possession of any Castle or Fort. The Sheriffe hath his authority from the King viz. by Statute 9 E. 2. unto which the King hath assented to defend any Castle defencible with the Militia of the County therefore if the Sheriffe or any such like subordinate authority from the King hold a Castle defenceable it is in judgement and speech of Law the Kings possession of the same but of this sufficient For the great Offices The great Offices of the Kingdome the disposition of them did anciently belong unto the Parliament as their rights and that Master Lambard a learned Lawyer in his Archeion of the Courts of Justice testifieth whose words are these The great Offices anciently pertaining to the Parliament That the Keeper of the great Seale was wont to be elected by Authority of Parliament and he saith further That he had read that Ralph Nevill Bishop of Chichester being Chancellour to King H. 3. being Commanded refused to yeeld up his Seale unto the King when he required it affirming that as he had received it by the Counsell of the Realme so he would not without like warrant resigne it againe And in the daies of the same King it was told him by all his Lords spirituall and temporall That of ancient time the creation and disposition of the chiefe Justice the Chancellour and Treasurer belonged to the Parliament Thus farre Mr. Lambard Dr. Cowell also in his Booke called The Interpreter whom I nominate at this time as a Royalist in this yet he citeth a President in the time of King H. the 6. who directing his privie Seale to Richard Earle of Warwick thereby to discharge him of the Captaine-ship of Callis the Earle refused to obey and continued forth the said Office because he received it by Parliament and the inference of Cowell hereupon is false that either the King must be above his positive Lawes or else he is no absolute King for he is an absolute King though not above the Lawes for his Government were then meere Tyranny Vid. Dâ—vant f. 16. 6. also the Kings of this Nation are nor in that sence absolute Monarchies for this is a mixt Government partly Politicall partly Monarchicall as that worthy Knight Sir Thomas Smith in his Common Wealth of England affirmeth and this I have remembred before Further Sir Edward Coke in his Magna Charta f. 558 559. saith That anciently Offices either for the preservation of the Peace or execution of Justice because they concerned all the Subjects of the County were not disposed of by the King but by the Free-holders of the County chosen in every severall Shire by the Kings Writ now if it were so for the publke Offices of the County the same Law and reason telleth you that it must be so for the publike Offices of the Kingdome either it must rest in the people or their representative Body Object But it may be objected That Sir Edw. Coke saith in the samâ— place that the Statute before named of the 28 E. 1. is altered by 9 E. 2. and so this Office of the Sheriffe being a publikt Office for the preservation of the Peace and execution of Justice also is not in the Subject or their representative Body Sol. To which I answer shortly because it hath been formerly debated Altered not abrogated or â—ullified That Sir Ed. Coke is thus to be intended that it is altered partly as to the election of the Sheriffe in the Exchequer if the Judges pursue the same Statute and the Free holders of the County doe not elect before them and so that authority is good Law We must make such interpretation that every learned mans judgement may be honourably esteemed and be effectuall It likewise appeareth by the same Author that anciently the Conservators of the Peace or Justices of the Peace were chosen by the People and so are many Offices at this day the election of the Officers is by the Free-holders or people the Kings Writ issuing forth first for that purpose Vsage of no forcâ— against a statute or judiciall record Now what Law hath taken away those from the people or their representative Body Verily none that I know no act Judiciall or Record whereby the right of the Kingdome is expresly given away or if this did appeare No statute gives away the Subjects right expresly in the disposition of great Office or of the militia or if it should be granted that usage recorded in the Kings Case were sufficient yet in these particulars it will not give a right unto the King and if he hath time out of minde disposed of them yet this will not availe if by any matter of Record the right of the subject appeare as it doth by Statute Law before remembred and by legall authority Nota. then usage is invalid as the learned in the Lawes know The Act of 28 E. 1. settles the Militia in the subject as you have heard formerly here the right of the subject appeares the Forts