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 |
|
A84082
|
Animadversions on a book called, A plea for non-scribers. By Ephraim Elcock.
|
Elcock, Ephraim.
|
1651
(1651)
|
Wing E325; Thomason E636_2; ESTC R206574
|
62,788
|
67
|
our ancient Chronologers for immediately before the passage they quote he acknowledges that before Richards Coronation most writers call him not a King and then he holds that Sycophantical glosse which Non-scribers make use of A Lawyer and that a friend of their own tells us from Walfingham a farre more authentique Historian then the Merchant-Taylor that in the Coronation of Richard the 2d when the King had taken his Oath Archiepiscopus praecedente eum c. the Arch Bishop Henry Percy the Marshal of England going before him turned himself to all the parts of the Church and acquainted the people with the Kings Oath asking them whether they would obey such a Prince and it was answered by all the people with a loud voice that they would which custom saith he hath bin constantly before and since observed And another of his profession saith Soveraign power of Parliaments part 1. p. 75. That the King ought to take his Oath before he should require his Subjects homage when any Subjects have sworn homage before the King had done his homage sworn fealty to the State Law it hath been observed by Historians as some kind of Comet or Prodigy in State-politiques so that notwithstanding Rights of the Kingdom p. 32 that for peace sake the next of the blood hath usually succeeded yet he could not require homage before he had first sworn to the Lords the Commons consâ—quently hath his Kingly bâ—ing from that stipulation He cannot then be coordinate with them whose swearing obedience to the Lawes they shall chuse gives him his Kingly power and dignity 3. Lex Rex quest 21. p. 177. 178. Those who make a King and have power to unmake him in point of misgovernment must be above the King in point of Government But the Parliament makes Kâ—ngs and Kings make not Parliaments the Kings power is fiduciary and put in his hands upon trust and must be ministerial and borrowed from those who put him in trust his power must then be lesse When the King hath received power from them they have the whole power they had before that is to make Lawes and resigned no power to the King but to execute Lawes and his convening them is an act of royal duty c. Lex Rex quest 24. p. 210. all this is Mr. Rutherford's and therefore should take more with Non-scribers And again the Parliament is coordinate with the King ordinarily but the coordination on the King's part is by derivation on the Parliaments part originaliter and fontaliter In ordinary there is a coordination but if the King turn tyrant the Parliament is to use their fountain power and that of the Law Par in parem non habet potestatem is no better from his pen saith Mr. Rutherford that is from the excommunicate Bishops of Rosse then from Barclay Grotius Arnisaeus Blackwood c. We hold the Parliament that made the King at Hebron to be above their Creature the King See then Reader who are the Patriarchs and Prophets of Non-scribers fast Cavaliers excommunicated Prelates But what say Non-scribers to this Argument Even run themselves into the height of Cavalierisme Appendix p. 35. The Authour of the Engagement vindicated saith the people chuse their Representatives and they set up Kings who are therefore meerly the peoples Creatures depend upon continuation of their pleasures Ejus est instituere cujus est destituere To this they answer This is spoken as if it were undeniably true that Kings with us have been wont to be set up by the Representatives of the people but we have neither seen nor read of any such custome in England we have not any one president of a King created meerly by a Representative Is this their knowledge of Histories to which they send us elsewhere for satisfaction Sir Thomas Smith calls the Parliament the Representative body of all England wherein every Englishman is presumed to be either by himself or by his Proxie And many Kings have been made by this Who made William the first King his Conquest Non-scribers will say was no just title the right successive heir of the Crown Edgar Etheling surviving who made William the 2. and Henry the 1. Kings while their elder Brother Robert was alive What Title had King John by succession as long as Arthur and Anne the Children of his elder Brother George Frey Duke of Brittain lived the latter of which Anne lived in the Reign of Henry the