Selected quad for the lemma: friend_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
friend_n	army_n	king_n	prince_n	764	5	5.4125	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25435	Angliæ decus & tutamen, or, The glory and safety of this nation under our present King and Queen plainly demonstrating, that it is not only the duty, but the interest of all Jacobites and disaffected persons to act for, and submit to, this government.		1691 (1691)	Wing A3181; ESTC R9554	40,230	66

Answer they received and it amounts 〈◊〉 this The King Declares to the Prince that 〈◊〉 consents to the calling of a Free Parliament and said he had appointed Lords Commissioners to adjust and regulate with the Prince all those Points that were necessary as well for the Free Election of Members to serve in Parliament as for the security of the next Sessions The Prince does propose such Conditions as were most equitable and most necessary for his own and the Public Safety The Prince demands that the Papists beput out of Places of Trust and that they be disarmed there could not have been security enough for himself and his Friends if the Papists had continued in Offices and in Arms with their Sword in their hands He requires that all the Proclamations in which his Friends had been Declared Rebels should be revoked and anulled How could a Free Parliament have been called and what Equity could the Prince have expected from the same if all the Peers and Gentlemen who had Declared for him had been excluded from sitting in Parliament as being Rebels He requires that all those of his side who had been taken should be set at liberty How could he provide for the security of the Laws and Religion so long as those who had come over to their Deliverers side were to be treated as Criminals and if they had been really chargeable was it ever required of a Prince who has his Sword in his Hand that he should condemn himself and give his consent that those who adhered to him should be treated as Traytors The Prince Demands that for the security of the City of London that the Custody and Government of the Tower should be committed to the said City It had been ill that in so nice a juncture King James had remained Master of the Tower to be in a capacity to destroy the City of London and to reduce it to Ashes so soon as ever she should attempt to favour the vigorous Resolutions of a Parliament If 〈◊〉 Prince 〈◊〉 ●●●manded that the Tower should be put into his own possession it had been unjust but since his intentions were to take such Measures and use such means as tended to the security of the People's Liberties it was absolutely necessary to secure all those Places of Strength which were made use of for destroying the Liberty of the Subject The Prince desired the King to withdraw from London during the holding of the Parliament or that if he inclined to stay there it might also be allowed that the Prince should be there with an equal Number of Guards a very just Demand The Prince was not obliged to leave King James in a Capacity of Exercising an Absolute Power over the English as well as the Scotch Parliament whilst he abide at London with his Guards which would not have failed to convey to the Tower all such Members who should presume to Declare themselves to be of an Opinion that crossed the King's Interest and Intentions King James and the Prince were at that time as two Parties at Law in a Suit that was to be heard and determined in Parliament and of which the Parliament was the only competent Judge and consequently it was necessary and equitable that the Parliament should enjoy an entire liberty This could not be unless he did overthrow or permit the Prince to be near to stand by his Friends as the King was desirous to defend his own The Prince requires that both the Armies should March 40 Miles from London The Prince could make no Demand more equitable to the end that the Parliament might be left in full Liberty It was not requisite that all King James's Forces should have Encamped round about Westminster and that the said King with his Sword in his hand should have forced the Parliament to Condemn the Prince of Orange and all his Friends as Guilty of High-Treason to be cut in pieces In the last place the Prince of Orange does Demand That to prevent the descent of the French Portsinouth might be put into the hands of a Person who might be trusted both by the Prince and by the King It was one of the most just and most necessary precautions in the World It is unknown to none that King James had Intelligence with the French with a design by their Assistance utterly to subvert Religion Liberty and Property The World was sufficiently informed that after the Report was spread of the Prince's Expedition it was several times deliberated upon in Council if they should receive the French Forces It was known that the Papists did mightily Press King James to consent thereunto and that the said King did only refuse it by reason of the fear he had of a general revolt of the Kingdom Had he not been very prudent to leave in the said King's hand during the sitting of the Parliament the Principal Port of the Kingdom that was open to receive Strangers with whom it is very well known that he had conspired for the Ruin of the Prince and of the Kingdom It was very impertinently said by a certain Foreign Scribler speaking of the Prince his Principality of Orange as a Title had not justified his raising of an Army to reduce the King of England with in due limits Was it not extreamly needful to give this Publie Advertisement and this very advantagious precaution in this Matter Without it there would have been some sort of Folks without all doubt who would have said why had not William of Nassan a Right to dispute the Crown of England with King James seeing he was already Prince of Orange before Does not the Principality of Orange give a very good Title to the English Crown This Author wanted an occasion to make a Defence by the by for the King of France for the ill Services he has done his present Majesty in that Principality and therefore he was obliged to bring in the Principality of Orange in this place only for this end that he might have the occasion to say that William Henry of Nassau was justly deprived of his Principality because it belonged to the House of Longueville which descended from that of Chaalons whereas the House of Nassau had only kept it by meer Vsurpation The French Court was resolved too late to do Justice in this Affair to the House of Longueville Henry IV Lewis XIII and Lewis XIV himself were very backward in rendering to their Subjects and to their Servants that which appertained to them and in accomodating the differences that have been depending amongst them The truth is if this pittiful Scribler had been Wise he would not have touched upon this Point and would not have recalled into Men's Minds such Ideas which cannot take place without causing Horror and a just Indignation To restore to the House of Longueville a Possession that so justly belonged to them it was not necessary to lay it desolate as they did to demolish and raze the Castles to level the