Navie Castles and Magazines depend all upon the Militia either the absolute or generall power of the Militia or the Militia positive or regulated by the positive Lawes both which are by Law vested in the People or the representative Body the Parliament as you have heard formerly The great Offices of the Kingdome appeare by learned and legall authority afore mentioned in the Subject and their representative Body both in right and in disposition What shall I say more if this be not sufficient to make the Subjects right cleare in this particular Prescription of no force against â— statute Then although the King hath by usage almost gained a perpetuity in them yet this will not serve no prescription or use will be of force against a Statute or judiciall Record for that is proofe to the contrary as the Law saith And the Kings Case is all one with the Subjects in this Regall use is of no force against a Statute or judiciall Record for as the rule of Law is true Nullum tempus occurrit Regi prescription is not good against the King in many Cases so it is as true Nullum tempus occurrit legi no usâ—ge or prescription is of any effect either in the Kings Case or Subject against the Law appearing by Statute or judiciall Record and I hope no man will say but that the Rolls of Parliament are judiciall Records Vsage of no force against claimes and interruptions besides our legall Annals or Bookes Further if usage shauld be admitted yet here have been divers clamours and interruptions of Parliament yea dispositions by them of those great Offices and those other particulars and then necessarily usage is not of force as the Law saith for the Parliament claimes unto the great Offices of the Kingdome yea their disposition of them from time to time I have spoken of before as also of the Subjects disposition of the Militia Vsage gaines no inheritance or right of claime or
debate or censure but a retarding of Justice If Judgement be given against the King he cannot examine this iudgement in an extrajudiciall way before himselfe but it must he subject to censure or debate in a legall way by Writ of Errour or the like An offence committed in the presence of a Court of Justice great and more capitall then in the presence of the King I need say no more for the proofe of this I will present you with the great Majesty that doth attend the administration of Justice and that is this An Offence committed in the presence of a Court of Justice is a greater Crime and more Capitall then in the presence of the King killing the Chancellor or Judge of either Bench doing his office is High Treason by the expresse words of 25. E. 3. not so if from the Bench though in presence of the King striking any man in Westminster Hall in presence of the Courts of Justice is the losse of a mans right hand and his goods and chattels not so in the Pallace or presence of the King unlesse blood shed ensue upon it and that is specially by Statute not by common Law but because alâ— have touched upon this before I will returne to the discourse intended It is manifest that the Law is the square and rule by which both King and people are directed and regulated in inferiour Courts What shall we then say to the high Court of Parliament in comparison of which all other Courts are but Tanquam viburna cupresso like shrubs to the lofty Cypresse or Cedar from whose fulnesse and abundance all other Courts receive even their power and authority There is an enemy at hand Object a strong objection and that is that this is no Parliament they have no plenitude of power without the King and the rest of the Lords and Commons now absent and by this they thinke to invalide all that hath been formerly spoken To which I answer Sol. That first the Parliament must he admitted to be a Court of Justice without the Kings Personall presence his legall presence being inseparable from this Court like as from all other his Courts of Justice and the contrary I suppose no man that is rationall will affirme Further I conceive in inferiour Courts his personall presence is against Law in point of Judgement in any matter between the King and his people for then the King should be Judge in his owne Cause contrary to the rule of Law Ministeriall or judiciall Acts not incident to the Regall dignity which saith That the Kings cannot doe any Act ministeriall to himselfe aâ— to take a Recogniâ—â—nce pro securitate paâ—is or the like much lord doe any Act judiciall betwixt himselfe and his people yea not onely so but he might fit in one Court and reverse a Judgement given against himselfe in another Court which how injurious this same would be unto the subject how dishonounourable and scandalous to the Court of Justice I suppose the weakest capacity