third Son of John The Arch-Bishop Hubert at the Coronation of John spake thus Noverit discretio vestra c. Be it known to your discretion that none hath right or any fore title to succeed another in a Kingdom unless first he be with invocation for grace and guidance of Gods spirit by the body of the Kingdom thereunto chosen Soveraign power of Parliaments part 1. p. 54. Rights of their Kingdoms p. 70. So Mr. Prinne out of Hoveden to which all the Assembly consented scientes quod non sine causa sic defini verat as the Authour of the rights of their Kingdom out of Matthew Paris and Wendover compared with Hoveden and others which Authour tells us that if Bracton and Fleta 2 ancient Judges may be made Judges of our Kings Titles they will tell us that in their times our Kings were elective And one of them lived in Henry the thirds time the other soâ—ewâ—at after Edward the 3. was made King by the same power that his Father was deposed by and what that was Speed Ed. 2. S. 74. Speed will tell you the sentence was pronâ—unced by William Tâ—ussel of all the men in England and of the Parliament Procurator Fractus Temporum part 7. Rich. 2. Henry the 4. was chosen and made King of England by the people for the rightful manhood they found in him as the old Fructus Temporum But to conclude who made Henry the 7. King not succession for by his Father he was a meer stranger to the Royal Line and by his Mother of such a â—prout of the Family of Lancaster as was excluded from succession to the Crown by that Law which made it capable of succeeding to ordinary Inheritances Speed Hen. 7. S. 1. as Speed confesseth By his wife he had it not for he exercised all the Acts of Royal Power before he was married His Conquest Non-scribers will deny to be a Title it must then follow Speed Rich. 3. S. 53. that it was from the Parliament he had his Title unless they will say with Speed he had it by election of the people in the field at Bâ—sworth But I believe Non-scribers will say that Act was more valid which was done by an orderly Parliament then that which was done by the Souldiers in the height and heat of their victory If they have not seen or heard these things they are strangers in English History But it was not the obscurity of these things in our Histories that made
withall engaged themselves to hold the Countrey of the Netherlands under the obedience of their Prince and natural Lord as they ought to do for so are the words of their protestation in Mr. Prinne's Book yet in the year 1581 Hugo Grotius de Antiq Reâ—p Batavicae cap. 5. Paulus Merula de statu Reip. Bataviae Diatâ—iba Johannes de Latt Descrip Belgicae tit Hollandia cap. 7. Henricus Sâ—terus Suecia pag. 131. Seq pag. 202. 206. 216. they solemnly abjured the King of Spâ—ine who was â—â—e Hereditary Earle of Holland And the Earles of Holland were not in any thing short of a justly regulated King and had as much Authority there as the Kings of England among us as the Authors in the Margin inform us The States of Sweden in the year 1544 changed their Elective Kingdom into an Hereditary which they entayled upon Ericus the eldest Son of Gustavus their King then and his issue male and if such issue failed upon John the Kings second Son and his heirs male and in like manner upon Magnus and Charles Duke of Sudermannia the Kings younger Children to this they sware solemnly Yet Ericus for his Tyranny was deposed by the States and John the second Brother crowned he dying and leaving Sigismund King of Poland and John Duke of Ostrogothia his 2. sons behind him Sigismund was crowned King of Sweden yet because he endeavoured to destroy the Protestant Religion established among them and Warred upon them he was deposed by an Act of the States Assembled at Stockholm in the year 1599 and in the year 1600 both he his posterity excluded from all government in Sweden by a Decree of the States assembled at Lincop nay more they excluded from the Kingdom John Duke of Ostrogothia the brother of Sigismund because they feared lest he out of naturall love to his brother should enter into any part or Covenant with Sigismund and his heires which might bring detriment to their countrey and then they chose Charles Duke of Sudermannia for their King And if the States of Holland might abjure their Earl and not be scandalous to us nay and we joyn with them as our Nation did in Queen Elizabeth's dayes if the States of Sweden might abjure Sigismund Ministri in hac sententia constanter permanserunt posse viz. Magistratum sub leges vi cogi