Selected quad for the lemma: hand_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
hand_n	body_n	foot_n	member_n	6,594	5	8.0095	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76365	A plea for the commonalty of London, or, A vindication of their rights (which hath been long with-holden from them) in the choice of sundry city officers. As also, a justification of the power of the Court of Common-councell, in the making of acts, or by-laws, for the good and profit of the citizens, notwithstanding the negative votes of the Lord Major and aldermen. Being fully proved by severall charters granted to this City, by sundry royall kings of England, confirmed by Act of Parliament, and by records witnessing the particulars in the practise of them. / In a speech delivered in Common-councell, on Munday the 24th of February, 1644. By John Bellamie.	Bellamie, John, d. 1654.	1645 (1645)	Wing B1816; Thomason E1174_3; ESTC R208882	15,067	36

Lord Major and Aldermen which as Lord Major and Aldermen they had not before must needs be quo ad hoc unto the making of a Law above the Lord Major and Aldermen But this Court of Common-councell hath the power to make a Law and by that Law to confer a power upon the Lord Major and Aldermen which as Lord Major and Aldermen they had not before Therefore this Court of Common-councell so farre as unto the making of a Law must needs be above the Lord Major and Aldermen That this Court hath the power to make a Law and by that Law to confertre a power upon the Lord Major and Aldermen which as Lord Major and Aldermen they had not before I prove de facto as appeares by an Act of Common-councell made in the 6th of Henry the 7th upon the 15th of April by which this Court conferred a power upon the Lord Major and Aldermen that at the election of the Chamberlain the Lord Major and Aldermen should present two men to the Commonalty and the Commonalty to choose one of them to be Chamberlain And in the same Act of Common-councell this Court conferred a power upon the L d Major and Aldermen that at the election of the Bridg-masters the L d Major and Aldermen should present four men to the Commonalty and the Commonalty to choose 2 of them to be Bridg-masters Which power of presenting two men for the choice of Chamberlain and foure men for the choice of Bridg-mastere by the L d Major and Aldermen they as L d Major and Aldermen had not before Ergo The Court of Common-councell quo ad hoc as unto the making of a Law must needs be above the Lord Major and Aldermen 2. Argument That Court which hath the power to make a Law and by that Law to take from the Lord Major and Aldermen that power which before was by a Law conferred upon them as Lord Major and Aldermen must needs be quo ad hoc as unto the making of a Law above the Lord Major and Aldermen But this Court of Common-councell hath the power to make a Law and by that Law to take from the Lord Major and Aldermen that power which by a Law was formerly conferred upon them as Lord Major and Aldermen Therefore this Court of Common-councell must needs be quo ad hoc as unto the making of a Law above the Lord Major and Aldermen That this Court of Common-councell hath the power to make a Law and by that Law to take from the Lord Major and Aldermen that power which formerly was by a Law confer'd upon them as Lord Major and Aldermen I prove as before de facto as appeares by an Act of Common-councell made the 21th of June 1643. by which this Court repealed the former Act of Common-councell of Henry the 7th and so tooke away that power from the Lord Major and Aldermen which before was by that Law conferred upon them as Lord Major and Aldermen and so setled the choice of Chamberlain and Bridge-masters in statu quo prius Therefore this Court of Common-councell quo ad hoc as unto the making of a Law must needs be above the Lord Major and Aldermen 3. Argument If the Court of common-councell so farre as unto the making of Laws be above the Lord Maior and Aldermen then the Lord Major and Aldermen can have no negative voice as Lord Major and Aldermen so as to hinder the Court of Common-councell from making of a Law but the Court of Common-councell so farre as unto the making of Laws is above the Lord Major and Aldermen therfore the Major and Aldermen as Lord Major and Aldermen can have no negative voice so as to hinder the Court of Common-councell from making of a Law That the Court of Common-councell so farr as unto the making of Laws is above the Lord Major and Aldermen the two former arguments fully prove therefore the conclusion stands firme upon it's true foundation viz. That the Lord Major and Aldermen as Lord Major and Aldermen can have no negative voice so as to hinder the Court of Common-councell from making of a Law Thirdly That it ought not to be so I prove by equity and justice The Aldermen are but in number 26 the Commoners in this Court about 250. in person and in representation many thousands Now if there should be a power of a Negative voice in 26. single persons Members of this Court and they thereby have the power to hinder the passing of Law which upon serious and solemne debate hath been upon good grounds assented unto and desired by so great a number and that for the common good and welfare of the Citizens of this City every one of which greater number being as fully interessed in the good or evill that may come by the passing or not passing of the Law in question as any of the 26. Aldermen are O then how many and how great advantages may we see before us which being by the passing of a Law obtained might make us happie And on the other side how many pressive and unsupportable evils may we see ready to swallow us up and for want of power to passe a Law to prevent them will make us irrecoverably miserable and yet we must all sit still and sigh with our fingers in our eyes and morne and die for the meere will and pleasure sake of 26. single persons nay of seven persons for thirteen Aldermen make a Court and seven of them being the greater number of thirteen have the power of the Court and so the power of a negative vote to hinder the passing of an Act in Common-Councell If this be granted into what a remedilesse way of ruine may we fall as in the case of Sr Richard Gourney in standing out against the just desires yea commands of Parliament And thus I have I hope fully and clearely proved both by Charters and by practise that the L d Major Aldermen and Commonalty conjunctim and not either alone as separated or disjunct from the other are the proper recipients of those grants and priviledges which our Royall Kings have in their bounty and favour invested this City with Therefore my Lord we honour your Lordship and all those worthy Senatours your Associates and we cannot but acknowledge your Lordship to be under his Majesty the head of our City yea a head of our own choosing if therefore we should goe about in the least measure to ecclipse your Honour or to diminish your just power we should in so doing wound our selves whose head you are But as we give you the honour of a headship O take not from us I beseech you the right of Membership but acknowledge us as Members of your body though we be as truly we confesse our selves to be with reference to your Lordship and the Aldermen but inferiour Members as suppose the hands and feet of this great body whereof your Lordship is the head yet as in the Naturall body the