doth apprehend Therefore the wisedomes of the 〈◊〉 hath appointed the sage and learned men being sworne to administer Justice indifferently betwixt the King and his people Court of B. Le R. B. C. Courts of Justice time out of minde and Magna Cart. ca. to did not â—reate and constitute the Court of C. B it did only settle it in Locâ— câ—â—tâ— No Courts of Justice at the first in the subject â—s now but all dispensation of Justice in the Crown viz. by the Kings ministery And the Opinion of Fineaux chiefe Justice in the time of King Henry the 7 That all administration of Justice into at first in the Crowne is to be understâ—â—d with this distinction it was not in that Regall period aâ— to the dispensation of it but it was in the regall Ministers or the Judges and so might be said to be in the Crowne according to the rule of Law Qui â—er alium facit per seipsant fadere videniâ— If so in inferiour Courts the same law â—â—â—â—â—â—ed sway in that high Court of Parliament also the practice and course of that Court sheweth plainely that they are a Câ—â—rt of Justice without the personall â—reâ—eâ—ce of the King Witnesse their reverâ—â—â—â— erroâ—ious judgements given in inferiour â—â—â—rt â—aâ—â—ing illegall Parents Monopolies granted by the King and many other might here be remembred I have heard it formerly objected that the House of Commons could not take a Recognizance Pro securitate pacis of themselves but it was alwaies transmitted to the Lords therefore this House was no Court of Justice for this is incident to every Court of Justice that is of Record yea a Commissioner of Oier and Terminer may take a Recognizans as it seemeth and for proofe the Case in the 1 H. the 7.19 20. is urged for there it is expresly said That the transcript of a Writ of Error upon an erronious Judgement in the Kings Bench shall be brought into the House of Peeres Et per Dominos tantum non per communitatem assignabitur seneschallus qui cum Dominis spiritualibus temporalibus per concilium Justiciar procedet ad errorem corrigendum Hence it seemeth that the House of Commons of it selfe cannot examine any Judgement in inferiour Courts and therefore should seeme to be no distinct Court of Justice of it selfe As also that the House of Commons considered in relation to that joynt power of Judicature that it hath with the House of Lords cannot take a Recognizans as is before objected for so it may seeme to be implyed by this Case I answer Sol. because the weight of this objection seemeth great that this Case may be admitted for Law and yet the power of that High Court of the House of Commons no whit diminished for this Case must be intended of their joynt and entire power of Judicature Coâ—rts of Justice have no immediate cognizance of each others proâ—eedings but they must be certified hereof and that in a legall way Certificate implies no immediate cognizans for otherwise the House of Lords could take no immediate cognizance or knowledge of the proceedings of the House of Commons nor è converso the House of Commons of the proceedings of the House of Peeres but their proceedings ought to be legally certified and by the words in this Record you may see it was done in relation to that joynt power for the words are Per Dominos tantum non per communitatem c. Here the Commonalty must plainely be intended as member or part of that High Court or otherwise the words were meerely nugatory for what need this restriction if the House of Commons were not conjoyned with the Lords in entercourse of Justice but were a distinct Court and severall from the House of Peeres it were as much as if the Kings Beanch should be restrained from having any immediate Jurisdiction or Cognizans in matters pertaining to the Common Pleas a thing ridiculous and superfluous seeing by
not grounded alwaies upon the positive Laws but upon intervenient accidents arising upon materiall circumstances of time place or other emergent causes which Orders are held by the Sages of the Law agreeable unto equity and Justice although no expresse Law to warrant the same In Chancery many crosse Orders the one to the other in a cause there depending yea almost seeming contradictory yet in Law and conscience justifiable and he that shall disobey those Orders is accounted a rebell unto the Law the King and his royall Government Jurisdiction of Courts title Parliament as appeareth by the Writ of Rebellion usually in those cases issuing and Sir Edward Coke affirmeth this power of Ordinance antiently pertaining to this high Court of Parliament And I know not but they may proceed to definitive Judgement in Causes notwithstanding any thing that hath been formerly spoken The Power of Parliament to proceed unto finall Judgement in case of wilfull