Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	henry_n	king_n	richard_n	15,475	5	9.2713	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42946	The character of Thomas Merkes, Bishop of Carlisle out of Bishop Godwin's Commentaries of the bishops of England, part 2, pag. 149 : together with his speech in the last Parliament of King Richard II, anno 1399, as it is recorded by Sir John Hayward in The first part of the life and reign of K. Henry IV, pag. 101.; De praesulibus Angliae commentarius. English. Selections	Godwin, Francis, 1562-1633.; Hayward, John, Sir, 1564?-1627. First part of the life and raigne of King Henrie the IIII.; Merke, Thomas, d. 1409. Speech in the last Parliament of King Richard II.	1689 (1689)	Wing G969; ESTC R23000	7,627	8

The Character of Thomas Merkes Bishop of Carlisle out of Bishop Godwin's Commentaries of the Bishops of England Part 2. pag. 149. Together with his Speech in the last Parliament of King Richard II. Anno 1399. as it is recorded by Sir Iohn Hayward in the first Part of the Life and Reign of K. Henry IV. pag. 101. Printed at London by Iohn Wolf Anno 1599. The CHARACTER THomas Merkes a Monk of Westminster was made Bishop of Carlisle by the Pope at the Request of King Richard II. Anno 1397. against the liking of the Chapter and consecrated the same Year who being entred upon his Charge shewed himself not unworthy of his Office For besides that he is commended for his Learning and his no small Prudence he is celebrated and that not undeservedly in the first place for his singular Faith and Constancy towards his Patron K. Richard as likewise for his famous Magnanimity that without any Fear he boldly professed his Loyalty not without great and manifest Danger when he might honestly have held his peace and ought to have done so if he had regarded onely his own safety There were some of the Nobles who did not desert the Cause of that unfortunate Prince till he was Prisoner to his Rival Henry Duke of Lancaster But this Prelate despising the danger that hung over himself would not desert the King even when he had some while before deserted himself but durst manfully defend the King and his Cause when he had lost his Power and Interest and when he certainly might conclude that no sort of Benefit could redound to the King but Ruine might befall himself thereby At that very time when the mad multitude always excessive in their Passions not content to have deposed King Richard and placed Henry of Lancaster their Darling in his Throne but with their Clamours seemed to extort from the Parliament that they might deal yet more severely with the King and there were not wanting some in the Parliament it self who cast out dark and ambiguous Speeches of putting him to death this Bishop then was not affraid to pronounce That there were none there present who had right to proceed to Iudgment against the King 〈◊〉 as their lawfull Prince they had obeyed twenty two Years Some few Heads of this Speech being onely related by Bishop Godwin the whole is therefore without any alteration Spelling excepted here printed from Sr. Iohn Hayward's Book When the Inheritance of the Crown was settled on K. Henry and his Line it was moved in Parliament what should be done with King Richard In answer to which the Bishop of Carlisle declared as followeth The SPEECH THis Question right honourable Lords concerneth a matter of great consequence and Weight the 〈◊〉 whereof will assuredly procure either safe Quiet or dangerous 〈◊〉 both to our particular Consciences and also to the common State Theresore before you resolve upon it I pray you call to your considerations these two things First Whether King Richard be sufficiently deposed or no. Secondly Whether King Henry be with good Iustice or Iudgment chosen in his place For the 〈◊〉 point we are first to examine Whether a King being lawfully and fully instituted by any just Title 〈◊〉 upon imputation either of Negligence or of Tyranny be deposed by his Subjects Secondly What King Richard hath omitted in the one or 〈◊〉 in the other for which 〈◊〉 should deserve so heavy Iudgment I will not speak what may be done in a popular State or in a consular in which although one beareth the name and honour of a Prince yet he hath not supreme power of Majesty but in the one the People have the highest Empire in the other the Nobility and chief Men of Estate in neither the Prince Of the first sort was the Commonwealth of the Lacedemonians who after the Form of Government which Lycurgus framed oftentimes fined oftentimes fettered their Kings and sometimes condemned them to death Such were also in Caesar's time the petty Kings of every City in France who were many times arraigned upon Life and Death and as Ambicrix Prince of the Leodienses confessed had no greater Power over the People than the People had over them Of the second condition were the Roman Emperours at the first of whom some namely Nero and Maximinus were openly 〈◊〉 others were suddenly surprized by Iudgment and Authority of the Senate and such are now the Emperours of Germany whom the other Princes by their Aristocratical Power do not only restrain but sometimes also remove from their imperial State. Such are also the Kings of Denmark and Sweveland who are many times by the Nobility 〈◊〉 either into Prison or Exile Such likewise are the Dukes of Venice and of some other sree States in Italy and the chiefest cause for which Lewis Earl os Flanders was lately expelled from his place was for drawing to himself cognisance in matters of Life and Death which high Power never pertained to his Dignity In these and such like Governments the Prince hath not 〈◊〉 Rights but is himself subject to that Power which is greater than his whether it be in the Nobility or in the common People But if the Sovereign Majesty be in the Prince as it was in the three first Empires and in the Kingdoms of Iudaea and Israel and now is in the Kingdoms of England France Spain Scotland Moscovia Turkey Tartaria Persia Ethiopia and almost all the Kingdoms of Asia and Africk although for his 〈◊〉 he be unprofitable to the Subjects yea hurtfull yea intolerable yet can they lawfully neither harm his Person nor hazard his Power whether by Iudgment or else by Force for neither one nor all Magistrates have any authority over the Prince from whom all Authority is derived and whose onely Presence doth silence and 〈◊〉 all inferiour Iurisdiction and Power As for Force what Subject can attempt or assist or counsel or conceal Violence against his Prince and not incurr the high and 〈◊〉 Crime of Treason It is a common Saying Thought is free Free indeed from punishment of secular Laws except by Word or Deed it break forth into Action Yet the secret Thoughts against the 〈◊〉 Majesty of a Prince without attempt without endeavour have been adjudged worthy of death and some who in auricular Confession have discovered their treacherous Devices against the Person of their Prince have afterwards been executed for the same All Laws do exempt a Mad-man from punishment because their Actions are not governed by their Will and Purpose and the Will of Man being set aside all his doings are indifferent neither can the Body offend without a corrupt or erroneous Mind yet if a Mad-man draw his Sword upon his King it hath heen adjudged to deserve death And lest any man should surmise that Princes for the maintenance of their own Safety and Sovereignty are the onely Authours of these Iudgments let us a little consider the Patterns and Precepts of holy Scripture Nebuchadnezzar