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	lord_n	treasurer_n	3,447	5	11.1666	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37464	The works of the Right Honourable Henry, late L. Delamer and Earl of Warrington containing His Lordships advice to his children, several speeches in Parliament, &c. : with many other occasional discourses on the affairs of the two last reigns / being original manuscripts written with His Lordships own hand.; Works. 1694	Warrington, Henry Booth, Earl of, 1652-1694.	1694 (1694)	Wing D873; ESTC R12531	239,091	488

send for any person but without that they cannot and therefore I do not see wherein a Justice of Peace has a greater power than the Privy Council or if he had yet it would not be so great a Mischief for he can only send for any person that is in the County but the Privy Council are not limited to this or that County but their power extends all over England But besides it is unjust to be punisht without a cause and restraint or being debarr'd of Liberty is a punishment and whoever he be that would have the Privy Council to exercise this Power when he has known what it is to be brought up by a Messenger upon an Idle Story let him then tell me how he likes it and answer me if he can A SPEECH AGAINST THE Bishops Voting In Case of BLOOD OF all the things that were started to hinder the success of the last Parliament and is like to be so great a stumbling-block in the next That of the Bishops Voting in Case of Blood was and will be the chief Now they that deny that the Bishops have right to Vote in Case of Blood do labour under two great difficulties first because this is a new thing at least it is very long since the like Case has come into debate And next because they are put to prove a negative which is a great disadvantage But Truth will appear from under all the false glosses and umbrages that men may draw over it And I doubt not to make it evident that the Bishops have no right to Vote in Case of Blood at least I hope I shall not be guilty of obstinacy if I do not alter my opinion till what I have to say be answered It is strange the Bishops are so jealous of their Cause as not to adventure it on their great Diana the Canon Law by which they are expresly forbidden to meddle in case of Blood Perhaps they would do by the Canon Law as it is said by the Idolaters in the Old Testament that part of the timber they made a god and fell down and worshipped it the rest of it they either burnt in the fire or cast it to the dunghil For they tell you that the Canon Law was abolisht by the Reformation and that none but Papists yeild obedience to it and therefore now they are not tyed up by the Canon Law but may sit and Vote in case of Blood if they please I should be very glad if they were as averse to Popery in every thing else and particularly that they would leave Ceremonies indifferent and not contend so highly for them whereby they make the breach wider and heighten the differences among Protestants in the doing of which they do the Pope's work most effectually I wish they would consent to have a new Book of Canons for those that are now extant are the old Popish Canons I like Bishops very well but I wish that Bishops were reduced to their primitive Institution for I fear whilst there is in England a Lord Bishop the Church will not stand very steddily But I will leave this though I need say no more and proceed to other things that are very clear as I conceive My Lord Cook in the Second Part of his Institutes the first Chapter treating of Magna Charta when he reckons up the Priviledges of the Church he tells us that Clergy-men shall not be elected or have to do in secular Office and therefore he tells us that they are discharged of such and such burdens that Lay persons were subject to and good reason it should be so that they might with greater ease and security attend the business of their Function that is to govern and instruct the Church But whether they had these Immunities granted them that they might study the Pleas of the Crown and Law Cases or else that they might apply themselves to the work of the Ministry let any Man judge for saith he Nemo militans Deo implicet se negotiis secularibus And if to sit and judge in case of Blood be not a secular Matter I have no more to say and I hope my Lord Cook 's Authority will be allowed And because as I conceive that my Lord Cook 's Authority may pass Muster in this point I will offer some things out of him that will make it evident that the Bishops are only Lords of Parliament and not Peers and if so it is against the Law of England for them to sit and judge upon any Peer for his Life for the Law says that every Man shall be tried by his Peers In the Second Part of his Institutes the first Chapter he tells us that every Arch-Bishop that holds of the King per Baroniam and called by Writ to Parliament is a Lord of Parliament But in the 14th Chapter when he reckons up who are Pares