Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	error_n	law_n	reverse_v	1,511	5	12.3423	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B06596	Sherlock against Sherlock. The master of the temple's reasons for his late taking the oath to their Majesties, answered, / by the rector of St. George Botolph-Lane. With modest remarks on the doctors celebrated notions of allegiance to soveraign powers.	Wagstaffe, Thomas, 1645-1712.	1691 (1691)	Wing W216A; ESTC R186142	12,557	24

in the making of Laws as to make his consent necessary to the being of all Future Laws was it not thus when the two houses were Erected and endowed with the like Power notwithstanding the Doctors says pag. 196. That the Law has no Authority nor can give any but what it receivs from the King For the Laws are made Authoritate Parliamenti which is by the Authority of the King Lords and Commons But to lay aside Bracton and Fortescue let us a little reason the Matter This Personal Authority of the King antecedent to all the Laws of the Land independent on them and superiour to them whence is it has be a Throne like God Is he of Himself and for Himself Or has he a Personal Authority from God antecedent to Laws to be a King Then shew a Revelation from God where he is named Or has he the Natural Authority of a Father to Govern his Children Then it must be proved That he has begotten his three Kingdoms and all the People in all other His Majesties Dominions Or has he a Personal Patriarchal Authority which is set up as a shadow of the Authority of a Father whereby the Eldest Son is his Father by Representation Then it must be proved That the King is the Eldest Son of the Eldest House of all the Families of the Earth Or were mankind made in the day of their Creation by Nations and Created Prince and People as they were Created Male and Female but if none of these things can be said then it remains That a Civil Authority that is a mutual Consent and Contract of the Parties first Founded this Civil Relation of King and Subject as we see it every day does of Master and Servant which is another Civil Relation and that the Consent of a Community or Society is a Law and the Foundation of all Civil Laws whatsoever is proved beyond all contradiction by Mr. Hooker Eccl Pol. Li 〈◊〉 1 chap. 10. Another Reason which the Doctor gives why the King is Irresistible in all Cases is Because he is Soveraign and it is essential to Soveraignty to be irresistible in all Cases Which is false For the King of Polland 〈◊〉 Soveraign he Coins Money with his own Image and Superscription upon it which according to the Doctor pag. 50 Is a certain Mark of Soveraignty and pag. 51. By the very Impression on their Money it is evident That he is their Soveraign Lord He stiles himself by the same Grace of God with any King in Christendom and wears the like Crown He Assembles Diets he disposes of all Offices he judges the Palatines themselves and is full of the Marks of Soveraignty And yet he that shall take a Polish Penny and make such work with it as the Doctor does with the Roman Tribute Money and out of it read Lectures either of Active or Passive Obedience in all Cases will read amiss For in case he breake his Coronation Oath they owe him no Obedience at all of any kind for this is one Clause in it Quod si Sacramentum meum violavero Incolae Regni nullam nobis obedientiam praestare tenebuntur So that in case he violate his Oath his Irresistibility departs from him and he becomes like other Men. I come now to the Doctor 's Second Case which is resolv'd under the covert and Countenance of the former That as well inferior Magistrats as others imployed by a Popish Tyrannical Prince in the most Illegal and Outragious Acts of Violence such as Cutting of Throats c. are as Irresistible as the Prince himself under pretence of having the Prince's Authority to do these Acts and must be submitted to under pain of Hell and Eternal Damnation Now to shew the Authority which we are bound to submit to not in Laws but in Persons who Act contrary to Law he has brought the following Argument which is the most laboured of any in his Book Nay it is very false and absurd to say That every Illegal Is an Vnauthoritative Act which carrie no Objection with it This is contrary to the practice of all Judicatures and the daily Experience of Men who suffer in their Lives Bodies and Estates by an unjust and Illegal Sentence For the most illegal Judgment is Valid till it be reversed by some Superior Court which most illegal but Authoritative Judgment derives its Authority not from the Law but the but the Person of him whose Judgment it is Case of Obed. Pag. 193.194.195 Now to use his own words this is very false and absurd all over For first Legal and Authorative are all one and Illegal Authority is in England unlawful lawful Power Secondly It is not true That an Illegal Judgment is valid till it be revers'd For the Judgment of a Man to Death in an Arbitrary way either contrary to the Verdict of his Jury or without a Jury is not Authorative or Valid at all no not for an hour But I suppose by illegal Judgments the Doctors means legal Judgments which have Error in them and if these should not be Valid and stand good till that Errour be found in some Higher Court there could not be legal nor Illegal nor any Judgments at all but all humane Judicatures must come to an end For if Judgment cannot be given till we have Judges who are not subject to Errour the Laws must ly by and rust and there can be no administration of Justice Thirdly The Authority of a Judgment which is Erroneous is not from the Judges Personal Authority above the Law nor from his Mistakes beside the Law but from that Jurisdiction and Authority which the Law has given to Courts and Judicial Proceedings which if they be in due course of Law are legal and are presumed to be every way right and as they should be and free from Errour till the contrary appears in some Higher Court. But if the Judges in Westminster-Hall should use a Personal Authority superior to Law in Judging Men to Death without a Jury or in condemning a Man when his Jury acquit him or the like the Law having given no Authority to any such proceedings these Judgments would be illegal and void and have no Authority at all Secondly Another Reason why we must submit to Illegal Violence is this Because though they have no legal Authority for it yet we have no legal Authority to defend our selves against it pag 192 But he himself has given as full an answer to this as can be desired in these words For no Man can want Authority to defend his Life against him that has no Authority to take it away pag. 59. Thirdly We must submit to Illegal Violence because the People cannot call inferiour Magistrates to an Account pag 191. But sure the People may defend themselves against the Murderous Attempts of inferiour Magistrates without pretending to call them to an account or sitting in Judgment upon them And when they themselves are called to an account for this Defence they may give