Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A25327
|
The Anatomy of a Jacobite-Tory in a dialogue between Whig and Tory : occasioned by the Act for recognizing King William and Queen Mary.
|
|
1690
(1690)
|
Wing A3053; ESTC R22595
|
20,621
|
38
|
Potestas designativa Person◠cannot pretend that here was a Choice or Designation made by their Representatives for the Convention had not taken the Oaths which should qualify them to act as their Representatives W. That is to say you would have them swear to be true and faithful to the late King when they believ'd that he ceas'd to be King and the Contract between him and the People was broken If it were broken then no doubt but they might do all that was necessary for subjecting themselves to King William and Queen Mary without regard to the Obligations enter'd into to the other as he was King of England T. I thought I should draw you into an Ambuscade Last part of the Magistracy c. p. 8. If you urge the Vacancy as the Author of the last part of the Magistracy and Government vindicated has smartly argued you must grant that the Government was dissolv'd every thing reduc'd to its primitive state of Nature all Power resolv'd into Individuals and the Particulars only to provide for themselves by a new Contract W. To use your Friend Dr. Brady's Expression yours is but an aiery Ambuscade suitable to the Judgment of your wordy Author according to whom our Common and Statute-Laws have had many an interruption But the great Civilian Pusendorf would tell him that no Nation can be presum'd so sottish to intend at the first setting up of a King that their Laws should determin with their Prince's Life or Title T. You still talk of the People's Choice when it is contrary to the Maxims of our Law that there should be any instant of time wherein we are without a King W. You mean when the course of Descents goes on but have there never been Interruptions T. Yes but not of right W. But had the Laws no force while they who you suppose to have had the right were out of possession T. That may deserve consideration but I am sure the Right could never be lost for it was first acquired by Conquest and it is not to be presum'd that a Conqueror would have his Right depend upon any Condition W. Not to trouble you with too many things at once I shall put you to prove four things 1. That W. I. was a Conqueror 2. That his Conquest was absolute without any manner of Terms 3. That he gain'd a Right for himself and his Heirs by proximity of Blood 4. That the Rule to judg who was his Heir is not the Law of the Land but something more sacred for as your own Historian has shewn J. I. History of passive Obedience sup had no right by the Law of the Land Prior to the Peoples Choice more than any body else of the Blood-royal and consequently according to your Advocate the People have been without any Government ever since the death of Queen Elizabeth Nay the Consequence will strike off both the Protestant and the Catholick Queen T. I never trouble my head with Consequences at such a distance But nothing in the English Government except what is done by the Monarch can be justified unless a Precedent can be shewn for it And I am sure no Precedent can be found where ever any English Parliament declared any one to be lawful and rightful King while one who had the Right remain'd alive W. I will grant it while the Right remain'd but they have transferr'd the Right from one to another and declared the Right to be in one who excepting that he was of the Blood-royal had no Right but from their Declaration as to go no backwarder appears in the Case of H. VII T. He had it in right of his Wife W. What think you if I shew this before he married T. The People of that time were better Catholicks than to be guilty of such an Injury to the next Heir W. To convince you of this I will shew you the form of such a Parliamentary Declaration before his Marriage which follows in these words Enry par le grace de Dieu Roy Dengletere de France In that Parliament he was desir'd to marry Seigneur Dirland au Parlement tenuz à Westminster le septisme jour de November l'an du Reigne du Roy Henry le septisme puis le Conquest primer au plesir de Dieu tout puissant bien publique prosperite suertie di cést Realm d'Engletere à la singular comfort de toutz les Subjects du Roy del mesme en remoevement de toutz ambiguitez questions del assent des seigneurs Espirituels Temporels à la request des Communes il est ordeigne establie enact par auctorite du dit Parliament Que les inheritaunces des Corones des Realms d'Engletere de Fraunce ove toutz Preemynence Dignite Royal a yeest appurtenant Et toutz autres Seigneuries au Roy regardantz oultre le mere ovesque les appurtenaunces a queaux en ascun manere duez ou perteignauntz soient estoient remaignent en le tresnoble Person nostre Soveraign Seigneur le Roy Henry le Septisme en les Heirs de son Corps leialment issantz perpetualment ovesque le Grace de Dieu ensy d'endurer in nulls-auters Henry by the Grace of God King of England and France and Lord of Ireland at a Parliament held at Westminster the 7th day of November in the First year of the Reign of King Henry VII since the Conquest For the pleasure of God Almighty the publick Good the Prosperity and Safety of this Realm of England to the singular comfort of the Subjects of the said King and for removing all ambiguities and questions of the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and at the request of the Commons it is ordained established and enacted by authority of the said Parliament That the Inheritances of the Crowns of the Realms of England and France with all the Preheminence and Dignity Royal to the same appertaining And all other Seignories belonging to the King beyond Sea with the appurtenances in any manner due to them or appertaining be stand and remain in the most Noble Person of our said Sovereign Lord K. H. 7. and in the Heirs of his body lawfully issuing for ever with the Grace of God there to endure and in no other persons This is to be found in the beginning of the Statutes of H. 7. and was sent to the Sheriffs of the several Counties of England to be proclaimed T. I listened to hear the words Lawful and Rightful W. I take the Recognition in the time of H. 7. to be more full for tho the declaring that King William and Queen Mary are Lawful and Rightful King and Queen and that the Royal Power is entirely vested in them as the Bill of Rights and the last act of Recognition declare strongly implies that King James has no Right Yet it is not so express as the other which places it in H. 7. and the Heirs of his Body and renounces the