absence of any the Judges of this Court paâ—alleld with this power in inferiour Court The Court full in Judgement of the law without those Judges which are wilfully absent if any Members of the Houses who are by Law Judges of this high Court shall refuse to discharge the trust committed unto them as the case now is and wilfully by absence or delinquency make themselves uncapable and unworthy of that great service for then I conceive it cleere that the Court is full in Judgement of Law without them and under favour there is no Law in point but the remaining Judges may proceed by the same authority For to examine a little the course of inferiour Courts of Law if any one or two of the Judges of the Kings Bench or Common Pleas shall obstinately recede from that Court and deny his attendance there for the publike shall not the residue of the Judges transact all matters there depending Certainely they may and further they ought so to doe And although for conveniency or conformity or to the end the Judgement may be the more unquestionable being confirmed by the greater number the weighty matters are agitated and determined in Plena curia for the most part yet I take it cleere in case of absence especially wilfull or obstinate the remaining Court may debate and finally sentence all matters incident to their jurisdiction Indeed in some particular cases the chiefe Justice or Judge hath formerly had the sole power as concerning Writs of Errour viz. that the warrant for the issuing out the Writ of Errour to the Chancery ought to be under the Teste of the chiefe Justice of the Kings Bench No judiciall but ministeriall acts by law transacted solely by any one Judge in inferiour Courts vid. Supâ—a but that Case or any of the like nature I conceive are only ministeriall but if a Writ be once returned in Court and so the Cause there depending no doubt the remaining Judges may judicially heare and determine Now if so in these lower Courts we cannot dis-affirme the same in this eminent Tribunall the Parliament the Court being the moddell and patterne of all other Courts the Gnomon that points out the course of the Sunne the course of Justice and equity to all the other Courts there being no brightnesse or lustre of Justice in inferiour Courts but resides more fully and more aboundantly in that high Court of Parliament So that I conclude the Parliament may make Ordinances Orders give Judgement and Sentence definitively in all matters whatsoever without the Kings personall presence or any of the Members of either Houses their absence being such as is formerly declared and that upon the reason of Law in these rivâ—lets of Justice their latitude of power and the superlative authority considered in themselves and in their course of prâ—ceedings being not so much as intended to be here mentioned but onely by way of comparison or resemblance of the Law in inferiour Courts to make things more conspicuous not any waies to dishonour this Court as if it should emendicare justitiam begge or borrow the rules of Justice from inferiour Courts who arâ— but tanquam ancâ—lle like handmaids to this Lady and Queene of Justice as also it is done ea intentione to informe vulgar capacities per notiora nobis by things even subject unto sence to the end they might if possible be satisfied I should now enter into the proofe of the violation of this priviledge almost forgotten by this digression namely the transacting of matters belonging unto this high Court by the new erect and pretended Parliament at Oxford a greater violation in this particular then if any inferiour Court of Justice in this Kingdome had assumed or arrogated this authority The Assembly at Oxford unwarrantable by law even in their Session much more in their proceedings because this Assembly at Oxford have not so much as any colour of Law to warrant even their Session much lesse their proceedings the matters there trans-acted and adjudged in derogation and dishonour of this high Court being so many and numerous as also the extrajudiciall arraignement of the Votes and proceedings of this Parliament but I thinke it is manifest to all the world and no man ignorant thereof The many and weighty Remonstrances Declarations and Ordinances of this high Court decâ—ared and pronounced null and void at Oxford and elsewhere by Declarations of his Majesty extrajudicially framed Much might be spoken herein with much sorrow and peradventure not without offence therefore I will desist and close up my meditations on this particular protesting nothing but the delivery of the truth with meekenesse and moderation and my soule is full of heavinesse and lamentation that ever so unhappy an occasion should be ministred â—eseeching God if it may stand with his