a moment and did the Prince's business without effusion of Blood It is true that at last the King at a pinch consented to the Calling of a Parliament but it was then too late and they knew very well that that was only to gain time yet tho' as late as it was it is yet true That if the King had stayed his Enemies could never have done any thing against him the Parliament had taken his part This is soclear by the manner of the carriage of many of the Members of the Convention that he must be blind who cannot see it or be very hard of belief not to acknowledge it As for the King's Friends they would have had no liberty of speech saith my Author how dare he say so seeing that in the Convention the King having left the Kingdom and the Prince of Orange being in the possession of his Army and the House of Commons declaring against James II. yet even then his Friends durst speak for him It was proposed in a full Assembly to call him back Many Lords-Spiritual and Temporal protested against the Vacancy of the Throne and with so little danger and disgrace that some of them were afterwards made Members of the Privy Council What could not the Friends of James II. have said if Himself had been present It is past all doubt that they had carried it for him or kept the Affairs of State in a most equal Ballance If the Prince had had any design to do violence to the Members of Parliament would not the whole Nation and all the Forces thereunto belonging have joyned together to oppose him as a treacherous person who came to destroy their Liberty after having so solemnly declared He would Maintain it Could the Prince with his 10 or 12000 Foreigners have made one day's resistance It is therefore certain that neither the King nor his Friends had any reason to be afraid in that case The other Argument by which this Man endeavours to prove that the pretence of a free Parliament is really a Chimera is because the Parliament could not make Laws without the King's consent And if it be granted that this pretended free Parliament had met the King would have opposed all their Resolutions He would have refused to pass the Bills And the Parliament could never have done any thing at least could not but by force Upon which account it would not have been a free Parliament seeing the King could not have his Liberty It may also be saith our pious Author that the Hand of God which is not shortened was so gracious to that generous Prince as to make him hearken to their Threats with the same Firmness of Resolution with which St. Lew is heard the Saracens whose Prisoner he was when a hundred drawn Swords ready to dispatch him could not shake him from his stedfastness and oblige him to take an Oath the thoughts of which were more terrible to him What is to be done on such an occasion Behold this pretended free Parliament is arrested all on a sudden and all the fair fruits that were expected from it become abortive The English ought to answer this They know their own Laws and we do not but according to the Light of good Sense and the Laws of Nature we may make him Answer by two Things that are very weighty The first is that we ought to distinguish betwixt those Laws that are already made and those Laws that are only a making That the Consent of the King of England is not necessary for the Preservation of those Laws that are made But there were Laws requiring the Exclusion of all Papists from Offices and Places of Trust as well Military as Judiciary and Civil There were Laws that prohibited upon the Pain of Death the Priests and especially the Monks coming into the Kingdom There were Laws standing that required the demolishing of the Romish Chappels and hindring all Publick Exercise of the Popish Religion There were Laws that declared every Person of the Realm guilty of High-Treason who should keep correspondence with the Court of Rome and who should hide Priests and Monks There were Laws enough for the Security of the Protestant Religion The Parliament had nothing to do but to put those Laws into strict Execution The King 's consent was not necessary for the enacting of new Laws for that purpose But seeing he has the executive Power of the Laws in his hands what is to be done if the King will not put those Laws in execution Then and in that Case it is evident that the Parliament might lawfully appoint some Persons who should execute those Laws for otherwise for what end are Laws made if it be always in the Power of one individual Person to hinder their Execution It must be supposed that those who made the Laws were no Fools but certainly they had not been wise if they had reserved no Power to themselves for the Execution of the Laws whensoever the King should refuse so to do It is not then necessary that there should be new Laws to bear down Popery which shewed her self bare faced Neither were there any new Laws necessary to oppose the King and to declare him incapable of the Government For all the Laws which before that Time had been made against Popery make it manifest with great Force and Necessity that a King of England must be a Protestant that without doing any Violence to the Law they might declare to James II. that they could no otherwise consider him but as a private Person But again there is no Law expressed in so general and so precise terms but admits of an Exception of Cases of Necessity And according to this Rule we are to understand the Laws of England That the Parliament cannot make a Law without the King Let us suppose that in a Kingdom such as England is where the Estates have reserved to themselves one Part of the Sovereign Power a King goes about to alienate all or any Part of the Realm to bring in a forreign Power to abrogate the Ancient to revoke all the Priviledges of the People to harrass his Subjects with an Army to cause to Murther all those who comply not with his Pleasure or all those whom he pleases so to treat Will any one say that the Estates or the Parliaments who are the Trustees Guarrantees and Protectors of the Liberties of the People have not a Power according to Law to issue forth such Orders and to take such Measures as may hinder the Violences committed by that Prince and that for this Reason The Parliament can do nothing without the King 's confent and therefore cannot oppose the Violences done by him for the King will never consent to it I maintain that he that would argue thus has utterly lost his Wits In vain have Parliaments reserved to themselves the Legislative Power if they had no Authority to exercise it In vain have they preserved their Priviledges if they had no Power for