Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	emperor_n	king_n	league_n	3,609	5	9.4892	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29573	An apologie of John, Earl of Bristol consisting of two tracts : in the first, he setteth down those motives and tyes of religion, oaths, laws, loyalty, and gratitude, which obliged him to adhere unto the King in the late unhappy wars in England : in the second, he vindicateth his honour and innocency from having in any kind deserved that injurious and merciless censure, of being excepted from pardon or mercy, either in life or fortunes.	Bristol, John Digby, Earl of, 1580-1654.	1657 (1657)	Wing B4789; ESTC R9292	74,883	107

the Pope no such Superior Jurisdiction Neither if he did are there any such Ecclesiastical Censures issued out against him as might warrant so much as his Catholique Subjects to take arms against him So that whatsoever Pretences may be in some Cases concerning such Princes as I have above specified wherein I shall not presume to deliver any Opinion yet in the present Case of King CHARLES there can be no colourable pretence of taking arms against him or of deposing him which I understand to be in effect when he is divested o● his just Regal Power Or of the imprisoning of his person which I understand to be not only when he is in Bonds or lockt up in a Room but when the liberty of going and the freedom of speaking is restrained to such places or persons as others shall please and he remain under the Guard of Armed men not of his own choosing but imposed upon him by others It must be acknowledged that the Kings of England derive their Title and Right from William the Norman who although he came in by Conquest yet his Successors considering that a Right acquired by Force may likewise be recovered by Force by those upon whom the forceable Intrusion was made were pleased by way of pact and stipulation to limit and qualifie that Imperium absolutum which is acquired by Conquest And the People of England thereupon did submit themselves to his Government and became his Subjects and his Liege-men And thereby was Constituted Imperium legitimum a just and Rightfull Soveraignty the Kings remaining with Supreme Power and the People with Common Right whereby they were freed from the Servitude of Conquest and remained under a free Subjection whereunto they had by their Consent submitted themselves The Kings likewise did recede from Absolute and Arbitrary Power and remained with Supreme but not with Absolute Empire By free Subjection I understand when a People live under Laws to which they have given a free Consent and not under the meer Will of the Prince And that they retain such a Propriety in that which is their own that without their Assent or legal forfeiture it cannot be taken from them And this is a true difference betwixt a Free Subject and a Slave or Servant Quicquid acquirit servus acquiritur Domino Liber quod acquirit acquirit sibi Whatsoever a servant getteth he getteth for his Lord Whatsoever a Freeman getteth he getteth for himself And so although that Dominion of all belongeth to the Prince Propriety belongs to every man Dominium totius apud Caesarem Proprietas apud singulos The Difference that I understand betwixt a Supreme and Absolute Empire is That in Absolute Empire the Rule of the Peoples Obedience is only the Soveraigns Will So it is in Turky Muscovia and all such Princes as retain entire the Right of Conquest and was in some sort under the Roman Emperor after the Lex Regia was established by the Peoples Consent whereby they transferred their entire Right unto the Emperor Supreme Empire I understand to be when a King hath a Supremacy and Soveraingnity over all but his Absolute Power is limited and restrained by reciprocal Pacts Laws and Stipulations betwixt Prince and People which is the Case of the Crown of England And to these Pacts the King and People are equally bound before God and Man And the King is as much bound to Iustice and to the protection of his Subjects and to the observance of the Laws not only out of Religion but out of Moral Honesty as the Subject is to Obedience And he is not only accomptable to God but his People have just and legal waies to seek Redress wherein he shall do Wrong notwithstanding that Axiome of our Common Law * That the King can do no Wrong which is very false in many senses and may be very well called fictio Iuris a kind of Metaphysical Fiction For Kings may do Wrong and be as wicked as other men and may commit Murther and lye with other mens Wives and wrongfully take take other mens Estates which no Fiction of the Law can make not to be Wrong although his Person be exempt from punishment And that abstract Consideration of the King for his just Power and Office as it hath been often ill used heretofore in way of Assentation So there hath been as ill use made of it in these troubles when the taking of arms and the fighting against him was pretended not to be against the King but against CHARLES STEWART But to speak in Terms intelligible a King both may do Wrong and the People may seek their redress in such sort as the Law of the Land alloweth And the difference betwixt King and Peoples failing in their reciprocal Duties is not but that they do Wrong alike offend God alike and are both of them liable to be questioned according to the extent of the Law by both their Consents established The Subjects transgressing the Law shall be punished according to the quality and measure of their Delicts Felony by loss of their Goods and Chattels and by a milder Death Treason by a more severe Death and Confiscation both of Goods and Inheritance But hereof they must be convict per pares by People of their own Condition and adjudged by a Superiour Iurisdiction which can be derived only and singly from the King So that the King not having his Peer or any of his own Condition cannot have a legal Tryal And having no jurisdiction superior to himself cannot be adjudged or sentenced by any For neither the Extent of the Law nor any Condition of the Pacts or Stipulation do reach to the punishing of the Person of the King or the forfeiture of his Dominion over us It is true that in civill things Tryals may be and often are brought against the King And Kings do give way That the Iudges be sworn to do equal Iustice betwixt them and their Subjects And in point of Oppression and Wrong we may Remonstrate our Grievances and challenge Redress by our Petitions Which if they be not condescended unto we may insist upon them as our right and claim them as a due and not as of grace And although we do it by way of Petition that is but a dutifull form of Subjects bringing their Plea against the King For in other sort he ought not to be impleaded Besides these Petions of Right we may as it hath been formerly said remonstrate enter our Protestations and take all those Courses which the Laws allow Neither ought the King to take Offence at these legal Contestations with him because by his assent unto the Laws he hath assented unto them Nay he ought in them to do us Right being bound thereunto by the Law of God and by his Oath and by moral Honesty and Iustice But if he fail in all these Duties our Jurisdiction reacheth not to his personal Punishment therein he is sub nullo nisi sub D●o and the Law stoppeth there

