Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	france_n	king_n	prince_n	18,120	5	5.7862	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75416	An ansvver to a speech without doores: or, Animadversions upon an unsafe and dangerous answer to the Scotch-papers, printed under the name of Mr. Challener his speech, which while it offereth to reach a blow at the Scotch-papers, doth indeed strike at the honour of the Parliament, and interest of the kingdome of England.	Birkenhead, John, Sir, 1616-1679.	1646 (1646)	Wing A3351A; Thomason E362_9; ESTC R201213	4,567	7

Ambassadour coming from another Kingdome or State expect no sufficient protection in England by the Law of Nations but by the Lawes of England without which protection as this Paper saith every man may kill him and destroy him nor can he have such protection except he become withall a Subject of England And was not the Honour of the Parliament and Kingdome of England in this well preserved Sure Foraine Nations will not thinke so It cannot be denied saith the Paper but there is a two-fold subjection Legall and Locall And this though it be onely pro tempore and the other during life yet it doth for the time totally obstruct the operation of the other subjection so that no King can command any Subject of his living out of his Kingdome but such Subject of his is to be disposed of by the sole Authority of that supreme Power where he makes his residence By which rule being at least equally applicable to any that are subject to the Parliament when both Houses send Commissioners into Scotland these Commissioners must not be subject to the Orders and Commands of the Houses of Parliament but must be disposed of by the sole Authority of the supreme Power in that Kingdome And is not this fine for the Honour of the Parliament He that will make it stand with their Honour Magnus mihi erit Apollo But come on Pag. 7. I doe affirme that if a King of Scotland should have come into England before the union of both these Kingdomes he had been instantly a Subject of England and his person to be disposed of by the sole Authority of the Lawes of England By which Principle the Prince of Wales now in France is become a Subject of France and his Person to be disposed of by the sole Authority of the Lawes of France so that the King and Parliament have not Authority to recall him And is not this a good salve for the Honour of the Parliament O brave Pag. 8. W● cannot admit of any regal●ty in the Person of a King of Scotland coming into England No man can be said to be Rex but in Regno And by just Analogy the Parliament of England cannot be acknowledged a Parliament but in England only neither can their Commissioners in any other Kingdome or State be admitted to propound declare treat or conclude in name of both Houses And is not this well look't unto for the Honour of the Parliament Is it not Pag. 9. If they the Scotch be our fellows why come they not to our Parliament Therefore if it can be made to appeare that they are our fellowes equalls and brethren they may come to our Parliaments Loe here how well the Priviledge of Parliament is preserved Here followes also a Story of John King of England cited as Duke of Normandy to appeare at Paris Whereunto the English replied That if the Duke of Normandy did goe the King of England must goe and if the Duke of Normandy were beheaded they knew well enough what would become of the King of England It was resolved by the Lawyers that if John had been in Normandy at the time of his summons he ought to have appeared but not so being in England Where beside the vast disproportion of comparing the case of one who was King of one Kingdome and Subject of another with his case who is a free Monarch of two free Kingdomes the Narration doth also extremely strengthen the Scotch Paper which it pretendeth to oppose for they answer the English now just as the English did then answer the French that is If this present King of England must be disposed of by the sole Authority of both Houses of Parliament what shall then become of the Person of the King of Scotland where is then the Scotch King in Concreto If the notion of a King in Abstracto be sufficient against the Scotch in this debate sure it was as strong against the English then Behold what a rationall account is here given for the single and sole Authority of the Parliament of England to dispose of the King of both Kingdoms If this be well pleaded I confesse I have lost my judgement Pag. 12. tells us the Kingdomes are now contending about the Kings Person not who should have it but who should not have it Which reflecteth strongly upon the Parliament and will inferre that forasmuch as they decline or shunne to have the Kings Person either they did not wisely or not uprightly when they Voted that his Person is to be disposed of as both Houses shall thinke fit And is not this much for the Honour of Parliament Is it not Pag. 14. 'T is desired to be considered whether as the case now stands The Kings safety be not incompatible with the safety of the Common-wealth I will not here relate what is vox populi concerning that Gentlemans old discontents at the King but I blesse my selfe to thinke where we now are when after so many Oaths Protestations Declarations and Covenants as for other ends so for the safety of the Kings Person 't is notwithstanding endeavoured to make the world beleeve that there is a great doubt made in Parliament whether the Kings safety is not incompatible with the safety of the Common-wealth And is this now compatible with the Honour of Parliament In fine I doe not know whether the Scotch may like this Speech of Mr Challenor for the matter of it as being a malleable Answer yea such as in the opinion of Intelligent Readers fortifieth their Papers not a little But I much mistake if it have a favourable aspect from the Parliament either for the matter or for divers acrimonious expressions in it which as I cannot easily beleeve to have beene spoken in that honourable Senate so none I thinke will like well provoking Language but those who desire to put the Kingdomes by the ears from which misery and from all the Plots both of Sectaries and Malignants Good Lord deliver us Amen FINIS