Buchanan Rerum Scot. lib. 17. his brother and issue and not be scandalous to us nay more and we help Gustavus the Son of Charles whose right was built upon Sigismund's ruine I can see no cause why our actions and engagement should be scandalous to any honest man among them or any other Nation that approved the equity of those actions in Holland or Sweden Scotland it may be will frowne because the current of Pensions from England is stopt but they that laid the foundation of Reformation in Scotland were of another mind then their present Kirkmen Mr. Knox defended the Lawfulness of putting Tyrants to death in a Generall Assembly In the Scotch Queen Maries dayes Buchanan Rerum Scot. lib. 20. Magis formidamus nimiae lenitatis apud omnes bonos reprehensionem quà m apud malâ—s crudelitatis calumnium Actio contra Mariam Scotorum Reginam pag. 100. Plea c. page 60. the Ministers were constant in this opinion that the Magistrate might be brought by force under the Lawes and the Earl of Morton and other Scotch Lords Ambassadors to Queen Elizabeth justified their deposition of Mary and affirmed that they might by the Law of Nature and their Countrey have dealt more severely with her and that her life and the successors of her Son depended upon their clemency their Oration which was presented to Queen Elizabeth a Latin Printed Copy whereof I have ends thus We more feare to be reprehended by good men for our over-much Lenity then we do to be slandered by the bad with cruelty Were Scotlands Kirkmen the true successors of Mr. Knox and Buchanan we could not offend them but we being their successors in the truthes they professed and the Scots Apostatizing we may well cast them in with Non-scribers and contemne the offences they take against us with Let them alone c. But the imposing of the Engagement say Non-scribers is scandalous because it takes away the Liberty of Conscience which the Imposers professedly maintain and they cannot see any reason but that they should leave Conscience free in Civill matters who would have it free in matters of Religion But besides that the Imposers of the Engagement have not for ought I know owned the Patronage of so vaâ—â— Libertinisme in matters of Religion as Non-scribers would â—ather upon them their Argument may be retorted upon themselves It is scandalous that they who hold tolleration of difference in outward formes of Discipline unlawfull should claime a tolleration in Civill matters and it would be scandalous in the Magistrate to tollerate any thing Festus Hommius col Anti-Bellarminianum Disp 34. Thes 4.5 Sam. Bolton Arraignment of error pag. 335. 336. Plea c. pag. 61. or to grant any priviledge which by the Priviledged is looked upon under the Notion of sin and Learned Presbyterians into the number of whom Non-scribers itch to be received rank opinions destructive to the publike Peace with such as are blasphemous and contrary to Fundamentall truthes and allow the Magistrate an equall nay greater Power to punish them that are seditious then them that are so erroneous Concerning the Agreement of the People I have this only to say that the Parliament never owned it and therefore Non-scribers do meerly Calumniate them in laying it at their doores But their new strain of Poetry wherein they would make Sphynx a resolver of riddles I must say that for ought I have read Isti quidem orationi Oedipos epus conjectori est qui Sphyngi interpres fuit Plautus in Paenulo Act. 1. Scen. 3. Plea c. page 42. the proposing of riddles is onely attributed to Sphynx the resolution to Oedipus And for the Riddle it self since Non-scribers are the Sphynges I will make them according to their own Poetry the unriddlers Non-scribers call the Government by Kings Lords and Commons the constitution of the People yet make the People subject to it So that the people by their own concessions may have a radicall virtuall Power of Soveraignty which when they have derived and it is in the Magistrate formally they are to obey the Magistrate made by them The people as a Community gave their Power to their Representatives as singulars are required to Engage They who aggregately as a Community are the Originall of power may severally and personally be the Recipients of it The rest of their Rhetorick is spent in bewayling the Tyranny Plea c. page 61. 62. 64. oppression Injustice which our Nation as they say is under notwithstanding the imposers of the Engagement professe opposition to Tyranny and make Justice and Liberty their Motto But that you may know