Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	king_n	time_n	year_n	19,963	5	5.0438	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38520	Epistola Medio-Saxonica, or, Middlesex first letter to His Excellency, the Lord General Cromwell together with their petition concerning tithes and copy-holds of inheritance, presented to the supreme authority, the Parliament of England : wherein the tortious and illegal usurpation of tithes, contrary to Magna Charta, is discovered, the blemished dignity of copy-holders revived, and how lords of manors have formerly incroached upon their liberties, by imposing arbitrary fines, and multiplying of heriots : whereunto is annexed two additional cases concerning the unreasonable exactions of fines and heriots, contrary to law, in these latter times ...	Cromwell, Oliver, 1599-1658.; Wingfield, Augustus. Vindiciae Medico-Saxonicae.	1653 (1653)	Wing E3170; ESTC R5296	18,776	30

the said Treatisers Arguments are fully manifested and the said Letter and Petition clearly vindicated from Error and Mistake BY AUG WINGFIELD A Member of this present PARLIAMENT LONDON Printed by F.L. for William Larnar at the Blackmore near Fleet-Bridge 1653. Tithes totally routed by Magna Charta HAving perused a Treatise of Tithes penn'd by way of Answer to its Opponents by one as it is conceived of the long Robe we thought fit to give timely admonition that though he pretend to be a wel wisher to Religion and Propriety yet when he speaketh fair men believe him not for there are it is to be feared seven Abominations in his heart who though his Sophisticated Arguments be covered with deceit yet shall his wickednesse be shewed before the whole Congregation Prov. 26.25 26. In his Epistle to the Reader he discovers both his spirit and his pride censuring his Antagonists as clamorous malitious ignorants though perhaps in the judgement of unbiased Moderators more learned peaceable and more Evangelically spirited than himself But fearing lest his great Diana Tithes the Nursery of contention and strife should in these days of Reformation and restauration of publique Freedom and liberty like Dagon before the Ark fall to the ground and come to nought he hath therefore out of his worldly wisdom judged it very opportune both in reference to himself and also to his Clients the Tith-taking Priesthood and Impropriator in this extremity of time to force into his Aid a Catalogue of Acts of Parliament though to little purpose since few of them before the Statutes of H. 8. intimate so much as a right much lesse command the payment of Parochial Tithes to Priests or others as if this Respondent would make us all beleeve that Ubi nomen Decima ibi argumentum Decimandi that wheresoever in any Statute the word Tith is found there is an argument for Tithing though by his leave in some of them by him quoted there is not so much as the name * Mag. Char. c. 1. Marl. c. 5. 25 E. 1. 2● E. 1. c. But although he and his Tith-taking Brethren have a long time like Simeon and Dovi confederated together not only to make us ignorants but still to keep so by perswading of us and our fore fathers That Tithes were first due by Divine Law then by Canon Law and now by Statute Law yet are we and the good people of England resolved to be no longer deluded by them with their Paralogisms and deceitfull reasonings And therefore that we may no longer digresse by way of preface we shall now come to reply and to examine those two grand objections which the Author of the said Treatise raiseth against the Middlesex Letter and Petition in the Expository opening of those two Statutes of Magna Charta ch 29. and 1. R. 2. ch 14. where this Respondent saith pag. 13. That for the Penner of the said Letter and Petition to make the People believe that the payment of Tithes is against Magna Charta is such an exposition as was never made upon that Statute and therefore to rectifie this Errour as he calls it he hath laboured though in vain to overthrow the said exposition and those invincible arguments built upon it and to set up his own contrary interpretation and false affertion viz. That Tithes and the payment thereof by the people were confirmed by Magna Charta ch 1. under the Notion of Church rights And first for proof thereof he saith pag. 14. That by the Common Law of this Land at the confirmation of Magna Charta Ecclesiastical persons had remedy to recover their Tithes in the Spiritual Court and then concludes that the Law gives no remedy but where there is a right which assertion is very untrue For Cook upon Tithes saith That by the Common Law Lands are undecimable and if undecimable then certainly by that Law there can be no Church right to Tithes neither to be recovered