Proceeding therein could be but by joint concurrence of both Houses I judged this the most proper Expedient of making my addresses unto them both I accompanied this my Petition with a letter of much Respect unto the Speaker of the House of Peers with many Motives to induce them to condescend to my Petition I received Answer by letter bearing date the 10. day of Iune 1646. from the Earl of Manchester Speaker pro tempore in the name of the House as followeth My Lord The House of Peers have received your Letter and have commanded me to return your Lordship this Answer That they leave your Lordship to take the benefit of the Articles of Excester which they will carefully observe c. Hereupon having the Articles of Excester confirmed I came up in person unto London and exhibited my second Petition to the House of Peers with the same Request I had formerly made That it might be communicated with the House of Commons And by a letter signified unto the Speaker of the House of Commons my being come to London upon the publique faith of the Treatie of Excester The particular safe-Conduct of their General under his Hand and Seal and his letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons and the assurance of the House of Peers That the said Articles should be carefully observed by them My second Petition was That I might without offence sollicit my Cause and use my indeavours to give satisfaction to the Houses I received Answer by the Earl of Manchester That the Lords thought it reasonable that I might take the full benefit of the Articles and use my best indeavours in solliciting my Cause in Person to my best advantage But the next day after I had received this permission from the Lords to follow my Cause I was notified and served with an Order by the Serjeant at Armes of the House of Commons That notwithstanding it was agreed by the Articles for Rendring up of Excester Oxford c. That the Excepted Persons might come to London to endeavour to make their Peace and Composition with the Parliament the House of Commons was resolved to admit them to no Composition notwithstanding the said Articles And therefore it being to no purpose for them to use any further indeavours in that kind the Serjeant at Arms of that House was from time to time to give notice unto all such Excepted Persons That they should immediately depart without the Line of Communication and Parts adjacent and not to return c. I conceived this very derogatorie to the House of Peers that I should be ordered by the House of Commons without the Concurrence of the Lords especially in a matter wherein the Lords had declared themselves before Herein I thought it fit to have recourse unto the Lords and sent the Copie of the said Order unto divers of them who seemed to find it very strange and wished it might be offered unto the House the next morning which was accordingly done But having been read after some time of a general silence another business was set on foot and this laid by so that I found little relief was to be had where I might so justly have expected it But in regard the Serjeant at Arms had told me He could return no Answer to the House of Commons but his dutie was only to notifie the Order and to give an accompt if obedience were not given to it I wrote a letter unto the Speaker conteining some few modest and necessary requests But nothing would be heard concerning me but that I was to depart the Kingdom within the limited time by the Articles of Excester which being within very few daies to be elapsed I was constrained to make all the haste I could to the sea side and there to imbarque my Self and Companie and horses in a small boat with three Mariners only and one Boy having used all possible means to have my time enlarged only for some few daies for the providing of fitting Transportation but could not obtain it so that two daies before the expiration of the time limited by the Articles of Excester I imbarqued at Weymouth and passed into France The Reason of my leaving the Kingdom of England was First for that I was assured that the time of the Treatie being expired I should be seized as a Prisoner of War and so I might have been proceeded against by Marshal law or an Arbitrarie Power instead of a legal Tryal according to the law which neither then I did nor will at any time decline The second was That notwitstanding by the 21. Article for the surrendring of Excester it was agreed That no Oath Covenant Protestation or Subscription should be imposed upon any Person whatsoever comprised in the said Articles Yet the House of Commons ordered 2 of June 1646. That no Person should come to reside in the Parliament Quarters which was then all England but he should take the National League and Covenant and the Negative Oath notwithstanding any Articles that had been or should be made by the Army neither of which I thought could stand with my Loyaltie or the Oaths or Protestation which I had formerly taken Besides I did conceive that no Person could live with comfort or safetie under such a Power that so avowedlie broke the Publique Faith of their own Armie and General whom though I found very desirous to have his Capitulations punctually performed yet were they in all things broken by the Houses or their Committees whensoever it was for their benefit For the General having given me his Letters and Protection under his hand and seal for the injoying and disposing of my goods for the space of four months according to the Articles yet the Committees of Dorset-shire slighted the said Articles and Generals latters being both shewed unto them and sold the said good● for a third parr of their value for their own or friends advantage By this manner of proceeding I having fallen from all hope or possibilitie of clearing my self by being brought to a legal Trial or publick Hearing And being loath to go to my grave from whence I cannot be far branded with that black Mark of not being capable of Pardon or Mercie neither for Life nor Fortunes which must insinuate me to the world to be some horrid pernicious and wicked Malefactor find my self obliged in that I owe to my self in Vindication of mine Honor and Innocencie as likewise to my Familie and Posteritie who will find themselves left to want and misery to let them see that it hath been an inevitable necessity and adhering to my Loyalty and Conscience that hath involved me in that general Calamitie that hath be fallen the Kings overborn Partie and the particular indignation of others and no particular wickedness or demerit of mine that hath assigned and severed me to that severe and merciless Sentence of Unpardonable Destruction If I could have had any hope of being admitted to a publique or Legal Proceeding I should