Will and Pleasure to heale all our wounds and to reconcile all differences with peace There is another right of Parliament yet behinde which requires me not to be silent as being of all one of the chiefest by breach of which the Sword is gone through our Land Armies of men have been raised whereby not only violation of Lawes Rights and Justice but even the destruction of all is at hand unlesse God in his mercy prevent it In briefe we have seene great forces raised and maintained by the King without any Law or authority to warrant the same being as I suppose misinformed and unadvised herein The Priviledge or right of Parliament it being directly against the right and power of Parliament which is this That no Armies of men can he raised by the King or any subordinate authority under him but as the positive Law hath prescribed unlesse by consent of Parliament And here peradventure it will be expected I should speake of the Militia of the Kingdome The Milita absolute or generall Vid. infra as being a matter at this time of the highest concernement but I will referre it to a distinct debate by it selfe as you shall perceive hereafter in this discourse
had utterly abrogated the first Statute Many Cases might likewise be remembred to prove this but in our Statute there are no words but affirmative only therefore no question upon this rule in Law so in the end you see these two Statutes are not the one contrary to the other Also there is another reason which makes for us and that is that 9 E. 2. is onely affirmative as you have heard and by implication must nullifie 28 E. 1. and that cannot be as I conceive It is a high and great right of the Subjects this of the Militia it is one of the chiefest flowers of the Garland of their Liberties it cannot be divested out of the Kingdome but by expresse words The Kingdoms right cannot passe by implication it is like unto Jus regale or a Royalty of the Crowne which cannot passe by implication as the Sages of the Law know for it is the Kingdomes case and no particular Subjects case and right One Act repealeth not anâ—ther by wordâ— generall and implicite and therefore from all cases in Law that can be opposed differing 10 R. 2. ca. 5. doth not take away 13 E. 1. commonly called the Statute of Donis conditionalibus because the words are generall and implicite Statutes made by the venerable presence of three hundred men or more equall to the Senate of Rome in wisedome shall not be disannulled by such ambiguous construâ—â—ions but I will leave this to the judgement of the learned Fâ—rther if the disposition of this branch of the Militia were the Kings Right by this Statute before mentioned If the Militia by the positive lawes limited were vested in the King yet he is not the sole proprietor but intrusted with it Sub modo aâ— the positive law hath appointed yet he it not the sole proprâ—etor thereof but intrusted Sub modo to dispose of it as the Law hath appointed and you see in what manner the Law hath setled it by this former discourse The King cannot command the Militia or raise an Army either by Sea or Land without his high Court of Parliament approve of the same they cannot be forced out of their Shires but in case of suddaine comming into this Land of strange enemies by the power of the King or by his legall authority But to lay aside all other weapon of defence and argument Argument by admittance and to close with the adverse part upon this very Law of 9 E. 2. and the sence of Law upon this Act and admitting 9 E. 2. to nullifie 28. E. 1. which yet we doe nor grant for a positive truth by admittance of it Argumenti gratia onely we will debate this Statute of 9 E. 2. and open it plainely to every capacity whereby it shall appeare here is no harbour for the Militia Royall it will prove but Statio malificae carinis an unsafe refuge The words of the Statute which they sâ—rmise vest the Militia in the King are these That the Sheriffes shall be chosen in every County by the Chancellour Treasurer Barons of the Exchequer or chiefe Baron as another Statute hath it or by the Justices by one Statute and by another Statute by the chiefe Justices of one Bench and of the other Parum differunt que re concordant But to our purpose In whom is the Militia setled by this Statute It is apparent not in the King but in the Sheriffe elected by the Judges who are sworne as well to the Kingdome and People as to the King By 9 E. 2. a hare nomination no right of the Militia setled in any as appeareth by their Oath But yet further In what right hath the Sheriffe the Militia of the County I answer Here is no right of the Militia vested in any by this Statute onely a bare nomination then the right and power of the Militia rests where it did before