by virtue thereof in the Spiritual or Popes Court Since the people of England were not bound in Law by his Cannons Neither is Cook single in his opinion For Selden fo 291 saith That Arbitrary disposition of Tithes used by the Laity as well de jure of right as the positive Law then received and practiz'd was as de facto of deed and practise is that which Wickleff remembred in his Complaint to the King and Parliament under R. 2. The substance whereof in brief is That the proud and pompous Priests did constrain the poor People of England viz. by Popish Canons to pay their Tithes unto them whereas within a few years before they paid their Tithes and Offrings at their own free will and pleasure Which is also attested by Ludlow a Judge of Assize in E. 3. who saith That in antient time a man might give his Tith to what Church he would which is true sayes Judge Brook in Abridging the case Selden fol. 252. And the said Author further saith fo 290. That under Innocent the 3d. it was usuall in fact for Laymen by the practice of the Law at that time both Common and Canon to convey the right of their Tithes as Rent-charges or the like to what Church or Monastery they pleased and such Conveyances were clearly good And whereas the Author of the said Treatise p. 14. quoteth Mr. Selden for his Authority of Parochial right he is clearly mistaken since Mr. Seldens judgement in the same place immediately following is cleerly to the contrary and that which is here alleged as the Treatisers main Argument is nothing but the opinion of the Canonists recited by Mr. Selden and by him in the same and following pages fully confuted pag. 144 146. Moreover Magna Charta is by Act of Parliament made in 25 E. 1. called the Confirmation of the Charters adjuged and declared to be the Common Law of the Land which if true as it is most true then Tithes being not so much as named much less confirmed by Magna Charta are not due by the Common Law as the said Respondent weakly supposeth and so not at all under Ecclesiastical cognisance But he objecteth and saith That Tithes are contained in these words The Churches Rights Mag. Char. cap. 1. for further satisfaction whereof see Cooks exposition upon the very same words where he saith that Ecclesiastical persons shall enjoy their lawfull jurisdictions and other their rights but not one word of Tithes without diminution and that no new Rights were given unto them hereby but such as they had before confirmed Now if no new Rights were given then not Tithes since the Author of the said Treatise confesseth p. 14. that the Common Right of Tithes due to the Rector of the Parish is but from the time of K. John and then as M. Selden whom he quoteth p. 146. declareth not so much as in opinion established whereby it is evident not onely by Selden and his own confession but also in the judgment of Gook that at

friends Gods friends and their Countries friends should now at length be left to remain in bondage and Gibeonitish slavery whilst their enemies riot and abound in liberty and freedom Wherefore we humbly desire that all Copy-holders of Inheritance may according to your severall Declarations of the 7th of April 1646. and of March 1648. be restored to christian freedom and liberty the fruits of Conquest and the just reward of their expence and hazzard that so of victors they may not become slaves and vassals in their estates to their conquered Lords whom they begin already to feel and are dayly like to find more cruell and unreasonable than ever if they shall return again to reign over them with the full sayl of usurped power Thus hoping that the same God who hath even miraculously given you Victory over your enemies rest from warres peace in your Habitations and put a power into your hands to do righteous things for the good of this Nation will also put into your hearts and minds to do these things represented unto you and what else you in your wisdoms shall know to be for the good and welfare of this Common-wealth And we shall ever pray c. The Case of Copy-holders stated according to the * Quando lex accommodatur ad causam personam non è contra When the Law is applyed to the cause and person not they to it Lesbian Rule of the Law in the corrupt times of Monarchy wherein is clearly proved that no Lord of a Manor of Copy-holds of Inheritance can take for a Fine where as they say uncertain of his Copy-hold Tenant two years clear yearly value of the Land FIrst Because it is resolved by Popham Chief Justice Clench Gaudy and Fenner Justices of the upper Bench in the 42. and 43 Eliz. between Hubbard and Hammon that if the Fines of Copy-holders of a Manor are incertaine upon admittances yet the Lord may not demand or exact an