soule diffuseth it selfe into all the Members of the body to make them fit for action as into the feet to walke into the hands to worke O suffer us I pray you to doe that which God which nature and which all our Royall Kings in all their Charters have granted to us and doth require of us that is that in our places we may act our parts And then you will easily see that as in the Naturall body the head cannot walke without the feet nor work without the hands nor can your Lordship and those worthy Aldermen though the head and chiefe of this great Councell yet act nothing without the concurrent power of us your hands and feet for to assist you The soundest and best of bodies are subject to diseases and those maladies in the most noble parts are ever most dangerous if therefore there breeds an ulcer or tumor in the head and cause it so to swell as it hinders the necessary and naturall motion of the rest of the Members and thereby endangereth the life of all Oh then blame not I beseech you blame not the feet if they run forth to seek a remedy nor yet the hands if they apply it for every Member as it tenders it 's owne well-being ought to seeke the welfare of the whole body And if the distemper be in the head as sad experience daily proveth no member of the body can then be well at ease But I fore-see an objection that may here be made against a part of what I have before spoken which is this That the choyce or election of some City-officers have been time out of mind in the power of others and not in the Commonalty as one of the Shrieves to be chosen by my Lord Majors Prerogative and the common Clark and common Serjeant by the Court of Aldermen I shall give to this objection a two-fold answer First that which our Saviour Christ gave to the Pharisees in the case of divorce they then pleading as these now prescription for it and saying that time out of mind even ever since Moses daies it had been so True saith our Lord Christ Moses for the hardnesse of their hearts suffered them to give a bill of divorce and to put away their wives but from the beginning it was not so The same say I 't is confest that a great while the choice of these and some other City-Officers have been suffered to run along in these Channels of pretended Prerogative and unwarranted custome but from the beginning it was not so therefore as our Saviour Christ said in that case What God hath joyned together let no man put asunder So say I in this what God and what the Charters of our City hath joyned together let not man let not not your Lordships pretended Prerogative let not unwarranted custome either put or keepe asunder The second Answer I give to this objection is this That this power hath either been given from the Commonalty by their owne consent or els taken away from them by usurpation if by usurpation then it behoves this Court the only representative body of this City to use all good meanes to regaine what hath been so long unjustly taken from them But if given away by consent as I will not deny but our fore-fathers in their times might be perswaded upon specious shews and faire pretences and peradventure in their esteeme upon solid reasons to make over a part of their power into the hands of the L d Major and Aldermen who knew better for their owne advantage how to use it then they to keepe it yet I hope if reason and just cause require the power of this Councell may reassume it again into the hands of the Commonaltie as it did in the like case upon the 21. of June 1643. reassume the sole power of choosing the Chamberlain and Bridge-masters into the hands of the said Commonalty I come now to the third and last head I am to speake to viz. The reasons or arguments wherefore those persons unto whom this power is committed should carefully and conscionably maintain and use those priviledges with which they are entrusted I will insist only upon two Arguments to presse this First from that dammage and losse which our Predecessours have under-gone for mis-using and non-usage of those Priviledges and Immunities which by the favour and bounty of former Princes have beene bestowed on them Secondly from that obligation of a sacred Oath by which we all as free men of this City stand bound for to maintain them The omission and misusage of Priviledges have been exceeding detrimentall to our Predecessours and may be of as dangerous a consequence unto us but before I prosecute this Argument give me leave to acquaint you how carefull one of the Kings of England was to preserve this City from losse and danger in this respect I reade that Edward the third in the first yeare of his raigne made provision for this City that our Liberties should not be seized into the hands of the King for any persionall Trespasse of any one minister of Justice in this City but did ordaine that such a minister of Justice should be punished according as the quality of his Trespasse should require But if the City it selfe which is only represented in this Court shall so farre undervalue or slight the grace and favour of our Royall Princes as not to use or to misuse such graunts and priviledges as they are pleased in their bounties to invest us with then as this neglect and non-usage or misusage of our priviledges hath made our Predecessours to pay deare for it So we may also mourne under the losse of it and smart for it For in the same Edward the 3. daies in the 15. yeare of his raigne it cost this City 1000. marks for not fully using those free Customes and Liberties which had been formerly granted to them where observe that it is not sufficient to use some of our free Customs and Liberties but we must use them all yea and fully use them in that way and manner as in which they were granted to us by our Charters else as then so now the non-usage or mis-usage of them may occasion a mulct or fine to be imposed on us For there is no man that is any whit conversant in our City Charters but can easily and truly testifie that not once or twice but 10. if not 20. times this City hath been forced to receive a pardon for non-usage and mis-usage of their priviledges and for City-Officers to be chosen and not by the persons appointed by Charter to choose them is a plain mis-usage of power and priviledge Therefore my Lord if your Lordship will by your Prerogative still choose one of the Shrieves and the Court of Aldermen will still choose the common Clarke and common Sergeant Why I beseech you may you not as well share the choice of all the City-Officers amongst your selves but if you will grant us of the