by Law and that if the very letter or sence of this Statute be urged the right of the Militia is not in the King Object Why then a further question ariseth upon this Act in whom is the right of the Militia or in whom was it before this Statute since this Law giveth no right to any I answer Sol. The Sheriffe had the possession of the Militia The Sheriffe of the Militia possessour by 9 E. 2. the law and Courts of justice Cestuy que use the Law was Cestuy que use that is to say had the right and interest of the same the Sheriffe had the disposition of it for the use benefit end behoofe of the Law for that you shall see plaine enough for the words of the Law are to this purpose That the Sheriffe is to dispose of the Militia to preserve the peace of the County to suppresse all Riots Insurrections in disturbance of the peace to execute the Judgements and Injunctions of the Law in the Courts of Justice What is the peace of the County but the Law of the County or rather the fruit and effect of the Law The peace of the County the law of the County or rather the fruit and effect of the law Due observance and execution of the Law is the preservation of the Peace whereas on the contrary violation of the Lawes brings Warres and Division with it Not a word here but that the Law is Vsu fructuarius of the Militia hath the right and power of it the Sheriffe the disposition as Minister and Servant of the Law If it be objected that the Law saith That to preserve the Kings Peace the Sheriffe hath the disposition of the Militia The Kings peace the Kings lawes or the fruit and effect of the law That is true and yet it is nothing to prove the right of the Militia in the King for the Kings Peace is meant or the fruit and effect of the Lawes by which Lawes the King injoyeth his Peace as well as the Subject so that still you doe but labour in vaine The Law still hath the right of the Militia also the Courts of Justice especially the high Court of Parliament where the law resteth as in the Center Vsage Regall of no force in the Militia Vi. infra For Usage and the Kings disposition of the Militia De facto though it were since the Conquest that is not materiall as you shall see presently in the debate concerning the great Offices of the Kingdome Vbi eadem ratio idem jus The Militia of the Navie As touching the Navy Royall the Forts and Magazines it is apparent that either they are included as parcell of the Militia of the Kingdome or are as appendants thereunto and therefore as to them Nihil erit jam dictum quod non dictum sit prius But yet to say something of them though but repitition The Navie that is to say the Ships are things in their nature transitory in Law they may have existence or not Diversis temporibus as occasion requireth and so in the eye of the
I answer Sol. The opposite power or faction hath been for many Ages prevalent and where the regall Power hath gained from the the Subject it is hard and with much difficulty to be reduced notwithstanding there havâ— not wanted in all Ages Champions and Assertors of these truths Tempore R. 2. H. 4 Therninge chiefe Justice nostrâ— tempore Crooke Hâ—tton Weston c. Illustre Parliamentum nunc apud Westminist yea even in our owne times there have been Propugnatores acerrimi Witnesse the Case of Mr. Hampden formerly remembred in the damning of which Judgement I thinke all these illegalities appeare which had it stood in force property in Estates had been a meere nullity yea the Axe was laid to the very root the subversion of Justice and Government Nota. yea your high Court of Parliament had been of no use for the Subject since upon the Kings owne personall judgement and opinion Viz. by thae judgement for ought that appeares otherwise for he that was the sole Judge of the danger of the Kingdome might have imposed what Taxes he pleased upon his People and upon refusall have inforced the paiment thereof a slavish and barbarous judgement nullifying upon the point all the positive Lawes of this Kingdome and making the Government it selfe meerely Arbitrary Preâ—ogative I should likewise here give you a touch of the Kings Prerogatives here as pertinent to this former Discourse for some may say The Liberties of the Subject are much insisted upon here but where are the Kings Rights and Prerogatives hath he none at all Therefore to omit the numerous Prerogatives of the King partly mentioned in that ancient Statute of Prerogativa Regis or dispersed in the legall Records or Annals which to present unto you would be too great a labour and needlesse 17 E. 2. Devant Ante diem clauso componet vesper Olympâ— Wardships Liveries Primer-seisin Marriages reliefe fines Pâ—â—â—aliener Customes Mines Wrecks Treasure trove Escheates Forfeitures cum multis