excessive or unreasonable Fine and if he doth the Copy-holder may deny to pay it without forfeiture and according to this resolution it was then said that it had been formerly adjudged in the same Court in one Hoddesdons Case Cookes Reports lib. 4to Now it is a Rule and Maxim that all excessivenesse is abhorred in Law and that all things ought to be interpreted with equity and moderation As put case the Lord of a Manor where Fines through his Tyranny are incertain hath taken time out of mind about a years value not much under nor over If there one of his Copy-hold Tenants shall improve his Land by great charge and industry from 5 l. per annum to be worth 20 l. per annum and then dye and after the Lord shall set two years Fine viz. 40 l. upon his Heir this will be an excessive and most unreasonable Fine First Because where a Lord hath usually taken about a year though a little under or over there to take a year and half though according to the value before improvement is excessive and so illegall if the Rules of right reason moderation and equity were closely held to and kept Next it is altogether unreasonable because through this improvement of the Tenant with a vast expence and charge perhaps treble to the Land the Lord now comes to take in a little compasse of time at a year and halfs Fine six years years value at two years Fine eight years value according to the yearly Rent and worth of the Land before improvement So that now a covetous and unconscionable Lord as too many there are will take advantage to enrich himself out of the Tenants vast expence and industry contrary to the Rules of Iustice equity and honesty Secondly and lastly no Lord of a Manor can by the present Law take two years clear yearly value for a Fine where as Lawyers say they are uncertain though repugnant to those great Authorities in the Letter before recited and contrary to their own Maxims and abundantly savouring of tyranny upon the admittance of a Copy-hold Tenant as is clearly resolved in an action of Trespasse between Stallon and Brady commenc'd in the first year of King Iames in the Court of Common Pleas where the Lord of the Manor did set a Fine at two years clear yearly value which the Tenant denying to pay being unreasonable the Lord enters and thereupon the Tenant brings an action of Trespasse and after five years demurre consultation being had with all the ludges and great Lawyers of England it was at length viz. in the sixth year of King Iames by the Iudges of the said Court of Common Pleas fully and unanimously resolved that the said Fine of two years was unreasonable and so no forfeiture by the Tenants denial Now from hence it must be concluded that for any Lord of a Manor to demand a year and a halfs Fine is the very utmost rigour and extremity of the Law as it hath flowed to us out of the impure fountain of Monarchy and all those who have exacted more have done illegal and unwarrantable Acts according to that Lesbian Rule But where Tenants have at their great charge made improvements as is above declared there for the Lord to take a year much more a year and half is altogether unconscionable and against the Rules of equity The Case of intolerable Oppression in point of Heriots A Copy-hold Tenant holds a 100. Acres of Land worth per annum 5 s. per Acre and 20 s. Rent yearly and for which the Lord claims a Heriot upon Death The Tenant aliens his Land to a hundred men now by our Book-Law made in corrupt times meerly in favour of Lords and to oppresse poor people the Lord of the Manor shall have his 20 s. Rent and besides a Heriot for every Acre upon the death of every particular Tenant for this reason which is no reason because a Heriot is an indivisible service so that it may so fall out that the Lord shall have Heriots in a short time to the value of one thousand pounds whereas the whole is not worth five hundred pounds and besides a poor man having an Acre of his Land not worth five pound and dying seised the Lord shall enter upon his Goods and take away for a Heriot a Cow or Horse worth six or eight pound to the utter ruine of his Wife and Children Now from a division of Land to urge a multiplication of Heriots hath neither antient Law reason nor honesty in it notwithstanding those slight Arguments and fond distinctions of Heriot Service and Heriot Custome which are used to the contrary REader these names should have been placed at the end of the 13th Page Col. Pride Aug. Wingfield Robert Cromwell Col. Potter Henry Arundell Nich Beale FINIS Vindiciae Medio-Saxonicae OR Tithes totally Routed BY MAGNA CHARTA IN A Reply to an Answer of Middlesex Letter and Petition in the latter end of a Tract called A Treatise of Tithes WHEREIN The Invalidity of