Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	brother_n	king_n	normandy_n	2,913	5	10.9735	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89005	Ochlo-machia. Or The peoples war, examined according to the principles of Scripture & reason, in two of the most plausible pretences of it. In answer to a letter sent by a person of quality, who desired satisfaction. By Jasper Mayne, D.D. one of the students of Ch. Ch. Oxon.	Mayne, Jasper, 1604-1672.	1647 (1647)	Wing M1472; Thomason E398_19; ESTC R201695	27,844	40

only supposition And you now Sir what the Logician saies suppositie nihil p●nit in esse what ever may be supposed is not presently true If Calumny her selfe would turne Informer let her leave out Ship-money a greivance which being fairely laid a fleepe by an Act of Parliament deserved not to be awakened to beare a part in the present Tragedy of this almost ruined Kingdome she must confesse that the King through the whole course of His Raigne was so farre from the Invasion of His Subjects Rights that no King of England before Him unlesse it were Henry the first and King Iohn whom being Vsurpers it concern'd to comply with the People the one having supplanted his Eldest Brother Robers Duke of Normandy the other his Nephew Arthur Prince of Britaine ever imparted to them so many Rights of his owne To that Degree of Infranchisment that I may almost say He exchanged Liberties with them Witnesse the Petition of Right An Act of such Royall Grace that when He past that Bill He almost dealt with His people as Traian did with the Pratorian praefect put his sword into their Hands and bid them use it for Him if he ruled well if not against Him In short Sir Magna Charta was a Vine I confesse cast over the People but this Act enabled them to call the shade of it their owne An Act which if your friend will please to forget Ship mony being in no one particular violated so farre as to be instanced in by those whose present Ingagements would never suffer such Breaches of Priviledge to passe unclamour'd will oblige posterity to be gratefull as often as they remember themselves to be Freemen This then being so the next inquiry will be whether a bare Jealousy that the King would in time have recalled this Grace and would have invaded the Liberty of his Subjects by the change of the Fundamentall Lawes could be a just cause for such a preventive Warre as this To which I answere that such a Faire though built upon strong presumptions cannot possibly be a just cause for one Nation to make Warre upon another much lesse for Subjects to make Warre against their Prince The Reason is because nothing can legitimate such a Warre but either an Injury already offered or so visibly imminent that it may passe for the first Dart or Speare hurled Where the Injury or Invasion is only contingent and conjecturall and wrapt up in the wombe of darke Counsells no way discoverable but by their own revelation of themselves in some outward Acts of Hostility or usurpation to anticipate is to be first injurious and every Act of prevention which hath only Iealousie for its foundation will adde new justice to the enemies Cause who as He cannot in reason be pronounced guilty of anothers Feares so he will come into the Field with this great advantage on his side That his reall wrong will joyne Battle with the others weake suspition But alas Sir Time the best interpreter of Mens Intentions hath at length unsee'ld our eyes and taught us that this hath been a Warre of a quite opposite Nature The Gentleman who wrote the Defence of M. Chaloners Speech and M. Chaloner himselfe if you marke his Speech well will tell you that the quarrell hath not been whether the subject of England shall be Free but whether this Freedome shall not consist in being no longer Subject to the King If you marke Sir How the face of things hath alter'd with successe How the scene of things is shifted And in what a New stile they who called themselves the Invaded have spoken ever since their Victories have secured them against the power of any that shall invade If you consider what a politick use hath been made of those words of Inchantment Law Liberty and Propriety of the Subject by which the People have been musically enticed into their Thraldome If you yet farther consider the more then Decemvirall power which this Parliament hath assumed to it selfe by repealing old Lawes and making Ordinances passe for new If you yet farther will please to consider How much Heavyer that which some call Priviledge of Parliament hath been to the Subject then that which they so much complained of The Kings Prerogative so much heavyer that if one deserved to be called a Little finger the other hath swolne it selfe into a Loyne Lastly if you compare Ship mony with the Excise and the many other Taxes laid upon the Kingdome you will not onely find that a whippe then hath been heightned into a Scorpion now but you will perceive that as these are not the first Subjects who under pretence of Liberty have invaded their Princes Crowne so farre as the Cleaving of Him asunder by a State Distinction which separates the Power of the King from his Person so ours as long as he was able to lead an Army into the Field hath been the first King that ever took up Armes for the Liberty of his Subjects Vpon all which premises Sir I hope you will not think it false Logicke if I build this Conclusion so agreeable to the Lawes of the Kingdome as well as the Lawes of God That supoosing the Parliament all this while to have fought as was at first pretended for the Defence of their assayled Liberty yet fighting against the King whose Subjects they are it can never before a Christian Judge make their Armies passe for just But being no way necessitated to make such a Defence their Liberty having in no one particular been assaulted which hath not been redrest if S. Paul were now on earth againe and were the Iudge of this Controversy between them and their Lawfull Soveraigne I feare he would call their Defence by a Name which we in our Moderne Cases of Conscience doe call Rebellion And thus Sir having as compendiously as the Lawes of a Letter will permit given you I hope some satisfaction concerning the first part of your zealous Friends dispute with you which was whether the Two Houses which he calls the Parliament have not a Legall power in Defence of their Liberty to take up Armes against the King I will with the like brevity proceed as well as I can to give you satisfaction in the second part of his Dispute also which was whether Religion may not be a just Cause for a Warre The Termes of which Question being very generall and not restrained to any kind of Religion or any kind of Warre whether offensive or defensive or whether of one Nation against another or of a Prince against his Subjects or of the Subjects back again against their Prince allow me a very large space to walk in In which least I be thought to wander and not to prove It will first be necessary that I define to you what Religion in generall is And next that I examine whether every Religion which falls within the Truth of that Definition may for the propagation of it selfe be a just cause of a Warre and so