Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A36630
|
His Majesties declaration defended in a letter to a friend being an answer to a seditious pamphlet, called A letter from a person of quality to his friend : concerning the kings late declaration touching the reasons which moved him to dissolve the two last parliaments at Westminster and Oxford.
|
Dryden, John, 1631-1700.
|
1681
(1681)
|
Wing D2286; ESTC R180
|
23,921
|
20
|
the Ministers in the Examination of the Popish Plot. Which being prov'd by Coleman's and others Letters and by both Houses by declaring the King's Life to be in danger c. Yet they have persuaded the King to believe nothing of this danger but to apprehend the Plot to be extreamly improv'd if not wholly contriv'd by the Presbyterians And to think it more his concernment to have an end of all then to have it search'd to the bottom and that this was the true reason why four Parliaments during the Examination of the Plot have been dissolv'd Reasonable People will conclude that his Majesty and his Ministers have proceeded not ridiculously but with all that caution which became them For in the first heat and vehemence of the Plot the Avenues of White-Hall were more strictly Guarded His Majesty abstaining from Places of publick Entertainment and the Ministers taking all necessary Care in Council both to discover Conspiracies and to prevent them So that simply considered the Popish Plot has nothing to do with the Dissolution of Four Parliaments But the Use which has been made of it by the House of Commons to Dis-inherit the Duke to deny the King Supplies and to make some Votes which the King declares to be illegal are the real and plain occasions of dissolving those Parliaments 'T is only affirm'd but never will be prov'd by this Author that the King or his Ministers have ever been desirous to stifle the Plot and not to have it search'd into the bottom For to what end has his Majesty so often offer'd the Popish Lords to be brought to their Trial but that their innocence or guilt and consequently that of the whole party might be made manifest Or why after the execution of the Lord Stafford did the House of Commons stop at the other Lords and not proceed to try them in their turns Did his Majesty stifle the Plot when he offered them or did they refuse to sound the depth of it when they would not touch upon them If it were for want of Witnesses which is all that can be said the case is deplorable on the part of the accused who can neither be bail'd because impeach'd in Parliament nor admitted to be tryed for fear they should be acquitted for want of evidence I do not doubt but his Majesty after having done what in him lies for the utmost discovery of the Plot both by frequent Proclamations of Indemnity and Reward to such as would come in and discover more and by several others too long to repeat is desirous for what good man is not that his care and trouble might be over But I am much deceiv'd if the Antimonarchical Party be of the same opinion or that they desire the Plot should be either wholly discover'd or fully ended For 't is evidently their Interest to keep it on foot as long as possibly they can and to give it hot water as often as 't is dying for while they are in possession of this Jewel they make themselves masters of the people For this very reason I have often said even from the beginning of the Discovery that the Presbyterians would never let it go out of their hands but manage it to the last inch upon a Save-all And that if ever they had tryed one Lord they would value themselves upon that Conquest as longas ever it would last with the Populace but whatever came on 't be sure to leave a Nest Egg in the Tower And since I doubt not but what so mean a Judge as I am could so easily discover could not possibly escape the vigilancy of those who are at the Helm I am apt to think that his Majesty saw at least as great a danger arising to him from the discontented spirits of the popular Faction as from the Papists For is it not plain that ever since the beginning of the Plot they have been lopping off from the Crown whatever part of the Prerogative they could reach and incroaching into Soveraignty and Arbitrary Power themselves while they seem'd to fear it from the King How then could his Majesty be blam'd if he were forc'd to dissolve those Parliaments which instead of giving him relief made their Advantages upon his Distresses and while they pretended a care of his Person on the one hand were plucking at his Scepter with the other After this the Pamphleteer gives us a long Bead-roll of Dangerfield's Plot Captain Ely young Tongue Fitz-Gerard and Mr. Ray rails at some and commends others as far as his skill in Hyperbole will carry him Which all put together amounts to no more than only this that he whom they called Rogue before when he comes into their party pays his Garnish and is adopted into the name of an honest man Thus Ray was no Villain when he accus'd Colonel Sackvile before the House of Commons but when he failed of the reward of godliness at their hands and from a Wig became a tearing Tory in new Cloaths our Author puts him upon the File of Rogues with this brand Than whom a more notorious and known Villian lives not The next thing he falls upon is the Succession which the King declares He will have preserved in its due descent Now our Author despairing it seems that an Exclusion should pass by Bill urges That the Right of Nature and Nations will impower Subjects to deliver a Protestant Kingdom from a Popish King The Law of Nations is so undoubtedly against him that I am sure he dares not stick to that Plea but will be forc'd to reply that the Civil Law was made in favour of Monarchy why then did he appeal to it And for the Law of Nature I know not what it has to do with Protestants or Papists except he can prove that the English Nation is naturally Protestant and then I would enquire of him what Countrymen our Forefathers were But if he means by the Law of Nature self-preservation and defence even that neither will look but a squint upon Religion for a man of any Religion and a man of no Religion are equally bound to preserve their lives But I answer positively to what he would be at that the Law of self-preservation impowers not a Subject to rise in Arms against his Soveraign of another Religion upon supposition of what he may do in his prejudice hereafter for since it is impossible that a moral certainty should be made out of a future contingency and consequently that the Soveraign may not extend his Power to the prejudice of any mans Liberty or Religion The probability which is the worst that they can put it is not enough to absolve a Subject who rises in Arms from Rebellion in foro Conscientiae We read of a divine Command to obey Superior Powers and the Duke will lawfully be such no Bill of Exclusion having past against him in his Brother's life Besides this we have the Examples of Primitive Christians even under Heathen Emperors always suffering yet never