in the Lords House he says not a word of the Bishops but repeats all the other Degrees of Lords as Dukes c. And without doubt he would not have made so great an omission if the Bishops ought to have been taken into the number Besides this if the Bishops be Pares how comes it to pass that an Act of Parliament shall be good to which their consent is not had passed by the King Lords Temporal and Commons But it was never allowed for an Act of Parliament where the Lords Temporal had not given their Vote And for proof hereof see my Lord Cook in his Chap. De Asportatis Religiosorum where he gives you several Instances of Acts of Parliament that passed and the Bishops absent But then in the Third Part of his Institutes he there puts the matter out of all controversie and shews that Bishops are to be tried by Commoners for says he in the second Chap. treating of Petty Treason None shall be tried by his Peers but only such as sit there ratione Nobilitatis as Dukes c. and reckons the several Degrees and not such as are Lords of Parliament ratione Baroniarum quas tenent in Jure Ecclesiae as Arch-Bishops and Bishops and formerly Abbots and Priors but they saith he shall be tryed by the Country that is by the Free-holders for that they are not of the Degree of Nobility So that with submission this is as clear as any thing in the World If the point be so clear that the Bishops may Vote in case of Blood it would do well that some Presidents were produced by which it might appear that they have ever done it at least that they have made use of it in such times when the Nation was in quiet and matters were carried fairly for Instances from Times of Confusion or Rebellion help rather to pull down than support a Cause But my Lord Cook in his Chap. that I mentioned even now De Asportatis Religiosorum gives you several Presidents where the Bishops when Capital Matters were to be debated in the Lords House withdrew themselves particularly 2 of

Rich. II. the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury made a solemn protestation in the Parliament for himself and the Clergy of his Province for that Matters of Treason were to be entreated of whereat by the Canonical Law they ought not to be present they therefore absented themselves But in regard I have hitherto voucht my Lord Cook for what I have said I desire that it may be observed that he wrote since the Reformation and what was Law when he wrote is Law at this day unless it be changed by some Act of Parliament made since and therefore he that denies my Lord Cook to have written Law must produce some Act of Parliament whereby it does appear that the Law is altered since his time Besides this the Bishops and other Clergy were called to Parliament very uncertainly sometimes more sometimes fewer and sometimes none at all as it was in Edw. I. time Therefore seeing the case to be thus That the Bishops are not Peers but only Lords of Parliament That an Act of Parliament is good though they be absent That they are to be tried by Commoners And that when Capital Matters were to be debated they have withdrawn themselves declaring at the same time that they ought not to have to do in such things And also that they have not so absolute a Right to sit and Vote in the House as the Temporal Lords have because they are called to Parliament so uncertainly I shall be glad to hear what can be said to make their Right unquestionable But if all this were set aside yet it remains on their part to prove that they have sate in Judgment upon the Peers I am apt to believe they will be hardly put to it to produce any President out of good Times when the Nation was in quiet and the Law had its course Nay I think they can scarcey find any that the Proceeds of that Parliament when it was done were not repealed by Act of Parliament and stand so at this day And I should also be glad to see that when a Peer has been tried out of Parliament that any Bishop was ever nominated to sit upon that Lord accused for out of Parliament if a Peer be tryed for his life it is by a select Number named by the King and if the Bishops have Right to sit and Vote upon the Peers it is strange methinks that there is not any Instance to be found where the Bishops or any of them have been named to Judge a Lord out of Parliament Now the reason as I conceive how this comes to pass is because it was never known that a Bishop was tried by the Lords out of Parliament and therefore they cannot try a Lord out of Parliament because they are not Peers for the Lords have never tryed any Bishop but in Parliament and that was always upon Impeachments and not otherwise And upon an Impeachment they may try other Commoners as well as Bishops Besides this it is plain that the Clergy even in the time of Popery would not have to do with Blood in any case whatsoever For when they engrossed all Offices and Places of Honour or profit you shall not find any Bishop that was Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench or Judge of any Court where Mens Lives were to be meddled with and the Clergy were not so ignorant or backward in their Interest as to let slip such profitable places had it suited with their Function I have often considered with my self what it is that has induced so many of the Temporal Lords to contend for the Bishops in this case I cannot perceive but that it is against themselves that they strive for without doubt the fewer that the Temporal Lords are the more considerable they are and why they should strive to make themselves less I cannot comprehend neither can any reason be assigned but that which is obvious to every Mans Thoughts That there is some secret power that governs their Lordships in this Affair But without doubt this powerful hand would not be able to turn the Scales so very much if Nobility had been bestowed only on such as deserved Honour But when Interest prevails above Merit no wonder that a Word or a Look do command so absolutely And yet there is this to be said for the Lord's House that there are a great many Lords who retain the Worth and Honour of their Ancestors That notwithstanding being frowned upon displaced and all possible discouragements yet have they shewed themselves to be Men of English Principles that they will serve the King as Englishmen but will not give up any of their just Rights to please him If the Bishops had never so clear a Right in this matter the it is to be consider'd that whatever Right they have that it was gained in the times of Superstition and Blindness when the Clergy Usurped and Lorded it over the Nation and therefore in regard that England has now recovered its Eye-sight and Understanding they are very unthankful if they do not reduce every thing to its proper Station And if the Bishops are prohibited by a Law not to Vote in Case of Blood or are abridged in any other Matter where the Interest of the King and People require yet the Church is not prejudiced for my Lord Cook tells us in the second part of his Institutes Nec debet dici in praejudicium Ecclesiae libertatis quod pro Rege Reipublicae necessarium invenitur And whether it be not for the Interest of the King and People that the Bishops shall not Vote in case of Blood I submit to any Man that wishes well to England Now I would fain be satisfied why our Bishops are more forward to have to do in case of Blood than the Bishops and Clergy in the time of Popery it 's plain they always declined it but ours will adventure a Kingdom upon it It 's true they will withdraw upon the Tryal of the Five Popish Lords but they will not upon Tryal of my Lord D s Pardon yet thus far they condescend that when Judgment is to be pronounced they will withdraw Very well First it is confessed on all hands that if my Lord D s Pardon do not hold good he dyes for it And next I would willingly understand the difference in this case when a Man is tryed for his Life before several Judges and all of them though he is Innocent resolve that he shall be pronounced guilty but they withdraw themselves and leave one of their Brethren to pass the Sentence Now the question is Whether the rest that were absent are not as guilty of shedding Innocent Blood as he who pronounced the Sentence And so on the contrary for any other thing whatever And whether this does not reach the case in hand I humbly submit But the truth of the matter is the Bishops do know that if my Lord D s Pardon be allowed then Arbitrary Power comes in with a Powder And then will be their Harvest

wealth thinking no doubt to enjoy greater Priviledges and Immunities than now they do But I am apt to believe that they who are not contented under this Government have not consider'd aright what a Common wealth is A Common-wealth makes a sound and shadow of Liberty to the People but in reality is but a Monarchy under another Name for if Monarchy be Tyranny under a single person a Common wealth is Tyranny under several persons as many Persons that govern so many Tyrants but let it be the best that can be yet the People under any Common-wealth enjoy not that Liberty that we do Gentlemen as the Excellency of this Government is an Argument sufficient to disswade any of us from the least attempt of alteration so Experience has taught us that no sort of Government but that we now live under will suit or agree with England Let us but consider the late Troubles how many several kinds of Government were there set up one after another All ways were tryed but nothing would do till we were returned to our old and ancient way But Gentlemen it may fall out that we our selves may be the Authors of our own Destruction for whatever the Parliament does we are bound up by it if they pass a Law to give away all we have to the King we must submit to it for it is our own Act and therefore it highly behoves us to be very cautious who we chuse to represent us in Parliament we put all we have into their Hands and what they do must bind and oblige