca. 21. stat 1. 14. Ed. 3. c. 21. statn r. but this appeareth to be a great errour and mistaking in the booke for we doe finde that that custome of woolls wooll-fells and Leather was begun by a grant in Parliament as appeareth in statute 15. E. 1. ca. 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 Earles Barons and all the Commonalty of land c. Novem. 3. Ed. 1. the King recited in his letters patents That Prelati magnates actota Communitas mercatorum Regni granted this new custome 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 foure pence in the pound over due custome payd by Merchants Aliens according to the purport of the Charta mercatoria 31. E. 1. Rot. char 31. E. 1. nu 44. in Turri by meere 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 meerely voyd to binde in succession And yet the Merchants Aliens doe 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 Custome 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 binde their successours in matters of traffique for their contracts are not ruled by the Common law of the Land but by the law of Nations per ●egem Mercatoriam as the book case is 13. Ed. 4.10 and there was a good consideration given them by the King for this encrease of custome as discharge of prise Wines for two shillings the Tonn 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 payeth now but two shillings the Tonn for prisage whereas it standeth an English man in much more so as the rule of commutative justice maketh the contract availeable to the King against the Merchants because he parteth with part of his prisage to the Merchant and maketh it availeable to the Merchant against the King because he giveth him encrease of custome above that is due by law 27. E. 3. c 26 But the statute of 27. E. 3. cap. 26. heretofore cited doth make this point cleare without scruple which confirmeth the Charter of 31. E. 1. entirely and by that the encrease of custome by three-pence in the pound which is by name mentioned in the statute is now due by act of Parliament If you will have the King hold this encrease of custome by Prerogative you goe directly against his meaning for it appeareth by that which presently followed this grant that the King took this encrease 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 premisses are of a power in the King only fiduciary and in point of trust and government the conclusion inferres a right of interest and gaine Admit the King hath Custodiam portuum yet hee 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 gaine and benefit by it The one is protection the other is expilation Portus sunt Publici The Ports in their owne nature are publike free for all to goe in and out yet for the common good this liberty is restrainable by the wisdome and policy of the Prince who is put in trust to discerne the times when this naturall liberty shall be restrained In 1. H. 7. fo 10. 1. H. 7.10 in the case of the Horentines for their Allome the Lord chiefe Justice Hussey 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 Councell as the booke saith before the Lords and Judges that he should not have licence to come into England un●esse he would take an oath at Calice that he would bring nothing with him that should be prejudiciall to the King and his Crowne The King by the Common Law may send his Writ Ne exeas regnum to any subject of the Realme but the surmise of the Writ is Quia datum est nobis intelligi quod tu versus partes exteras absque licentia nostra clam destinas te divertere quamplurima nobis coronae nostrae preiudicia prosequi Fitzh N. B. 85. b. Fitzh N. B. 85. b. So in point of government and Common good of the Realme he may restraine the person but to conclude therefore he may take money not to restraine 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 forraigne affaires with the like power he hath in Domestique government There is no question but that the King hath the custodie of the gates of all the Townes 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 sicknesse 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 Townes in this Kingdome to any great Faire or Mart Shall he therefore restraine the bringing of Goods thither unlesse money be given him by way of imposition The King in his discretion in point of equity and for qualifying the rigour of the Law may enjoyne any of his Subjects by his Chauncellor from suing in his Court of Common Law May he therefore make a benefit by restraining all from suit in his Courts unlesse they pay him an imposition upon their suits 2. E. 3.7 In 2. E. 3. in the case of the Earle 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 severail Ports great Yarmouth little Yarmouth and Gerneston should arrive all at great Yarmouth and at no other place within that Port. The lawfulnesse of this Patent being in question in the Kings Court it was reasoned in the Kings behalfe for the upholding of the graunt as it is now that the King had the custodie of the Port he might restrain Merchants from landing at all in his Kingdome Therefore out of the same power might appoint where and in what Haven they should land and in no other This 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 graunts The Presidents that were vouched for maintenance of this power of restraint in the King were foure produced almost in so many hundred yeares Rot. parl 2. E. 1. n. 16. Rot. fin 2. E. 1. n. 17. Rot. claus 10. E. 3. dor 31. Rot. claus 17. H. 6. in dors whereof two were in the second yeare of E. 1. one in the tenth yeare of E. 3. another in the seventeenth yeere of H. 6. since which time wee heare of none but by Act of Parliament as they had beene 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 practise of the Common-wealth The restraint in the time of E. 1. the one of them was to forbid the carrying of wooll out of the Realme the other was to forbid all Traffique with the Flemings That of 10. E. 3. was to restraine the exportation of ship-timber out of the Realme 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 bee as the reverend Judge Sir Anthony Fitzherbert holds it in his writ of Ne exeas regnum in Na. Br. Fitzh N. B. 85. that by the Common law any man may goe out of the Kingdome but the King may upon causes touching the good of the Common-wealth restraine any man from going by his Writ or Proclamation and if hee then goe it is a contempt This opinion of his is confirmed by the booke Dier 1. El. 165. Dier 13. El. 296. 1. Eliz. fol. 165. Dier 12. 13. Etiz Dier 296. In like manner if a subject of England be beyond sea and the King send to him to repaire home if hee doe it not his lands and goods shall bee seised for the contempt and this was the case of William de Brittain E. of Richmond 19. E. 2. 19. E. 2. Hee was sent by the King into Gascoine on a message and refused to returne 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. 3. Ph. M. in my L. Dier fol. 128. B. and the law there held to bee so at that time upon a question moved in the Queenes behalfe against divers that being beyond the seas refused to returne upon commandment sent unto