AN ANSVVER TO A Speech without Doores OR ANIMADVERSIONS Upon an unsafe and dangerous Answer to the Scotch-Papers printed under the name of Mr. Challener his Speech which while it offereth to reach a blow at the Scotch-Papers doth indeed strike at the honour of the PARLIAMENT and interest of the Kingdome of ENGLAND PROV 28. 2. For the transgression of a Land many are the Princes thereof IF any shall aske Who art thou and what meanest thou I shall not make my Answer so wide as Di●g●nes did I am not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea I will yet take me to a narrower compasse I am one who have adhered to the Parliament all along from the very beginning of the war and I have served them faithfully in their lowest condition resolving still to be for them in that which is just and right against any person or Nation in the world And as to my meaning in this particular t is not to write in defence of the Scotch Papers let their Papers speake for themselves if they can and if they cannot I have nothing to say for them and however I will not ju●dre in illorum verb● but I write in defence of the Honour of the Parliament and of the Interest of England which have received a dangerous wound by this printed Paper which comes abroad as a Speech spoken by Mr Challenor in the House of Commons I doe not presume to examine or at all to intermeddle in any thing spoken within those wals I speake to the printed Paper which for any thing I know may be supposititious or at least different from the Originall Sure if I mis-heard not t is not printed as it was spoken in the House which yet is pretended in the Title Page else what is become of the Dog that is not worth the whistling after and what is become of that other passage concerning the debate at a Comedy in Oxford concerning the fittest place for erecting the Kings Throne the determination whereof was so difficult that some thought it best not to erect it at all Whatever was spoken in the House I suppose t is no Priviledge of a Member of Parliament to print what he list against the Honour of the Parliament and Interest of the Kingdome neither can it be a breach of the Priviledge of a Member and much lesse the breach of a Priviledge of Parliament to vindicate the Honour and Interest of Parliament which is my present worke and so I come to it without further prefacing My Animadversions upon the Paper are these ●irst of all it presenteth to the view of the world a champion coming forth Goliah-like for the Parliament but stumbling wofully in the very beginning of his dispute It draweth together three large sheets of the Scotch Papers into this syllogisme Wheresoever the Kingdome of Scotland hath an interest in their King there they may dispose of him But the Kingdome of Scotland hath an interest in their King he being in England Therefore in England they may dispose of him The Paper runnes along in answer to this Syllogisme and here is a man of straw set up to be buffeted I will concurre with Mr Challenor to denie this Argument but all this while the Scotch Paper escapeth scot-free there is no such Argument in their Paper neither for matter nor forme they doe not say that either this Kingdome or their owne may dispose of the King but that it belongeth to both Kingdomes to dispose of him And if there must needs be a Syllogisticall arguing and answering their Argument ought to have been stated thus Whatsoever is by Covenant Treaty and the very Law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdomes ought not to be disposed of but by the mutuall advice and consent of both Kingdomes for the good of both But the person of the King whether in England or Scotland is by Covenant Treaty and the very Law of Nations of joynt interest and common concernment to both Kingdomes Therefore the Person of the King whether in England or Scotland ought not to be disposed of but by the mutuall advice and consent of both Kingdomes for the good of both This is the summe of what the Scotch Papers say as to this point which is there prosecuted and endeavoured to be proved by parts but whether it was for the Honour of the Parliament that one of their Members should Answer what the Scotch say not and not Answer what they say let rationall men judge To no better purpose is that distinction Pag. 4. 5. of the King in Abstracto and the King in Concreto which beside that it maketh Persona to be Concretum I know not by what rule of Logicke doth plainly begge from the Scotch what is in question For the Scotch Papers doe state the question as the Vote of the honourable Houses September 24. had done before them not upon the Authority Power and Office of the King but upon the Person of the King and to this very purpose are all their Arguments brought to prove a joynt and equall interest of both Kingdomes in the Person of the King which by Covenant they and we both are bound to defend and preserve as well as his Authority and just Power But this pretended Answer in stead of answering or confuting their Arguments denieth their Conclusion Was this now for the Honour of the Parliament Was it not I but saith the Paper Person● sequitur locum and his Person must be disposed of by the supreme Power of that Countrey wheresoever he shall happen to abide By this Principle forsooth the Person of the King of England if he were in Scotland must be disposed of by the supreme Power of that Countrey without the advice and consent of the Parliament of England And was not this well pleaded for the interest of the Parliament and Kingdome of England I thinke not Within a few lines after I finde it said That the Kingdome of England is as distinct in interests from Scotland as Spaine And is all our conjunction of interests in one Religion one Covenant one King one Cause one Warre turned in end to no more but this Then may Scotland make a Peace without the advice and consent of the Kingdome of England as well as Spaine may Then also may Scotland enter into a Confederacy with a Forain Kingdome without asking advice or consent from this Kingdome as well as Spaine may And was not this well provided for the interest of England was it or was it not I turne over to Pag. 6. where I read thus I shall take this as granted for good Law that let the Person of any Nation that were I confesse Persona Concreta under the sunne which is in amity with England happen to come into England that person is forthwith a Subject of England For he being protected by the Lawes of England he becomes thereby subject to those Lawes c. Then must any