us Every Man is mortal and possibly may be corrupted to vote against the Interest of them he represents I accuse none of your Representatives nor do I accuse all only tell you that Men may be corrupted Therefore in my opinion whenever you have occasion to chuse a Member for the Parliament as now you have you ought to have a care of an ambitious Man or a Man that is vain glorious for it was never known that any of that Temper were so out of a real intention to the Publick Good for Ambition or Vain-glory was never accounted to be the Make of an Honest Man and if you 'll give me leave I 'll tell you what sort of a Man I shall give my Vote for if I cannot have a Man that is both wise and honest then I would rather be for an honest than wise man for I would rather trust all I have with a man that is truly honest and less knowing than with a man that is more knowing and less honest I shall always be for a man that has a good Estate in the Country for though he may possibly forget us yet he will remember himself and avoid all unnecessary charge upon the Country because he himself is to pay part of it Next I am for a moderate man one that is not strict or rigid neither one way nor the other either in Church or State for it's Moderation that must keep every thing in right order and it's Severity and Rigidness that will bring things into confusion In short Gentlemen let your own Judgment and not another Man's Interest or Inclination direct you in this case for our Parliament is our Weal or Woe And now I will proceed to the Particulars of your Charge The first and chief thing that you are to present is High-Treason To Compass or Imagine the Death of the King the Queen of their Eldest Son Now Gentlemen you must observe that the Heirs to the Crown are of two sorts first Heir Apparent that is the King 's Eldest Son that is living for no body else can be Heir Apparent secondly their Expectant or Presumptive that is he who in course of Descent is next in Blood to the King if he hath no Son Now the Offence is not so great to kill or procure the Death of the Heir Expectant as it is to compass or imagine the death of the Heir Apparent To levy War against the King in his Realm or to adhere to the King's Enemies in his Realm or to give them Aid or Comfort in the Realm or elsewhere To counterfeit the King 's Great Seal or Privy Seal or his Money To bring false Money into England counterfeit the Money of England and knowing the same to be false with intent to make payment with the same To kill or slay the Chancellor Treasurer or the King's Justices of the one or the other Bench Justices in Oyer or of Assize and all other Justices assign'd to bear and determine being in their Places doing their Offices To counterfeit the King's Sign Manual Privy Signet or Seal by 1 Q. Mary 6. To diminish scale or lighten the current Money of England 18 Eliz. 1. So Clipping Washing Rounding and Filing of Current Money by 5 Eliz. 2. There are too many Offenders in this nature amongst us The second time to extol and maintain the Pope's Authority formerly usurped here and the second time to refuse to take the Oath of Supremacy 5 Eliz. 1. A Priest or Jesuite that shall come and remain here who shall be in any Seminary and not return within six months after proclamation 27 Eliz. 2. To put in use any Bull or Instrument of Reconciliation or Absolution from Rome or from any person authorized or claiming Authority from Rome Any Person that shall willingly receive any Absolution and all Aids and Abettors it 's High-Treason in them by 13 Eliz. 2. To withdraw any of the King's Subjects from their Obedience or Religion And such Persons as shall be withdrawn from their Obedience to the King or their Religion 23 Eliz. 1. And now Gentlemen give me leave to take notice to you of them who very largely discourse that the King is above the Laws I am very apt to believe that they don't consider very well what they say nor don't know or remember that as it is High-Treason to kill or hurt the King so it is High-Treason to subvert the Government or to endeavour any alteration of it and then I would ask any man to solve me this Question Whether or no it be not an alteration of the Government to render all our Laws ineffectual and useless which must necessarily follow and where it is or upon what they ground their Opinion I am sure the Word of God warrants no such thing nor can any such thing be found in the ancient Government of this Island for at first it was govern'd without a King I don't mention this as if I question'd the King's Title to the Crown no Gentlemen I would have every subject to pay him all possible Duty and Obedience but I say this to shew you that there is no Ground for that Opinion that the King is above the Laws And I am sure I never met with it either in Magna Charta or any Law made since and therefore I could wish they would forbear to preach up such destructive Doctrine both to King and People I am sure it is for