deserves like an ill Bouffoon He defends the sharpness of the Addresses of which his Majesty complains but I suppose it would be better for him and me to let our Principals engage and to stand by our selves I confess I have heard some members of that House wish that all Proceedings had been carried with less vehemence But my Author goes further on the other hand He affirms that many wise and good men thought they had gone too far in assuring nay in mentioning of money before our safety was fully provided for So you see he is still for laying his hand upon the penny In the mean time I have him in a Praemunire for arraigning the House of Commons for he has tacitely confessed that the wise and good men were the fewer because the House carryed it for mentioning money in their Address But it seems they went too far in speaking of a Supply before they had consulted this Gentleman how far the safety of the Nation would admit it I find plainly by his temper that if matters had come to an accommodation and a bargain had been a bargain the Knights of the Shire must have been the Protestant Knights no longer As for Arbitrary Power of taking men into custody for matters that had no relation to Privileges of Parliament he says they have erred with their Fathers If he confess that they have erred let it be with all their Generation still they have erred and an error of the first digestion is seldom mended in the second But I find him modest in this point and knowing too well they are not a Court of Judicature he does not defend them from Arbitrary Proceedings but only excuses and palliates the matter by saying that it concern'd the Rights of the People in suppressing their Petitions to the Fountain of Justice So when it makes for him he can allow the King to be the Fountain of Iustice but at other times he is only a Cistern of the People But he knows sufficiently however he dissembles it that there were some taken into custody to whom that crime was not objected Yet since in a manner he yields up the Cause I will not press him too far where he is so manifestly weak Tho I must tell him by the way that he is as justly to be proceeded against for calling the Kings Proclamation illegal which concerned the matter of Petitioning as some of those who had pronounced against them by the House of Commons that terrible sentence of Take him Topham The strange illegal Votes declaring several eminent persons to be Enemies to the King and Kingdom are not so strange he says but very justifiable I hope he does not mean that illegal Votes are now not strange in the House of Commons But observe the reason which he gives for the House of Commons had before address'd for their removal from about the King It was his business to have prov'd that an Address of the House of Commons without Process order of Law hearing any Defence or offering any proof against them is sufficient ground to remove any person from the King But instead of this he only proves that former Addresses have been made Which no body can deny When he has throughly settled this important point that Addresses have certainly been made instead of an Argument to back it he only thinks that one may affirm by Law That the King ought to have no person about him who has the misfortune of such a Vote But this is too ridiculous to require an Answer They who will have a thing done and give no reason for it assume to themselves a manifest Arbitrary Power Now this Power cannot be in the Representatives if it be not in the People or if it be in them the People is absolute But since he wholly thinks it let him injoy the privilege of every Free Born Subject to have the Bell clinck to him what he imagines Well all this while he has been in pain about laying his Egg at the last we shall have him cackle If the House of Commons declare they have just Reasons to fear that such a person puts the King upon Arbitrary Councils or betrays His and the Nations Interest in such a Case Order and Process of Law is not necessary to remove him but the Opinion and Advice of the Nation is enough because bare removing neither fines him nor deprives him of Life Liberty or Offices wherein State Affairs are not concern'd Hitherto he has only prov'd according to his usual Logick that bare removing is but bare removing and that to deprive a man of a Publick Office is not so much as it would be to hang him all that possibly can be infer'd from this Argument is only that a Vote may do a less wrong but not a greater Let us see how he proceeds If he be not remov'd upon such Address you allow him time to act his Villany and the Nation runs the hazard I answer if the House have just Reasons on their side 't is but equitable they should declare them for an Address in this Case is an Appeal to the King against such a man and no Appeal is supposed to be without the Causes which induc'd it But when they ask a Removal and give no reason for it they make themselves Judges of the Matter and consequently they appeal not but command If they please to give their Reasons they justifie their Complaint for then their Address is almost in the nature of an Impeachment and in that Case they may procure a hearing when they please But barely to declare that they suspect any man without charging him with particular Articles is almost to confess they can find none against him To suppose a man has time to act his Villanies must suppose him first to be a Villain and if they suspect him to be such nothing more easie than to name his Crimes and to take from him all opportunities of future mischief But at this rate of bare addressing any one who has a publick profitable Employment might be remov'd for upon the private Picque of a Member he may have a party rais'd for an Address against him And if his Majesty can no sooner reward the Services of any one who is not of their party but they can vote him out of his Employment it must at last follow that none but their own party must be employ'd and then a Vote of the House of Commons is in effect the Government Neither can that be call'd the Advice and Opinion of the whole Nation by my Author's favour where the other two Estates and the Soveraign are not consenting 'T is no matter says this Gentleman there are some things so reasonable that they are above any written Law and will in despite of any Power on Earth have their effect whereof this is one I love a man who deals plainly he explicitly owns this is not Law and yet it is reasonable and will have its effect as if it were