aliis c rights and prerogatives done al Roy pur defend soy mesme son Realme of great benefit to the Crowne and the respect of these the subject to be free from Taxes and Impositions Definition of the Prerogative Rules restrictive of the Prerogative I will onely in a way compendiary shadow them unto you by their rules and restrictions which like the skilfull Pilot steere the course of this great Ship the Royall Prerogatives in the turbulent seas of humane affaires therefore in the first place note that the Kings Rights and Prerogatives are differenced in Law his Prerogatives are onely incident to the Crowne his Prerogatives are his rights but not â—onvâ—â—so The definition of a Prerogative is a power preheminence or priviledge which the King hath over and above other persons and above the ordinary course of Law in the Subjects case in right of his Crowne his Prerogatives are either personall or by reason of his possessions or having relation to both All of them have these restrictions they hold not in any thing injurious to the Subject they must be by prescription oâ— usage beyond all memory to the contrary no Prerogative can Commence at this day without authority of Parliament To give you some instances Basketviles case sâ—venth report The King hath title by Laps to present to a Church he suffereth a Presentation the Clerke is inducted and dyes now the Patron shall present not the King and although the Prerogative be that no laches or negligence shall be impured to the King Nullum tempus occurrit Regi faith the Statute yet laches here shall be imputed or otherwise the subject should be injured in his right the King had but onely the first or next presentation given him by Law therefore he shall not have the second Viz. By Writ certif otherwise Perpaâ—â—ll or letters act of force The King may take a man into his protection by his Prerogative to free him from Suit and molestation if he be imployed in the Kings service and so legally certified but he cannot protect him that is in â—aâ—â—â—tion or against whom an Execution is to be granted at the Suit of the Subject because that would be tortious to the Subject and dispossesse him of that interest which the Law hath vested in him Royall Proclamation a Prerogative He hath a great Prerogative indeed viz. to make Proclamations Sub pena which no Subject can doe but this Proclamation must be in supplement or Declaration of a Law already in being not in derogation of any Law established nay I conceive he cannot command any thing by Proclamation at least Sub pena it there be no Law in force to warrant it although in this particular his Proclamation be in nature of a Law remediall preventing some great mischiefe at present by no positive Law redressed What shall we then thinke of those frequent Proclamations of late times denouncing men Traitors before the Law hath so adjudged them contrary to the knowne rules of Justice yea men the Members of Parliament which cannot be legally judged Traitors but by the Justice of that high Court as formerly you have heard yea divers others also no waies sentenced I assure my selfe in any legall way so to be To the second rule or restriction of the Prerogative I need say little authorities are so plentifull If Lands come unto the King by Purchase in these he hath no Prerogative as in those he holdeth Jure coronae by great antiqui y. The King hath no Prerogative in the Militia Nota. These concerning the Militia the negative voyce in Parliament cannot be Prerogative they are not within these rules or limitations for if the Prerogative should be of force for the Militia it would be injurious to the Subject it should also commence by usage within memory contrary to the Statute of 28 E. 1. 25 E. 3. 4. H. 4. 13. c. Vid. ante yea to other more moderne Lawes So likewise the negative voice in Parliament it would not onely be injurious to the Subject but even to the Lawes and Government it selfe Mag. Char. ca. 29. making them all meerely Arbitrary yea contrary to Statute Law as some good opinion hath been Thus you have a briefe view of the Prerogatives rather shewing you what they are not then what they are which I was moved unto for the satisfaction of those who have not so deep insight into the Lawes Perpaucos arbusta juvant humilesque myricae And now I have passed through the enemies Quarters that is to say the strength of their Positions and Assertions by which they have misled a great party of this Kingdome I will a little breath and deliver unto you the summe of all and run over the heads of their Principles Their first The materiall cause of Parliament as you may see in the beginning of this Treatise strikes at the root and branch of Parliaments the materiall cause thereof that is the